lured by the video capabilities of the D90 and the good reports about the D300 from johnnybrown and jamesD i swallowed hard and got a D300s. I have a whole bunch of lenses that are alright / good, so might try to flog some and rationalise.
until you have a play with a D3/D3s/D3x
Oof! Good call Grimer, balls deep!Quoteuntil you have a play with a D3/D3s/D3x...and think 'shit this is massive, and for what?'. Handled a few and not remotely tempted.[/quoteI've had them on hire a few times for jobs here and there, image quality blows the D300 outta the water as far as I am concerned, at high ISO especially, plus D3X is necessary for some jobs that I do where large scale printing is required, also I always shoot my D300 with the grip on as I prefer the ergonomics like that, since I have masssssive hands!
D3x aside, my assessment was that image quality at base ISO is identical. The big bodies aren't really practical for anyone who goes out to climb and photograph.
Anyway, we don't need this thread any more. Thinking of upgrading your camera? Read this.
Confident you could tell the files apart without looking at the exif?
Now just waiting on a good deal on a 16-85mm to get me started
Just a follow up to the above... I 100% recommend the 16-85mm (unless you can afford a d300 of course),
I'm really hoping Nikon bring out some more decent DX primes, a 14mm/2.8 prime would be the answer for me.
We keep banging this drum, but its now over 10 years since DX cameras appeared and we've not seen a single small light DX prime of any flavour yet