D300 - "Promi-Berichte"
Verfasst: Fr 30. Nov 2007, 09:45
Verlinkt hier bitte Berichte von prominenten (oder weniger prominenten) Testern ausserhalb des Forum:
Ken Rockwell
Ken Rockwell
Seite 1 von 2
Verfasst: Fr 30. Nov 2007, 22:21
Imaging Resource - eine englische Seite, die ich gerne lese.
Verfasst: Di 4. Dez 2007, 21:40
Thom Hogans erste Eindrücke:
http://www.bythom.com/rush.htm
Interessant ist folgendes -vorläufige- Fazit:
"Quite a few people are waiting for my judgement on the D300 and the D3. All I can say so far is that the D300 appears to be somewhat better than the D200 when the camera is set optimally, and when conversions are done optimally. How much better I can't say and won't until I've had a chance to shoot with the D300 for some time and do more exhaustive side by side tests and conversions. On the other hand, the D3 is clearly better than any previous Nikon DSLR, though again how much better is open to question and requires a lot more use and testing to determine."
http://www.bythom.com/rush.htm
Interessant ist folgendes -vorläufige- Fazit:
"Quite a few people are waiting for my judgement on the D300 and the D3. All I can say so far is that the D300 appears to be somewhat better than the D200 when the camera is set optimally, and when conversions are done optimally. How much better I can't say and won't until I've had a chance to shoot with the D300 for some time and do more exhaustive side by side tests and conversions. On the other hand, the D3 is clearly better than any previous Nikon DSLR, though again how much better is open to question and requires a lot more use and testing to determine."
Verfasst: Di 4. Dez 2007, 23:06
Wolfram hat geschrieben:Thom Hogans erste Eindrücke:
http://www.bythom.com/rush.htm
Interessant ist folgendes -vorläufige- Fazit:
"Quite a few people are waiting for my judgement on the D300 and the D3. All I can say so far is that the D300 appears to be somewhat better than the D200 when the camera is set optimally, and when conversions are done optimally. How much better I can't say and won't until I've had a chance to shoot with the D300 for some time and do more exhaustive side by side tests and conversions. On the other hand, the D3 is clearly better than any previous Nikon DSLR, though again how much better is open to question and requires a lot more use and testing to determine."
Fast schon Bundestagsreif...viele Worte ohne Inhalt.
Verfasst: Mi 5. Dez 2007, 06:59
Naja, wie immer eine Frage der Interpretation 
Dass Mr. Hogan aufgrund des ersten Eindrucks nicht in Euphorie verfällt und die Vorteile der Kamera gegenüber der D200 so deutlich relativiert, ist Aussage genug.
lg, Wolfram
Dass Mr. Hogan aufgrund des ersten Eindrucks nicht in Euphorie verfällt und die Vorteile der Kamera gegenüber der D200 so deutlich relativiert, ist Aussage genug.
lg, Wolfram
Verfasst: Do 6. Dez 2007, 12:30
Dieser neue Bericht gehört ja wohl auch in diese Rubrik:
http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Nikon_D300/
Compared to Nikon D200
The Nikon D200 remains on sale at a tempting price and features pretty much the same build quality and design as its successor. The difference between 10 and 12 Megapixels is also not significant when it comes to real-life detail. The big differences are in terms of features, with the D300 boasting 100% viewfinder coverage, a 3in VGA screen, slightly faster 6fps continuous shooting, a much more sophisticated 51-point AF system, 14-bit processing, Live View and an HDMI port.
All nice features, but the final image quality won’t be much different. So if you don’t want or need the D300’s new features, you could go for a D200 and put the rest towards a decent lens. See our Nikon D200 review for more details.
Herzliche Grüße,
larry
http://www.cameralabs.com/reviews/Nikon_D300/
Compared to Nikon D200
The Nikon D200 remains on sale at a tempting price and features pretty much the same build quality and design as its successor. The difference between 10 and 12 Megapixels is also not significant when it comes to real-life detail. The big differences are in terms of features, with the D300 boasting 100% viewfinder coverage, a 3in VGA screen, slightly faster 6fps continuous shooting, a much more sophisticated 51-point AF system, 14-bit processing, Live View and an HDMI port.
All nice features, but the final image quality won’t be much different. So if you don’t want or need the D300’s new features, you could go for a D200 and put the rest towards a decent lens. See our Nikon D200 review for more details.
Herzliche Grüße,
larry
Nikon D300, how much of an improvement?
Verfasst: Di 11. Dez 2007, 13:56
Re: Nikon D300, how much of an improvement?
Verfasst: Di 11. Dez 2007, 14:17
Ist echt interessant, ich bin bei meinen bisherigen Versuchen zu fast der gleichen Einschätzung gekommen. Wobei ich die LOW Einstellung nachträglich in NX noch etwa um ein Drittel herunterfahre und dann bei Bedarf später mit Dfine noch ganz leicht nachentrausche.
Oh, Mist, bin ja gar kein Promi.....
Verfasst: Mi 12. Dez 2007, 20:05
Verfasst: Do 13. Dez 2007, 19:45