Who's considering switching to Nikon?

There are many cameras with almost unusable high ISO, the manufacturer should have left it out but maybe the marketing people won - not that I believe or hope that the D3 will be bad, but no-one knows how much the specs are worth until some real pictures are taken.

• Anders @ http://www.aobild.com *

Uh, not off the charts in the case of the 70-200/2.8:

http://photozone.de/8Reviews/lenses/canon_70200_28is/index.htm

The 70-200/4 seems superior actually, assuming you don't need the extra stop. If you'd said that, or something unambiguously legendary like the 300/2.8 instead I'd have agreed with your statement.

Izzo said:

Only people with short memories, big wallets and small minds... My
70-200 2.8 IS is the sweetest bit of glass going around, Canon IQ is
off the charts, you couldn't pay me to switch.

Izzo

Click to expand...

It looked like it was on par with 1d MKIII.

I'm thinking 6400 and 25,600 are going to be like the usual "Hi" settings on Nikon cameras... not very good. Probably similiar to pushing the 1d MKIII to those settings. But of course, time will tell.

Matt Sergeant said:

This is all we know so far:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1021&message=24492014

Interesting times.

Click to expand...

no text..

There is something about good ol Nikon that strikes at the hearts of men. I couldn't help but get so excited about these two new Nikons. They will shred, I have no doubt. They have probably been thoroughly tested by Nikon R&D and Quality Control as to avoid the focus issues like Canon. They knew what they were doing all along. They didn't rush these new designs to market.

Congratulations to Nikon and I'm very happy for all the diehard Nikon shooters who never turned their back and betrayed them. I feel like a traitor. But I know some loyal Nikon pros who are going to be very happy.

When I think about the excellent Nikon flash system that they have always had and the new cameras I cant help but want to get one or two.

And yes, I might have to buy both. How could you not want to get your hands on them?????

Yes, they are just tools folks, but get real and follow your heart. My heart will always belong to Nikon............

Mike
--
http://www.pbase.com/michaelcorral

Dave,

I was thinking the same thing and remember how killer their flash system is. I shoot special events and now getting into weddings and these new Nikons are no doubt looking like great cameras.

Mike

Dave Luttmann said:

Film_Ruled said:

I am first in line for a D3 and D300, if they scream, the Canon gear
will go on the bay and the FM3A's and 5 Nikon lenses I already own
will go into full service again.

Overall, Nikon has always made the better system, the D3 makes it
complete again...

Click to expand...

Agreed. The D3 looks like a killer cam for my wedding work.

Click to expand...

--
http://www.pbase.com/michaelcorral

You're always welcome back home I'll be grabbing a D300 for myself, looks like a Killer Cam!!!
--
Visit my website at
http://www.danielsdiaz.com

Wouldn't switch at this point, but competition is a wonderful thing!

Dan

--
---
G Dan Mitchell
SF Bay Area
http://www.gdanmitchell.com/

I already own all the Nikon stuff and Canon stuff. At this point I would only consider getting a D3 to to bury the disappointing 1D Mark III. However I'm first on the list to get a 1Ds Mark III (assuming fixed focus problems) as Nikon has NOTHING that is in that ballpark. I really don't understand why Nikon has such a small FF sensor in the D3 unless it is just a competition for the 1D Mark III with a 1Ds Mark III competitor later. The D3 is smaller than the 5D and D2Xs in mpixels. Puzzling, they could have made big inroads with a 20 megapixel FF sensor and a 1.5 crop ala the D2Xs, but maybe they chose the two camera route that Canon does for the pro level cameras. The D300 if it has decent noise just makes the 40D a hoo hum who cares new camera. So one good release for each company and 1 what were you thinking release. In some ways (if it remains their top of the line camera) the D3 has some of the ooopss of the Olympus E1. Too little too late.

...from Japan...Interesting days.

Strongly seconded. Assuming usable ISO 25600 (and therefore presumably even more usable ISO 6400), I'd say the sky is the limit, so to speak. Now if I could just get an adapter for my 24/1.4, 50/1.4, and 100/2...will wait to see the Canon response first.

brian44 said:

FretNoMore said:

brian44 said:

I know it could get confusing but I'm actually considering running
parallel systems, as long as the D3 really does have incredible low
noise/high iso performance. And there is no sign of Canon bringing
out a 200mm f1.8 replacement. The Nikon might have a place for some
types of job I do.

Click to expand...

Please give some examples of jobs that Canon's gear can't do but the
new Nikons can - not trying to be confrontational, just interested to
hear about real use cases

• Anders @ http://www.aobild.com *

Click to expand...

I thought I gave a clue in my post. Shooting at ISO 25600 with a
200mm f2 would be very useful to me. In other words, very low
available light.

Click to expand...

Paul North said:

who's jumping ship?
which camera is better?

Unless there is a Huge change, which in this case there is not, I
would just stick to the brand you have! we all know that canon is
going to come out with something to compete with the Nikon gear! and
history shows that Nikon has taken it's time getting new products on
the table for it's customers.
So I guess if nikon had a better camera today, you go get a nikon,
then in 8 - 14 mos when canon announces it's new and improved camera
with great new specs, you all jump back to canon??
The only reason I would get a nikon today is if I did not own a
current SLR system! and even then, I would lean to the canon product,
there are new cameras and lenses being anounced all the time.

Paul.
--
check out my pics...
http://www.northactionshots.com
http://www.pbase.com/pnorth

Click to expand...

I hear you. My only grip about Canon gears so far is that their accessories are WAY higher than Nikons... For example, check out the wireless file transmitter....

Well, he was spot on this time.
--
I got a Nikon camera, I love to take a photograph...

I agree that the D3 seems to be a 5D killer.

I still have some time to wait as I am happy with my current 5D, but if Canon does not announce a new 5D in th next 6 Months or the 5D MkII is a disappointment I will consider switching to Nikon, particularly since I have not yet heavily invested in L glass. I mostly use an f1.8/50mm and an f1.4/30mm for landscape and architecture photography.

First need to see if teh 3D perfoms the way it should and how the noise works out. Nikon has been disappointing with that in the past.

I just don't see anything ground-breaking (from either manufacturer) here. For the most part these cameras are evolutionary not revolutionary. From what I can see we've reached the point of diminishing returns now with both major players making essentially equivalent products that will, in the hands of a competent photographer, make essentially equivalent images. I will stick with my "investment" in Canon until someone (and it may not be either Canon or Nikon) really hits it out of the park. I'd like to see someone dramatically increase the dynamic range that can be captured in a single shot, for example. I will keep happily shooting my 5D and MarkIIn (which both take wonderful images by the way-as do the "old" Nikons) and wait to see what the next round brings. Menawhile I'll spend the money I save on gear to travel and get advanced instruction in my hobby-and maybe some new glass...

...before waxing ironic about how Nikon's caught up in one fell swoop. Both cameras look great on paper, but so did the D200 when it debuted, and we all know how that shook out. I hope they are every bit as good as they look (cuz I for one will get a D3 if the IQ is what it should be), but lets not get ahead of ourselves.

shaktipalooza said:

He never got rid of the 70-200 VR which is by all accounts equal to
or superior to the Canon equivalent (which I own).

Looking at the development history with Nikon I would have never
guessed they'd catch up in such a big way, simply amazing.

thang said:

It's as good, if not better, than the Canon's equivalent. I have used
both!

Click to expand...

--
5D sample gallery: http://mrs-h.smugmug.com/gallery/2539780#137075551

Click to expand...

--
- -
Kabe Luna

http://www.flickr.com/photos/kabeluna/

I'll be waiting too.

I'm guessing Canon really got caught with their pants down with a watered down AF system on the 5DmkII already in the pipeline. I'm not so heavily invested in L glass that I couldn't make the switch. I was planning a big lens purchase this fall but now I'll wait to see how Canon answers.

fschoonbaert said:

I agree that the D3 seems to be a 5D killer.

I still have some time to wait as I am happy with my current 5D, but
if Canon does not announce a new 5D in th next 6 Months or the 5D
MkII is a disappointment I will consider switching to Nikon,
particularly since I have not yet heavily invested in L glass. I
mostly use an f1.8/50mm and an f1.4/30mm for landscape and
architecture photography.

First need to see if teh 3D perfoms the way it should and how the
noise works out. Nikon has been disappointing with that in the past.

Click to expand...

--
5D sample gallery: http://mrs-h.smugmug.com/gallery/2539780#137075551

--

For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
Carl Sagan

nunatak said:

well, at least the D3 doesn't weigh quite as much as that jug of milk
you have on order.

Click to expand...

You might want to check your numbers there. Phil's numbers for the D3 don't include batteries. The 1DsMk3 weight includes a battery.

1DsMk3: 48.9oz with batteries

D3: 43.7oz without batteries.
EN-EL4 is 4oz. according to B&H, not counting the battery door cover.

So the total D3 weight is 43.7 + 4 + battery door cover (maybe .3oz?)

So call it 48oz total, or less than 2% lighter than a 1DsMk3.

Yep, big savings in weight.

I took a hit when I switched from Nikon 4 years ago after the entire D2H mess. Since then, I have shot tens of thousands of super clean files at 8MP or in many cases 17MP. Had I stayed with Nikon I would have had a mishmash of 4.1MP ultra noisy files, combined with a few 12MP "average" images for a couple of years, and I would have upgraded at least twice (D2H to D2Hs and D2X to D2Xs) in hopes of improving my image quality. I would still have been shooting at 1.5x and have an investment in now nearly obsolete DX glass (not obsolete if you don't mind 5MP). All of this and still I would have only had files out to 12MP in size.

So when I say not "groundbreaking enough to switch", I look at where I'm at now versus where I would be if I spent the money to switch back to Nikon.

The switch from Nikon to Canon was clearly a good move. Those 4 years (5 by the time the D3 is available) of super clean, high resolution images are far more valuable than the thousands of dollars I spent doing a switch.

A switch back? Not so clearly a good investment. Nothing in the D3 specifications shows me anything that I can't get already - and in some cases better - than what I have now. Plus there's the very real issue of service - CPS is stunningly good. NPS burned me multiple times - but truth told it's been 4 years so maybe they've fixed their problems. However it is a factor for me - once bitten, as it were.

Don't get me wrong - I think the D3 is an amazing camera...and a couple of features would be nice to have. If I was starting brand new it would be a very tough call.

But as a former Nikon abuse victim and now an established Canon user that has been treated well for four years, nothing in the D3 specifications screams "gotta have" to me.