d3 and lenses

mickhall

mickhall

Suspended / Banned
Messages
389
Name
mick hall
Edit My Images
Yes
Am thinking about a new camera am stuck between a d300 or d3 the only thing which is putting me off d3 is that i may not be able to use my lenses can someone who has more brains than me(everyone!) tell me how do i tell what lenses i could use on d3?
 
^^ what he said, but in a less harsh way lol.

You'd probably be diving in at the deep end if you went for a D3 and many of it's functions you'll probably never use over a prosumer camera. I'd probably just got for the d300.
 
have got a d200 now and a few lenses 80-200 2.8 ed
sigma 50-500
nikon nifty fifty

what i really wanted to know is would i get full frame on these or would they be cropped?
 
i think the best way to get the most out of a forum like this is to spell out what you want

what do you want to do with the camera? -

what do you want the camera to do for you?

both cameras will allow you to take great photos, but both will allow you to take bad one's as well (my canon 1dmk2n does!!) the d3 is an expensive camera - does it have functions that you need that justify the price?
 
DX lenses will not work as FF lenses but none of yours are of the DX variety. The D3 can automatically crop the sensor down to roughly 6.7 megapixels for DX lenses so they will work but you will just get a smaller file as it will only use the middle of the sensor.

Its an amazing camera but unless you need the low light ability (which is everything you have read about and then some!) I would suggest the D300 as its every bit a very capable camera with just a few features missing.
 
NorthernNikon said:
Simple, if you don't already know what lenses will fit on a D3 then a D3 would be wasted on you.
Click to expand...

That was pretty much exactly what I was going to post before I clicked on this thread. If someone contemplating a D3 doesn't know what lenses to use then they're better off giving the money to charity IMO.

Just my 2p worth.
 
Still, there's no reason why NorthernNikon should enforce the pretentious tag that a lot of photographers seems to get stuck with nowadays with his response. Regardless of what we might think it is their money to spend how they like. A little advice wouldn't go amiss. Why take the time to disrespect someone and not bother to offer a little advice instead?
 
Some not very helpful replies to this thread imo - the op asked a perfectly reasonable question.
If I was in the same situation, I can say in all honesty that I would be making 100% sure that my current lenses would serve the D3 & in order to do so I would be asking pretty much the same question as the op. The fact that I may have required verification of this compatibility does not even slightly mean that I could not justify buying the camera or that my photography skills weren't up to par - it just means that I trusted the opinions/advice/experience of the people here rather than just googling it for an answer.
In addition to this, Nikon don't exactly make things easy with their mad lens names do they :lol:

Sportysnaps & Richard Peters are on the right track - review exactly what you need from the camera & be honest about whether or not you need the extra features - if not then use the money for glass, lighting, holiday, etc (& the D300 of course :lol:)

Edit: Got in there before me KayJay - condensed what I needed to say in three lines :lol:
 
There are many wonderful features in the D3 that no other Nikon offers. The high ISO quality is simply "wow", the environment sealing beats the D300 by a long shot, the dual memory slot allows you to keep as much as 32GB in there (with today's CF capacity), the built-in power-grip, the full-size view finder that is a lot brighter than the D300 ... and the list goes on.

So, if you can afford the D3 then why are you thinking twice about this?

As for your existing lens kit, sorry to say but why do you care if these fit? You have the 80-200 which is about £800; the 50-500 at about £600; and the 50 at about £160. All these glass don't come close to the price of the D3.

Now, it has already been said ... you can get really crappy shots with the D3. The image quality is all up to you. I have some of my best shots with my "old" D70 and non-pro. glass (24-120VR). So, it is all down to your abilities.

That aside, all your glass will fit the D3; but I would think once you get your hands on the D3 - and I hope you do - you will find yourself spedning a lot of £££ on glass.


As for the comments about why bother with the D3 if you don't know what glass fits ... my answer there is simple, there is a huge pleasure in being able to afford something even if you can't / don't know its limits! How many would love a Ferrari, if they could afford it, but can't begin to push that car to its limits (not for fear of law, but for lack of knowledge)?
 
mickhall said:
have got a d200 now and a few lenses 80-200 2.8 ed
sigma 50-500
nikon nifty fifty

what i really wanted to know is would i get full frame on these or would they be cropped?
Click to expand...

DX on Nikon lenses means the lens is optimized and designed around the cropped sensor. In reality this means the lens projects a smaller than normal (35mm) frame. The D3, being full frame would not benefit from a DX lens. Though it supports it, it would only record a 5.1 megapixel image due to automatic cropping. BUT, the lenses you have listed above are not designated DX lenses. This means you will not have to worry about not having full frame (35mm) coverage.

Your Sigma lens is a full frame lens too. Sigma designate their cropped sensor lenses with a DC. Practically speaking they work the same as their Nikon DX counterparts. Again, your 50-500 will be fine as it is not a DC lens.

As for the harsh, unwarranted comments above, they are uncalled for and very elitist <-- which seems to be cropping up more and more on these forums. Pathetic really.
 
Richard Peters said:
Its an amazing camera but unless you need the low light ability (which is everything you have read about and then some!) I would suggest the D300 as its every bit a very capable camera with just a few features missing.
Click to expand...

Whilst that's true in general, I have to say the image quality of the D3 is in a different league to the D300. The noise is like real grain, which is why it's so good IMO. Having said that, out of the two I've got a couple of my best shots with the two cams out of the D300. Go figure :shrug:

King_Boru said:
As for the harsh, unwarranted comments above, they are uncalled for and very elitist <-- which seems to be cropping up more and more on these forums. Pathetic really.
Click to expand...

Agreed couldn't have said it better :shake:
 
King_Boru said:
As for the harsh, unwarranted comments above, they are uncalled for and very elitist <-- which seems to be cropping up more and more on these forums. Pathetic really.
Click to expand...
Absolutely.

NorthernNikon and sprog - who appointed you to decide whether the OP is allowed to buy a D3 if we wants to?
 
Some pretty harsh stuff here guys....:thumbsdown:

I thought long and hard about a D3 over my 300. I asked myself wether my abilities and talents and needs warranted a D3? The answer was no, so I got the 300, which was probably overkill as well.....:lol:

If you can afford and want a D3, then go get one, it will take crap images as well as good ones, that is down to you. As regards your original question about lenses, that has already been answered.
 
icecavern said:
Whilst that's true in general, I have to say the image quality of the D3 is in a different league to the D300. The noise is like real grain, which is why it's so good IMO. Having said that, out of the two I've got a couple of my best shots with the two cams out of the D300. Go figure :shrug:
Click to expand...
Oh absolutely, there are way more things the D3 has over the D300 but as the OP doesn't 'appear' to know too much about it I was just boiling it down to the main factor to keep it simple :)

Of course if they can afford a D3 I'd just say get it then you can grow in to it. But it may be that they are stretching themselves for it, in which case I'd think twice.
 
Wail said:
As for the comments about why bother with the D3 if you don't know what glass fits ... my answer there is simple, there is a huge pleasure in being able to afford something even if you can't / don't know its limits! How many would love a Ferrari, if they could afford it, but can't begin to push that car to its limits (not for fear of law, but for lack of knowledge)?
Click to expand...

Big difference is that its entirely possible his end photo will be the same whether he has the d300 or d3. Whereas if you had a Ferrari and a Corsa the end result would be very different. The d3 does have great ISO performance but if he doesn't know whether his lenses will fit does he know that he needs that performance? I agree with some thoughts in this thread. Its more than likely that the d3 will be wasted on the guy. Oh but he has the money, so? If he has that much money then he should use it on lenses not bodies with features he won't use. He could happily get a d300 & more lenses with his savings. He'll get photos he's happy with and buy the time he's outgrown the d300 the d4 will be out to upgrade to.

cjnicolai

- It's easier to focus on buying that next piece of equipment than it is to accept that you should be able to create great work with what you've got. Buying stuff is a convenient and expensive distraction. You need a decent camera, a decent lens, and a light meter. Until you can use those tools consistently and masterfully, don't spend another dime. Spend money on equipment ONLY when you've outgrown your current equipment and you're being limited by it. There are no magic bullets.
Click to expand...
 
The Nikon 'FF' is new, and there is some confusion about what lenses will project the correct image circle onto the sensor in FF mode. If you have Nikon DX lenses then it is easy to understand, they will work in DX mode on the D3. For lenses from other manufacturers it is harder to know what mode they will work in. There is no harm in asking, it is a big investment with the D3 or D300 after all.

If I had the money, I would get the D3 and enjoy getting to know it. That is if I also had the money to afford the lenses to make the most of it though. The D3 will show the deficiencies of lower quality lenses, but if I had the money for the camera and the lenses to go with it then I would spend the cash, regardless of what the final results were, or were used for. It is nice to sell some pictures, and it would be, I imagine, great for your pictures to pay for your equipment, but if you have the money, who cares? My financial level is the D200/D300, and so are my lenses (and even that is a stretch). :( :D

Enjoy your photography, and ignore the elitists. ;)

And may you make the appropriate choice for your situation. :)
 
I'm very surprised to some of the responses on here to an honest and genuine enquiry. We all have questions that need answering from time to time and we all can't know everything.

Mick, if you want a D3 then go for it! It is a fantastic camera (as is the D300) but I would look at what your requirements are - if it is nature, sport or anything that requires lens length you might want to consider the D300. I have both and have used the D3 with the 70-200mm VR for equestrian events but usually when I have been able to get close to the fences or indoors. When I can't get so close or if I'm shooting rugby or football I use the D300 beause of the crop factor.

As you probably already know both are great bodies but they do give quite noticeable and different results, the colour rendition is excellent on the D3 (Diego compared it to film and I have to agree) and no doubt you are aware of the excellent noise handling of the D3. I've no idea what you are using at the moment but either camera will take some getting used to, I remember when I went from a D70 to the D200 and it was not as forgiving but that just makes you up your game as you have to improve to get good results imo.

Good luck with the decision!

:thumbs:
 
StewartR said:
Absolutely.

NorthernNikon and sprog - who appointed you to decide whether the OP is allowed to buy a D3 if we wants to?
Click to expand...

Stewart, reread my post. Where does it it say that the OP can or cannot do what he wants with his or her money?

To the rest, there seems to be some incredibly over-sensitive souls knocking around here. Telling someone that a £3,000 camera (body only) would be wasted on them isn't pretentious, it isn't elitist, and it certainly isn;t harsh, it's a plain and honest opinion. Why sugar coat it? Only professionals or serious and highly talented amateurs will get the most out of a D3. For the most of us, it is over-specified, and I include myself in that group.

I have no issue with people buying kit because they want the best, or because they have the money to spend, what someone spends their cash on is up to them, but if someone is pondering over spending the best part of £3k on a camera and yet don't know enough about the camera system to understand it's limitations and capabilites it's a fair assumption to assume that it would be wasted on them.
 
I concur with what you say.But,Jesus, I can be brash and forthright at times mate, it is how you said it.

You know how sensitive some suvverners can be........:exit:
 
NorthernNikon said:
Stewart, reread my post. Where does it it say that the OP can or cannot do what he wants with his or her money?

To the rest, there seems to be some incredibly over-sensitive souls knocking around here. Telling someone that a £3,000 camera (body only) would be wasted on them isn't pretentious, it isn't elitist, and it certainly isn;t harsh, it's a plain and honest opinion. Why sugar coat it? Only professionals or serious and highly talented amateurs will get the most out of a D3. For the most of us, it is over-specified, and I include myself in that group.

I have no issue with people buying kit because they want the best, or because they have the money to spend, what someone spends their cash on is up to them, but if someone is pondering over spending the best part of £3k on a camera and yet don't know enough about the camera system to understand it's limitations and capabilites it's a fair assumption to assume that it would be wasted on them.
Click to expand...

I think thats a fair comment really.
 
NorthernNikon said:
a fair assumption to assume
Click to expand...

Perhaps the assumption to assume an individual is not capable of using a camera due that individual presenting a question to which the answer is obvious to you was the incorrect approach. Assuming somebody is not able to appreciate the full capability of a camera due to possibly having a lesser understanding of the jargon riddled marketing mumbo jumbo of todays world is a bit narrow-minded.

Quote from forums rules:

Conduct towards other members

No posting argumentative comments or remarks, or those aimed to invoke a negative reaction.
No offensive, rude or derogatory comments towards another member.
No insults or personal attacks towards other members.
No harassing behaviour towards other members.
Please have respect and offer courtesy. If you can't say anything in a civil manner...don't say anything at all.
Disagree by all means, but criticise the thought, not the thinker. Healthy discussion is welcomed and encouraged, but we can all do so without being rude or using nastiness towards each other.
No telling members to 'use the search' in an abrupt or rude fashion.
No criticising a member if they post something that has already been posted.
Please do not criticise staff decisions publicly. Instead, use the Contact Us link to resolve things privately and amicably.
Click to expand...
 
Chill out and stop preaching. It is a discussion on an internet forum, its not life and death.

In my opinion of course......:thumbs:
 
fracster said:
Chill out and stop preaching. It is a discussion on an internet forum, its not life and death.

In my opinion of course......:thumbs:
Click to expand...

I'm not preaching, just stating the obvious. There is a distinct difference. :thumbs:
 
Please guys, stop it. :( Cleaning up threads takes time and means I can't go looking at the great images being posted.
 
I say GO FOR IT!!

If you can buy it without having to die of hunger, go get it tomorrow.

Please do not think that a better camera will take better pix for you...the opposite is true IMHO.:D

Still, if you can do it buy it, enjoy it and grow into it!:thumbs:
 
To answer the OP - if you need a D3, you will know you need a D3 :) I just went from D200 to D300, and it's a whole world newer - unless you're a pro, the D300 is without a doubt the King of the sub-pro DSLRs out just now. Even die-hard Canon-abusers agree;)



***removed***
 
Why does it need to be cleaned?
Is a free forum not a good one?
Just curious.
Adam
 
Adam Rowney said:
I think thats a fair comment really.
Click to expand...

Aye it's fair. But the initial comment isn't. People are not mind readers. Some clarification or justification in the initial post would have been better and would probably have reflected less badly on him in the first place.
 
Ignoring the ugliness...

Should you buy a D3 to go with those lenses?

No - I don't think so.

I'd recommend getting the D300 and spending the rest on better glass. Unless you can afford the D3 AND better glass that is. Keep the 50mm F1.8 though :)
 
-Oy- said:
Ignoring the ugliness...

Should you buy a D3 to go with those lenses?

No - I don't think so.

I'd recommend getting the D300 and spending the rest on better glass. Unless you can afford the D3 AND better glass that is. Keep the 50mm F1.8 though :)
Click to expand...

I don't really agree - either the 80-200 or the 50mm would work great with the D3, and the 80-200 is among Nikon's best (some say better than the 70-200VR).

To answer the OP, if you're choosing based on your lenses, they will all work with the D3 and the D300. As to which camera, better to choose based on what you need it to do. Do you need the full-frame, the speed, or the low-light capability of the D3? If not, the D300 might be better, and put the money saved toward something else.
 
This is my first post here, and it seems to me that some of these responses are unnecessarily restrictive and harsh. Do we all need to know exactly how we intend to use a specific camera before we're entitled to buy it?

I bought a D3 on the basis of the reviews and because I often shoot stage performances and am not allowed to use flash. It's been great for that, but as I've become more familiar with the camera I have been able to extend my shooting range into new areas which the D3 has made possible. For me it's about being stimulated, extended and challenged by new possibilities.

No doubt other, more talented photographers can do much better than I with cameras that are much simpler and cheaper. But that's not the point. The pictures I took with a D2X were better than the ones I got with a D70 and the ones I take with a D3 are better than the ones I took with the D2X.
 
nice first post, welcome aboard :)
 
Luckynp said:
But that's not the point. The pictures I took with a D2X were better than the ones I got with a D70 and the ones I take with a D3 are better than the ones I took with the D2X.
Click to expand...

Bit of a grey word 'better' isn't it? half a rung up from 'nicer'.

More importantly, did you shoot using the same lens(es) on all three bodies? I'm sure this would be of interest the thread starter.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top