D3 & D300 AF sensor

[James Haba]

In this article byThom D3 or D300? by Thom Hogan He states that the Af sensors are more tightly spaced at the center of the D3 image area whereas they are spaced more evenly on the D300.

If it is the same sensor used on both, this makes sense. The sensor array, placed over a smaller chip, equals a broader coverage.

So, for those of you using the D300, have you observed this ability to focus well in all areas to be true in you actual use? Obviously if you don't have a D3 you can't compare that however, a comparison to any pro Nikon camera is valuable.

[Bruce_Stenman]

I believe that Thom is referring to the placement of the 15 cross type AF sensors which on the D3 are in the center 25% of the viewfinder and cover about 1/3 as much of the horizontal axis of the viewfinder as is true with the D2x.

The 15 cross type AF sensors with the D300 are also concentrated in the center of the viewfinder (center 3 columns and 5 rows) but they cover about 30-35% of the horizontal axis. Slightly better than the D3but still a lot less than is true for the D2x and its cross type sensor placement.

The non-cross type sensors are significantly inferior in their ability to be used to focus on a subject in normal indoor lighting situations. This may be mitigated by the use of the SU-800 or a SB-800 to provide AF assist.

In terms of low light autofocus, the Canon Mark III and 40D are a lot better than the D3 and D300 when photographing subjects in many situations I commonly encounter as a wedding photographer.

[Roger_Martin]

Originally Posted by James Haba

In this article byThom D3 or D300? by Thom Hogan He states that the Af sensors are more tightly spaced at the center of the D3 image area whereas they are spaced more evenly on the D300.

If it is the same sensor used on both, this makes sense. The sensor array, placed over a smaller chip, equals a broader coverage.

So, for those of you using the D300, have you observed this ability to focus well in all areas to be true in you actual use? Obviously if you don't have a D3 you can't compare that however, a comparison to any pro Nikon camera is valuable.

In actual use?
The D300 is a great camera, but....
I bought the D300 before the D3 arrived and used it for over 10,000 shots indoors and out. The D3 is so much better in every way that I sent the D300 back and got a second D3. I found that the D3 not only focusus better but much faster as well. For my use, the D300 vertical grip was ackward and did not enhance performance at all.

Except for low light (above 1200 ISO) I also like the build and performance of the D2X better. The handling and workflow are better matched as backup cameras. Mint D2X bodies have been selling for less on eBay than a new D300.

The tighter spacing of the AF sensors on a D3 is better for sports shooters or anyone that prefers spot focusing.

I do find the Mark III of 40D as good or better than the D300 but not even close to the D3 in low light, handling, or workflow when used for sports or weddings. I suggest that the Canon trolls not actually try one because it will make them feel so bad about their decision to go over to the "dark side".

[Bach Photo]

Funny that you should say that about the 40d and Mark III, My mark III is in for repair because it wouldn't lock in focus in lower light situations (the 40d does actually a great deal better). But I beleive that my d300 is by far faster at acheiving intial lock and as far as focus accuracy in slow moving walking shots is near 100% as compared to my Mark III's 30% (the reason I sent it off to NJ).

Michael Steinbach
Bach Photography, LLC

[Terry Zorich]

Originally Posted by Roger_Martin

I do find the Mark III of 40D as good or better than the D300 but not even close to the D3 in low light, handling, or workflow when used for sports or weddings. I suggest that the Canon trolls not actually try one because it will make them feel so bad about their decision to go over to the "dark side".

Good feedback. (I was about to say "Good information", but of course, this is all subjective...)

I have a 1D Mark III, and I'm considering adding a D3 this spring. I would not consider replacing my Canon gear at this point, because to be perfectly honest, while the D3 has some great features and promising performance, Nikon has trailed Canon in the DSLR field for so long that I'd like to see Nikon be able to sustain the success over the course of a couple years. It's not as if Canon won't respond. A 1DM3n, perhaps? I wouldn't be all that surprised to see a Canon reponse by this time next year...

I'm not a Canon "fanboy" or apologist. To this point I've owned Canon gear because (to date) it's been the best available. If that changes - and the D3 may have just tipped the scales - then I will still be interested in owning the best available. This is why I'm contemplating adding a D3 to my collection.

However, I've been extremely satisfied with Canon service, and am not at all looking forward to owning Nikon gear that will eventually need servicing, as a glowing (or even positive) report on Nikon service seems to be a rare thing indeed.

[LarryLetzer]

I have had two items in for Nikon Repair. One was a brand new 17-55 lens that would not focus. It took about two weeks to get it back and it was no better than before. I called Nikon Repair and they Replaced the lens with a new one overnight. They also sent a call tag for the unfocusable lens. Great service.

Next time I sent a D2X in. I am an NPS member which did not mean very much when it took over two weeks for it to come back. However, the camera was fixed under warranty and it works perfectly now.

[Roger_Martin]

I will have to give Nikon repairs mixed reviews myself.

In 2000 I sent in my D1 camera to be repaired at the California facility. They claimed "impact damage" and charged me $800 on a camera that had worked perfectly before but just needed sensor cleaning. I buckled, paid and got my camera back totally out of adjustment. So bad that I had to send it to New York where the work was covered by warrantee. My X supplier recently sent a defective lense to California. They were given the same run around. I got it back 3 months later. The Camera store had told me they would replace the one week old lense so I did not warn them.

Since that first experience, I have sent all my gear to New York where the turnaround, repair quality, service, and fee have been extremely good every time. I also have had really good luck with the Canada facility. But Customs delays, shipping, and tarrifs make that too expensive.

[Pro Photo Store]

Visit the B&H Pro Photo Store for the best Gear Prices and regular specials!

Brilliant Color for any Digital SLR
White Balance Cap
The Pros Agree on ColorRight
What People Are Saying