Most Helpful Customer Reviews
|
|
103 of 104 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
The Pinnacle, 18 Mar 2008
This review is from: Nikon D3 Digital SLR Camera (Electronics)
Spend ten minutes with a D3, and you will be saying one of two things: either "that's really heavy", or "I want one". Nothing could have prepared me for the experience the first time the Nikon reps stuck one in my hands, and I spent four months saying "I'm definitely not getting one", until I finally succumbed. But then, I was used to the D2X.
My staff all said "your cameras are really heavy-- I wouldn't want to carry that around." They favour the D200.
That's about it really: if you want absolutely uncompromising performance up to ISO 6400 with negligible noise, and up to ISO 25600 when needed, and you want it at 9 frames per second, and you want a battery that is good for thousands of shots, and you want it in a rainproof, metal body, and you want faster autofocusing than you've ever seen, then this is the camera to get. On the other hand, if those aren't key issues, and either weight or cost is an issue, then it's better to look at other options, especially the D300, which crams into its diminutive body almost all the power of the D2X, and for much less money.
The D3 is Nikon's first digital camera with a sensor the size of 35mm film. This is often referred to as 'Full Frame', or FF, but Nikon calls it FX, to distinguish it from the APS-C sized DX format. FX and DX each have their own advantages, and its important to understand which is right for you before choosing.
The larger frame size of FX, for the same resolution, means the light sensors are larger, which in turn means less noise. Much less noise, in fact, giving the D3 the previously impossible extended range of ISO 25600 equivalent, which allows what people are beginning to refer to as 'available darkness' photography.
The larger frame size also means that older lenses work in exactly the same way they worked on 35mm, which means they have a shorter apparent focal length than on a DX camera, less depth of field, and a smaller minimum aperture before diffraction sets in.
Taken together, these make FX an excellent choice for weddings, sports and photojournalism -- anywhere where you face low-light, or want to create creamy out of focus highlights.
The smaller frame size of DX, for the same resolution, means smaller sensors and hence more noise, but an apparent increase of 1.5x in focal length (actually, the focal length stays the same, but the angle of view is less, which is the same effect as more focal length), and more depth of field.
These make DX an excellent choice for anything requiring long telephoto, and anything for which depth of field is important.
With all this in mind, Nikon has solidly targeted the D3 at professional sports, news and wedding shooters, though it is an all round performer which will not disappoint in a very large variety of applications. Its resolution is very slightly less than the D2X was -- enough to shoot for a billboard, but not enough to shoot for a truck-side without upscaling. That said, the D3 has so little noise that you can happily upscale even when the image was taken at ISO 6400. The speed of the autofocus is quite frightening, and Nikon has substantially upgraded it, giving 51 autofocus points, and using extremely sophisticated circuitry that actively identifies and tracks moving objects. It also comes equipped with rear-panel 'live-view', which is useful in all kinds of photojournalistic situations, and also in portraiture. The addition of a built in virtual horizon is a neat feature, since you can operate it while looking through the viewfinder. Landscape shooters will like this, although, again, it's the rough and tumble of press shooting which is the real winner. Another bonus for the busy photojournalist is the ability to edit images in camera, cropping, changing the format (though not the orientation), and applying a number of filters. This is ideal if you need to finalise a shot to get off to a picture editor against a deadline, and don't want to spend time in Photoshop.
The D3 benefits from a lot of other refinements -- like replacing those fiddly, easily lost knobs for the extension flash and 10 pin connector with rubber covers that stay on the camera, and an HDMI output. Built in Chromatic Aberration cancellation means that all shots at many focal lengths on most lenses will be crisper. The VGA resolution rear screen is also magnificent
Ultimately, though, its real advantage over other cameras, and the main reason for choosing it over the D300, is its noise performance. This is absolutely stunning, and it really is hard to imagine until you actually try it. The D3 has less noise at 6400 than the D2X had at 800. Suddenly fast shots in dimly lit sports hall become crisp and clear. Candids taken with a flick of the camera take on a studio-sharpness. The Nikon CLS flash system gets an effective power boost which puts the SB-800 on a par with studio-strobes. Apart from architectural photography, where photographers are stacking neutral density filters to filter out the people present in shot, there are few aspects of the art which won't benefit massively from this. It's, quite simply, a different world.
This is a very expensive purchase, particularly if you already have an investment in DX lenses, which either work in crop mode on this camera, or (for the experimental) vignette strongly at most focal lengths. If you are paying this much, you should probably also look at getting the 14-24 mega-wide zoom, or the 24-70 AFS N lenses.
If you are prepared for that, and for the weight, then this camera takes exquisite, breath-takingly sharp images, and does so in conditions that would previously have produced dull, grainy and blurry compromises.
Do yourself a favour, though. If you really aren't in a position to buy this camera, don't pick one up in a shop, don't let anyone let you handle their's, and, don't, on any account, start surfing the web to find out just how good it really is. That way madness lies.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you?
 
|
|
|
|
|
|
28 of 29 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
Great camera, shame about Nikons con with the upgrade, 10 Aug 2008
This review is from: Nikon D3 Digital SLR Camera (Electronics)
Before buying the D3 I phoned a dealer in London and asked for a price. They quoted me some high figure, above that of Amazon, but did not have one in stock. A few minutes later they phoned me back and said they would have a used one either that day or next. I thought this was a bit odd for someone to be selling a D3 already, as it has only been available a few months. They then told me that they have sold several used D3's, where someone had bought a new D3 and then decided to swap it for the newer D700. The D700 is similar, but is quite a bit smaller and lighter - it is also cheaper too. It's the exact same 35 mm sensor.
I then played a bit with both cameras and found the D3 more confortable in the hand, despite the extra size and weight, so settled on the D3, rather than the D700. The D3 has the advantage of more frames per second, which is what I wanted for wildlife photography.
I think "The Pinnacle" whose review on Amason is dated 18 Mar 2008, has done an excellent job, so I'm not going to repeat what he/she has said, since it would be a bit pointless. I was not even aware of the "Chromatic Aberration cancellation" they mentioned. This camera will take some getting used to, as it's quite complex, but I guess that is stating the obvious.
One thing the other reviewer did not state is that the camera can save images in various formats include TIFF, JEPG and NEF, which is a raw format of Nikon's design, which allows for higher quality if post processing pictures.
I've only given the D3 4 stars due to the amount of memory in it. The amount of memory restricts the number of frames that can be taken before a buffer fills up. If you save as NEF and higher quality JPEG, that is only 15 frames. Once the buffer is full, the frame rate drops dramatically until the data in the buffer is written to the compact flash card. Now Nikon will upgrade the camera for you, by adding 2 GB of RAM, which increases the number of shots before the buffer fills by a factor of about 2.5. But in the US they want $499 and in the UK £352. In addition to that, you need to pay carriage both ways. I think this is really excessive for 2 GB of RAM. It should have been included in the camera, not sold as an option for which the camera needs to go back to Nikon for. I've suggested to Nikon they should drop this charge and offer the upgrade free. I encourage other D3 owners to do the same. How many people feel happy about buying an expensive camera, then sending it back and paying a lot of money for memory which would cost Nikon very little?
The camera has two slots for compact flash, which can be configured in various ways. The default is to just let you take extra photos with the extra memory. But two other options are 'backup' where the same images are written to two cards in case one fails. The other is JPEG+NEF, where JPEG is written to one complact flash card and the NEF to the second card. You do not need to use both slots, but it obviously has advantages if you do.
So a good camera which will be a great camera if Nikon ship this with the extra memory and offer a free upgrade to existing users.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you?
|
|
|
|
|
|
11 of 11 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
By far the best professional SLR out there., 12 Jan 2009
This review is from: Nikon D3 Digital SLR Camera (Electronics)
I have used mosr of the Nikon professional grade SLRs and recently have been using the D3. I had anticipated a camera a bit better then my 2DH and 2DXs but this camera blows those out of the water.
What makes this camera so good? Well I am a semi-pro sports photographer and if you have ever tried to shoot night games at Championship to non league stadium level you will appreciate that light levels are awful. However, whilst I have experience noise in my earlier cameras I can quite easily shoot at ISO 3200 and there is no noticable noise to speak of.
The camera reacts very speedily and once again compared to the Nikon 2 series its knocks spots off those cameras. I can quite easily lock onto a player and merrily shoot away knowing all images will be sharp.
The other great thong about this camera is that it has not one but 2 compact flash card facilities. I like to shoot RAW but the football clubs I work for need jpegs. So all I need do now id adjust the camera to load RAW on once card (this is for me to manipulate and provide poster size images) and the jpegs can be saved onto the other compact flash card which I can give straight to the club. Pure genius and I don't think any other camera manufacturer has that facility.
I have recently been trying my hand at HDR (High Dynamic Range) photography. I have used my D2Xs but this cameras chip is better suited to it and when I process the images they look even better then I expected.
Downsides to the camera? Well its an FX model which is full frame and all my Nikons are DX format. In DX a 200mm lens is the equivilent of a 300mm which is great for sports. In FX it is only a 200mm so I guess that means I will be shelling out more cash for longer lenses, but that is a small sacrifice. By the way I do understand I can shoot in DX format but get a small image.
Well I reckon this is the best camera available at the price currently and I am sure if you are looking to upgrade to Nikon , that this is the camera to go for.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Most Recent Customer Reviews
|
