Discussion
Frankly it changes the rules, ISO speed is basically no longer an issue . . . it means you can take pictures where you otherwise could not . . . I shot a load of images today at 1600 ISO without giving it one thought, the images out of the camera don't need anything done to them apart from a crop . . . it's a different world from the D2x . . .
I should also say that the AF and metering systems are just as much a step forwards as ISO noise performance . . .
Fd
I should also say that the AF and metering systems are just as much a step forwards as ISO noise performance . . .
Fd
fergusd said:
Frankly it changes the rules, ISO speed is basically no longer an issue . . . it means you can take pictures where you otherwise could not . . . I shot a load of images today at 1600 ISO without giving it one thought, the images out of the camera don't need anything done to them apart from a crop . . . it's a different world from the D2x . . .
I should also say that the AF and metering systems are just as much a step forwards as ISO noise performance . . .
Fd
Agreed, don't forget one of the other things about the great ISO performance is the knock on effect that has in the creative ability you have to use flash. I should also say that the AF and metering systems are just as much a step forwards as ISO noise performance . . .
Fd
Chris
I'm going to finish the season with my D2X and then consider the options. For me, the most important thing is the dust sealing, not the price difference. I bought a D70 a few years back to learn DSLR photography while still using the F5 and had to clean the sensor too many times but the D2X, no matter what the conditions, has never had to be cleaned in two years of heavy use. Now Nikon say that the D700 is somewhere between the D300 and the D3 on this subject, so I reckon I'll have a good chat to Gray's of westminster before making the decision.
I very nearly went for the D700 (in fact I cancelled an order for one).
Reasons I went for the D3
Battery life (big issue) - guaranteed for twice the actuations - button layout I was used to - I have several compatible batteries - 100% viewfinder (what on earth were Nikon on when they only gave the D700 95%?) - I'm not changing lenses so won't worry about dust cleaners - not much price difference (Got the D3 for 2.1k plus VAT).
D700 is obviously a great camera - but I just know I would have bought the extra grip (battery) which would have made it heavier than the D3!
I guess if I'd been changing lenses and wasn't coming from a D2X with similar everything it would have been EVEN more difficult to choose.
Reasons I went for the D3
Battery life (big issue) - guaranteed for twice the actuations - button layout I was used to - I have several compatible batteries - 100% viewfinder (what on earth were Nikon on when they only gave the D700 95%?) - I'm not changing lenses so won't worry about dust cleaners - not much price difference (Got the D3 for 2.1k plus VAT).
D700 is obviously a great camera - but I just know I would have bought the extra grip (battery) which would have made it heavier than the D3!
I guess if I'd been changing lenses and wasn't coming from a D2X with similar everything it would have been EVEN more difficult to choose.
Edited by GetCarter on Monday 11th August 15:18
GetCarter said:
what on earth were Nikon on when they only gave the D700 95%?
I heard it was to accommodate the sensor cleaning mechanism, which the D3 lacks. However, I'm not particularly interested in that nor the 95% VF, so it just shows you how different people have different wants and needs 
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff








