V1.02
Thom Hogan’s Complete Guide to the Nikon D300
Page 40
• The Canon <name a model> is better.
Nikon and Canon
have both been producing interesting and quality
products. As I write this, the Canon 40D provides slightly
fewer megapixels and features than the D300 at a lower
price, while the Canon 5D provides the same number of
megapixels and a larger sensor at a higher price.
I’ve used all three in the field and would be happy with
any of these DSLRs; my personal choice would be the
Nikon, with the 5D a close second. In particular, the
D300’s flash system is more reliable and I find its
autofocus system more flexible. Most people find the
Nikon user interface more approachable and direct. That’s
not to bash the Canons—they are perfectly fine cameras in
their own right. In most well trained users’ hands, though,
neither a Nikon nor Canon DSLR is going to be “better.”
The further we get into the digital age, the less tangible
difference I see between the products of either company,
at least when it comes to image quality. Sure, there are
some small differences. The D300 tends to produce less
chroma noise than the 40D when noise is produced, the
40D tends to block up colors slightly at higher ISO values,
and the D300 uses a noise suppression technique that
produces small artifacts in absolute black that make it less
useful for astrophotography.
Bottom line:
The visual differences aren’t strong enough to
suggest one brand over another. My suggestion is to try
both brands and go with the one you like better from a
handling standpoint.
• The D300 produces lines in some shots.
Actually, you can
make just about any DSLR produce objectionable artifacts
if you push it beyond its capabilities, and that’s partly
what is happening here. Essentially, people dial in
Active
D-Lighting
, a high ISO value (usually via Automatic ISO),
turn
Long exp. NR
to
On
, take a very long shot, and then
underexpose. And they complain when they sometimes
see ugly line-type artifacts in the shadows after a few
