D3 v D3x

N

Nenagh

Suspended / Banned
Messages
307
Name
Terry
Edit My Images
No
I'm looking at possibly moving to a full frame sensor SLR with the choice between D3 and D3x. (may look at the D700 also).

One of my main bugbears with digital is noise. I hate it, big time. So I was thinking that the D3 may be a better choice than the D3x in that regard.

Now the dust has settled what are peoples experiences here with either camera?

Any help would be appreciated
 
Also depends on what you shoot. They have different fps, do you need the extra pixels?
I would have said if your that concerned about noise, then the D3 is the one for you out of the D3 or D3x. (6400 as opposed to 1600). But its never that simple really.
Get yourself to Focus 2009 in Feb and have a play with all 3 and a chat to Nikon. Its a good day out anyway.
I do believe that the D700 is very good too. Just to confuse you even more. :lol:
For what its worth, I think my D3 is great and find myself picking up the D300 less and less these days.



Kev.
 
Hi,

a D3 and a D3X belong in two entirely separate categories. The D3 is a very versatile camera, high FPS, full frame, tough build, used with anything from sports, journalism, portraits, landscaping and weddings, the list goes on but I haven,t had enough coffee.
The ISO capability available with a D3 is a very useful tool, it's revolutionized the digital world and you'll still hear folk raving about about it now, including me!

The D3X is a different camera altogether, it's geared toward a different market.

To be frank, many pro's have discounted buying a D3X at this time, even Joe McNally is sticking with his D3.

Ask yourself if have you all the quality glass you need or may need before dropping 5K+ on a body.

Also what kind of computer power do you have? The D3X's NEF files are enormous and even the most capable systems are going to chug a little with those kind of sizes. In addition to these considerations, think about hard drive space, your going to need lots more of it = more expense.

Unless your making a killing on supplying stock images, high profile commercial or studio work etc a D3X is surplus to requirements.

I think most working folk may look at pricing one up but not for another 12 to 18 months minimum. It would have to drop to below 3K for me to consider one for portraits and landscaping.

The D3 may even be surplus to your requirements if you only have a few lenses.

Spending 5K on lenses is never bad, no matter how unhappy your partner would be :)
 
Thanks Kev/PD. Always seems that someone here has everything so I guess sombodies got the D3x.
The extra pixels would only allow more crop opportunities. I rarely print above A3+ so it's not for huge poster prints.
However I understand that more pixels can equal more noise so this is my worry with the D3x.

Kev, how does your D3 compare to the D300 in terms of Noise, definition, etc
 
Thanks Tom.

I have been going the Glass route whilst waiting for the Camera Body market to settle down and currently have a 400 2,8 VR, 200 f2 VR, 85 f1.4, amongst others, so I'm ahead of the game so to speak. Hence I now want a Camera to match as most of my lenses are FX
 
Nenagh said:
Thanks Tom.

I have been going the Glass route whilst waiting for the Camera Body market to settle down and currently have a 400 2,8 VR, 200 f2 VR, 85 f1.4, amongst others, so I'm ahead of the game so to speak. Hence I now want a Camera to match as most of my lenses are FX
Click to expand...

Someone's won the lottery! My new best friend!

What do you shoot? A 400 2.8 on a full frame is a set up I would happly slice up fluffy bunnies for, I had the pleasure of using a 400 with my D3 a few months back, awesome gear, also a 200-400 was pretty darn good but I prefer primes.
 
Nenagh said:
Kev, how does your D3 compare to the D300 in terms of Noise, definition, etc
Click to expand...

You can't just look at noise in isolation.

D300 "low noise" means low detail.

D3 / D700 "low noise" mean low noise - and decent detail (certainly up to about ISO3200).

D3X will top out around ISO1600 just pixel peeping compared to a D3.

However if you print, a D3X ISO3200 should hold more detail than a D3 ISO3200 image when printed at the same size, even if at 100% is has more "noise" (and it will)

So - when asking the "noise" quesion, always consider your output device.
 
Good info guys,i`m about to go for a D700 or a D3,is the D3 that much better than the 700?
 
It will be ,more or less, for high ISO work. The 300 ticks all the boxes for what I enjoy photographing, this new body would be for other stuff.
 
fracster said:
It will be ,more or less, for high ISO work. The 300 ticks all the boxes for what I enjoy photographing, this new body would be for other stuff.
Click to expand...

If it's just the high ISO then a D700 would be just the job bud, if your shooting in situations where a high FPS isn't that necessary then you can save a fair few pounds. The grips are always an option but you end up getting closer to D3 prices when one is considered in the budget anyway.
 
fracster said:
It will be ,more or less, for high ISO work. The 300 ticks all the boxes for what I enjoy photographing, this new body would be for other stuff.
Click to expand...

Hi Ade,

I have the D3 and love it. I should imagine the D700 is exactly the same in terms of IQ but has obvious differences in size, weight, etc. If I recall you use a grip with the D300. If you are planning on using a grip with a D700 I would recommend getting the D3. Having said that, you are then not left with the option of a smaller unit when need be, so the D700 may be more versatile for your needs.

Get both, I have a spare room for when 'her indoors' throws you out:D

Joking aside the D3 has exceeded all of my expectations and I really cannot see me changing this until it dies.

Chris :)
 
I was a staff photographer for an Athletics magazine for a number of years, and spent 15 years photographing all equestrian sports professionally (I have full Turf Club accreditation, and also did a fair bit of magazine work for Horse and Hound etc). Nowadays I've more or less retired from those things and just enjoying a more peaceful life. I still shoot some sports and I'm also trying all the things I wish I'd had time to photograph years ago (birds,travel etc).

My requirement is to shoot as high a quality as I can, retired or not, within my basic style, remains. Photography was and is my hobby first and last.
 
Nenagh said:
I was a staff photographer for an Athletics magazine for a number of years, and spent 15 years photographing all equestrian sports professionally (I have full Turf Club accreditation, and also did a fair bit of magazine work for Horse and Hound etc). Nowadays I've more or less retired from those things and just enjoying a more peaceful life. I still shoot some sports and I'm also trying all the things I wish I'd had time to photograph years ago (birds,travel etc).

My requirement is to shoot as high a quality as I can, retired or not, within my basic style, remains. Photography was and is my hobby first and last.
Click to expand...

Considering your track record, personally I would say a D3, simply because if you do fancy shooting some sports then you can, a D3X will get you more detail but I still think that you would be better suited with more versatility.
If possible, go and try out both?

The AF system with the D3 is superb, there's not much that it can't do when it comes to shooting fast action or more gracefully action, whether it's sports or wildlife, it really does the job.
my recent samples here and some notes on the D3 buffer upgrade here

T.
 
The size of the unit has made me lean more towards the 700 as Mrs Frac will be using it as well. The grip for my 300 will fit the 700?

FPS do not really concern me as the 300 suits that purpose for my wildlife stuff.The only lens I have that is not suitable is the 17-55,but that sits well with the D200/300,so next question.....:D........other than the 24-70 Nikon (muchos money), which are recommended mid range zooms for FF?

Yes Chris, you are correct, getting both is not an option..........:lol:
 
Agree with the 28-70. It's my next port of call lens wise.

My feelings were towards the D3 over the D3x, regardless of the price difference (although it helps). I just wanted to ensure my thoughts were valid.

My assumptions are that with zero crop at 300 dpi and printing to A3 at iso 800 or less there should be little if any differences between the D3 and D3x.
 
Nenagh said:
My assumptions are that with zero crop at 300 dpi and printing to A3 at iso 800 or less there should be little if any differences between the D3 and D3x.
Click to expand...

I've had usable and highly printable shots up to ISO 12800 with my camera, I can't guarantee that a print of A3 would be the standard that your after, but a recent shot of mine at ISO 12800 is running as a front cover in a figure skating magazine over here.

Here's an ISO 2000 shot. (No luminancy noise reduction applied, only colour noise reduction)
3231268291_b81c532748_o.jpg


and a fairly weighty enlargement. Dew drops and all. ISO 2000 (No luminancy noise reduction applied, only colour noise reduction)
_9EM8064-1.jpg


ISO 6400 (No luminancy noise reduction applied, only colour noise reduction)
_9EM5494.jpg


and the crop ISO 6400 (No luminancy noise reduction applied, only colour noise reduction)
_9EM5494-2.jpg


ISO 10,000 (No luminancy noise reduction applied, only colour noise reduction)
_9EM3031.jpg


and the crop ISO 10,000 (No luminancy noise reduction applied, only colour noise reduction)
There is a slight loss of crispness here but I think that's due to me missing the focus and not a loss of detail.
_9EM3031-2.jpg


It's needs to be mentioned that the lighting at the above event, (European figure skating champs 09), was superb, the D3's ISO capability enabled me to achieve shutter speeds that I previously would never have been able to select like 1/1250th and 1/1600th.
 
I love my D700, only real reasons I can see to go for the D3 is if you prefer the size (some people do!), need the improvement in fps and/or battery life. Otherwise save yourself the grand difference :)
 
Tom your work is every bit up to the quality I seek and beyond. A D3 is everything I need. I will also have a look at the D700 although prefer the more substantial feel of the D3 against the D300, so may have similar feelings with the D700.

Thanks again for to everyone for all the help. Is is very much appreciated
 
fracster said:
Good info guys,i`m about to go for a D700 or a D3,is the D3 that much better than the 700?
Click to expand...

The D700 hits 8fps with the battery grip, the only thing holding the D3 is the tougher frame and dual card slots. Dual slots is nice, but how many people who use good (i.e. SanDisk) cards and treat them properly get a corrupt card?

If I had cash to throw around, I would have gone for the D3. I don't so there were two choices:

D3

or

D700 + Grip + Extra batts + Nikon 24-70/2.8, 70-200/2.8 or 14-24/2.8

Chose the latter, with the 24-70 :)
 
I was in a similar situation recently and I went for the D700.

The only things the D3 offers over the D700 is faster Fps (although I have the grip and 7fps is pretty damn quick) Duel memory card slots,slightly better build although with the grip the D700 is actually slightly bigger and heavier..(same metal core though)and a 100% viewfinder.

The D700 has a few things the D3 doesnt too.

It has the sensor cleaning mode which ive found quite effective and also it has an on board flash,which some people will balk at.Whilst not entirely effective as a flash in its own right it serves as a commander for nikons CLS system where you can use your Sb series flash guns off camera...great intro to strobist and wireless lighting.

It has the size advantage too, its easy to use all day and take to family events,weddings or on hols without standing out as the "spot the Dork with the huge camera" when discretion might be more apt.

You can always stick on the grip when you want fast shooting for wildlife or sports.

p.s Id buy soon theres another price hike in FEB apparently.:eek:
 
The built-in flash is a very good point, it is pretty weedy but I use it all the time for studio work and saves buying a flash or SU-800 just to make use of CLS.
 
The only reason I'd choose a D700 over a D3 is size if you want a camera without a grip.

If you buy a D700+grip+EN4a+charger you'll have spent more and have a bigger any heavier camera than just getting the D3 in the first place. ;)

Pete
 
icecavern said:
The only reason I'd choose a D700 over a D3 is size if you want a camera without a grip.

If you buy a D700+grip+EN4a+charger you'll have spent more and have a bigger any heavier camera than just getting the D3 in the first place. ;)

Pete
Click to expand...

People always quote that, but who said anything about buying the EN4a battery and charger? D700 holds a battery, as does the grip. I've never been in a situation where I needed the EN4 type.

The D700 + grip + additional two batteries + Nikon 24-70/2.8 cost the same as a stock D3. Unless you cannot work without a harder frame and dual card slots (very, very few people really need this if they look after equipment properly), it's a no brainer!

The built in flash is also a very good point - using the D700 as a commander unit has been invaluable so far :)
 
rdh said:
People always quote that, but who said anything about buying the EN4a battery and charger? D700 holds a battery, as does the grip. I've never been in a situation where I needed the EN4 type.

The D700 + grip + additional two batteries + Nikon 24-70/2.8 cost the same as a stock D3. Unless you cannot work without a harder frame and dual card slots (very, very few people really need this if they look after equipment properly), it's a no brainer!

The built in flash is also a very good point - using the D700 as a commander unit has been invaluable so far :)
Click to expand...

I did say that it was 'my' choice if I was making it. I find the battery life of the EN4a to be worth the cost. But that's me, I hate charging batteries and carrying loads of spares.

Radiohead said:
As good as the D700 is I much prefer the speed and handling of the D3.
Click to expand...

Same, I have both and I always grab the D3 out of the two. I find the D700 much slower in use from a file preview point of view.
 
rdh said:
Dual slots is nice, but how many people who use good (i.e. SanDisk) cards and treat them properly get a corrupt card?
Click to expand...

I did. That's when I started using two cards in parallel.
 
mr_pants said:
I did. That's when I started using two cards in parallel.
Click to expand...

That's very unfortunate, after experiencing that it's obvious how the dual card slot offers peace of mind. Just for the record - I'm not promoting the D700 over the D3, just arguing the financial cases for it.

Ice / radio: whats the battery life difference on the D700 between the two types of battery - is it that substantial?
 
I find battery life on the D700 excellent.

When I had a D200 or S5 Pro I was always carrying spare batteries around - especially the D200 which just ate batteries like it was going out of fashion.

I can do 500 no problem at all with the stock EN-EL3e or the excellent Phottix "Titan".

I'd imagine - if its anything like the D2X - you could do 1500 no problem with an EN-4La in the grip.
 
puddleduck said:
I find battery life on the D700 excellent.

When I had a D200 or S5 Pro I was always carrying spare batteries around - especially the D200 which just ate batteries like it was going out of fashion.

I can do 500 no problem at all with the stock EN-EL3e or the excellent Phottix "Titan".

I'd imagine - if its anything like the D2X - you could do 1500 no problem with an EN-4La in the grip.
Click to expand...

1500 - very impressive.
 
I get 500 ish on the standard D700 battery ( but it drains very quickly if not used. ) and easily over 2000 on the D3. After a wedding, so the camera in use all day, I've never yet had to worry about battery life. In fact I have done a wedding, then a motorsport event back to back without changing battery.

The D3 has better battery life than the D2x for me so far, I used to get 1500 shots out of an EL4 on the D2.

Pete
 
After a typical wedding with say 750 shots on each body on the D3 and a fair amount of chimping in the quieter periods I usually see 65% remaining on the battery indicator. That's with non-VR lenses generally. I reckon on 2000 shots per body in typical use for me. Very good indeed. I don't remember ever having to change a battery on the D3 mid-wedding (although I carry 2 spares).

Andy's right about the D200 though - I would see around 200 shots per battery from that. Shocking!
 
icecavern said:
I get 500 ish on the standard D700 battery ( but it drains very quickly if not used. ) and easily over 2000 on the D3. After a wedding, so the camera in use all day, I've never yet had to worry about battery life. In fact I have done a wedding, then a motorsport event back to back without changing battery.

The D3 has better battery life than the D2x for me so far, I used to get 1500 shots out of an EL4 on the D2.

Pete
Click to expand...

Radiohead said:
After a typical wedding with say 750 shots on each body on the D3 and a fair amount of chimping in the quieter periods I usually see 65% remaining on the battery indicator. That's with non-VR lenses generally. I reckon on 2000 shots per body in typical use for me. Very good indeed. I don't remember ever having to change a battery on the D3 mid-wedding (although I carry 2 spares).

Andy's right about the D200 though - I would see around 200 shots per battery from that. Shocking!
Click to expand...

Thanks very much guys. That has pretty much sold me on upgrading to the EL4 at some point (eating my words now) :¬)
 
Just to add, I got the phottix grip and the phottix equivalant of the EL4,used on my D300,the battery lasts weeks.I don`t know the actual shutter count but for example,on the last shoot I took 420 images without the meter moving from full.

Damned site cheaper than the Nikon equivalant too.
 
fracster said:
Just to add, I got the phottix grip and the phottix equivalant of the EL4,used on my D300,the battery lasts weeks.I don`t know the actual shutter count but for example,on the last shoot I took 420 images without the meter moving from full.

Damned site cheaper than the Nikon equivalant too.
Click to expand...

Linky? :¬)

Pete - I've had a D700 for a month or so now, upgrading the battery doesn't really bother me since I've managed to get loads of use out of it (you can save while you're shooting which has a lot of value).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top