Good Lord this D300!

[Michael.]

Wow, this camera is amazing. Took about 100 shots already, shot my friend's Honda Ruckus, some pets, the sky (sun setting), and then a few over at BJ's with a friends grocery getter Volvo wagon ha.

I'll have some posted up soon, probably by lunch time...

[SaturnTypeR]

pics? :crack:

[Michael.]

im at my gf's right now, but as soon as she leaves for class around noon i'll be at my place and i'll get them posted!

[Michael.]

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3141/2551599292_c2d744c62f.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3193/2551599550_2e39330731.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3003/2551600132_2f8aa7c1b8.jpg

[Michael.]

here are the first shots that i liked. straight from the camera didnt even resize.

First D300 Shots - a set on Flickr (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mjl4/sets/72157605430453730/)

(friend got a ruckus. i want one now ha)
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3042/2550892819_b2aae46877_b.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3156/2551715964_2599d07ccb_b.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3273/2551716848_1c0d6f74db_b.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3087/2551718862_cfc364cdfd_b.jpg

edit: why the hell doesnt my exif show up still? i turned on the picture authentication, but after some of the pictures so idk if that has anything to do with it...or maybe its the way i'm taking the photo link from flickr...

[btuner]

if your trying to show off the quality of the camera and the crispness of the photos, the DOF is waayyyy to shallow!

[Michael.]

i had it at 2.8

but if you want me to i'll have more tomorrow when i go shooting with my gf and i'll be using the flash and stuff...

[btuner]

i had it at 2.8

but if you want me to i'll have more tomorrow when i go shooting with my gf and i'll be using the flash and stuff...

sounds good:bigthumb:

[racerraul]

That's a nice cam... you are def teh l33t3st in teh forum ;)

Def get out shoot some more...

[Still_sl00]

post the volvo wagon! being bored and running out to BJ's at 10Pm with my roomates moms volvo station wagon FTW!!!

[Michael.]

tested out the real world high iso shots:

inside, iso 3200
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3008/2554776260_f80cf8eb82_b.jpg

inside, iso 400
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3051/2554770846_401cdf524c_b.jpg

outside, iso 3200
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3112/2554770058_fac092c5f7_b.jpg

outside, iso L 1.0 (which i think means a full stop down compared to iso 200 which is the lowest it will go to - still gotta do some reading unless Chris or someone correct it)
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3044/2554770700_004e78e9dc_b.jpg

[.:Chris:.]

Wow, that's awesome. My D200 gets a tiny bit of visible noise at 400, but from there on up I refuse to use it... it's as bad as the D50.

L1.0 is ISO 100 equivalent. The sensor won't nativley go that low, so essentially it takes an image at ISO200 and processes it down to 100 before making the JPEG... that's my understanding anyway.

[Mars_302]

never understood why nikon just didnt call their 200 just 100. From my understanding sensor ISOs are not based on film ISO standards, ISO 100 is the natural native for the sensor and anything above that is an enhancement

[.:Chris:.]

From my understanding sensor ISOs are not based on film ISO standards

I always thought they were. After reading wikipedia, I think the answer is that they're "sort of" the same:

"In digital camera systems, an arbitrary relationship between exposure and finished image lightness can be achieved by setting the system's signal gain (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Signal_gain). This gain is not exactly the same as a sensitivity, which is why the relationship to an ISO speed is more complicated. On a camera, however, setting an ISO speed and setting the exposure accordingly, whether automatically or manually with the help of an exposure meter (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exposure_meter), should result in a photo of appropriate lightness just as with film cameras."

[DC Dave]

Nice upgrade Mike!