*** Official Nikon D3X Discussion Thread ***
- Thread starter PsiFox
- Start date
Radiohead
Mine sucks
- Messages
- 3,756
- Name
- Guy
- Edit My Images
- No
I guess it depends on whether you can make do with a D700 for 6-8 months?
Cons against Canon for you (assuming here) are the UWA performance and the ergonomics. Otherwise get those and take a hit if you decide to sell for the D800. Tough call though.
- Messages
- 3,980
- Name
- Tomas
- Edit My Images
- No
That's just it, I'm willing to wager that the noise capability isn't anywhere close to the D3, personally, I think it's a camera targeted at a different market (Landscapes, portraiture etc), a market that needs low light capabilities as much as they need a high frame rate.
- Messages
- 2,470
- Name
- Pete
- Edit My Images
- Yes
You miss-understood my post. Noise QUALITY not quantity. Compare a D300 to a D3 and you see a huge difference in the colour noise in an image.
- Messages
- 3,980
- Name
- Tomas
- Edit My Images
- No
Gotcha. Quote withdrawn and one respectfully apologizes and also offers cake and fine wines as a token of good will.
davekiddle
Like to feel muppets
- Messages
- 6,169
- Name
- Dave
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Did someone mention fine wines?
- Messages
- 3,980
- Name
- Tomas
- Edit My Images
- No
Sure, your welcome to a slice Guy, Battenburg or Angel mate?
It's possible I could russle up a bit of Black Forest Gateaux?
Did someone mention fine wines?
Indeed Sir, The finest available to humanity!
- Messages
- 6,776
- Name
- Andy Drake
- Edit My Images
- Yes
You really need someone to meld a canon/nikon together don't you
Well the D700 body is great, suits me well. But its really not optimal for landscape / base ISO work (its *fine*, just not optimal).
Now the 5D MKII has the body size I want, and the resolution. But personally I prefer Nikon (although not "loyal" per se)
However given that I've not paid for the 5D MKII (not heard from RGBTech) and not had much luck building up a Canon lens collection, I could quit while I'm behind and wait for a bit..
- Messages
- 1,757
- Name
- Alastair
- Edit My Images
- Yes
What a strange statement. How can you possibly think that no one cares about this camera?
Well we've had the last several months prior to the D3x announcement with so many Nikon owners telling us that any more pixels than the D700 are simply wasted. So which is it?
- Messages
- 6,776
- Name
- Andy Drake
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Well I imagine those of us who plan to get get a D3X / D800 are in the more megapixels camp, and those of us who are happy with the D3 / D700 at 12 megapixels will stick to what they've got.
Simple really.
Radiohead
Mine sucks
- Messages
- 3,756
- Name
- Guy
- Edit My Images
- No
Are you being deliberately obtuse. Has every D700 owner said that?
No.
The higher res bodies don't interest me. But they do interest plenty.
As it happens, yes I was, and frankly it was a complete troll of a post.
Having said all of that, it was made for a reason, i.e. to make a point of just how pathetic some of the posts have been by too many members when slagging off for example the 5D2.
Lets face it, the 5Dmk2, D3, D3x, D700 et all, are ALL great cameras, and a big improvement on what could be bought a few years ago.
We should be thankful that not only do they exist, but that there's the level of competition that exists between Nikon, Canon and Sony. That competition is what is going to make much better performance available at a much lower price. I just wish some other forum members would also see that.
Personally, I think the D3x announcement is ace, bring it on. Nope, I'm a Canon user, so I won't be buying one, but it's going to be one of the nudges that is required to get Canon off their backsides and reduce the prices on their better kit.
Hope that makes sense, and apologies if my previous post seemed a little out of order, as clearly it was.
Well I have to admire the honesty
Thanks for hopefully understanding where I'm coming from.
I really do see new kit from rival manufacturers as being a GOOD thing, as it drives competition. So for example, the release of the Sony A900 is brill as far as I'm concerned, even though I have absolutely zero interest in it, because I'm now pretty much tied into the lens collection that I have.
If only we could discuss things in a more rational way, and focus more on the good things.
- Messages
- 6,776
- Name
- Andy Drake
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I don't recall any posts. Perhaps the video has raised eyebrows, but given that 21 megapixels have been with us for a while, your rant feels misplaced. Can you point out some of the "pathetic posts"?
Well it would if it was relevant, but unless I've missed it, I just don't see your point. I think you've been on DPReview and took a wrong turn?
The phrase containing "pot" and "kettle" ring a bell?
Just go have a scan in here, starting at page 1:
http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=83770&highlight=5d2
Now bear in mind that we all know the old 5d has always been a "portrait and landscape" camera, so it shouldn't really have come as a surprise that the new one is in the same market place.
Just go see how many comments there are about how much better the Nikon xxx is, mostly ignoring the benefits that it's 21mp sensor will bring to the party.
True, but i know a number of 5D Shooters that love the 5D but just didn't feel that the new one corrected any of the problems that they had with the old.
- Messages
- 6,776
- Name
- Andy Drake
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Cameraworld is quoting £5,500
http://www.cameraworld.co.uk/ViewPr...d_name=Nikon D3x deposit only. Available soon!
(obviously just a guess), "Price is expected to be around £5,500 for the body."
Lets hope they are wrong.. that feels £2k too high to me!
A price tag like that will sell a LOT of Canon 5D MKIIs....
http://www.cameraworld.co.uk/ViewPr...d_name=Nikon D3x deposit only. Available soon!
(obviously just a guess), "Price is expected to be around £5,500 for the body."
Lets hope they are wrong.. that feels £2k too high to me!
A price tag like that will sell a LOT of Canon 5D MKIIs....
- Messages
- 2,470
- Name
- Pete
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I don't understand how that statement can make sense. The D3x isn't a 5D competitor, it's aimed at the 1Ds. Funnily enough the 1Ds retail price is £5500 or there abouts. Yes it can be bought for less, but so will the D3x once it's been out a while.
- Messages
- 6,776
- Name
- Andy Drake
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I don't understand how that statement can make sense.
Its pretty obvious surely? Look how the D700 sold. Folks like smaller bodies. A lot of folks like high megapixel sensors. A lot of folks like full frame sensors. A lot of folks would really like all that in a small body - preferably with a low-ish price tag.
If you are starting out, what would you buy, given the current economic climate?
I don't think its that difficult to make sense out of?
Its pretty obvious surely? Look how the D700 sold. Folks like smaller bodies. A lot of folks like high megapixel sensors. A lot of folks like full frame sensors. A lot of folks would really like all that in a small body - preferably with a low-ish price tag.
If you are starting out, what would you buy, given the current economic climate?
I don't think its that difficult to make sense out of?
- Messages
- 8,758
- Name
- John
- Edit My Images
- No
Givover
It doesn't make too much sense to me either, I understand peeps do want different things but it isn't something you can generalize with sweeping statements about how the D700 sold, tell you what....it didn't sell cos it was smaller than a D3 that's for certain.
If its 5.5k, its 5.5k, I don't think any mistake will be made in pricing or position, and it won't fit into everybody's financial plans, but then neither does the 1D.
- Messages
- 61
- Name
- Tim Yorath
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Ah, someone with a brain, thank you.
I love folk who think 5D is a Pro camera. Yes, it's fine for weddings, but I wuld never take it anywhere it might see rain. I've heard of way too many dying due to moisture ingress.
D3X is in 1Ds territory, so 3500 is BOTTOM book, more likely 4 grand.
I love folk who think 5D is a Pro camera. Yes, it's fine for weddings, but I wuld never take it anywhere it might see rain. I've heard of way too many dying due to moisture ingress.
D3X is in 1Ds territory, so 3500 is BOTTOM book, more likely 4 grand.
EdinburghGary
Reply not Report
- Messages
- 19,065
- Name
- Gary
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Radiohead
Mine sucks
- Messages
- 3,756
- Name
- Guy
- Edit My Images
- No
A pro camera is one you can earn money with. Simple as that.
- Messages
- 6,776
- Name
- Andy Drake
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Yes, I hear you are looking for one, any luck?
One of the silliest most ill-formed comments I've read. And I spend time on DPReview. How's the hunt for that brain going? Not so good by the looks of it..?
I reckon it'll be £3k exc VAT. £5500 is mental, and I really don't think it'll sell well at that price. If its true, I have a feeling, Jacobs just made it up.
I believe the 5d MKII and the A900 has redefined market expectations - at £5.5k it'll be a dead duck I think.
Hacker
TPer Emeritus
- Messages
- 7,625
- Name
- Colin
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Considering the market it is aimed at I reckon the price will be somewhere in the region of £4,300 - £4,500 at a minimum. The volatile currency markets and weak pound will obviously have an major influence on this and I would be very surprised if it is under £4k.
EdinburghGary
Reply not Report
- Messages
- 19,065
- Name
- Gary
- Edit My Images
- Yes
- Messages
- 3,980
- Name
- Tomas
- Edit My Images
- No
Most likely but let's see, I felt that the D3X was a while away and to be fair it still is, there'll be a fair few months wait before we see any in stores.
The D800 I assume will be a full frame, high MP in a smaller body type to rival the 5DmkII possibly, offering the high res end in a more 'compact' body.
All speculation and pontification of course.
T
EdinburghGary
Reply not Report
- Messages
- 19,065
- Name
- Gary
- Edit My Images
- Yes
The thing with the D3 and D3X - is it not what Nikon usually do? Did they not spilt the D2 into two models, a fast one, and a fat megapixel monster?
The D200 - what was its lifespan, 2 years?
To be fair, it looks like things are hotting up between Nikon and Canon, would not surprise me if they release an upgrade to all lines once per year now.
Gary.
Radiohead
Mine sucks
- Messages
- 3,756
- Name
- Guy
- Edit My Images
- No
I'll take whatever you have Tomas
Back to the D3 or D3x - here's why I personally need the higher ISO performance.
Wedding yesterday in Windsor. 11th century church and a very grey day meant poor light inside. Vicar was quite happy for me to shoot the ceremony.
With 2 caveats - no flash, and it was in candlelight.
That meant to have any chance of stopping movement and getting 1/125s I was at ISO 10,000 and f1.6:
More than usable for album work.
It also gives me 1600 performance like this:
- Messages
- 3,980
- Name
- Tomas
- Edit My Images
- No
Maybe it's what target markets want, maybe it's better for sales, maybe combining the two bodies capabilities is unsuccessful or unstable, I really don't know, what makes sense to me though is Nikon nurturing D3 sales for a little while longer with the D3X not being an upgrade.
I still am in the strong belief that Canon and Nikon are both puppets held by the same master, when sales need to be boosted - the puppet on the left dances more vibrantly and seems more favorable, when the hype dies down the puppet on the right brandishes new spangly wares and thus continues the cycle. Stability and security, keep your enemies closer, so close that your actually partners.
The other element is the more file sizes increase with camera's the more computer power demand increases too, the technology is normally under the hat and being intensely researched as the current stuff is being released and placed on the shelf, maximizing profits.
I assume corporations need a little more than a year for all the time and hard work to produce the results they desire, but again I speculate and pontificate of course. Just my thrup'ney bits.
- Messages
- 3,980
- Name
- Tomas
- Edit My Images
- No
The gateaux is on reserve so be quick man!I'll take whatever you have Tomas
I know what you mean, I bet the 1600 shot has no NR either?
I have the same needs Guy, so far the D3 is the best system I have used for ice halls and indoor arena's, I'm more than happy, I'm very confident!
It's also it's a breath of fresh air in situations like so:
My girlfriends folks summer cottage, we have no electricity there, it's part of the escape, so here we have two personal snaps taken hand-held in nothing but candlelight with no NR at all, processed in Lightroom then photoshop, not NX2.
ISO 2500, 1/25th, f/2.8, there are four candles dangling on a mini chandelier just above his head.
I'll take whatever you have Tomas
Back to the D3 or D3x - here's why I personally need the higher ISO performance.
Wedding yesterday in Windsor. 11th century church and a very grey day meant poor light inside. Vicar was quite happy for me to shoot the ceremony.
With 2 caveats - no flash, and it was in candlelight.
That meant to have any chance of stopping movement and getting 1/125s I was at ISO 10,000 and f1.6:
More than usable for album work.
It also gives me 1600 performance like this:
Cool, I like a post like that. Bugger all about technology blather, just some ace pics.