In a short window of 4 days 4 new mid-professional range cameras were released, 2 by Canon, the mid-range 40D and the pro-range 1Ds Mark III on 20th August 2007 and 2 by Nikon, the mid-range D300 and the pro-range D3 on the 23rd August 2007. For more information there is always dpreview.com but here are some of my initial thoughts about the cameras.
Canon 40D versus Nikon D300
Megapixels: In terms of megapixels, 10mp for the 40D and 12mp for the D300 translate to a insignificant difference in resolution between the two, so no one will ever lose sleep over the pixel count.
Frames per second: The interesting comes at fps, where the 40D scores insignificantly higher at 6.5fps than the D300 at 6fps without the battery grip. However, with the battery grip added, the D300 can perform at 8fps which is considered yesteryear’s benchmark for a professional action camera. Considering that both the 40D and the D300 are only mid-range cameras, such high fps can really serve the needs of many, for example the sports amateur.
Autofocus: The D300 has 51 focus point with 11 being cross types while the 40D only have 9 focus point albeit all being cross type. This, in theory, should mean that the D300 has a faster and more accurate autofocus system and gives the D300 an advantage over the 40D in action shots. The positive thing about both cameras is the inclusion of cross types (and many of them too) which (in theory again) should translate to a more efficient autofocus system.
LCD Monitor: The D300 has a stunning 3.0inch which has 922000 pixels packed into it, which gives a resolution of almost 1mp. Constrast that to the 40D which only has an aboe average 3.0inch LCD with 230000 pixels. The D300 thus should give us a more detailed view of the photos even after much magnification.
Liveview Implementation: While the 40D adopts the flip-the-mirror-up-then-autofocus-and-metering-then-flip-it-down approach, the D300 uses a constrast detection mode which is typical of how the average digital compact work. The later approach should provide for less shutter lag (if well implemented) than the 40D’s liveview, though its worth noting that liveview is always slower than using the good old optical viewfinder.
Viewfinder: The D300 has a 0.94x magnification but with a frame coverage of 100%, compared to the 40D which have a slightly better 0.95x magnification but with only 0.95x coverage. The D300 should give a bigger view and finally we are seeing 100% frame coverage instead of having to worry about the small thin perimeter which is not captured by the viewfinder.
Others: Sensor cleaning and also weather-proofing is another feature of both cameras. While older generations of Canon cameras with sensor cleaning (e.g. Canon 400D) did not have a reputation for being extremely effective, we would have to wait for reviews to see if the sensor cleaning in the 40D (and of course the D300) is effective or not. Weather proofing is a “important” feature too, since can be considered a distinguishable feature (arguable though) that seperates mid/pro-range from entry-level cameras.
Price: The 40D is competitively priced at only USD1299 while the D300 is a lot more at USD1799. Whether the USD500 is justifiable for the advantages the D300 have over the 40D might be debatable, but most people who shoot Canon would probabaly go for the 40D while the Nikon shooters would probabaly go for the D300.
