Diego Garcia
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 3,238
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Hi,
Got to use a Nikon D3 and a D300 last night and this morning.
First of all, the D3. What a machine. Slightly bigger than the D2X/s, I have to say that the high ISO is amazing, and to me as good as the Mark III that I own - though Nikon claim it is two stops better, the proof will be in a real world test under poor flood lights. The back screen in very nice, nearing 1 million pixels, it is razor sharp. As before, the two dials effect a button push such as ISO etc. Personally, I find Nikon menus to cumbersome but having always shot Canon its a moot point and would be easy to get used to it. It automatically recognises DX lenses and sets the camera up in crop mode, which can be turned off.
Has some new unique features, such as picture sets, which is fully customisable. For instance if you like a style/way someone shoots you can down load that set and load it to your machine, perhaps to mimic a style that a pro landscaper may use. Nikon expects 'picture sets' to retail on individual sites whilst other users may simply give them away? Who knows?
It also has something called scene recognition where the camera can automatically detect skin tone hues of all colours and prioritise the 'human' subject. We asked if this was based on the demigraphic/location and Nikon advised that in test, they found very little difference in the skin tones and hues of all races. Interesting. I do hope that DSLR's are not ebbing toward the naff features found on compacts though.
Overall, the D3 is superb camera but at £3.5K I am not sure if I could or would pay that for it.
Oddly, the old wireless transmitters have been rendered useless with the D3 as they are not backward compatible. I was talking with many pro's and Nikon this morning and the general feeling among the pro scene is 'gutted', more expense. Whats odd is that the new wi-fi unit now sits in your pocket tethered to the camera via usb which in my mind is not true wi-fi - that said, the laptop can sit in the bag like before. Strange decision though.
I found the D300 to be much of a muchness. The high ISO is not in the same league as the D3, which stands to reason given the sensor size. However, 1600 ISO was very noisy to me eyes, although I only viewed on the back screen. To me, the D300 did not feel like a big step up from the D200 though Nikon state it is in ISO and focusing. I would not drop £1400.00 on it at the moment and after playing with a Sony 700 ealier this week, I would go for that every time. (I think).
In summary, the Nikon babies are nice, but I will stay with Canon. If I could take one thing across it would be the double delete rather than delete and dial, but thats hardly new is it.
UK street date is Nov 21st 2007 - small quantities.
Sorry for the brief review, never been much of a pixel peeper - I prefer taking pictures!!!!
Pete.
Got to use a Nikon D3 and a D300 last night and this morning.
First of all, the D3. What a machine. Slightly bigger than the D2X/s, I have to say that the high ISO is amazing, and to me as good as the Mark III that I own - though Nikon claim it is two stops better, the proof will be in a real world test under poor flood lights. The back screen in very nice, nearing 1 million pixels, it is razor sharp. As before, the two dials effect a button push such as ISO etc. Personally, I find Nikon menus to cumbersome but having always shot Canon its a moot point and would be easy to get used to it. It automatically recognises DX lenses and sets the camera up in crop mode, which can be turned off.
Has some new unique features, such as picture sets, which is fully customisable. For instance if you like a style/way someone shoots you can down load that set and load it to your machine, perhaps to mimic a style that a pro landscaper may use. Nikon expects 'picture sets' to retail on individual sites whilst other users may simply give them away? Who knows?
It also has something called scene recognition where the camera can automatically detect skin tone hues of all colours and prioritise the 'human' subject. We asked if this was based on the demigraphic/location and Nikon advised that in test, they found very little difference in the skin tones and hues of all races. Interesting. I do hope that DSLR's are not ebbing toward the naff features found on compacts though.
Overall, the D3 is superb camera but at £3.5K I am not sure if I could or would pay that for it.
Oddly, the old wireless transmitters have been rendered useless with the D3 as they are not backward compatible. I was talking with many pro's and Nikon this morning and the general feeling among the pro scene is 'gutted', more expense. Whats odd is that the new wi-fi unit now sits in your pocket tethered to the camera via usb which in my mind is not true wi-fi - that said, the laptop can sit in the bag like before. Strange decision though.
I found the D300 to be much of a muchness. The high ISO is not in the same league as the D3, which stands to reason given the sensor size. However, 1600 ISO was very noisy to me eyes, although I only viewed on the back screen. To me, the D300 did not feel like a big step up from the D200 though Nikon state it is in ISO and focusing. I would not drop £1400.00 on it at the moment and after playing with a Sony 700 ealier this week, I would go for that every time. (I think).
In summary, the Nikon babies are nice, but I will stay with Canon. If I could take one thing across it would be the double delete rather than delete and dial, but thats hardly new is it.
UK street date is Nov 21st 2007 - small quantities.
Sorry for the brief review, never been much of a pixel peeper - I prefer taking pictures!!!!
Pete.
