The GetDPI Photography Forum
Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!
No reports here on the D3x
- Thread starter Guy Mancuso
- Start date
GrahamWelland
Subscriber & Workshop Member
GrahamWelland
Subscriber & Workshop Member
I've also been shooting with the D3X since January or so - as mentioned elsewhere here it's really been a joy to use and in practice it's identical to using the D3. What you do have to watch out for is the glass quality as it is brutal with anything less than excellent glass and technique. The D3/D700 and D3x complement each other and I don't consider the D3x to be a replacement for the D3. The D3 is a more flexible camera with more DR flexibility and high ISO/low light performance. The D3x provides the pixel resolution that I've been missing since shooting LF, 6x7 and exceeds the performance I was getting a while back with a Kodak DCS 645M/Mamiya AFD II combo (no surprise there really I guess).
The frame rate at 14bits is significantly slower. However, this really isn't a problem for the landscape type of shooting that I bought it for.
I ignored all the bleeting about price/D700x/etc etc - I wanted a high resolution platform that supported my body of Nikon & Zeiss ZF glass which made it a no-brainer decision.
The frame rate at 14bits is significantly slower. However, this really isn't a problem for the landscape type of shooting that I bought it for.
I ignored all the bleeting about price/D700x/etc etc - I wanted a high resolution platform that supported my body of Nikon & Zeiss ZF glass which made it a no-brainer decision.
M
marknorton
Guest
I have both the D3 and the D3x and agree with the other comments. It's much easier to be wowed by the D3's high ISO capability than by the D3x's high resolution - the D3's performance is more accessible but I'm not the first to find the images out of the D3 a bit soft out of the camera. The D3x fixes that and having two cameras which are so close ergonomically makes good sense.
The D3x really only comes into its own with the best glass and a tripod and I have not yet got into Zeiss and Leica R; whatever the merits of putting an 80mm Summilux on the camera, going back to a manual diaphragm does seem a retrograde step.
Main impact of using the D3x is the increased storage requirements because the files are so big and I've had to buy another NAS RAID box - ReadyNAS PRO with 6 * 1.5Tb drives, recommended.
The D3x really only comes into its own with the best glass and a tripod and I have not yet got into Zeiss and Leica R; whatever the merits of putting an 80mm Summilux on the camera, going back to a manual diaphragm does seem a retrograde step.
Main impact of using the D3x is the increased storage requirements because the files are so big and I've had to buy another NAS RAID box - ReadyNAS PRO with 6 * 1.5Tb drives, recommended.
I sold my D3 and bought a 5DII.
Still trying to figure out if that was a good thing.
I would have bought a D700x, but oh well...
Still, The Canon just does not handle like a Nikon. I it is a bit awkward and had an awful stupid mode dial which does nothing but get in the way, but The Canon lenses are promising.
-bob
Still trying to figure out if that was a good thing.
I would have bought a D700x, but oh well...
Still, The Canon just does not handle like a Nikon. I it is a bit awkward and had an awful stupid mode dial which does nothing but get in the way, but The Canon lenses are promising.
-bob
D
ddk
Guest
I guess that where the Sony comes in with its Zeiss glass. I have heard the same comments from a friend regarding Nikkors and D3x, he ended up with some new Zeiss ZF glass in thed but is bitching about mf and like you he feels that its a step backwards too. This is were he draws the line though and wont consider having to manually stop down converted Leica lenses.
GrahamWelland
Subscriber & Workshop Member
You are much more likely to suffer from blur handheld with the D3x due to the smaller sensor size and increased pixel density. Any minor movement will be picked up by adjoining sensors and rendered in the final image where with larger pixels the movement may not have rendered on adjoining sensors. Net result is more blur for the same absolute movement of the lens/image.
I prefer to use my D3/D700 for handheld work. D3x almost forces tripod use if you want critical sharpness regardless of the glass being used.
I prefer to use my D3/D700 for handheld work. D3x almost forces tripod use if you want critical sharpness regardless of the glass being used.
I switched to D3x from Canon 5D. And the D3x is my first Nikon. The reason I did this was to get a camera for landscapes (mostly) that would replace my large format Linhof. I knew it would not be fully equal replacement so I decided to make a gallery size print (60*90 cm) from D3x's file (which I downloaded from the Internet). When I get this print I was amazed with the quality - and I hadn't done any PP on that file.
I'm not going to sell my Linhof - it's still a great camera that helps to make very good prints! But there are lots of moments when it's very difficult to use LF camera even when I'm prepared for landscape photography.
I could buy 1DsIII but its images were just ... not good enough. Same with 5DII.
Now, I'm really glad I made that move.As I said - the camera is a joy!
I'm not going to sell my Linhof - it's still a great camera that helps to make very good prints! But there are lots of moments when it's very difficult to use LF camera even when I'm prepared for landscape photography.
I could buy 1DsIII but its images were just ... not good enough. Same with 5DII.
Now, I'm really glad I made that move.As I said - the camera is a joy!
Lars
Active member
At this point I'd write any price adjustments off as currency-related rather than competition related. These days the USD moves up and down 5% more or less on a weekly basis. You'd almost think it was weather-related.
That may or may not be true ... but what is true is how relevant it is in relationship to other selections under consideration. If the others don't also drop in price the same %, then currency flux is irrelevant to the buyer.
ptomsu
Workshop Member
A D3X has a nice number of MPs but cannot replace a MF camera due to several reasons, which are commonly well known and do not need to be repeated here again.
And just to throw my opinion in - I switched from Nikon (D3) to Canon 5D2 because of the IQ. And I did not like the D3X files. And I also like the Canon glass more.
So you see this is rather everything subjective - is'nt it?
Lars
Active member
Nice shots Andree. In #1 and #2, how do you feel about how the camera/lens handled the overexposed area just behind the model? From here it looks pretty good, though #2 seems about 1 stop more exposed than #1, with more blown highlights as a result.
I'm going to keep bugging you about using f/2 on that lens from time to time, hope you don't mind.
I'm going to keep bugging you about using f/2 on that lens from time to time, hope you don't mind.
deepdiver
New member
Hi Lars!
About your question of how this camera handled the overexposed area, i'll be honest with you. I'm not the expert on this one, however, I will try to make a comment base only from my experience
No.1 for sure, Sony A900 can handle OE area much better than Nikon D3X
It's not easy to get blown-out area on A900, whereas on Nikon D3X is just like nikon D3 or D700. i don't see any improvement on Dynamic Range on nikon D3X at all..!
I dont know, how come on DXO website, they put nikon D3X's DR is higher than D3 or D700
Talking about taking picture using F2 - F2.8
Actually I did take some picture using F2 - F2.8
on those pictures, one of them were taken using F2.5 or F2.8 (Picture No.3)
Dont worry, I promise I will add more picture later with some images that taken using F2 - F2.8
Andree