D3 or D3s

macvisual

macvisual

Suspended / Banned
Messages
7,193
Name
Peter
Edit My Images
No
After buying a Nikon D700 a few months ago and loving it,

I quite fancy aiming for either a D3 or D3s for a little wildlife stuff in near future…..I’ve a Nikkor 300mm f/4 arriving soon, maybe look at a 400/500mm lens at some stage for extra reach…
Just got myself a minty Nikkor 180mm f/2.8 D.

So which D3 version/model would youse guys/girls recommend please…?…I’ve never owned one, would really appreciate your knowledge/experience and thoughts on this. Cheers

I appreciate a lot of used D3’s will probably have a v.high shutter count.

And whilst I’m asking, any advice on Nikon teleconverters please….

Thank you.


Best regards.
Peter
Central Scotland
 
D3S is a great piece of kit, I had a pair for wildlife and they were great with good low-light capability, definitely better than the D3.
Nikon TC 1.4 iii better than ii
 
pmac said:
D3 is just a d700 in a big body.
D3s is the better camera.
Maybe try and find a cheap d4/d5
Click to expand...
In terms of IQ, yes. But with very good weather sealing, more FPS, twin card slots, double the expected shutter life (300,000) and better displays.
I've had both the D700 and the D3 for many years, both have been superb, my go-to has always been the D3, I just like the handling better.

There are probably loads of "low mileage" D3's about, plenty of people found them to be an excellent studio camera and, like me, used them professionally but took relatively few shots.
 
Back in the day when the D3s was introduced it wasn't a great leap from the ground breaking D3 but today that difference is well worth paying that bit extra for. They are both brilliant cameras and are totally bullet proof and give many years of service. However if you can stretch your budget a little you can find some D4s which are a bigger leap in performance than either of the others. But, as I said earlier you will not be disappointed with either, it's just what your budget allows.
 
I own both the 700 and the D3 , For my use the D3 is well good enough. It is or was a pro speck body . Love it .
 
After a brief bit of karma sidestep, I traded in my D7000 a few years ago to get a D3S body that I had originally been saving for but didn't end up getting. Primarily wanted it for cleaner low light stuff, but it's good for most general use. The differences are probably incremental between D3 and D3S, but the prices aren't really that different so you may as well go for the newer body if a nice one comes along.

As for teleconverters, I've always been given the impression that they're a bit rubbish. I got a 2x one (TC-20E) for a reasonable price to try, and thus far I think it's better than I anticipated it would be. Not perfect, but far from junk.
 
Willenium said:
After a brief bit of karma sidestep, I traded in my D7000 a few years ago to get a D3S body that I had originally been saving for but didn't end up getting. Primarily wanted it for cleaner low light stuff, but it's good for most general use. The differences are probably incremental between D3 and D3S, but the prices aren't really that different so you may as well go for the newer body if a nice one comes along.

As for teleconverters, I've always been given the impression that they're a bit rubbish. I got a 2x one (TC-20E) for a reasonable price to try, and thus far I think it's better than I anticipated it would be. Not perfect, but far from junk.
Click to expand...
I always feel that even the best teleconverters are an anachronism with digital cameras; the image quality is now so good that the image can just be cropped with minimal IQ loss. They were however, useful with 35mm film cameras.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top