Welcome to Omgili,
Omgili ( Oh My God I Love It ;) is a search engine for discussions. With Omgili you can find answers and solutions, debates, discussions, personal experiences, opinions and more... To learn more about Omgili click here.
This is a complete preview of the discussion as it was indexed by Omgili crawlers. Use this preview if the original discussion is unavailable.
Click here to view the original discussion.
[http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?message=28991020&changemo...]
Click here to search for discussions with Omgili discussions search engine.
 |
Which Canon is competitor to D300? [Page 1]: Canon EOS 40D - 10D Forum: Digital Photography Review
I was going to buy a 5D again after having mine stolen 3 weeks ago, however its about to be replaced and I think it will be out of my budget!
As such the D300 is the best offering at around £950, OR is the 40D in the same league?
Some people say its the same as the D80 as such it can't compete with the D300.
I love the handling of the 5D and I understand the body of the 40D is almost identical.
As such it has everything the 5D should have apart from the full size sensor and a few other minor bits.
However with a L lens or the 18-55 f2.8 non L lens, is the 40D anywhere near as good as the D300 or do we need to wait for the "50D"?
Ian
|
|
The 40D is the D300 competitor.
If you love the handling of the 5D, chances are you will not like the handling on the D300 much.
The shape and placement of the shutter button is not as comfortable.
The front wheel requires an unnatural angle of your fingers, either you need to operate it with your middle finger (not nice) or an odd uncomfy angle with your index finger.
It also is too recessed into the grip (and the grip material gets loose easily, making for some more problems there, apparently).
The back wheel also requires some getting used to with your thumb.
The D300 has more AF points, and many more AF settings on different places, so many that even Nikon manual writers and Nikon reps can not make sense of what settings to use for what situations.
If you like complex and puzzling, you will be right at home with the D300, its settings and its menu structure.
Image quality wise the two are comparable.
The 40D does not filter as much noise as the D300 does (in fact it does not filter any in standard settings or in RAW).
Both have live view, the 40D's live view is a better implementation.
Both are good cameras.
The D300 has more settings all over the place, but the essentially offer the same.
It is easier to make the 40D do what you want it to do colour wise, AF wise than the D300.
The 5D follow up(s?) will most probably be announced in the next week or so, so you might just wait with any camera buying decision to see what the canon announcements will be (so that you know the price range).
|
|
Comparisons routinely get made between these 2 cameras, but from a price standpoint, I just dont see a comparison.
It appears that at least in the Nikon and Canon lines, they have chosen to not compete in a couple areas.
I am not sure that the D300 has a competitor.
It stands alone because of feature set and price.
The 40D on the other hand has a handful of cameras available at its price of around $1000.00.
http://www.dpreview.com/...
...2Coly_e3%2Csony_dslra700%2Cnikon_d300&show=all
|
|
Wow. So what your really trying to say is that the D300 is inferior in *every* way you mentioned?
No bias there.
The front dial is too uncomfortable?
Really? A lot of people use it just fine (at least as well as using the single dial on top of the canon bodies.) The thumb dial is awkward?
Come on. The Canon bodies have buttons back there, are those canon buttons awkward then too?
Or are buttons easier to operate with your thumb than a dial is?
To the OP:
The 40D is a nice looking camera, and it is most likely a better purchase than a D300 if you already have Canon lenses and like the Canon body layout.
Unfortunately (or fortunately depending on your outlook) Canon and Nikon do not make bodies that compete head to head on features, this allows the consumers to pick the model that best suits their needs, as opposed to picking the brand they prefer (go into Home Depot and see just how similar all the cordless drills that cost $200 are.)
As for the 5D, from what I understand, the 40D has superior handling and features due to the fact that it is a newer design, but it is a crop body and has the photo characteristics of a crop body.
The 5DII coming out soon?
Probably. It makes sense.
However, that has been stated many times for the last couple months.
Picture quality wise, there are more than enough real world samples on Pbase to get a feel for the performance of all of the contenders.
No need to rely on biased forum opinions to decide that.
-Suntan
|
|
Since at least the D100, Nikon has taken the approach of staggering its models with respect to Canon.
It you lined up the each companies products, they place in price and features at points in between those of the other.
This helps prevent exact comparison, because a missing feature can be explained in terms of cheaper price or a higher price in terms of an added feature.
I'd place the D300 as a half-step above the 40D, both in features and price.
So, there's no escaping having to develop a price-feature tradeoff weighting in your mind when comparing.
David
|
|
And still no information.
Looking at your long review, I have to assume you have never handled the D300.
Anyways the D80 would be a closer more comparable camera to the 40D, the D300 is a step up in pretty well all areas from the 51 point AF, Cam 3500 AF system, Iso 6400 max, better weather sealing, 100% Eyepiece coverage, better rear screen and let's not forget the liveview can also be used in auto mode.
The OP if not heavily invested in lenses might be at an advantage to consider a switch at this time.
Oh and by the way I own all Canon gear and I do love it but misinformation is just that Misinformation
--
Cal
Put a Canon to your head, You deserve it....
http://funshots.smugmug.com/
|
|
...and have widely differing price points.
However it is more of a stretch to compare the d80 to the 40d, than to make the much more logical comparison of the d300 to the 40d.
The d80 has a plastic body and is only 3fps, usually these features (esp plastic body) are often deal stoppers for prosumer shoppers.
In addition, it is a ccd as opposed to cmos sensor which was the major impediment for Nikon not being able to compete with Canon in this segment in the recent past.
The d300 is a step above feature wise over the 40d.
It has essentially a full pro feature set (sans integrated grip) in an aps-c format.
OTH, the d300 costs fully 1.7 times more than the 40d.
With the image quality being very, very close, one must really decide whether the improved feature set of the d300 would be of use to ones photograhpic style.
Many shooters (esp sports/bif guys for the 51pt focus) may be attracted to the d300 feature set.
The nikon flash system is a big plus for certain shooters as well.
For most shooters lots of these features would be of little consequence.
For me, the d300 & especially the d700 are right on the mark features wise & can be barely squeezed into my budget.
Very compelling cameras.
So far canon has the lens that I need so I am waiting to see what Canon will offer soon.
You may want to take another close look at the lens line ups.
Perhaps the biggest consideration, since lens lineups eveolve more slowly.
In any event, I second the advice of waiting a week or two for the new Canon announcements.
They may make a FF offering for less than the current 5d.
They may blow the doors off the d700 for less money as well (doubt it).
A 50d announcement is not out of the question either.
Finally, I'm sorry about your 5d, I've had it happen and it doesn't feel good.
good luck,
n
Quote: :
>
I was going to buy a 5D again after having mine stolen 3 weeks ago,
>
However its about to be replaced and I think it will be out of my
>
Budget!
>
>
As such the D300 is the best offering at around £950, OR is the 40D
>
In the same league?
>
>
Some people say its the same as the D80 as such it can't compete with
>
The D300.
>
>
I love the handling of the 5D and I understand the body of the 40D is
>
Almost identical.
As such it has everything the 5D should have apart
>
From the full size sensor and a few other minor bits.
>
>
However with a L lens or the 18-55 f2.8 non L lens, is the 40D
>
Anywhere near as good as the D300 or do we need to wait for the "50D"?
>
>
Ian
--
There is simply too much beauty in the world to photograph it all, but I'm trying.
|
|
Ok guys, a bit naive talking Nikon on t I am the Canon forum.
However Iam unsure where to ask this question, where I will get an informed opinion.
I underestimated the strength of feeling between the 2 camps.
For what it's worth I had my lens stolen with my 5D and 580 MK II.
So I am starting from scratch.
I guess I am asking what most people are, 40D V D300 V 5D
I am happy to buy the 40D if the IQ is excellent as it's less than half the price of the 5D and £350 less than the D300.
Now thats more money foe L lenses!!!!
Ian
|
|
I switched from D300 to 40D last month.
My primary reason was for f/4 lenses.
I see no difference in IQ between the 2 cameras.
From my perspective I like how the 40D handles better than the D300.
That is just my opinion.
|
|
Cal Quote: :
>
And still no information.
Looking at your long review, I have to
>
Assume you have never handled the D300.
Anyways the D80 would be a
>
Closer more comparable camera to the 40D, the D300 is a step up in
>
Pretty well all areas from the 51 point AF, Cam 3500 AF system, Iso
>
6400 max, better weather sealing, 100% Eyepiece coverage, better rear
>
Screen and let's not forget the liveview can also be used in auto
>
Mode. The OP if not heavily invested in lenses might be at an
>
Advantage to consider a switch at this time.
Oh and by the way I own
>
All Canon gear and I do love it but misinformation is just that
>
Misinformation
>
--
> Cal
>
>
Put a Canon to your head, You deserve it....
>
>
Http://funshots.smugmug.com/
So you think summing up some specs on paper shows the D300 to be better?
Silly.
Does the 51 AF point system cover a wider area?
No, the same. Does it work more accurately and faster?
No, accuracy about the same, and it is slower.
Does it work better in low light?
No, the 40D focusses better in lower light.
ISO 6400 max.
Does that mean the D300 is better at higher ISOs?
No, the 40D is the same or better.
The ISO 6400 setting on the D300 produces not so nice results with desaturated colours, my 450D does better at ISO 6400 (2 stop under exposed and pull back in RAW convertor, in that goes over your head) with much better noise behavior and no colour saturation change.
Better weather sealing?
I am sure. I use my 450D in light rain and that is no problem.
When weather sealing really comes to its own is in situations where I am missing weather sealing myself (means: weather sealing is for pro's that have to make photos even when the conditions chase normal people indoors).
And it would be nice if Nikon started to make fully weather sealed lenses...
Now do you have figures of what weather conditions would make the 40D fail and where the D300 would keep on functioning?
(side point...
I have not have one camera fail on me due to dust or water inside)
100% view finder?
Yes, nice view finder.
So if that is your single camera requirement, get a D300.
Better rear screen?
Yes. Now why do I find this a very secondary requirement?
Double the resolution.
This is not my computer screen, I do not care...
And is that double resolution the source for the slow flickering 15fps live view feed?
Live view auto what?
Yes, the D300 has contrast detection AF for use on a tripod.
VERY slow contrast detection AF.
If that is what you mean.
The 40D's live view is better implemented (how you operate it, the information it gives you with the right white balance, flicker free 30 fps vs 15 fps flicker on the D300, exposure histogram), and has a silent mode where the mirror stays up.
It is nice if you like drooling over on paper specs, does not make the EOS 40D a lesser camera...
|
|
|
And on par with what the D300 offers.
You do not have to fight the 40D to get accurate colours, you do have to figure out how to set a D300 up to do the same, though.
|
|
Glasswave
I apprecaite your comprehensive feedback and what you say makes sense.
I can only wait 3 weeks as I am going to Venice so need to get familiar with the camera.
The D300 gets very solid reviews everywhere, as does the 5D/40D.
However I think they have different applications.
This is mainly due to the features, however at £550 the 40D would give me spare funds for another lens.
The D300 + 18-50 f2.8 Nikon would take up all my budget.
Thanks again
Ian
|
|
|
I doubt anyone can see any IQ differences between 40D and D300, but D300 is more expensive and it has more "bells and whistles" and it is better weather sealed.
They are not in the same category.
--
Kari
SLR photography for 40 years
60°15´N 24°03´ E
|
|
> I am happy to buy the 40D if the IQ is excellent as it's less than
>
Half the price of the 5D and £350 less than the D300.
Now thats more
>
Money foe L lenses!!!!
Well, from all the samples I have seen on the net, the 40D does not produce better (or even as good of) pictures than the 5D.
If that is the question you are asking for opinions about.
There you go.
If you are asking if the 40D is the competitor to the D300.
Yes, it is the closest thing Canon has.
Based on my understanding of the capabilities of the 5D (if the 5D is what you want/are happy with) the added features of the D300 would not be overly applicable.
In other words, aside from the image quality of the 5D, it isnt really a speed demon.
Therefore, if you are happy with the speed/response/usability of the 5D for your kind of shooting, the D300 might be overkill.
Stick with looking at the 40D and saving a couple hundred.
-Suntan
|
|
Good point, but with the £400 I can save on the body it could buy me another lens.
If you were talking say £150, the D300 wins
thanks for your opinion
Ian
|
|
|
Its amazing. Most of these people that have commented have not even used a D300.
|
|
Quote: :
> So you think summing up some specs on paper shows the D300 to be
>
Better? Silly.
Try one out and see for yourself...
>
>
Does the 51 AF point system cover a wider area?
No, the same. Does it
>
Work more accurately and faster?
No, accuracy about the same, and it
>
Is slower. Does it work better in low light?
No, the 40D focusses
>
Better in lower light.
The 51 point AF covers approx 1/3 of the viewfinder area where the 40D possibly 1/4 take a look for yourself.
Both are very good for focus and yes the Canon is faster in low to almost nonexistent light, but in normal light and moving objects the Nikon is definately beter and more accurate.
>
>
ISO 6400 max. Does that mean the D300 is better at higher ISOs?
No,
> the 40D is the same or better.
The ISO 6400 setting on the D300
>
Produces not so nice results with desaturated colours, my 450D does
>
Better at ISO 6400 (2 stop under exposed and pull back in RAW
>
Convertor, in that goes over your head) with much better noise
>
Behavior and no colour saturation change.
ISO 6400 is only for emergency, I have not found personally much use for ISO 6400.
If you have found your 450D does well that is great I have not been impressed with the 30D and 40D same with my 1Dmk2N probably why it's not offered in the xxD seies..
>
>
Better weather sealing?
I am sure. I use my 450D in light rain and
>
That is no problem.
When weather sealing really comes to its own is
>
In situations where I am missing weather sealing myself (means:
>
Weather sealing is for pro's that have to make photos even when the
>
Conditions chase normal people indoors).
And it would be nice if
>
Nikon started to make fully weather sealed lenses...
>
Now do you have figures of what weather conditions would make the 40D
>
Fail and where the D300 would keep on functioning?
>
(side point... I have not have one camera fail on me due to dust or
>
Water inside)
Weather sealing, you don't find this useful.
Well I paid extra for just that feature with my 1 series and yes I would pay again.
Anyways the 17-55 DX, 70-200 f2.8 VR, 200-400 f4 VR and the 200 f2.0 VR are weather sealed and "Nikon".
There is no garrantee weather sealing will absolutely protect your camera only that it should be better (Better safe than sorry)
>
>
100% view finder?
Yes, nice view finder.
So if that is your single
>
Camera requirement, get a D300.
Just another feature...
>
>
Better rear screen?
Yes. Now why do I find this a very secondary
>
Requirement?
>
Double the resolution.
This is not my computer screen, I do not
>
Care... and is that double resolution the source for the slow
>
Flickering 15fps live view feed?
Or more accurate...
>
>
Live view auto what?
Yes, the D300 has contrast detection AF for use
>
On a tripod. VERY slow contrast detection AF.
If that is what you
>
Mean.
> The 40D's live view is better implemented (how you operate it, the
>
Information it gives you with the right white balance, flicker free
>
30 fps vs 15 fps flicker on the D300, exposure histogram), and has a
>
Silent mode where the mirror stays up.
True the implementation may be a little better on the 40D but we'll see whether Nikon changes theirs in future upgrades another thing Nikon does (Canon please note this)...
>
>
It is nice if you like drooling over on paper specs, does not make
>
The EOS 40D a lesser camera...
Not drooling over the specs just the features.
Tryout the D300 you might like it, I was quite impressed.
If I was not so vested in Canon I might have switched...
--
Cal
Put a Canon to your head, You deserve it....
http://funshots.smugmug.com/
|
|
If you are used to the 5D you will not like the D300.
If you are used to the Nikon, you will not like the Canon.
Why, because the control menu and the way it is set up are different for each line.
If you are willing to work the learning curve, than look at what each offers for what you want.
Me, I sold the 20D, 40D, and the 5D, and got the 1D 3.
WHY It fit my needs and shooting style best.
Gasp! A couple of my friends love their Nikon gear.
Bottom line, if you have invested in quality lens, don't switch.
If not, head to the store and play with them all.
Go with what is intuitive for you.
The trolls and fan boys will hate this, but Canon and Nikon rule.
You can not go wrong with either.
Digital has now passed the Kodachrome 25 in so many ways.
They can beat the medium film format of old.
Canon vs Nikon, Nikon vs Canon.
Who cares but the trolls and fan boys.
Quote: :
>
I was going to buy a 5D again after having mine stolen 3 weeks ago,
>
However its about to be replaced and I think it will be out of my
>
Budget!
>
>
As such the D300 is the best offering at around £950, OR is the 40D
>
In the same league?
>
>
Some people say its the same as the D80 as such it can't compete with
>
The D300.
>
>
I love the handling of the 5D and I understand the body of the 40D is
>
Almost identical.
As such it has everything the 5D should have apart
>
From the full size sensor and a few other minor bits.
>
>
However with a L lens or the 18-55 f2.8 non L lens, is the 40D
>
Anywhere near as good as the D300 or do we need to wait for the "50D"?
>
>
Ian
--
Canon Since 1970
|
|
Well, the Nikon does have a 17-55 f2.8, not a 18-50 f2.8.
The 17-55 f2.8 is a nice lens, but loses a bit of contrast and resolution at the long end.
It is more expensive than the Canon counterpart, which offers IS, and has very solid performing optics.
|
|
|
|