Reading mode: Light Dark

the images alone worth the price tag!

Go to last post
RomanJohnston said:
Thom...if your out there, I thought you said it indeed was not a sony
sensor....

Does this mean it is not a Nikon tweaked sony sensor?
Click to expand...
No. It seems clear that the sensel is the same as the A900. What's yet fully unclear is how much else is different, but it does appear that there are other differences. See the article on my site for more.

--
Thom Hogan
author, Complete Guides to Nikon bodies (19 and counting)
http://www.bythom.com
 
rhlpetrus said:
IR says pixel pith of D3X is 5.49 micra against 5.9 for A900. Is that
an ADC consequence or comes from sensor?
Click to expand...
NikonUSA and a few others seem to have transposed two numbers. I'm pretty sure that both are 5.94 pitch, which would indicate the same sensel.

--
Thom Hogan
author, Complete Guides to Nikon bodies (19 and counting)
http://www.bythom.com
 
Hans Giersberg said:
I've been bashing Nikon about the D3X price in other threads, but I
was expecting to be wowed by the D3X IQ, nontheless.
Click to expand...
It's way too early to talk about IQ. No one has had enough time to analyze the pluses and minuses of the pixels and optimize their output.

--
Thom Hogan
author, Complete Guides to Nikon bodies (19 and counting)
http://www.bythom.com
 
Thom Hogan said:
RomanJohnston said:
Thom...if your out there, I thought you said it indeed was not a sony
sensor....

Does this mean it is not a Nikon tweaked sony sensor?
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Thom Hogan said:
No. It seems clear that the sensel is the same as the A900. What's
yet fully unclear is how much else is different, but it does appear
that there are other differences. See the article on my site for more.
Click to expand...
.. now I'm confused; did you mean to say (as you say on your website) that "it seems clear that the sensor isn't the A900 sensor" .. ??

--
Ron Wrucke (Va Eastern Shore)
http://EasternShoreImaging.com

 
I tend to agree with those who think the A900 and 5D2 can closely match
the 3Dx in IQ.

But I wonder if the real value in the latter lies in its outstanding AF? Maybe
that is what will justify the price for those who take PJ and sports.
--
Mike S
 
Hans Giersberg said:
I've been bashing Nikon about the D3X price in other threads, but I
was expecting to be wowed by the D3X IQ, nontheless. I've been
shooting Nikon for almost 30 years, so I admit I'm biased in their
favor. Unfortunately, now that I've downloaded the two landscape
samples, I'm not that impressed. They are good, but not stellar. I
certainly don't see anything that I wouldn't expect to also see from
a 1DsIII, 5DII, or A900.
Click to expand...
The landscape samples posted by Nikon are average at best. The micro detail is pretty poor IMHO.

I agree with Thom that this might not be representative of what the camera can deliver, but I have for sure not be wowed the least bit by these samples. They are clearly behind what my Mamiya ZD can deliver, and I find the pixel quality to be inferior to what I am seeing with my D3 as well.

If this is the best it can deliver, then MF manufacturers need not worry too much and the price is indeed way too high.

Cheers,
Bernard
 
manel said:
I just managed to download one of the landscape files and it is
amazing !
Click to expand...
Are we really looking at the same sample images?

Please ellaborate, what is impressive about them? DR might be, but that's about it.

I have a hard time finding a real sharp area anywhere, micro detail appears to be mushy... I seriously don't get the excitement here. I am in fact most un-impressed by these samples.

Cheers,
Bernard
 
Kaustav S Saikia said:
http://www.nikon-image.com/jpn/products/camera/slr/digital/d3x/sample.htm

Just download the ISO 100 studio files : wow!
I have used the 5d, D200, D3 and currently the 1DsM3 ---- nothing
even comes closer to these samples.
I can only compare it with the Hassy 39 that I had used once or twice.
Click to expand...
Well, the studio shot is the only one that is indeed pretty impressive.

The landscape shots show poor micro detail separation, clearly not MF league, I hope that this is not representative of what the camera can deliver.

Cheers,
Bernard
 
Bernard Languillier said:
Please ellaborate, what is impressive about them? DR might be, but
that's about it.

I have a hard time finding a real sharp area anywhere, micro detail
appears to be mushy... I seriously don't get the excitement here. I
am in fact most un-impressed by these samples.
Click to expand...
At least to me, DR and resolution are impressive.
The first portrait, with micro 60, is also very sharp.

--
http://www.frikosal.blogspot.com
 
Thom Hogan said:
It's way too early to talk about IQ.
Click to expand...
I agree. The samples are JPEGs. Nikon's samples have never really impressed me. My take on them may have been colored by my shock at the price (tho I don't think so). I was specifically looking for something special in the edge acuity department, and I failed to see anything special there. But as you say, it's way too early to draw any definitive judgements.

--
I Reject Your Reality And Substitute My Own

Web Site - http://www.hgiersberg.com/
 
manel said:
At least to me, DR and resolution are impressive.
The first portrait, with micro 60, is also very sharp.
Click to expand...
DR maybe, resolution is a lot less impressive to me. Again, I am speaking of these samples, they might not be representative of what the camera can deliver.

Cheers,
Bernard
 
Their literature says they are not using 16 bit A/D converters. They are using 14-bit like on the D3/700/300. Instead, the processing math is done using 16 bit integers, which is common across the whole DSLR line. One problem about going to 16 bit however is that they would not be able to run them as fast and get the expected noise performance. Since they weem to want 5 FPS speed in a studio/landscape camera, that imposes some limitations.

Michael
dppotygh said:
--
http://www.photos-of-the-year.com/contest2008/
Click to expand...
--
Michael

http://www.michael-newberry.com
 
Bernard Languillier said:
Kaustav S Saikia said:
http://www.nikon-image.com/jpn/products/camera/slr/digital/d3x/sample.htm

Just download the ISO 100 studio files : wow!
I have used the 5d, D200, D3 and currently the 1DsM3 ---- nothing
even comes closer to these samples.
I can only compare it with the Hassy 39 that I had used once or twice.
Click to expand...
Well, the studio shot is the only one that is indeed pretty impressive.
Click to expand...
And those are exactly where comparisons are usually possible.
Bernard Languillier said:
The landscape shots show poor micro detail separation, clearly not MF
league, I hope that this is not representative of what the camera can
deliver.
Click to expand...
The only way to say these could be better is to have both cameras, say D3x and Hassy P25 side by side, similar lens, etc, and compare results. Any change in lighting, use of a filter, motion due to wind, etc, changes the way a landscape appears in a picture.

I'd reserve judgement on that until such a comparo is done, carefully.

The studio shots, also the cars, are outstanding, and tha bodes well for the IQ of the camera. If they got a 1/2 stop better DR than A900 (already good), good colors, and detail and noise similar to 1DsIII, well, it's a killer camera IMO. The 1DsIII did pretty well in this test comparing it to 5DII and Hassy + P25 back:

http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=29821

And noise, 1DsIII and 5DII are exactly same in RAW:

http://luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=29896

So those that are saying the D3x is just a step back, lots of noisy pixels without anything going for it, are just jumping the gun, the final verdict is still way out there and the final one may well be very very positive for the D3x.

The price is another story, but the market will take care of that.

--
Renato.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rhlpedrosa/
OnExposure member
http://www.onexposure.net/

Good shooting and good luck
(after Ed Murrow)
 
Read my statement once more, and note the points. Give me all of the cameras, give me a week in the studio, and I'll give you shots (all cropped or enlarged to the same size) that you cannot tell apart, camera-wise.
KP
--



http://www.ahomls.com/photo.htm
http://www.phillipsphotographer.com
Voted Best of the City 2004 by Cincinnati Magazine
I don't believe in fate, but I do believe in f/8!

'The urge to save humanity is always a false front for the urge to rule it.', H. L. Mencken
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

D
D3x: shall I, shan't I, shall I, shan't I...
Replies
11
Views
12
PhotoRecon
P
Kaustav S Saikia
1 Ds MK3 Review and some ruminations from a Nikon user.
Replies
5
Views
6
Jon_Doh
Jon_Doh
B
D3 = wonderful, new technology; D3X = high priced disappointment?
Replies
0
Views
1
Bill F.
B
T
New D300 Samples--an evaluation
2 3 4
Replies
68
Views
89
Tim OConnor
T
J
Sample D200 images examined
Replies
11
Views
12
Joe Melillo
J

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top