Nikon D3x is out, no one talking about it?

[smalltake]

I thought I saw the advert today on Nikon D3x (NEW), but no one talking about it here? Did my eyes play tricks on me in the morning?

[vizuel]

no money to talk about it

[cteckwee]

It was announced some time ago (1 Dec 2009):
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0812/081201nikond3x.asp

I guess it is too expensive for most users, thus not many people discuss about it.

[cteckwee]

Nonetheless, there are a few people in this forum talked about it previously, check out the previous threads:

http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=453004

http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=457275

http://www.clubsnap.com/forums/showthread.php?t=453374

[smalltake]

Oh ok...... just kapoh look see look see....... tot can see some discussion. Learn abit more about the latest BBB virus.....

But I think should have someone using the cam....... in CS.......

[tomcat]

Originally Posted by smalltake Oh ok...... just kapoh look see look see....... tot can see some discussion. Learn abit more about the latest BBB virus..... But I think should have someone using the cam....... in CS.......

Those would be professionals and they don't have time to chit chat or brag about their gear purchases in the CS forums.

[Big Kahuna]

Originally Posted by vizuel no money to talk about it

I agree...for those who have money....have no time to talk

[LowLights]

Got a chance last night to take a few shoots off my friend's D3x.. let's put it this way..
"Don't play with fire, if you don't want to get Burn"

Shot it with a 85 f1.4 AF.. it's ability to crop in and still have good resolution for distance subject is simply AMAZING !!

The WB is also good.

But I only played with it for about 10mins.. so I can't say too much about other things, but the poison is seep into me

[Daedalus Trent]

uh...can anyone explain the rational for the D3X having a lower maximum ISO than the D3?

[blackman]

Based on the sensor size and MP, pixel size of D3x is just half of D3. Definitely D3 has higher ISO capability than D3x.

[Daedalus Trent]

Originally Posted by blackman Based on the sensor size and MP, pixel size of D3x is just half of D3. Definitely D3 has higher ISO capability than D3x.

oic, so it's to do with pixel size, yes? Larger pixel = larger surface area for light can fall on?

[u2nofear]

Originally Posted by tomcat Those would be professionals and they don't have time to chit chat or brag about their gear purchases in the CS forums.

those professional only know how to take good photo, but no interested in what is pixel size with big sensor size ...

Originally Posted by Big Kahuna I agree...for those who have money....have no time to talk

only those have money , they are too free and no place to spend....i think they are shy to ask or chit chat here cause they buy D3x but not sure yet how to use with taken good pic...

[blackman]

Originally Posted by Daedalus Trent oic, so it's to do with pixel size, yes? Larger pixel = larger surface area for light can fall on?

That is what i think it should be theoretically. It is all to do with SNR (signal to noise ratio). larger pixel, higher signal strength, higher SNR if noise keep constant, -> can push to higher ISO limit, or better ISO performance.

If D3X can have same ISO limit as D3, it means Nikon has done good job in reducing sensor noise level by 2 times.

[Rashkae]

Originally Posted by blackman That is what i think it should be theoretically. It is all to do with SNR (signal to noise ratio). larger pixel, higher signal strength, higher SNR if noise keep constant, -> can push to higher ISO limit, or better ISO performance. If D3X can have same ISO limit as D3, it means Nikon has done good job in reducing sensor noise level by 2 times.

Correct. It's down to the limits of physics with the sensor technology.

The D3X uses a slightly modified version of the A900 sensor. Once Sony creates the high-resolution backlit CMOS full-frame sensors, You could expect a D4/D4X with far better ISO performance.

[tomcat]

As expected, the D3x is noisier than the D3 at the same ISO.. at least according to the tests carried out by this guy here:
http://www.pbase.com/chipscar/d3_vs_d3x_tests

[Rashkae]

Originally Posted by tomcat As expected, the D3x is noisier than the D3 at the same ISO.. at least according to the tests carried out by this guy here: http://www.pbase.com/chipscar/d3_vs_d3x_tests

Yup, but that's on a pixel-to-pixel check.

If you take an A900 or D3X picture and resize it, you'll actually have a cleaner, sharper picture then from a D3/D700.

[night86mare]

so nice to fondle

[theveed]

Besides, a D3X buyer won't be using it in low light LOL...

[tomcat]

Originally Posted by Rashkae Yup, but that's on a pixel-to-pixel check. If you take an A900 or D3X picture and resize it, you'll actually have a cleaner, sharper picture then from a D3/D700.

The D3x images had been resized to match those of the D3 in this case.

[blackman]

Originally Posted by Rashkae Yup, but that's on a pixel-to-pixel check. If you take an A900 or D3X picture and resize it, you'll actually have a cleaner, sharper picture then from a D3/D700.

Resizing picture and compare ISO performance is just to cheat human eyes. When scaling picture, the noise being scaled as well, your eyes see cleaner doesn't means the picture is indeed cleaner. 100% crop or pixel-to-pixel comparison would be more accurate.