D3X official specs
- Thread starter pisduck
- Start date
- Status
i was thinking of that too.
hmm..
was wondering even if i bought the d3x, should i keep the d3 as well.
why dont they launch this thing for xmas.
it will be such a wonderful gift for myself.
Knowing Nikon, she moves at her own pace and more importantly set the standard. As such the specs in the D3X is expected (was already in their plan last year as various rumours had indicated) to be what it is. Nikon did go trying to pitch her products against the 5DII, after all the D3 already set the benchmark for the 5DII.
I would rather look at the camera and not the senseless comparision as Nikon is Nikon and Canon is Canon, each has it own ways of doing the same function of producing fine cameras.
Unlike the D3 where it is for sports and news and events sort of shooting.
The D3X is targeted at different segment of market from the D3. It is for fashion, studio and commercial type of shoot or even landscape photographers, where image quality (detail, color, tonal gradation, and dynamic range) is medium format delectable (or better in some areas) where even at ISO of 1600 the image is still of high quality and can still deliver. Most medium format digital backs while claiming to have ISO 50 - 400 or even 800 cannot produce images usable at ISO 200 and above (maybe 400 for the newer ones which I have not tried)
And if for whatever reasons(best known to the photographer himself) where ISO above 1600 is need, there is still Hi 3 (or 0.3 cannot remember clearly) at IS 3200, where good usable image can still be produced, (you have to wait for the release of camera and the various reviews to bear witness). But seriously if one is looking for Hi ISO, machine gun speed shooting, then this camera is not meant for you. BTW the camera is about 5fps (if I am not mistaken)
This camera does present a big step forward for the segment of photography being targeted; of cos not ordinary consumers
Yes you should still keep the D3.
The D3x will be great for your studio type of shot
Your wish will be granted. It will be out in Singapore in time for Christmas, I don't think there will be shortage (the price and economic conditions took care of it) But its peanut to you hehehehe
I would rather look at the camera and not the senseless comparision as Nikon is Nikon and Canon is Canon, each has it own ways of doing the same function of producing fine cameras.
Unlike the D3 where it is for sports and news and events sort of shooting.
The D3X is targeted at different segment of market from the D3. It is for fashion, studio and commercial type of shoot or even landscape photographers, where image quality (detail, color, tonal gradation, and dynamic range) is medium format delectable (or better in some areas) where even at ISO of 1600 the image is still of high quality and can still deliver. Most medium format digital backs while claiming to have ISO 50 - 400 or even 800 cannot produce images usable at ISO 200 and above (maybe 400 for the newer ones which I have not tried)
And if for whatever reasons(best known to the photographer himself) where ISO above 1600 is need, there is still Hi 3 (or 0.3 cannot remember clearly) at IS 3200, where good usable image can still be produced, (you have to wait for the release of camera and the various reviews to bear witness). But seriously if one is looking for Hi ISO, machine gun speed shooting, then this camera is not meant for you. BTW the camera is about 5fps (if I am not mistaken)
This camera does present a big step forward for the segment of photography being targeted; of cos not ordinary consumers
Yes you should still keep the D3.
The D3x will be great for your studio type of shot
Your wish will be granted. It will be out in Singapore in time for Christmas, I don't think there will be shortage (the price and economic conditions took care of it) But its peanut to you hehehehe
Last edited:
thanks P.E for the heads up.
i really dont know if i'll get one in that case.
yes, i do shoot high iso but i rarely go beyond 1600 or even 1000.
i think the ONLY reason i'll get a d3x is the 24? or 25mp.
i love that kind of resolution.
and the ability to really blow things up.
any indicative price?
i hope it's cheaper than what i paid for my d3.(i.e 7k) but i doubt....
i really dont know if i'll get one in that case.
yes, i do shoot high iso but i rarely go beyond 1600 or even 1000.
i think the ONLY reason i'll get a d3x is the 24? or 25mp.
i love that kind of resolution.
and the ability to really blow things up.
any indicative price?
i hope it's cheaper than what i paid for my d3.(i.e 7k) but i doubt....
Price wise not sure, as I don't intend to get one (I wasn't interested $ not enough - still got my Mamiya/Leaf for this type of shoot) but my guess will be $10k region -/+ . It will probably go lower in tandem with the NYSE or STI southern direction when the recession is being felt next year here. :think:
It's about 21.something mp if my cracked crystal ball read it correctly.
It's about 21.something mp if my cracked crystal ball read it correctly.
Last edited:
I work without pay for my company ... hor :sticktong
And still have to clean and take care of all the equipment like baby after use, if not company fire me ok.
Yes, it is 24.5 MP
Many says it is the noisy A900 Sony sensor which is also 24MP.
If it is true, this could be a reason why Nikon do not allow the camera to go too high of the ISO.
Comparing with other camera maker is good actually. Most well known review sites compares the ISO level as one of the gauge to see which is better. It also make camera makers to produce better cameras if their current range is poorly reviewed. The low price of Sony cameras also drive down the price of others makers too. In the end who is the one that benefits from all the competitions of the camera makers? ....We, the user.
Canon produces the full frame 1ds Mk3 and 5D.
Nikon responded with never heard of high iso of D300, D3 and D700 and make many sports photographers to switch to Nikon during the 2008 Olympics.
Canon throw the ball back to Nikon yard with 5D mk2 with the same high ISOo as D3,D700.
Nikon can only return with a max ISO 6400 of the D3x. Canon should be laughing right now.
The normal max ISO of D3x is 1600 (Normally the max ISO already has visible noise.). Hi1 and Hi2 are normally shoot at the normal max ISO which is set to -1 and -2 exposure and push up. This normally resulted in higher noise level and requires some noise reduction to look better which in turn reduces details.
Let's hope this D3x will able to produce magic at all these ISO level.
Many says it is the noisy A900 Sony sensor which is also 24MP.
If it is true, this could be a reason why Nikon do not allow the camera to go too high of the ISO.
Comparing with other camera maker is good actually. Most well known review sites compares the ISO level as one of the gauge to see which is better. It also make camera makers to produce better cameras if their current range is poorly reviewed. The low price of Sony cameras also drive down the price of others makers too. In the end who is the one that benefits from all the competitions of the camera makers? ....We, the user.
Canon produces the full frame 1ds Mk3 and 5D.
Nikon responded with never heard of high iso of D300, D3 and D700 and make many sports photographers to switch to Nikon during the 2008 Olympics.
Canon throw the ball back to Nikon yard with 5D mk2 with the same high ISOo as D3,D700.
Nikon can only return with a max ISO 6400 of the D3x. Canon should be laughing right now.
The normal max ISO of D3x is 1600 (Normally the max ISO already has visible noise.). Hi1 and Hi2 are normally shoot at the normal max ISO which is set to -1 and -2 exposure and push up. This normally resulted in higher noise level and requires some noise reduction to look better which in turn reduces details.
Let's hope this D3x will able to produce magic at all these ISO level.
Yes, it is 24.5 MP
Many says it is the noisy A900 Sony sensor which is also 24MP.
If it is true, this could be a reason why Nikon do not allow the camera to go too high of the ISO.
Comparing with other camera maker is good actually. Most well known review sites compares the ISO level as one of the gauge to see which is better. It also make camera makers to produce better cameras if their current range is poorly reviewed. The low price of Sony cameras also drive down the price of others makers too. In the end who is the one that benefits from all the competitions of the camera makers? ....We, the user.
Canon produces the full frame 1ds Mk3 and 5D.
Nikon responded with never heard of high iso of D300, D3 and D700 and make many sports photographers to switch to Nikon during the 2008 Olympics.
Canon throw the ball back to Nikon yard with 5D mk2 with the same high ISOo as D3,D700.
Nikon can only return with a max ISO 6400 of the D3x. Canon should be laughing right now.
The normal max ISO of D3x is 1600 (Normally the max ISO already has visible noise.). Hi1 and Hi2 are normally shoot at the normal max ISO which is set to -1 and -2 exposure and push up. This normally resulted in higher noise level and requires some noise reduction to look better which in turn reduces details.
Let's hope this D3x will able to produce magic at all these ISO level.
As I say before this is just a typical consumer's comparison of MP and ISO which fortunately Nikon do not fall into that consumer marketing gimmick trap (this time) and goes for what photographers are look for. Which is what this camera is built for. Go dpreview and read the forum which delves on such issues.
As I say no point comparing cameras as each has its merits and demerits.
Ultimately such comparison will lead to flame bait and fanboys etc which in this forum here we will not tolerate.
24.5mp good and increase from my outdated "prediction" of 21mp - my bad.
Last edited:
Yes, it is 24.5 MP
Many says it is the noisy A900 Sony sensor which is also 24MP.
If it is true, this could be a reason why Nikon do not allow the camera to go too high of the ISO.
Comparing with other camera maker is good actually. Most well known review sites compares the ISO level as one of the gauge to see which is better. It also make camera makers to produce better cameras if their current range is poorly reviewed. The low price of Sony cameras also drive down the price of others makers too. In the end who is the one that benefits from all the competitions of the camera makers? ....We, the user.
Canon produces the full frame 1ds Mk3 and 5D.
Nikon responded with never heard of high iso of D300, D3 and D700 and make many sports photographers to switch to Nikon during the 2008 Olympics.
Canon throw the ball back to Nikon yard with 5D mk2 with the same high ISOo as D3,D700.
Nikon can only return with a max ISO 6400 of the D3x. Canon should be laughing right now.
The normal max ISO of D3x is 1600 (Normally the max ISO already has visible noise.). Hi1 and Hi2 are normally shoot at the normal max ISO which is set to -1 and -2 exposure and push up. This normally resulted in higher noise level and requires some noise reduction to look better which in turn reduces details.
Let's hope this D3x will able to produce magic at all these ISO level.
whatever it is...as long as its good enough to serve me and deliver to my clients...i guess what matters to me is how much bread i can bring home.
if such endless comparing of brands can make the the recession go away...i would join in too but...sigh :dunno:
Point being? If the ISO6400 on the D3X outdoes 5D2, I doubt anyone will be complaining. Let's wait for the sample pictures and a side by side comparison before we come to conclusion eh?
Point being? If the ISO6400 on the D3X outdoes 5D2, I doubt anyone will be complaining. Let's wait for the sample pictures and a side by side comparison before we come to conclusion eh?
I think that should be the way... wait until we see them picture come out then compare like aple to aple. So what is the point of telling your customer about your camera iso capability is up to 25000 if the quality of the picture is mediocree and comparable with photo from other brand of camera at iso 1600? Let wait and see.... If this new 24 megapixel sensor from nikon is also the same as in sony A900, we will have to see the different in performance between EXPEED 16 bit and BIONZ.
ive gotta say, its a good move by Nikon.
The D3X will pretty much deter professionals from buying the 5d2 for fashion etcetc and opt for Nikon instead, since the 5d2 isnt the most professionally built body in the market.
The D3X will pretty much deter professionals from buying the 5d2 for fashion etcetc and opt for Nikon instead, since the 5d2 isnt the most professionally built body in the market.
- Status
Similar threads
