D3x...First Impressions

A

Arkady

Suspended / Banned
Messages
10,476
Name
Rob
Edit My Images
No
Repeated in Out Of Focus...


OK... I did some reportage stuff at the Iserlohn Schutzenfest back home in Germany over the weekend and my only real gripe is the lack of focus-area info on the top LCD screen, compared to the D2x I was using before...
I never realised how many times I checked it before shooting until it wasn't there any more... I used to be able to look at a subject and be moving the cursor to the right AF-Point without bringing the camera up to my eye...can't do that anymore and I find it quite annoying...

I do like the 51-pt AF, though for general stuff I'll be reducing the number of AF points available as it takes an age to scroll across the screen now, whereas two or three pushes on the cursor-dial would do it before...

Image quality is about what you'd expect from a 24Mp chip, so I won't bore you with any images as they'd have to be resized anyway...

Exposure seems to lean towards over-exposure, so I may apply -2/3 stop at a later date after more testing, but since I shoot manual anyway it's a bit redundant...

I've been shooting lossless/compressed NEF/RAW and it seems fine - doesn't take up too much space; about 24Mb per frame, so the two 8Gb cards in each camera will store approx 400 images between them, which is fine...lol
Plus I'll carry an additional 2x 8Gb cards and all my 'old' 4Gb cards - about a dozen of them...
So no more need for a portable 'image-tank' HD, thank God...

Not camera-related, but the Nikon Transfer protocol has changed from the old format and I now find it quite difficult to add all my file-info at the transfer stage, whereas it used to be a doddle...too many damn options now...keep it simple, please? There doesn't seem to be anywhere to add basic caption info, though all the other fields are there...

All in all it feels good...crisp release, good AF, even with older lenses and good image quality...
However, unless I was doing group portraits, studio work and weddings for a living, I'd probably buy a D3 if it were my own money I was spending...
 
The thing with the D3x is that hardly anyone actually needs it over a D3.

Even if you do portraits, studio stuff and weddings, you still don't need 24mp. The only people that would benifit the D3x are those who are perhaps in advertising, and need massive prints (not just big A2s and stuff, like meter long prints).

It's stupidly expensive too, almost £5,000. Insane. Even if you did need it, I don't know if it warrents spending an extra 2 grand.

The AF is awesome though, I love the AF on my D3, the 51-point 3D tracking is amazing.
 
Droooooool.

I am just selling everything I don't need to buy a D700. Would love the D3 but would have to start selling things I do need in order to get that :) D3x..... well, if I won the lottery I would buy a couple, maybe 3

I went on Nikon's site for a brochure for the D700 and clicked D3x too just for a read, brilliant camera and is probably showing what we can expect out of the next generation of normal cameras ie D700x / D4 etc What I really like from the 24Mp is that it is still 10Mp with a crop lens, this could be good for the next gen cameras. Clearly you are not really going to want to stick a cropped frame lens on the D3x :)
 
Interesting that you mention the "need" to move to a 24MP sensor. I know a chap who owned both a D3 and a D3x (at the same time) and has since sold both and bought a D700 as he felt that he didn't need the extra resolution, but wanted a lighter body but with the great functionality.
Have to say, makes me think that the D700 is the sweet spot in Nikon's range right now unless you genuinely NEED to have two memory cards and shoot lots in portrait mode.
 
Mr_Sukebe said:
Interesting that you mention the "need" to move to a 24MP sensor. I know a chap who owned both a D3 and a D3x (at the same time) and has since sold both and bought a D700 as he felt that he didn't need the extra resolution, but wanted a lighter body but with the great functionality.
Have to say, makes me think that the D700 is the sweet spot in Nikon's range right now unless you genuinely NEED to have two memory cards and shoot lots in portrait mode.
Click to expand...

I should have enough money in the next month to get my D700. I hope that if Nikon ARE about to launch its replacement they hurry up!
 
Its funny they always spout that 24mp is of no use, yet nobody ever used to say anything like that about the 1DS Mk III... Nobody also used to bitch and moan about the price of Canon's flagship product either.... so why do all mentions of the D3X turn into just that?
 
Arkady said:
However, unless I was doing group portraits, studio work and weddings for a living, I'd probably buy a D3 if it were my own money I was spending...
Click to expand...

I was reading your deviant art last night mate and saw that two D3X's were on the way. I knew you'd draw the 'shoulda gone for a D3' line under it though.

Unless your printing at hu-ge sizes, I couldn't see the D3X having any advantage over the D3 for the kinda paces that your going to be putting it through out in the field.

The ISO capability is good on the X but no where near as flexible as a D3 and someone like yourself would have really used that kinda facility as well as the FPS and AF.

Anyway, it really doesn't matter as I know you'll still be producing your usual stunning work.

All the best.

T.
 
desantnik said:
Its funny they always spout that 24mp is of no use, yet nobody ever used to say anything like that about the 1DS Mk III... Nobody also used to bitch and moan about the price of Canon's flagship product either.... so why do all mentions of the D3X turn into just that?
Click to expand...

Bearing in mind that the OP himself who made the comment, don't you think it's worth giving a little credence?
 
Mr_Sukebe said:
Bearing in mind that the OP himself who made the comment, don't you think it's worth giving a little credence?
Click to expand...

Where did the OP say anything about the price or megapixels other than "Image quality is about what you'd expect from a 24Mp chip, so I won't bore you with any images as they'd have to be resized anyway..."? :shrug:
 
Images would have to be re-sized to post them here...so there's no point doing so - there are plently of online links to full-size images taken under ideal conditions if people really need to count pixels.

Pretty much anything over 10Mp with decent processing algorithms will do the job these days - it's the way the camera feels and ease of use regarding operation and functions that's more important to me.

Price? Since I don't pay for my cameras, I didn't comment about that as it has no relevance to me.

Plus I just got the word from the Bosses - I'm getting two D3 bodies in 3-4 weeks as well, so I can choose which ones to use for whatever jobs come up...it's all good really...
 
desantnik said:
Its funny they always spout that 24mp is of no use, yet nobody ever used to say anything like that about the 1DS Mk III... Nobody also used to bitch and moan about the price of Canon's flagship product either.... so why do all mentions of the D3X turn into just that?
Click to expand...

I would have thought that although 24MP isn't required for magazine glossy shoots, it would be handy to have the fine pixel detail that they require for all the post processing and retouching.
 
welly said:
Where did the OP say anything about the price or megapixels other than "Image quality is about what you'd expect from a 24Mp chip, so I won't bore you with any images as they'd have to be resized anyway..."? :shrug:
Click to expand...

Please go re-read the OP which makes a comment about "unless I was doing this for a living, my money would be on a D3".
Bearing in mind that the only significant difference between the D3 and D3x is the resolution, that seems to me to be pretty implicit in suggesting that he considered the image quality difference to not particularly cost effective.

Or did I miss something?
 
DizMatt said:
I would have thought that although 24MP isn't required for magazine glossy shoots, it would be handy to have the fine pixel detail that they require for all the post processing and retouching.
Click to expand...

Reading the thread where most people admit to never printing their pictures, I would think about 2M would be more than enough!


Steve.
 
Mr_Sukebe said:
Please go re-read the OP which makes a comment about "unless I was doing this for a living, my money would be on a D3".
Bearing in mind that the only significant difference between the D3 and D3x is the resolution, that seems to me to be pretty implicit in suggesting that he considered the image quality difference to not particularly cost effective.

Or did I miss something?
Click to expand...

Correct - 10.2Mp is more than adequate for most of the work I do, let alone personal photography, which is mostly confined to online-sharing and the occasional A3 Print.

I regard the 'old' D2xs as being of better-than-film performance for the type of work I do.
The D3 is almost medium-format in terms of image quality due to the FX-size chip and has the flexibility of a 35mm-format camera.

Having 24Mp is good, very good, as it allows me to downsize as required, but unless someone was paying me to shoot car commercials or something else requiring 5x4-quality, I wouldn't pay for it.
The D3 has greater flexibility, a more useful EV range and faster FPS/larger buffer capacity.

Being that I got these cameras for nothing, I don't have to justify the expenditure and so can offer a perhaps more balanced view of it than someone who has foregone a new kitchen to pay for it...
 
yes and yes...I thought that was fairly implicit, though I guess not...lol
 
Arkady said:
yes and yes...I thought that was fairly implicit, though I guess not...lol
Click to expand...

I understood entirely but sometimes people state that their new DXXX now equals film resolution forgetting that film is available in 120, 5"x4", 8"x10", 8"x20", 20"x24", etc.


Arkady said:
Being that I got these cameras for nothing, I don't have to justify the expenditure and so can offer a perhaps more balanced view of it than someone who has foregone a new kitchen to pay for it...
Click to expand...

And that does sound like a nice price!


Steve.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top