comparing D300 vs 1DM2 for photojournalism,

dimashp · 9th February 2009

Hi all,

I initially wanted to purchase 1DM2. Reasons are it is rugged and probably has super fast AF and simply suit my style (photojournalism, nature and fast sport action). And, why i did not choose Mark 3 instead ? Kinda out of my budget...So i am aiming at 2nd hand one.

However, i met my friend last week and he told me new things from Nikon. In particular D300 which has weather sealing (not sure which one is better). But i was amazed with its auto tracking system. And expeed

Ok...I am kinda outdated with Nikon after my last experience with D70.

Just last week i tried my friend 40D with 70-200, was covering badminton matches. But i found it was quite trouble some to cover. Light is pretty poor. Fair enough, it is 40D, lose out to 1D and (i think) with D300 in terms of AF.

So question is, which one should i get D300 and 1DM2 (at this budget) ?. And probably equipped with 70-200mm.

Points to consider, their AF system, picture quality and extreme weather and condition.

Thanks =Dimas

Rashkae · 9th February 2009

D300 is not a "new thing". and from what I've read so far, the AF on the Canon bodies is inferior to the D300. Also, the 1D is a full frame body while the D300 is a crop. Consider that in your focal length calculations too.

For extreme weather conditions, you may even want to look at the Olympus E3 instead.

flipfreak · 9th February 2009

Originally Posted by Rashkae

D300 is not a "new thing". and from what I've read so far, the AF on the Canon bodies is inferior to the D300. Also, the 1D is a full frame body while the D300 is a crop. Consider that in your focal length calculations too.

For extreme weather conditions, you may even want to look at the Olympus E3 instead.

i have to disagree on AF comments. the AF speed from the 1 series is definitely faster than the D300. Even on the 40D, the single shot AF is faster than the D300 and the comment came from a nikon user who had the d300 and upgraded to d700 lately.

the 1D2 is probably lacking in low light AF focusing though if u shoot alot in dim conditions. interface may not be as idiot proof like the newer cameras. if u plan to shoot sports, the fps and af will be the reason u pick the 1d2.

but as a general usage camera, i will pick the d300 since it is more well rounded.

DiGdUb · 9th February 2009

i believe 1D is 1.3x, not FF

. 1Ds is FF.

Rashkae · 9th February 2009

Originally Posted by DiGdUb

i believe 1D is 1.3x, not FF . 1Ds is FF.

Ah! Thanks for the correction; yeah, you're right.

Rashkae · 9th February 2009

Originally Posted by flipfreak

i have to disagree on AF comments. the AF speed from the 1 series is definitely faster than the D300. Even on the 40D, the single shot AF is faster than the D300 and the comment came from a nikon user who had the d300 and upgraded to d700 lately.

Really? How odd. I've heard numerous complaints; one 1D user even has to use a torch to illuminate a model during a studio shoot because the 1D could not lock on.

But it may be specific to low-light AF. Maybe in well-illuminated events/sports it performs better.

PointBlue · 9th February 2009

I would also choose the D300 with a battery grip, simply because it's way WAY lighter than a 1D2, which weighs like a brick. The 1D2 does have better AF, but only a few ms ahead of the D300.

flipfreak · 9th February 2009

Originally Posted by Rashkae

Really? How odd. I've heard numerous complaints; one 1D user even has to use a torch to illuminate a model during a studio shoot because the 1D could not lock on.

But it may be specific to low-light AF. Maybe in well-illuminated events/sports it performs better.

low light is a problem on the 1d2 and 1d2n. that is one problem with that 2 models. it has since been much improved on the newer models. the ts has to consider that if he wants to get it.

having said that, the d300 is not without its problems as well like camera hanging, af doesnt lock on and etc. all happening to the same user. i wondered did he get a lemon sometimes.

dimashp · 9th February 2009

hi all...wow, quick reply from all of you...THANKS...i tried 1dm2 last time, interface sucks (nt a problem though). for its weight, i don't mind as it was built for harsh condition. but i was shocked to know that 1dm2 did not perform in low light (which is real bad, as i do not think i can use flash if i'm covering badminton, etc...or else they will smash me =P)

how good is the auto tracking in D300 ? that is one of the feature which made me think twice before deciding on 1D. is it that accurate or probably just another imperfect feature.

i read in few forums. as for sport photography, nikon is hitting canon a real hard (esp in Beijing Olympic). really need to make a tough decision on nikon/canon. i don't think i can afford to switch to another system after my investment for this. =(

xl1 · 9th February 2009

take 1Dmk2 !!! for AF you cannot beat canon 1 series, btw im using canon and nikon, you always can using remote trigger for your flash, think out of the box...!

xl1 · 9th February 2009

Originally Posted by Rashkae

Really? How odd. I've heard numerous complaints; one 1D user even has to use a torch to illuminate a model during a studio shoot because the 1D could not lock on.

But it may be specific to low-light AF. Maybe in well-illuminated events/sports it performs better.

who is the complainer? casual user or semi pro or professional? i believe what they said to you is user problem, don't know how to maximize the tools and at the end blame the tools whahaha....or maybe they using elcheapo lens to produce thousand $ picture, common.. im using 1 series for 7 years never has such a ridiculous problem, because i read the manual!

cyrzk · 9th February 2009

as for me,ill vouch for 1D mk2 since you are eyeing for photojourn,sports and stuffs.

my 2 cents worth

thanks

flipfreak · 9th February 2009

Originally Posted by dimashp

hi all...wow, quick reply from all of you...THANKS...i tried 1dm2 last time, interface sucks (nt a problem though). for its weight, i don't mind as it was built for harsh condition. but i was shocked to know that 1dm2 did not perform in low light (which is real bad, as i do not think i can use flash if i'm covering badminton, etc...or else they will smash me =P)

how good is the auto tracking in D300 ? that is one of the feature which made me think twice before deciding on 1D. is it that accurate or probably just another imperfect feature.

i read in few forums. as for sport photography, nikon is hitting canon a real hard (esp in Beijing Olympic). really need to make a tough decision on nikon/canon. i don't think i can afford to switch to another system after my investment for this. =(

badminton not an issue la. they not playing in that dim sort of lighting. in fact, i think most sports don't play in those type of lighting.

dimashp · 9th February 2009

hi hi hi...so then, from what i've read...1dm2 wins d300 ? hmmm...well...not all those badminton in indoor stadium, but others...which lighting is quite a problem =( hahahaha...btw, thanks all !!!

YSLee · 11th February 2009

Originally Posted by xl1

take 1Dmk2 !!! for AF you cannot beat canon 1 series, btw im using canon and nikon, you always can using remote trigger for your flash, think out of the box...!

Mmm, all those pros with their 1D3 must be really happy then.

nightwolf75 · 11th February 2009

i'm using the d300 and have used 1dm2. actually, there's no comparison bet the 2 brands cos they work on different algorithms anyway. there are too many variables to even start measuring the speeds. even if u can, it is meaningless IMO, regardless of what the 'experts' say. end of the day, both are fine AFs.

i do know abt the problems of 1dm3. but, among my frens using it, it doesn't really appear even for those early adopters. mebbe my frens have yet to replicate it... hehe..

as an OT, the d700's AF system (roughly the same as d3, also the same number of AF points of d300, IIRC) is just as good. try capturing a flying mosquito like him...
http://duncandavidson.com/2009/02/te...tes-image.html

lightning · 11th February 2009

Having a 1D3, and used the 1D2 before, I swear by its AF, not sure why people are complaining about the 1D3 AF, but to me having a 9 out of 10 frame in focus shots on a head on approaching car travelling at 60km/h is good enough for me.

Sometime people blame the equipment and etc and someone use a 50 1.8 @F1.8 to track motion and say that the AF is lousy. To me it is absoultely nuts to use a 50mm F1.8 lens to track. I shoot using the 1Dm2, 1dm3 with 70-200 F2.8, 300F2.8, 400 F2.8 all perform like a charm even at F2.8

Was tempted to switch to 5Dm2 but in the end I did not is due to the AF capability, Weather sealing, handling. 5DM2 just not cut out for sports. As for D300, I am not sure if it is that good. But one thing for me is service support from the Brand. Canon has never delay in my service, never say no to my request that are reasonable. I have ever asked the service centre to repair my camera (Change shutter) within a day (3hrs) because the shutter died and I need to shoot in the evening. You might want to check out the nikon service centre and see how well stock up are their spare parts.

Shot with 1DM2 and 400 F2.8

The full res of this photo will show it's full glory!

boyboy · 11th February 2009

Originally Posted by dimashp

how good is the auto tracking in D300 ? that is one of the feature which made me think twice before deciding on 1D. is it that accurate or probably just another imperfect feature.

not foolproof. impressive enuff to make u buy one on the spot (that's not what happened to me, though). but after u use it, u will know.

i never actually successfully used the tracking feature successfully. i'd just use the 51 AF area and let the camera auto select and do tracking itself. then fire away in burst mode. i've got decent (by my standards at least) shots this way.

longkangman · 11th February 2009

Originally Posted by lightning

Having a 1D3, and used the 1D2 before, I swear by its AF, not sure why people are complaining about the 1D3 AF, but to me having a 9 out of 10 frame in focus shots on a head on approaching car travelling at 60km/h is good enough for me.

my 5d2 will not miss an approaching car travelling at 60km/h too.

zj2000 · 11th February 2009

When shooting sports the 1dmkII AF is blazingly fast. When i first used it made my 350d feel like a PnS. As a general purpose camera though it is not that great. due to it's 1.3 crop, there are hardly any ultrawide angle available for it. walkabout lenses like the 24-105 will also be a bit tight on the 1dmkII. i guess it's really up to you whether you want a more general purpose camera or a specialised sports shooter. In spite of what some ppl say, the canon's AF in low light is not that bad. even my 350d with a $50 lens can AF accurately at f5.6 iso100 30s sort of exposure without need for AF assist.

I'll choose the 1dmkII over the d300 mainly because I'm not too impressed with it's AF speed on the few occasions that I have used it. I find that even a 40d locks focus faster than the d300. Either camera you choose will be a good choice, take a look at the 2nd hand prices in the market I think they are quite close which should mean that ppl have equal regard for these 2 cameras.

9th February 2009	#1
dimashp Member Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 125	comparing D300 vs 1DM2 for photojournalism, Hi all, I initially wanted to purchase 1DM2. Reasons are it is rugged and probably has super fast AF and simply suit my style (photojournalism, nature and fast sport action). And, why i did not choose Mark 3 instead ? Kinda out of my budget...So i am aiming at 2nd hand one. However, i met my friend last week and he told me new things from Nikon. In particular D300 which has weather sealing (not sure which one is better). But i was amazed with its auto tracking system. And expeed Ok...I am kinda outdated with Nikon after my last experience with D70. Just last week i tried my friend 40D with 70-200, was covering badminton matches. But i found it was quite trouble some to cover. Light is pretty poor. Fair enough, it is 40D, lose out to 1D and (i think) with D300 in terms of AF. So question is, which one should i get D300 and 1DM2 (at this budget) ?. And probably equipped with 70-200mm. Points to consider, their AF system, picture quality and extreme weather and condition. Thanks =Dimas Last edited by dimashp; 9th February 2009 at 11:40 AM.

9th February 2009	#2
Rashkae Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 8,313	Re: comparing D300 vs 1DM2 for photojournalism, D300 is not a "new thing". and from what I've read so far, the AF on the Canon bodies is inferior to the D300. Also, the 1D is a full frame body while the D300 is a crop. Consider that in your focal length calculations too. For extreme weather conditions, you may even want to look at the Olympus E3 instead. __________________ Alpha Last edited by Rashkae; 9th February 2009 at 11:49 AM.

9th February 2009	#4
DiGdUb Member Join Date: Apr 2006 Posts: 1,667	Re: comparing D300 vs 1DM2 for photojournalism, i believe 1D is 1.3x, not FF . 1Ds is FF.

9th February 2009	#7
PointBlue Member Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Pasir Ris Posts: 198	Re: comparing D300 vs 1DM2 for photojournalism, I would also choose the D300 with a battery grip, simply because it's way WAY lighter than a 1D2, which weighs like a brick. The 1D2 does have better AF, but only a few ms ahead of the D300.

9th February 2009	#9
dimashp Member Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 125	Re: comparing D300 vs 1DM2 for photojournalism, hi all...wow, quick reply from all of you...THANKS...i tried 1dm2 last time, interface sucks (nt a problem though). for its weight, i don't mind as it was built for harsh condition. but i was shocked to know that 1dm2 did not perform in low light (which is real bad, as i do not think i can use flash if i'm covering badminton, etc...or else they will smash me =P) how good is the auto tracking in D300 ? that is one of the feature which made me think twice before deciding on 1D. is it that accurate or probably just another imperfect feature. i read in few forums. as for sport photography, nikon is hitting canon a real hard (esp in Beijing Olympic). really need to make a tough decision on nikon/canon. i don't think i can afford to switch to another system after my investment for this. =(

9th February 2009	#10
xl1 Senior Member Join Date: May 2004 Location: Under the Son Posts: 2,598	Re: comparing D300 vs 1DM2 for photojournalism, take 1Dmk2 !!! for AF you cannot beat canon 1 series, btw im using canon and nikon, you always can using remote trigger for your flash, think out of the box...! __________________ www.ubans.com Last edited by xl1; 9th February 2009 at 09:46 PM.

9th February 2009	#12
cyrzk Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Jurong East Posts: 262	Re: comparing D300 vs 1DM2 for photojournalism, as for me,ill vouch for 1D mk2 since you are eyeing for photojourn,sports and stuffs. my 2 cents worth thanks

11th February 2009	#16
nightwolf75 Moderator Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: in bet MORE diaper changes... Posts: 14,591	Re: comparing D300 vs 1DM2 for photojournalism, i'm using the d300 and have used 1dm2. actually, there's no comparison bet the 2 brands cos they work on different algorithms anyway. there are too many variables to even start measuring the speeds. even if u can, it is meaningless IMO, regardless of what the 'experts' say. end of the day, both are fine AFs. i do know abt the problems of 1dm3. but, among my frens using it, it doesn't really appear even for those early adopters. mebbe my frens have yet to replicate it... hehe.. as an OT, the d700's AF system (roughly the same as d3, also the same number of AF points of d300, IIRC) is just as good. try capturing a flying mosquito like him... http://duncandavidson.com/2009/02/te...tes-image.html __________________ When did ignorance become a point of view? - Dilbert budget AD/ROM shooter, anyone?

11th February 2009	#17
lightning Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Punggol Posts: 3,761	Re: comparing D300 vs 1DM2 for photojournalism, Having a 1D3, and used the 1D2 before, I swear by its AF, not sure why people are complaining about the 1D3 AF, but to me having a 9 out of 10 frame in focus shots on a head on approaching car travelling at 60km/h is good enough for me. Sometime people blame the equipment and etc and someone use a 50 1.8 @F1.8 to track motion and say that the AF is lousy. To me it is absoultely nuts to use a 50mm F1.8 lens to track. I shoot using the 1Dm2, 1dm3 with 70-200 F2.8, 300F2.8, 400 F2.8 all perform like a charm even at F2.8 Was tempted to switch to 5Dm2 but in the end I did not is due to the AF capability, Weather sealing, handling. 5DM2 just not cut out for sports. As for D300, I am not sure if it is that good. But one thing for me is service support from the Brand. Canon has never delay in my service, never say no to my request that are reasonable. I have ever asked the service centre to repair my camera (Change shutter) within a day (3hrs) because the shutter died and I need to shoot in the evening. You might want to check out the nikon service centre and see how well stock up are their spare parts. Shot with 1DM2 and 400 F2.8 The full res of this photo will show it's full glory! __________________ My stock photos victor.shutterbug.sg Last edited by lightning; 11th February 2009 at 04:32 PM.

11th February 2009	#20
zj2000 Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 1,457	Re: comparing D300 vs 1DM2 for photojournalism, When shooting sports the 1dmkII AF is blazingly fast. When i first used it made my 350d feel like a PnS. As a general purpose camera though it is not that great. due to it's 1.3 crop, there are hardly any ultrawide angle available for it. walkabout lenses like the 24-105 will also be a bit tight on the 1dmkII. i guess it's really up to you whether you want a more general purpose camera or a specialised sports shooter. In spite of what some ppl say, the canon's AF in low light is not that bad. even my 350d with a $50 lens can AF accurately at f5.6 iso100 30s sort of exposure without need for AF assist. I'll choose the 1dmkII over the d300 mainly because I'm not too impressed with it's AF speed on the few occasions that I have used it. I find that even a 40d locks focus faster than the d300. Either camera you choose will be a good choice, take a look at the 2nd hand prices in the market I think they are quite close which should mean that ppl have equal regard for these 2 cameras.