Menu
What's new
The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Trying to do street photography with the D300 vs GRD2

nostatic

nostatic

New member
tough crowd there.

Do you find that being an in Nambia you can use the dslr as a "tourist" and get shots easily? I know that when I was in Hong Kong it seemed easier to snap away with a bigger camera than it is here in LA.

wrt DOF, that is a challenge. I've been shooting a lot with my Pentax lately and end up going auto ISO setting the range from 100 to 1600, and stopping down to get some extra breathing room. One advantage I get back is that I can run a Pentax 50-135* f2.8 zoom that has incredible contrast and shoot from further away. With the larger sensor I can crop and still get a decent image. Not quite "street" though.

The good news is that your D300 should have stunning AF performance (the Pentax is weak in that area). You should be able to frame/af/snap quickly. For street on the Pentax I always use single point AF and center what I'm shooting at, then swing to frame while the shutter is halfway down. The multipoint often gets confused in busy environments. I also have a 1 second review so I can check exposure as the metering can be interesting as well. I end up switching between spot and average depending. Luckily on the Pentax it is an old school lever as opposed to a menu option.

I look forward to your experiments, especially what you do with the "clean" files (relative to small sensor). I'm seeing a significant difference between 10mp small sensor and 14.6mp aps.
 
Last edited:
otumay

otumay

New member
Funny you've raised the issue just when I traded my D2x for a D300, and was contemplating a comparison of these two cameras myself. A few weeks back, I made a similar comparison between the GRD-2 and Kodak DCS Pro SLR/n and reached somewhat striking (immature perhaps?) results: Ricoh failed miserably in white balance (I was shooting RAW), and to add insult to injury, gone were the details of buildings I've shot from a couple of hundred meters. Kodak, itself not a good performer in the white balance category, excelled when compared to the Ricoh.
Last weekend me and my girlfriend went to some rural parts of Turkey with my new D300. She used the GRD-2 (Fine jpeg, b+w) and we nearly always ended up with similar shots. I liked her photos a lot, though I'm also much impressed with my output with the D300. A dynamic range almost comparable to Fujifilm S5 Pro, an attractive soft look without compromising resolution and detail, and lovely colours I've come to expect only from Sigma SD-14. A comparison would be unjust however, since I shot RAW only. Anyway, to sum up, I have a feeling that GRD-2 is best when shooting b+w at close range.
Will keep in touch if something creeps up. By the way, I liked your shots very much.
 
M

Mitch Alland

Guest
nostatic said:
tough crowd there.
Click to expand...
Telling me! Don't people realize that you have to learn to use a camera? There is also the issue that the GRD2 may turn out to be much more suitable for street photography than the D300, although I have not concluded that yet because I don't know the new camera well enough yet.

Do you find that being an in Nambia you can use the dslr as a "tourist" and get shots easily? I know that when I was in Hong Kong it seemed easier to snap away with a bigger camera than it is here in LA.
Click to expand...
Don't know yet as I've only been able to shoot yesterday in Tsumeb, a mining town where there are no tourists.

—Mitch/Tsumeb, Namibia
http://www.flickr.com/photos/10268776@N00/
 
M

Mitch Alland

Guest
otumay said:
Funny you've raised the issue just when I traded my D2x for a D300, and was contemplating a comparison of these two cameras myself. A few weeks back, I made a similar comparison between the GRD-2 and Kodak DCS Pro SLR/n and reached somewhat striking (immature perhaps?) results: Ricoh failed miserably in white balance (I was shooting RAW), and to add insult to injury, gone were the details of buildings I've shot from a couple of hundred meters. Kodak, itself not a good performer in the white balance category, excelled when compared to the Ricoh.
Last weekend me and my girlfriend went to some rural parts of Turkey with my new D300. She used the GRD-2 (Fine jpeg, b+w) and we nearly always ended up with similar shots. I liked her photos a lot, though I'm also much impressed with my output with the D300. A dynamic range almost comparable to Fujifilm S5 Pro, an attractive soft look without compromising resolution and detail, and lovely colours I've come to expect only from Sigma SD-14. A comparison would be unjust however, since I shot RAW only. Anyway, to sum up, I have a feeling that GRD-2 is best when shooting b+w at close range.
Will keep in touch if something creeps up. By the way, I liked your shots very much.
Click to expand...
Thanks, Otumay! Although I haven't run any tests it's easy to see that the D300 has more dynamic range than the GRD2, with less of a tendency to blow highlights. Indeed, the colours of the RAW files are very good.

—Mitch/Tsumeb, Namibia
http://www.flickr.com/photos/10268776@N00/
 
ecliffordsmith

ecliffordsmith

New member
Hi Mitch,

Tough indeed. Out of curiosity, what made you go for D300 or DSLR in general?

I am curious how you find peoples reactions change. I find a difference between my M8 and a GRD2.
 
M

Mitch Alland

Guest
Ed, last week I found that I was going able to take off some ten days in Namibia and therefore wanted a camera that could take a telephoto with an EFOV of 300mm for photographing game. Then, when I looked at the D300 in a Bangkok camera store I found the technology dazzling, particularly the incredibly fast and accurate autofocus, together with the relatively quiet shutter and the quick, well-dampened mirror movement. Also, I wanted to see how, and whether, my photography would change with high-quality larger sensor camera. Finally, I also wanted to try a camera that would be much easier to work with at ISO 1600 and 3200.

As I only shot yesterday evening I cannot yet conclude on whether people react differently to this larger camera the to the GRD2, but to go by these initials impressions of yesterday alone my feeling is that it is not than different.

—Mitch/Tsumeb, Namibia
http://www.flickr.com/photos/10268776@N00/
 
M

Mitch Alland

Guest
Ellemand, here in Namibia the ISP connection that I'm using is slow. Therefore, I was able to look at only one of the pictures, the one of the two men running in the rain, which I sort of like. How do you feel about doing this kind of street photography with a DSLR rather than a small sensor camera?

—Mitch/Tsumeb, Namibia
http://www.flickr.com/photos/10268776@N00/
 
M

momo

Member
the first thing that strikes me...

the broad dynamic range of the D300 images...most of what I have seen here from the grd2/gx100 cameras are severly clipped whites and blacks...not that they don't look good, just a fact, to each his/her own about liking that or not...

not sure if 'dynamic range' is the right term here but these D300 images look more three dimensional, broader steps from lights to darks...

in my own work i much prefer the dslr quality/range to my F30, but I always attract a lot of attention with the 'big black box'...people wave me off not to take their picture...i never get that with the F30...'big black box' = pro/uncomfortable...F30 = tourist/harmless...

as for the nasty remarks about your work getting stale etc...blow it off, do your thing...it's blablabla...

thanks for sharing your work and work method with us mitch...i've seen your work and read your ideas first on the dpr forums...then found you here...

myself, i'm toying with the idea of a gx100 or grd2 but hesitate...i actually prefer the gx100 for the zoom lens but think i may wait a bit, see if ricoh introduces an upgraded version with more internal memory so shooting raw isn't so tedious...

i've also been hesitant because of the narrower, in my eyes, 'dynamic range'...but compromise is what these little wonders are all about...at least in 2008...one day we will have D300 image quality in the size of a grd2...when?...anybodys guess...



Mitch Alland said:
I thought some people might be interested with my initial struggles to do street photography with the Nikon D300 compared to the GRD2, but it still too early for any conclusions:

http://forum.getdpi.com/forum/showthread.php?p=16992#post16992

—Mitch/Tsumeb, Namibia
http://www.flickr.com/photos/10268776@N00/
Click to expand...
 
E

ellemand

Guest
Hey Mitch.
I have no problem using DSLR's to my street-photography - and I do that a lot.
I use my GRD's and D-lux3 for that too, when I often don't wont to carry the big camera.
When I go out shooting with the DSLR I often use only one prime - mostly 35 mm (equalized) or an 17-40 mm zoom.

Cheers
Ellemand.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ellemand/
 
M

Mitch Alland

Guest
Re: the first thing that strikes me...

momo said:
as for the nasty remarks about your work getting stale etc...blow it off, do your thing...it's blablabla...
Click to expand...
No, that doesn't bother me — it takes all kinds...
momo said:
...myself, i'm toying with the idea of a gx100 or grd2 but hesitate...i actually prefer the gx100 for the zoom lens but think i may wait a bit, see if ricoh introduces an upgraded version with more internal memory so shooting raw isn't so tedious...
Click to expand...
You may want to consider the GRD2 with the 21mm and 40mm EFOV converters, which I like a lot. I've shot some interesting portraits with the latter that you may have seen. Waiting is problematic with digital because everything changes so fast — for the same reason buying is problematic as well.

—Mitch/Tsumeb, Namibia
http://www.flickr.com/photos/10268776@N00/
 
mwalker

mwalker

Subscriber Member
Mitch, I really like the waiter shot in this series and all of your work. I've been studing your work closley with the GDRII. Do you find the GRDII a little edgier and the D300 photos more refined?
 
Lili

Lili

New member
David and Goliath
Thats what I thought when I read the title of this thread ;)
Seriously, Mitch I do NOT find your work to be stale and it is NOT your *duty* to knock anyones socks off but your own.
That being said, change is good; it refreshes ones view of the world and helps one to grow.
I shall watch your synergy with the Nikon with interest.
 
M

momo

Member
Re: the first thing that strikes me...

Mitch Alland said:
No, that doesn't bother me — it takes all kinds...You may want to consider the GRD2 with the 21mm and 40mm EFOV converters, which I like a lot. I've shot some interesting portraits with the latter that you may have seen. Waiting is problematic with digital because everything changes so fast — for the same reason buying is problematic as well.

—Mitch/Tsumeb, Namibia
http://www.flickr.com/photos/10268776@N00/
Click to expand...
yes, i've seen the beautiful, gritty, portraits...and even though I do feel that the grd2 gives somewhat better detail than the gx100, I don't like the idea of carrying the lenses, having to pop stuff on and off the camera body...i like the ease of the zoom to frame and re-frame on the fly,...

also, for me, the whole gestalt of these small body/small sensor cameras is the absence of weight and extras...simple, fast, unobtrusive...

i agree with you...waiting is not a good thing, however, the gx100 is a year old now...maybe something will happen between now and august...i'm betting ricoh will add internal memory like they did for the grd2...when, oh when...

but i will need something relatively soon...i'm giving my F30 to my wife...and need something for an extended stay in New York starting mid April...

oh, by the way...I've also been looking at the D300 as an upgrade to my aging Canon D60...i agree with your assessment of the grain and higher iso's...i like what nikon is doing, how they handle noise with their dslr's...
 
popum

popum

New member
Mitch

Very interesting thread. I'm dealing with the same issues. I have GRD1 and GRD2 and really appreciate them as street shooters. I just sold my M8 (couldn't get the shots I wanted... my fault) and bought a D300. Used it in the streets of NYC last Saturday with a 35mm prime. I felt it worked very well with the continuous focus and, at least in NYC, didn't evoke any different reaction from folks than did the GRD or M8.

I'm still learning the D300 but like what I'm getting so far.

Mike
 
P

Player

Guest
Mitch, I just want to add, as others have, that I don't find you pictures getting "stale" at all. Similar theme (streetshooting), but each photo is unique and interesting. Keep up the great work!
 
S

sizifo

New member
Was playing with a d300 in a shop recently. It is an incredible piece of technology. It sounds like you fell in love with this aspect, and had to have it. But frankly, I can't imagine it can be better for the style and type of photography you do than the GRD2. Just too many important down sides: viewfinder only, weight + size, dof. And even though it's not as loud as other dslrs it did seem significantly louder than the grd 2. But of course, styles change.

Is the liveview feature useful at all?
 
nostatic

nostatic

New member
I can say that I have yet to use liveview on the K20d except to test it. Something about a dslr makes me want to pull it up to my eye. Plus the liveview implementations in dslrs tend to be pretty klunky. Unless you have separate sensors, you are forcing the design to do something it really doesn't want to do.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top