|
dbrayack
Aug 23, 2007, 3:24 PM
Post #1 of 25
(4715 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 1260
|
Its definitely going to be a tough choice...it seems that nikon has really hosed those who invested in the DX lens (fricking 'doh 17-55mm F2.8)...Their new top model is full frame, with a crop mode (12.1 MP with a standard lens, about 5 MP with a DX lens). Though the D300 is a 12.3 MP DX camera. and cost about 3200 less.
Here is info on the two new bodies.
D3
http://www.dpreview.com/.../07082312nikond3.asp
D300
http://www.dpreview.com/...7082313nikond300.asp
-Danno
(This post was edited by dbrayack on Aug 23, 2007, 3:24 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
maldaly
Aug 23, 2007, 3:40 PM
Post #2 of 25
(4705 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 31, 2002
Posts: 1208
|
Dan,
It looks like the D3, when used with DX lenses will default to a DX mode. Now that doesn't make me want to NOT but the FX lenses but it does soften the blow a bit. Here's the blurb from Nikon:
FX and DX Nikon’s digital SLR cameras based on its DX-format sensor have been hugely successful and represent an excellent combination of high image quality, size and value. And while the DX-format has been widely accepted by professional photographers and photo enthusiasts around the world, there is an increasing demand among professionals for a digital SLR camera that features higher ISO sensitivity, wider dynamic range and offers the same relationship between picture angle and depth-of-field that were the hallmarks of the 35mm film format.
Responding to this demand, Nikon has developed the D3 as its first digital SLR camera that features the Nikon FX-format CMOS sensor to meet the real-world requirements of its professional customers. The D3 delivers full resolution 12.1 megapixel images at up to nine frames per second when used with conventional AF-Nikkor lenses. When used with DX Nikkor lenses, the D3 automatically switches to the DX-format mode that uses a cropped portion of the sensor to generate 5.1 megapixel resolution images. While in this mode, the D3 automatically masks the portion of the viewfinder that will not be photographed and enables the capability to shoot up to 11 frames per second.
Both Nikon FX and DX-formats provide their own advantages, and Nikon recognizes that both formats are necessary in order to satisfy its diverse customer demands. Based on this recognition, Nikon will strengthen its D-SLR lineup with the addition of the D3 FX-format SLR camera and a broadened assortment of Nikkor interchangeable lenses, while continuing to develop and market high-performance DX-format cameras and lenses.
mal
|
|
|
|
|
dbrayack
Aug 23, 2007, 3:48 PM
Post #3 of 25
(4700 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 1260
|
Its actually quite smart for them. They have both a fast sports camera (D2H) and high resolution camera (D2x) all in one bag. Maybe I'll start shooting football or something....
Really, the biggest gain for climbing photography is the high ISO performance. Maybe we'll be able to start shooting at like F9 =).
Hey Mal, wanna sponsor me? $5000 is that much right? 
|
|
|
|
|
maldaly
Aug 23, 2007, 4:19 PM
Post #4 of 25
(4690 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 31, 2002
Posts: 1208
|
Sure...I'll buy you the camera if you buy me the lenses.
NOT!
|
|
|
|
|
dbrayack
Aug 23, 2007, 4:27 PM
Post #5 of 25
(4686 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 1260
|
 I got a (all of a sudden) rusty 17-55mm F2.8 if you'll trade me for a D3.
|
|
|
|
|
maldaly
Aug 23, 2007, 5:07 PM
Post #6 of 25
(4671 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 31, 2002
Posts: 1208
|
What else?
|
|
|
|
|
dbrayack
Aug 23, 2007, 5:16 PM
Post #7 of 25
(4657 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 1260
|
hmmmmmm....maybe a daughter in 20 years?
|
|
|
|
|
maldaly
Aug 23, 2007, 7:32 PM
Post #8 of 25
(4642 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 31, 2002
Posts: 1208
|
NFW dude. My kids are almost out of the house!
|
|
|
|
|
the_alpine
Aug 26, 2007, 8:51 PM
Post #9 of 25
(4587 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 6, 2003
Posts: 371
|
Why does Nikon keep refusing to put a firewire plug on their top end bodies!? Fucking usb is slow as molasses.
|
|
|
|
|
deepplaymedia
Aug 26, 2007, 9:21 PM
Post #10 of 25
(4578 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 30, 2005
Posts: 192
|
^ use a firewire cardreader chris!
|
|
|
|
|
the_alpine
Aug 27, 2007, 12:25 AM
Post #11 of 25
(4555 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 6, 2003
Posts: 371
|
No!! I refuse! Actually, I want the firewire option for shooting tethered. USB takes 10ish seconds to move from camera to monitor. Canon's use firewire and accomplish this in 1ish seconds. Surely there are pros out there shooting tethered with a nikon that experience this same level of jackassery. Put 'em both on there Nikon!
|
|
|
|
|
deepplaymedia
Aug 27, 2007, 1:48 PM
Post #12 of 25
(4518 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 30, 2005
Posts: 192
|
yup fair enough, i VERY rarely shoot tethered so it doesnt affect me so much but i can imagine it would very frustrating to use all the time
|
|
|
|
|
Smikey
Aug 28, 2007, 3:10 AM
Post #13 of 25
(4482 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 27, 2007
Posts: 19
|
In reply to: Its definitely going to be a tough choice...it seems that nikon has really hosed those who invested in the DX lens
The D300 is a D2Xs (or better in some specs) for $2,000 less....that’s a HUGH score for DX users.
The D3 finally allows my film lenses to go back to doing what they were meant to do in the 1st place with full frame. (Finally real 14mm again on Nikon digital, and my 17-35 lead duck will be worth carrying around again)
Now the total sh*tty part is I have to figure a way to part with 5K to get one.
|
|
|
|
|
piton
Aug 29, 2007, 12:57 PM
Post #14 of 25
(4419 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 11, 2002
Posts: 1034
|
imo i think the D3 & D300 are overrated. Full Frame and only 12 mp. so far Canon is kicking nikon ass. anyway when i'm ready for an upgrade i won't have to worry since i stay away from dx lenses
|
|
|
|
|
nefarius
Aug 29, 2007, 4:25 PM
Post #15 of 25
(4399 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 6, 2003
Posts: 128
|
I'm a Canon shooter, but even I have to say to the above, "There's always at least one confused guy, huh?"
If the IQ is there, Canon is getting it's ass spanked. Hard. This is good, however, as Canon will finally be forced to put some real features into their bodies now.
|
|
|
|
|
piton
Aug 29, 2007, 5:24 PM
Post #16 of 25
(4382 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 11, 2002
Posts: 1034
|
not confused Randy
but if you are saying that the Nikon D3 12mp Full Frame has more features than the Canon 1ds mark III full frame 21mp and nikon is kicking Canon ass then yeah "huh"
how long has canon had a full frame dig for since 2002?
the only ad nikon has from the specs is maybe the iso ratings but we'll see how good that is
(This post was edited by piton on Aug 29, 2007, 5:32 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
nefarius
Aug 29, 2007, 5:57 PM
Post #17 of 25
(4372 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 6, 2003
Posts: 128
|
OK, so let's start with Nikon having the fastest camera (fps) at this point, superior AF (as usual) 51 AF points vs. 45, significantly higher native ISO's, better viewfinders, 900K+ pixels in their LCD display vs 233K, backwards compatibility with all of their lenses, better flash synch, and then maybe the fact that their Live View makes Canon's look a generation behind.
Oh yeah... Let's not forget the $3k price difference.
Don't believe me, go handle one. Don't have time, try doing some reading.
It's not really about FF, nor megapizels, especially now. Canon is notorious for jilting their customers out of features. Always have been. Want some more features? OK, give us another $500. Want more, give us more $$$. Canon users have been tired, for a while, of Canon extorting $$$ for features that are already in other manufacturer's bodies. Simply because they were leading the pack with noise.
Unfortunately for them, that is changing. Other cameras, which have always been more fully featured than the "equivalent" Canons are now working out their noise issues and forcing Canon to do things it really doesn't want to, such as add weather sealing (only partial still) to the 40D. In so many ways now, the ball has been served to them and it's up to them to return the serve.
This is such common knowledge and bitched about by Canon users, so frequently, that I'm not sure why you'd even dispute it.
(This post was edited by nefarius on Aug 29, 2007, 6:00 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
piton
Aug 29, 2007, 6:12 PM
Post #18 of 25
(4365 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 11, 2002
Posts: 1034
|
geez i didn't know people actually cared about lcd size i thought mb size of the photo is what matters to a photog at least it does to me.
don't know about canon w/ them extorting $$ i have a nikon.
and FF does make a big diff in nikon digs espicially if you have dx lenses which pretty much imo have no use on FF dig and film cameras. that's why i don't have dx lenses. but you will get 11fps though. yeah um big whoop
asa far as a seal goes, mine is weathered seal but i'm bringing a tarp w/ me in the rain.
back to my original the D3 and D300 don't impress me much. the d200 imo does impress me though
|
|
|
|
|
nefarius
Aug 29, 2007, 6:18 PM
Post #19 of 25
(4359 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 6, 2003
Posts: 128
|
Interesting opinions. But, they do vary.
No worries. So long as you're happy.
|
|
|
|
|
Smikey
Aug 31, 2007, 2:39 AM
Post #20 of 25
(4291 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 27, 2007
Posts: 19
|
Here is a link to help cut through the b.s. of what the new D300 and D3 all mean (At least what they should mean to most anyway)
http://bythom.com/D3comments1.htm
it doesn't matter if you like or dislike the new offerings from Canon or Nikon, as this is huge push forward in DSLR's across the board in every direction that will ultimately benefit all in some way.
Of course the camera never matters in the end anyway its the 12" behind it that matters...
|
|
|
|
|
piton
Sep 5, 2007, 5:13 PM
Post #21 of 25
(4183 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 11, 2002
Posts: 1034
|
yeah um Thom gets paid by Nikon to talk up their products. Thom also complains about carring a 40lbs pack.
|
|
|
|
|
Smikey
Sep 5, 2007, 8:55 PM
Post #22 of 25
(4152 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 27, 2007
Posts: 19
|
If Thom got paid by Nikon he would also be under an NDA, but he constantly makes statements prior to Nikon camera launches that would violate an NDA. Plus he does rip into Nikon when they deserve it.
Example:
http://www.bythom.com/confusion.htm
I agree on the whining on the 40lb pack thou ; )
(This post was edited by Smikey on Sep 5, 2007, 8:57 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
pico23
Sep 27, 2007, 8:26 AM
Post #23 of 25
(3760 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 14, 2003
Posts: 2378
|
Glad to see everyone from every company is equally miserable taking pictures.
sort of the bottom line. Shooting RAW at under 800 ISO there is virtually no difference between brands (with Fuji being the rare exception in DR).
So sadly, the features are what you are paying for with any brand. Those that give it to you for less and stillprovide a system you can work with are obviously the better choice.
DX/FX/(4/3)/APS-H are just sizes. A lot of old timers (people that started shooting film) are married to a format of 24x36 for various reasons. Maybe they have 35mm (24x36) legacy lenses, maybe they just don't like converting focal lengths or the difference in DOF.
For me it's the equivalent of Medium Format vs. 35mm vs. Large Format. All have benefits. Will FF be the future in 5 years? nope. A bunch of formats will still exist and all will offer advantages, noise will be the least advantage in the end as it's just a stop gap to go bigger for now.
The D3 though looks like a hell of a camera, and since a 6MP camera can do a full 2 page mag spread as could a 10MP, I'm thinking a 12MP CMOS will probably be OK.
I suppose those looking for more res are chiefly concerned with lines of resolution from the sensor and it's resolving power making the most of lenses, rather than actual pixel dimensions of an image. Since the Nikon D200 had equal lines of resolution to the 5D on a smaller sensor, it's not unreasonable that Nikon has significantly more lines of resolution than a Canon 16MP camera, but the lower pixel count would allow for superior low light (high ISO) shooting. More pixels don't always equal more resolving power, but if past technology is indicative of anything more pixels in the same size sensor tend to mean more noise.
But the D300 is essentially a D2X for a lot less, and a D3 is essentially a lower pixel count 1Ds on with a hell of a motor drive.
|
|
|
|
|
kest2703
Sep 27, 2007, 8:40 AM
Post #24 of 25
(3756 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 31, 2007
Posts: 41
|
|
|
|
|
|
pico23
Oct 15, 2007, 5:42 AM
Post #25 of 25
(3527 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 14, 2003
Posts: 2378
|
One thing further to note.
There is all this hoopla that the 12MP D3 isn't up to snuff with the 1DsMIII.
Actually you are looking at it wrong. it's a vastly superior camera. Huh?
See we've been conditioned that MP's were the holy grail because when cameras first came out that was a huge factor in quality.
However, Nikon took the D2HS and Canon 1DsMIII (FF) and put them into 1 camera.
You now have ISO 6400 that from test images looks amazing and 6400 isn't your extended ISO, it's a native ISO. You also have extended all the way to 12,800. Pretty freakin amazing. Sure landscape artist really don't care about 12,800 but if you could only own 1 35mm format camera to do everything this is it.
Adding more pixels will only increase noise. Larger pixels reduces noise...problem is unless you want to carry a medium format camera around the only way to get larger pixels is to reduce the amount of them (such as the D1H, D2H, D2HS).
Nikon did a good thing. And it was a bold move. I've been waiting for companies to stop battling it out on MPs and start improving exposure latitude, lowering noise, and fidelity.
The D3 is perhaps the most rounded body ever made. It can shoot sports, portraits, PJ, etc. While the 1Ds is really more of a studio/landscape fine arts camera.
It took Nikon a while of playing catchup after being the 35mm imaging company of most of the 20th century but it's now thrown canon a serious curve ball on a fastball count with both the D300 and D3.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
