Login or Join Now

Upload your photos, chat, win prizes and much more

Username:
Password:
Remember Me

Can't Access your Account?

New to ePHOTOzine? Join ePHOTOzine for free!

Like 0

d3s or d3x - need advice.

Join Now

Join ePHOTOzine, the friendliest photography community.

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!

New PortraitPro 12 SALE + 10% OFF code EPZROS814
thewilliam
26 Apr 2012 - 2:41 PM

Your OP suggested that you'd already decided to go with one of the D3 series. Yet you now talk in terms of a D700 and its cost saving. There is a good reason why the D3 series weigh and cost more than the D700 and that's better weather sealing and the camera is generally tougher. You probably need more durability than the D700 will give you.

With full frame, you'll need to avoid or sell the original Nikon 70-200 because it's soft in the corners. She-who-must-be-obeyed has one and it's brilliant, but only with her DX cameras. I have the older 80-200 and thoroughly recommend it. Or you could get the Mk II version of the 70-200 if you really need VR.

No two photographers have the same needs or opinions so nobody can really guide you towards a good choice of camera.

Annette, in your position, I'd look at the metadata for the pix I'd already taken. What ISO were you using? Do you wish you had higher? Bear in mind that even the cheapest modern Nikon gives better high ISO performance than the D2X. How big/sharp do you want to make your pix? Most folks treat the D3X as a studio tool but you can wind down the resolution.

Last Modified By thewilliam at 26 Apr 2012 - 2:41 PM
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links 
26 Apr 2012 - 2:41 PM

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

annettep38
annettep38 e2 Member 3186 forum postsannettep38 vcard France30 Constructive Critique Points
30 Apr 2012 - 12:34 AM

Well I really appreciate your input.

So I have spent the last week a lot of time in thinking about your various points.
And came up with the following:
- I need the new camera to be a lot sharper and more noise and EV tolerant than the last one.
- it has to be Land Rover proof.
- And also I want again as much detail and flexibility as I used to have between my Pentax 67, the F2 and the Toyo field.

Then I showed Chris the difference between the two options for 1200 and 3200. And between my old camera and the candidates.
To which he replied: I don't know anything about it but even I can see a difference between the expensive one and what you got now.

So I said to myself, If he can see it then I'll listen to my longing for quality and buy it. I've sold the 400mm to my accountant and now I have to kill the piggy bank.
William, my old lens is a 80-200mm MF 2.8 the heavy version. For sale now, I think I'm fine with my 300mm prime for the new format and I got the 70-300 VR, not because I need the VR. It just happened to be so sharp.
trouble with VR is, it doesn't reduce the vibration ofr birds or Landrovers or insects Smile.

LenShepherd
LenShepherd e2 Member 62458 forum postsLenShepherd vcard United Kingdom
1 May 2012 - 10:25 AM


Quote:
With full frame, you'll need to avoid or sell the original Nikon 70-200 because it's soft in the corners. She-who-must-be-obeyed has one and it's brilliant, but only with her DX cameras.

I own the D3s, the 70-200 Mk 1, the 70-200 Mk II, and the 24-70.
In Nikon's f2.8 MTF the 70-200 Mk 1 is better than the Mk II at 200mm, and better except in the extreme corners than either the Mk II or 24-70 at 24mm.
Few complain about the 24-70 quality Wink
Nobody noticed the 70-200 Mk 1 fault until dpreview claimed it had one Wink
One of the main advantages of the Mk II is to hold apparent image size during focus to make it better suited to video recording.
I think most of us who own the 14-24, 24-70 or either 70-200 accept image quality is better in the f5.6-16 aperture range than in the corners at f2.8.

thewilliam
1 May 2012 - 11:22 AM

The "faults" in the original 70-200 seem to have been real enough for Nikon to introduce a mark II long before the natural replacement time.

Maintenance of apparent image scale during focus pulling is dear to the heart of every cinemaphotographer and is one reason why movie lenses are so much more expensive than stills lenses. The lack of breathing is one thing that makes the Zeiss 100mm macro lens so convenient for close-up work.

annettep38
annettep38 e2 Member 3186 forum postsannettep38 vcard France30 Constructive Critique Points
10 May 2012 - 12:05 AM

Conclusion....
I have taken about 600 pictures now . Most of them were boring wedding pictures but they presented a good opportunity to to test what I dreaded most: the performance in bad light.
What can I say, the D3x is much better than I thought, at least up to 800 ASA.
And I love the 4x5 format. That is a feature I didn't know existed, now I'd never miss it.

LenShepherd
LenShepherd e2 Member 62458 forum postsLenShepherd vcard United Kingdom
10 May 2012 - 10:18 AM


Quote:
Maintenance of apparent image scale during focus pulling is dear to the heart of every cinemaphotographer and is one reason why movie lenses are so much more expensive than stills lenses. The lack of breathing is one thing that makes the Zeiss 100mm macro lens so convenient for close-up work.

As I said, it is also the reason Nikon introduced the Mk 11.
Getting technical the Mk 1 breathes a lot (Nikon used to advertise it's "best in class" close focus magnification) whereas the Mk II does not.

RRRoger
RRRoger  453 forum posts United States
18 Jun 2012 - 3:03 PM

Get a D800
It has the best of everything except the huge, heavy built in vertical grip of the D1-4

User_Removed
18 Jun 2012 - 3:40 PM


Quote: Get a D800
It has the best of everything except the huge, heavy built in vertical grip of the D1-4

That's what I would have said too, RRR. But too late - Annette decided that the D3x was the one best suited to her needs. If she can handle the bulk and weight (don't forget that she has used Pentax 67 and field cameras), then I am sure she will enjoy it.

annettep38
annettep38 e2 Member 3186 forum postsannettep38 vcard France30 Constructive Critique Points
18 Jun 2012 - 7:29 PM

Dear Left Forum,
the D3x has now produced 2775 images. The only snag is that is takes much longer to write a RAW image. So no fast sequences.
The noise is much less @ 1600 or even 3200 than the D2x. Also, the dynamic light option helped me to get some very pleasing night images. They are posted as is, I only corrected the 18mm's vignetting. No more gruesome shadows, no time wasted on trying to get the blue light right, I had left the white balance on auto and the dynamic light on normal.

And the weight of the monster really helps with hand held night shots!! I am lazy by nature and prefer to carry lenses rather than my tripod, which lives in our garden.

Add a Comment

You must be a member to leave a comment

Username:
Password:
Remember me:
Un-tick this box if you want to login each time you visit.