New D800 vs. Used D3X .. Hmmm..

B

Bascule

Suspended / Banned
Messages
71
Name
Ben
Edit My Images
No
In March, a useful windfall will be seeing me buying my first new kit in a few years. I sold my D3S a little while ago, and retained my D700.
In March, I will be replacing the D3s with a D4 - that's decided. I had planned to pick up a D800 as well, giving me D4 and D700 for weddings and D800 for studio work. (I know there's overlap on these applications, and thats fine)

However, I have been offered a used D3X, from someone I trust, as its hardly used and he hasn't used it at all in 6 months. It's done a total of 24k activations, and is in perfect condition.

My dilemma is that I was comfortable in the choice of a new D800, despite the cost (call it £2350 by the time I've purchased a grip and a spare battery etc)

The D3x has been offered to me for £1900, so is usefully cheaper, even if I buy a new battery.

Close enough though, that it rules out 'cost' as being a factor in the choice between the two.

I'm interested then, in anyones sensible input to this, ideally anyone who has both cameras - I totally understand the paper differences, but real-world is where the interest lies. So far, asking about has only really had opinions from those who have one or the other, but not made real world comparisons living with both.

My own feelings are - The extra low-light sensitivity of the D800 would normally make it my preference - I rate that higher than the pixel count advantage. Video doesn't interest me, so thats irrelevant. The shutter life difference is there and real, but then the D3X doesn't clean it's own sensor. As I understand it, they both have 100% viewfinders, both have decent AF, the major difference is a build-quality one - and given that the D800 is still very well built, Im just not convinced either way..

In summary, is the low light performance and higher resolution of the D800 worth sacrificing to get the bullet-proof D3X - which lets face it, is still a spectacular body.. and I'd still have the D4 and D700 for low-light work..

Really torn. All feedback welcome!
 
First world problems eh? :D

I was very lucky to be in a position to buy all the gear I wanted late last year too. I was using a bit of a busted D90 with some old used lenses for a long time, and had the urge to go FX for years really. My dream camera was always the D3s or D3x, both monsters. The D3s so good with ISO performance, and the high res quality of that D3x - I would have given anything for either one ... then the money came ... and the D800 was out! I wrestled with the options in my head, could have bought both, but I wanted the right lenses to match too. I don't need 2 bodies .. yet.

I opted for the D800 in the end, because in general I prefer a mid sized body. Figured I could buy a grip whenever I felt the need.

I don't do sports or any kind of shoot where I would need fast fps, and I would say I'm a bit of a cropper - yeah, I know ... but old habits die hard. The resolution of the D800 sucked me in, and I went for the E because I'm also a sucker for sharpness. I'm not sorry. I've used it in all kinds of situations, kicked her up to 10K ISO at rock gigs and was well impressed. Very little clean up in post was needed. I know the D3s would be a step better, but I don't need to go any higher than that!

I would choose the D800 over the D3x any day, because it's more flexible with that better ISO performance [I hear the 3x is atrocious with it?] and the resoloution is higher for studio work too. It'll have better tech for CLS and will get more out of high end lenses too.

Users of both may say different though.
 
That's a nice problem to have Ben;)

For some reason I've always wanted a D3x but it's always been way out of my price range (even 2nd hand). It's probably the rarest of all the Nikon FX bodies.

I've no doubt the D800 will produce better IQ than the D3x but sometimes it's not just down to IQ. I don't shoot landscapes or studio material and I personally would go for the D3x for one reason only - I don't need or want 36mp.

The D800 may give you something much different to what you already have whereas the D3x probably won't, so you may find the D800 more rewarding. But then how often will you get the chance to own a D3x at such a great price. I doubt you'd be disappointed with either camera.

Hopefully some D3x owners will come on and offer advice.
 
If you don't shoot landscape or studio much, would the terrible ISO performance of the D3x not scare you off?

I've just checked my local used gear site, and there's a D3x on there going for a lot more than a new D800! And it's getting offers close enough ... so it is sought after. That's actually a very good price on the one you are eyeing up OP. But .. doesn't make it the right choice!

I'm sure there must be some D3x owners here?
 
Not having handled the D4 or D800 the question is how similar are they both in terms of operation?

If you kept the D3s then I would have said get the D3x, but now that you are changing to the D4 much depends on what accessories you have for the 3 (ie spare battery, LCD cover etc etc) -

Difficult choice to make.
 
I was offered a D3X for about the money recently. I turned it down for the exact reason that if I wanted to I could buy a brand new D800 for about the same.

And if I was using a D3X I'd want pixels.
 
Well I have owned both.

Had the D3x for about 3.5 years and the D800E for about 2 months. I sold my D3x to buy a D800E. Fully depreciated, and out of warranty it made sense given the uses I have intended for that body for the next 3-4 years and the sale to purchase prices I achieved.

In your position it is a very close call. The D3x would be a very close match to your recently departed D3s from a setup, configuration and ergonomics point of view. It would also have been a doubling of megapixels. I'm guessing (although I have never owned one that the D700 may be similar as well).

If you are buying a D4 then you'll see that the AF switch is completely different to the D3/D3s/D3x and the same as the D800/E but that the rest of the camera is similar in setup to the D700 with the dial on the top LHS. The 16MP of the D4 compared to the 24MP of the D3x isn't as much of a jump - especially with the clean files you get from the D4. You'll also be on a different battery system from the D4 or D700 whichever you choose.

While we are on the subject the D3x's ISO performance isn't "atrocious" - very usable (as in 20x16" prints) up to 1600 ISO which is credible performance in most situations. No it doesn't give you the same performance as a D3s/D4 at 6400 ISO but it was never really going to given it's age and sensor pushing resolution at the time.

It really is close. Quality of the D3x is incredible particularly at 400 ISO and below. Detail exceptional for studio work, landscapes etc. Built like a tank and if you are used to using D3s bodies then it will be a breeze to use it. You will need to clean it though - the FF sensor doesn't have a sensor-shaker attached and it does attract dust/oil although you do get used to giving it a swipe with an arctic butterfly when required.

The D800 would give you - even more MP if you need them, 2 stops more ISO and most critically for me a 2 year warranty - a D3x is almost certainly out of warranty and anything up to 4 - 4.5 years old. The D800 for me only works with the grip installed - simply too small a body otherwise - although I'm not too concerned about build quality on it. Only you will know if your treatment of the body requires the smaller additional robustness you get with the D3x.

Either way you won't be disappointed. If anything your upgrade from the D3s to the D4 is the most marginal of the ones you have outlined....
 
OK, atrocious was a bit of an exaggeration :D

One thing I wonder with those who say they feel the D800 is too small ... how big are your hands??

I bought a grip for mine and I've only used it once really.

Some say they like having the extra shutter button for portrait orientation ... but a smaller body is much easier just flip sideways with your finger kept on the shutter
 
Cagey75 said:
OK, atrocious was a bit of an exaggeration :D

One thing I wonder with those who say they feel the D800 is too small ... how big are your hands??

I bought a grip for mine and I've only used it once really.

Some say they like having the extra shutter button for portrait orientation ... but a smaller body is much easier just flip sideways with your finger kept on the shutter
Click to expand...

Man sized.... on the smaller body 30% of my hand lies below the base of the camera.

It also isn't easier to flip the camera sideways if for the last 12 years and hundreds of thousands of frames you have shot with the second shutter button for portraits. Nor does it give you as stable a grip with your arm up there for slower shutter speeds.
 
But it is easier. It's lighter, smaller, it's a flick of the wrist to turn a camera ... Doesn't matter how many frames you've rattled off.

Man sized? :D Any man with hands has "man-sized" hands. Mine aren't exactly tiny, I'm a pretty big chap. D800 size body to me is perfect. With a grip there is more to hold, but unless your hands are actually shovel sized ...

Anyway just wondered.
 
Last edited:
Cagey75 said:
But it is easier. It's lighter, smaller, it's a flick of the wrist to turn a camera ... Doesn't matter how many frames you've rattled off.

Man sized? :D Any man with hands has "man-sized" hands. Mine aren't exactly tiny, I'm a pretty big chap. D800 size body to me is perfect. With a grip there is more to hold, but unless your hands are actually shovel sized ...

Anyway just wondered.
Click to expand...

Whatever. Who cares.

If you are using it with a grip or not because it works then it was a great decision. If you bought it and don't need it, or if you didn't and do then something went wrong.
 
I do, or wouldn't have asked. Fact is, it's easier turn a smaller camera on it's side, one-handed [say you have off cam flash in the other for example] - where you usually would use 2 hands to turn a gripped body and then have to locate the other shutter button. Simple logic. I too have shot hundreds of thousands of frames ... Something went wrong?? no, it was £50 ... may as well have it. No need for touchiness.
 
Cagey75 said:
I do, or wouldn't have asked. Fact is, it's easier turn a smaller camera on it's side, one-handed [say you have off cam flash in the other for example] - where you usually would use 2 hands to turn a gripped body and then have to locate the other shutter button. Simple logic. I too have shot hundreds of thousands of frames ... Something went wrong?? no, it was £50 ... may as well have it. No need for touchiness.
Click to expand...

You either can't read or are deliberately argumentative. I simply stated I had shot hundreds of thousands of frames with a pro body (2 shutter buttons). And therefore my muscle memory, instincts, and stance are trained to shoot in portrait mode a particular way. Sometimes I'm shooting in portrait mode for 6-8 hours. I wouldn't want to do that with my hand cocked over the top of a flipped camera.

If you have shot hundreds of thousands of frames with a basic body & no grip then you'll have the same experience with the camera flipped.

All you are doing is agreeing with the reasoning but arguing that your way is right. Fact is it doesn't matter either way providing you are getting the shots you want, with the level of quality, comfort, and endurance you require.

As usual I'm trying to help the OP based on factual and actual experience. Not hearsay and hyperbole.
 
Last edited:
Really appreciate the responses, and a particular thank you to Meonshore, for a really balanced response.

I have to say, I'm also a huge fan of having the grip on. Back in the day when all I used was a D50 with an 18-70, no issue. However, once I started having heavy pro glass on as a matter of course, the extra mass at the camera end makes handling those lenses much easier, I vastly prefer the balance of a larger body (whether with a grip or an all-in one). I took my D700 on a trip once without the grip, drove me mad. Much much better with the grip on. A quick flick for a single shot, yes I'd probably keep my hand in place, but a sequence or planned series of shots on portrait, vastly prefer having the second set of controls.

I think the final decision is a D800 + grip. Heart wants the D3X, for all the reasons given. Head says, that over the next 4-5 years (my usual commitment to a body, or in this case two) I will value the extra flexibility of the 800, particularly in sensitivity - and have a two year warranty.

Tough call though. I totally agree with the comment about moving from D3S to D4 - it wasn't a planned move, I had to sell the D3S for financial reasons, an unfortunate necessity at the time. The D4 will be my workhorse and is simply that if I want 4-5 years use then I want the 'current' model now.

I've seen stunning images from both bodies, this has been an interesting exercise!

Thanks again, all.

Ben
 
I own neither of the options but have contemplated the dilemma myself. My decision was to stay with what I've got (a D700) and buy a nice car and conservatory! If I was to change bodies, I would be going for 2 years or warranty (although I've never had to use a Nikon one) over 3-6 months, purely for peace of mind. The 800 is also more me sized and shaped (without the grip - I loathe them but that's not what's under discussion!) despite me having rather large hands (the only ring I've ever found "off the shelf" that fitted me was a piece made by the silversmith for display - Z+6...). If I wanted/needed to bang in nails, the 3's extra heft and build quality might sway me slightly but I take rather better care of my kit than that!

Of course, for the OP, despite cost not being a problem, he might like to save a bob or 2 and source a low mileage preowned D800...
 
Well it was their flagship super high res camera. The D800 by all accounts beats it in every respect with regards to IQ. Some reviewers have even said they see the D800 more a D3x replacement than D700 replacement. I understand the body has the built in grip etc but to me I don't see why anyone would want a D3x over the D800.
 
For any reason other than aesthetics. Most of these cameras will no doubt be used in studios etc where I think the need for a tank of a camera is less! Google it its not like I'm the only person sees the d3x as irrelevant now!

D3x for build and battery life
D800 for literally everything else and add a grip then the d3x has no advantage at all
 
Last edited:
Obsolete and irrelevant are interesting terms.

The D3x is still more than capable of delivering exceptional images. I earn't plenty from my D3x after the D800 was available and I would imagine that £100,000s of pounds will still be earned by photographers across the world using it - for years to come.

It isn't maybe as obvious or attractive a commercial proposition as a new purchase as it was in the past when it was the only 24MP or greater FF camera in a Nikon mount. But it still won't be "obsolete" when a D4x is released.

Internet reviews are one thing but they are rarely written by working pros, particularly commercial photographers. Pixel peeping amateurs, and bloggers/journalists are keen to generate traffic and debate with black and white claims - and often it isn't the headline specs which are the critical differences.

For example - the 24mm PCE lens works perfectly with the D3x. On the D800/E it can't be fully rotated past the prism when switching the tilt and shift axis. Not a major issue for me as whilst I use the 24mm for some of my interiors and industrial work it is a smallish proportion of the total time I spend behind a camera. I can either use the D4 or mount the D800E upside down and rotate the images if they are going to be used very large (typically exhibition panels). If I was shooting on that lens all the time then I wouldn't want anything other than the D3x bolted onto it.
 
Good point. I know what you mean. I didn't mean them terms in the sense of the cameras no longer usuable or relevant. I meant it to people in the market to buying a high res camera now. Of course it's still going to be useful for people that own it.
 
Do you really need 3 cameras? It's great to have a backup or 2nd body and lens for weddings but I'm sure a D4 will be more than enough in the studio , if I had a D4 and D700 I really won't need anything else, btw fixation have 3 D3x's for sale :), reasonable money too
 
bryan elliott said:
Do you really need 3 cameras? It's great to have a backup or 2nd body and lens for weddings but I'm sure a D4 will be more than enough in the studio , if I had a D4 and D700 I really won't need anything else, btw fixation have 3 D3x's for sale :), reasonable money too
Click to expand...
Even with VAT to add the one with the new shutter is an attractive price
 
bryan elliott said:
Do you really need 3 cameras? It's great to have a backup or 2nd body and lens for weddings but I'm sure a D4 will be more than enough in the studio , if I had a D4 and D700 I really won't need anything else, btw fixation have 3 D3x's for sale :), reasonable money too
Click to expand...

3 bodies would be my minimum requirement for a busy wedding photographer. Style dependant of course but many wedding pros use two bodies interchangeably during the day either with two primes eg 35/85 or two zooms 24-70/70-200 or some combination of those. If one of those fails during the day then you *could* make do with one body for the rest of the day - but a third body in the bag or in my case it was in the boot gets you back up to normal working practice.

On the one occasion I had a body fail at a wedding (during the service) I took the first opportunity to nip out to the car, dump it, and pick up my spare body - returning to complete the wedding with only a 5 minute gap during the drinks reception. Fortunately that was my last wedding of the year in late December and I got the body repaired, returned to me and tested in about a week.

Had it been a Friday or Saturday in the summer then I could have been down one body for a couple of weddings (double/triple weekend) and maybe the following weekend as well. I wouldn't want to go to a wedding with one body whilst one was in the shop for repair. Yes I could have rented but my 3rd body was the D3x which was in constant use as a commercial photography camera so I had it anyway. I have additionally used a third body during the winter to keep it inside during arrivals at the venue (for example) to ensure that I had one warm body ready - and avoided entering the church/ceremony room with a cold camera and lens which immediately fogged up and had condensation for key parts of the service.

There is a relatively well known story that Susan Stripling lost 3 bodies during a wedding in the US during an electrical storm. She ended up using guests cameras (so 5 bodies in total) to deliver the images. Exceptional obviously but a demonstration as to the possibility of issues faced.

As for the suitability of the D4 in the studio - well only the OP knows the type of work they do and how complete a solution the D4 would be in that environment. I would mainly depend on the regularity images are used at > 20x16". Realistically £2k for a pro photographer to have a D800 in that environment if they have regular portrait sales > £500 is a small investment for the additional resolution it provides. I'm a firm believer in having matching bodies if you are a wedding photographer, I'm also a firm believer that if you shoot different things, and you have the return on investment, in having the best tool available for each of those jobs.
 
Last edited:
Right. One person has earned some time off for deliberately trolling / baiting.

Thread cleaned.

Any more nonsense from the usual suspects and extended time out will be given. I strongly recommend you put each other on ignore pronto. You know who you are.
 
Your right meonshore

Suppose it will come down to how busy a business he has and can he justify spending the money on the business , for me I'm a 1 camera guy and prefer to change lens and keep a backup, like you normally in the boot lol, but do appreciate some people like to use multiple bodies(I know I used too)
 
For weddings - I'm definitely a two-camera guy. Not a fan of swapping lenses about in the middle of a 'busy' patch, and it means if either fails for any reason I can still deliver. Not happened yet, for sure but that's really not the point. That's why there's a spare sb-800 in the case, too. Peace of mind. Typically, it's the 24-70 f/2.8 on one, which stays there, and either the 70-200 f/2.8 or the 85mm f/1.4 on the other.
Keeping the D700 is not so much about having a third body (though I'm sure it will be there in the car still!) as much as that particular camera has travelled with me countless times across the Atlantic with work, all round Europe and down to Croatia with a bunch of other VW campers, won me some awards and given me many memories and images I'm proud of, and I simply can't imagine parting with it! Maybe, just maybe, it could go to my daughter. (Hmmm.)
I'm hoping the D4 will prove to be an equally familiar and cherished companion, not just a work tool! The D700 earned its stripes far more than any previous body, as far as I'm comcerned. However, it won't last forever, or at least I can't count on that, so I'm simply taking advantage of a rare opportunity to refresh the kit with the next 4-5 years in mind, that's all.
:-)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top