Site Sponsors
Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: Why is a used D3x still so expensive ?

  1. #1
    New Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    12
    Post Thanks / Like

    Why is a used D3x still so expensive ?

    The price of a used D3x is still higher than a new D800.

    How is that possible? The D800 has 50 percent more pixels, has less noise at higher ISO, better color depth.

    So why is the D3x still so expensive?

    Thanks for your ideas,

    Bernd

  2. #2
    Subscriber & Workshop Member GrahamWelland's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Vancouver, WA
    Posts
    5,800
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    564

    Re: Why is a used D3x still so expensive ?

    Well, if you're a D3/D3x user you'll probably appreciate the feel of a real camera body vs a half camera body ...

    It's true that the D800 technically surpasses it on almost every front, it isn't a dust monster which the D3x certainly could be, and is smaller & lighter. However, there's something about the sense of permanence and reliability about the bigger D3 series bodies that I feel that Nikon have lost.

    Now the question is whether you are comparing used D3x bodies to used D800 bodies. If that's the case then I suspect it's as much a factor of supply and demand vs the other traits. Basically there are/were a lot less D3x bodies out there if only due to the much higher initial costs.
    Remember: adventure before dementia!

    As Oscar Wilde said, "my tastes are simple, I only like the best"
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  3. #3
    Subscriber Member Jorgen Udvang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Pratamnak
    Posts
    9,331
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2157

    Re: Why is a used D3x still so expensive ?

    Quote Originally Posted by GrahamWelland View Post
    Well, if you're a D3/D3x user you'll probably appreciate the feel of a real camera body vs a half camera body ...

    It's true that the D800 technically surpasses it on almost every front, it isn't a dust monster which the D3x certainly could be, and is smaller & lighter. However, there's something about the sense of permanence and reliability about the bigger D3 series bodies that I feel that Nikon have lost.

    Now the question is whether you are comparing used D3x bodies to used D800 bodies. If that's the case then I suspect it's as much a factor of supply and demand vs the other traits. Basically there are/were a lot less D3x bodies out there if only due to the much higher initial costs.
    +1

    The D3X is still the highest megapixel body with that body style. There's also another fact that is easily forgotten:
    The D3X is the same generation of camera as the D3/s, D700 and D300/s, cameras used by a large number of professional photographers still. All these cameras can use the same battery, the EN-EL4a (D300/s and D700 in the vertical grip) and the same CF-cards (the D810 only accepts a few, selected cards, typically Sandisk and Lexar, and the second slot takes an SD card). While this may seem like minor thing to many, it isn't when shooting with multiple bodies at large events, like sports events that can last for days. The last thing you want to worry about then is which battery and which card goes into which camera, not to speak of body failures that could make some of the batteries I rely on unusable for the rest of the event.

    Remember also that a D3X is smaller than a D800/810 with the vertical grip, and the battery door never springs open when brushing towards another photographer or object with the danger of breaking it off. This happens to me regularly with the smaller bodies at sports events with many photographers where the fight for position often can be just as hard as the fight going on at the track.

    I was looking at the D3X as the most likely upgrade myself, until I realised what a great camera the D810 had become and got a great deal on one. Now, I consider swapping my three older bodies for a second D810, partly of course because it's a great camera, but also because I don't want more complications than strictly necessary. I hesitate because of the loss I'm taking on the old bodies that still work very well for me at events etc. Also, my D2Xs, like the D3X, is more comfortable to hold during long shootings than the D810 due to the shape (thinner body), weight distribution and integrated vertical grip.

    Interestingly, the D3X is still a current body, and I wouldn't be surprised if some photographers still buy new ones at the street price, which seems to be somewhere between $7,000 and 8,000. It's a lovely camera, with ergonomics to match. I would still love to have one
    Things I sell: https://www.shutterstock.com/g/epixx?language=en
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  4. #4
    Subscriber & Workshop Member GrahamWelland's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Vancouver, WA
    Posts
    5,800
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    564

    Re: Why is a used D3x still so expensive ?

    +1 on the batteries. It was a complete PIA when Nikon changed their pro body batteries as many of us had large collections of them and could always rely on being able to swap and share between bodies.
    Remember: adventure before dementia!

    As Oscar Wilde said, "my tastes are simple, I only like the best"

  5. #5
    Senior Member bensonga's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    2,416
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    819

    Re: Why is a used D3x still so expensive ?

    Personally, I love the Canon and Nikon Pro bodies and would happily pay the price for a few more (I already have a Nikon D2x and Canon 1D Mark II).

    One could ask a similar question re the Canon 1D Mark IV and the 5DIII. In reality, depending on what prices you check, the D3x has fallen more in value (in percentage terms), relative to it's original price, than either the Canon 1D Mark IV or the Nikon D3s. I think a used D800 has fallen even more (percentage wise) and in a very short period of time.

    There is an article on Steve Huff's website that claims to show that a used Leica M9 holds it's value better than any other comparably price pro level DSLR, based on a small sample of eBay sales. When I looked at the prices quoted in the article for the Canon 1D Mark IV, they were lower than I had seen, so I did a bit of poking around and then posted a comment based on my observations.

    Of the four cameras I looked at (the M9, 1D4, D3x and D3s), the D3x had the highest depreciation (again, as a percentage of original price) and the 1D4 and D3s had depreciation rates lower than the M9. These were all based on prices for comparable condition bodies from a single large retailer (B&H Photo).

    See my comment at the end of this article, if you are interested.
    The Leica M9 held its relative value better than any DSLR of its time By Karim Ghantous | STEVE HUFF PHOTOS

    Gary
    Last edited by bensonga; 19th January 2015 at 00:26.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  6. #6
    Subscriber Member Jorgen Udvang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Pratamnak
    Posts
    9,331
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2157

    Re: Why is a used D3x still so expensive ?

    I agree that the price fall of the D3X has been enormous. That was also the case for the D2X/s, which can now be bought at around $500 even for a very low mileage sample. If there's ever a D4X or maybe D5X with 50+ MP and other radical improvements, I suspect that the D3X will fall under $1,500 relatively quickly. That's what happened with the D800 when the D810 was launched, even without an increase in MP.

  7. #7
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Vivek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    13,594
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

    Re: Why is a used D3x still so expensive ?

    Gary,

    They will not show my comment.

    Did you read the first two lines (along with the title)?

    Itís noteworthy that the Leica M9 has held its value so well since its launch in 2009. It does produce beautiful photos and after owning an M8 (but not an M9) I have to say that the digital M system is great.

  8. #8
    Super Duper
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    3,848
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why is a used D3x still so expensive ?

    Gary, your data is likely far more relevant as you point out. As we all know, one seller's 'mint' on eBay is often 'well used' in reality.

    There are so many variables that go into this, not the least of which is there are far more DSLRs in the used market than M9s, supply and demand in the used market, not to mention the price of new products (which may or may not be equivalent in every regard) driving down the price of the used.

    That said, does anyone have a low mileage D2HS available?

  9. #9
    Senior Member Swissblad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    1,204
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Why is a used D3x still so expensive ?

    Locally the price has dropped significantly to under $2K.... tempting...... brute of a camera though.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •