What a load of BS. Bo starts off by saying that "we" (who's this "we", anyway?) "..are certain" the D3x will become the "new king on the throne". But then he goes on to point out and then dismiss some of the underwhelming points about the D3x, such as its reduced frame rate, reduced ISO range, overdue arrival, and huge file sizes. And most everything else about the camera - such as high ISO noise performance - is merely speculation at this point.
What's not in question is that Nikon is late to the party. Again.
As a loyal Nikon user (D70, D2x, D200, D300, D3) I am not looking to purchase the D3x. $8000.00 is a joke (if it was the first camera above 12 megs and 2 years ago then maybe), but $6000.00 is the max anyone should pay for this camera (opinion of course).
I use my D3 and can print SHARP 24X36" prints. By the time you frame them they are LARGE. My canvas panoramic images are over 6ft long! I know the benefits of more pixels (ability to crop, larger images and possibly "sharper" due to pixel count, etc. etc.), but again I can show anyone on this forum a 20X30" or larger print that will blow you away. TACT sharp at ANY distance! I could probably do 30X40" at appropriate viewing distances, but my Epson 7800 obviously doesn't print that large...
Anyway, I am sure the D3x is a great camera (it is a D3 with larger sensor), but for 8K, I don't think so.
Very much so. For those of us who are primarily available light photographers, these are two entirely different cameras. For me it is far more advantageous to have a camera that can take a photograph like that one at 6400 iso than to be able to print a larger print or zoom in on an eyelash. When the D3 came out, one Nikonian commented that Nikon was making a statement with the D3 and that statement was that the quality and the capacity of the pixels was more important than the number of them. I think he was right.
To follow up Nigel's comment - and to somewhat contradict my own response - I have attached two photographs. The first is Mark Goldstein's really excellent studio photograph with the D3x and the second is my photograph taken with a D3. Both photographs are 100% crops at 200 iso without sharpening or any alteration except for a slight brightening of mine. Both were taken with an AF-S Nikkor 24-70.
are, however, very impressive, you can zoom in almost too far ... until you see that portrait was taken in a studio, by a top class pro knowing his every pixel would be magnified by us lot AND he had to use a 60mm micro lens to get the result... Then one begins to wonder - as another Nikonian has observed - that perhaps not many Nikon lenses are up to the D3X's resolving power. There is also the increasingly essential requirement of taking EXTREME care with focus which might demand a tripod at all times. Finally, those of us without unassisted vision wonder if the auto-focus is up to honing in on an eyelash ...
As interested as I am to sate my desire for the D3X the price, combined with these uncertainties means that I will await analysis from the far more experienced Nikonians before I test the water.
>Then one begins to wonder - as another Nikonian has observed - >that perhaps not many Nikon lenses are up to the D3X's >resolving power.
Let's remember that the pixel density of the D3X is actually rather less than that of the D2X, D300 and D90. Lenses that have resolution sufficient to give good results on those cameras should be fine on the D3X (at least, within its DX crop area)
Will someone shoot a standard color target under controlled lighting and report delta E min, max, mean, median after normalizing the RAW file on a 18% gray patch on the same target? (No other manipulation.)
URL where this test or similar tests are performed?
Thanks for posting value add details about the D3x. I really appreciate.
I fully agree with Steven. All sample images I hae seen so far are average quality at best and I honestly hope the D3X is capable of a MIUCH better performance then that. But I am afaid that the D3X suffers from the same problems as my D2X: all images are slightly blurred and soft beyond the point of USM repair, no matter what lens is used. And no, my body does not suffer from front or back focus. I even considered having the low pass filter removed. Anyone out there who has any experience with this?
Well it's great to see Nikon coming out with new products and staying on top of the opposition but at nearly £5000 pounds it must be for a niche market. Ok we would all love one but I certainly could not justify owning one, & apart from the cost my skills would not do it justice !!!!!
The other thing is that we are well into the laws of diminishing returns, the difference between the last & next is getting less but you can end up paying more.
I loved my CP5000, but the D70 was in a different galaxy & then my D300 is great but on the same planet.
For me a used D3 may replace my d300 next year, unless the new D3 price falls enough !
I think the camera should be great. I figure for landscape or wildlife photographers they should have a great camera to use if they can afford it. Probably in the current economy Nikon may have some pretty dusty camera's sitting on the shelf.
The D3X may well be one of the greatest cameras Nikon has created in its long history. I agree with other comments that it came late considering the competition from Canon and Sony. Unfortunately at a time where the world (and our) economies are suffering, the $8000 price is poorly timed. I'll bet that given some months after its introduction Nikon will have to correct this figure through rebates or concessions of some type.
I think those of us that cannot afford to enter the edge of the "medium format" world should not condemn Nikon for attempting to do so. I, like many of you, have waited for a hi-res body from Nikon. I love my D3, and a 3X would never replace it. However, a body that gets me close to a medium format image for under $18K...... Maybe some of you should look at it from the other side of the coin.
As far as the comparisons: How about a real test? Who has both bodies already? Shoot the exact same subject in a controlled environment with both bodies. ISO 200, 400, 800, 1600. Let us zoom and see the difference in the resolution.
>I think those of us that cannot afford to enter the edge of >the "medium format" world should not condemn Nikon >for attempting to do so.
That assumes that Nikon are the first to enter the "medium format" world when the reality is that Canon already did so more than a year ago. The price of a 20+ mp camera has already been set and it is much lower than what Nikon are asking.
Initial reports of the 5DMkII suggest that it's ISO performance is on par with the D700. It that proves to be the case, then not only with this make the price of the D3X look even more ridiculous, but the 5DMkII will look like even more of a bargain.
Ive already done six AD/ industrial commissions, Corporate profiles and one AD-Campaign, small billboard size 90X70 with this camera and it beats any other DSLR Ive ever worked with, hands down and Ive worked with all of them. Im not concerned about comparisons with the MarkIII or the Sony, Im more interested in comparisons with my P25 or 39. The D3X, in a nutshell is a money making machine, exactly what is was made for.
Really enjoying the upgrade to the D3X from D2X, didn't realise how much I had missed full frame ! I have one problem, I like to able to view the NEF thumbnails but there doesn't seem to be any codec support for mac users. Obviously I can view the files through Lightroom and View NX but it is really good to able to have a quick thumbnail view on the mac. Does anyone have the same problem and if so, are there solutions ? Cheers
Sun 22-Feb-09 05:27 PM | edited Sun 22-Feb-09 05:28 PM by bgs
(edited: Changed subject line)
As Steve said, the Mac's built-in support for the D3X (also needed for Aperture on Mac) is not available yet. There are long lists of ppl being really upset about this on the Apple site (just as "they" were earlier as it took fairly long for Apple to deliver raw support for e.g. the D300). I am using Capture NX2 for converting RAWs on the Mac right now as a bypass solution (I am an Aperture user).
In January, Michael Reichman, of The Luminous Landscape, took a D3x to Antarctica. His opinions are at www.luminous-landscape.com/ - under “What's New” (March 2, 2009). Good guesses on Nikon’s marketing strategy.