Reading mode: Light Dark

Used D3s or D4... useful for my needs? (strength sports)

Go to last post
sts2

sts2

Leading Member
Messages
916
Reaction score
1,033
Location
Utrecht, NL
Short version of the question I'd like to ask your advice on: how much improved low light performance will an old D3s or D4 give me compared to a D800/D810 for my line of work? Think: fast movements, stationary, very poor lighting.

The reason for asking instead of just looking at DXO mark scores is because I find that in the real world, high iso performance ranges from 'fine' to 'unacceptable' depending on how much light is available. All modern cameras are great at iso 6400 in good light, but frequently the details fall to pieces in poor light.

Long version: I'm a hobbyist turned "parttime pro" that shoots strength sports almost exclusively (CrossFit, olympic weightlifting, powerlifting). These are sports characterised by often fast & explosive movements, and are performed mainly indoors (in poorly lit venues). Athletes don't move around much; so while the action is fast, it's quite stationary. Besides covering competitions I also do studio shoots under controlled lighting conditions.

My instagram/website are probably the best places to get a sense of my kind of work: https://www.instagram.com/barbellphotography/

Loading…

www.barbellphotography.com

I use a D800, and 90% of the time wide open at f/2.8 (or 1.4 when I can use primes), and with a shutter speed not slower than 1/250th (preferably faster). I often have to reach ISO 3200-6400 because of the poor lighting in some venues. Sometimes the light is actually so bad, the AF cannot lock on with anything other than the centre point! But because most of those shots get downsampled for internet usage, the noise is actually "ok" most of the time.

But I would like to have better low light performance, if it could be significant. How much real-world benefit will I get from the somewhat older D3s or D4? Or even a D500, although I prefer FX and most of the time don't need the "DX reach"

Please keep the following needs in mind:

- Focus speed & accuracy are extremely important. The D800 is good, but I do feel it could be better
- High frame rate would be nice, but I can do fine with 4 fps... a little experience fills in the blanks. I wouldn't say no to 10 fps but I don't need it.
- High resolution is important for me because of the studio shoots, less important for competitions. But if I would get an extra body, I'd still use the D800 for studio shooting
- The "high ISO" shots are usually delivered to my client digitally for facebook albums or websites, so downsampled considerably
- I do crop my "favorite shots". The 36mp gives me a lot of headroom which I probably don't need, but I would be afraid 12mp is a bit on the low side.

Any advice is much appreciated!
 
I have a D810 a D750 and the D4s

I max the D810 at 1600 ISO, the D750 at 3200 ISO and the D4s at 12800 ISO.

The D4s has better and more positive focus than the D810 but the D750 is as good, although the the D750 has a much smaller focus spread, which can be a pain at times.

I have and run my own studio too, but I find that 12 million pixel to be the smallest I can use. 16 million is more than enough for anything but only allows for small amounts of cropping. As I never or rarely crop an image this is of no importance to me. :)
 
I would go with the D500 to get the higher frame capture rate. The reach may not seem important but a 70-200mm f/2.8 is more usable in the situation you described on a DX camera. Same would be the case is getting closer and using a 24-70mm or 24-105mm lens on a D500. With your situation you can prefocus and probably use manual mode to nail the shots.

The autofocus is much improved with the D5 and D500 cameras with 3x as many cross type AF sensors which is important in low light with low contrast subjects, like people. The D3s and D4 are using the AF system that was released in 2007 with the D3 and refined slightly but not significantly.
 
I strongly support the direction you're going with the D4/D3s vs. the 800 series if you want better quality shooting in low light. That's exactly what the 4 and 3s were made for.

glo
 
For measurbators:

http://www.photonstophotos.net/Charts/PDR.htm#Nikon D3s,Nikon D4,Nikon D500,Nikon D800

personally find d3s/D4 are about a stop better than D8xx but you can't put a number value on superior focus and frame rate for fast action.

Personally don't think d500 is the way unless you are happy with d800 across the ISO rangeand need or want pixel density and faster frame rate and focus.

Used prices on D4 are crazy good these days

--
" Today's Pictures Are Tomorrow's Memories "
 
Last edited:
chipmaster said:
personally find d3s/D4 are about a stop better than D8xx but you can't put a number value on superior focus and frame rate for fast action.

Personally don't think d500 is the way unless you are happy with d800 across the ISO rangeand need or want pixel density and faster frame rate and focus.
Click to expand...
Yes, in difficult situations, I don't push a D500 past 3200. I'll push ro 6400 for nighttime sports, but I have my NR and sharpening recipe down. I think it's a great daylight DX camera. That being said, I'm trying to trade mine with cash for a D4s to go along with my D5.

I'd go for the D4s. You'll get cleaner high ISO files under difficult lighting conditions. Also, the D500's AF isn't quite the same as the D5's. The latter has a dedicated extra chip. Consider the D4s AF on par with the D500. You're making money and have the advantage of downsampling for the web. But... do you want OK or great?
 
calson said:
I would go with the D500 to get the higher frame capture rate. The reach may not seem important but a 70-200mm f/2.8 is more usable in the situation you described on a DX camera. Same would be the case is getting closer and using a 24-70mm or 24-105mm lens on a D500. With your situation you can prefocus and probably use manual mode to nail the shots.

The autofocus is much improved with the D5 and D500 cameras with 3x as many cross type AF sensors which is important in low light with low contrast subjects, like people. The D3s and D4 are using the AF system that was released in 2007 with the D3 and refined slightly but not significantly.
Click to expand...
 
I have the D800, D4 and more recently also added the D3S to my stable.

The D4 is a low light beast, there is no doubt.
It provides a bit better high ISO performance than the D3S, a little more res (for cropping or down sampling) and I find the metering better.
Its DR at lower ISO's is also a bit better
I havent had the opportunity to shoot the D3S a lot as its only a backup body.

Honestly though, you dont need fast FPS from what you said, so you may want to look at a D750.
Has more MP, great ISO performance - from what i've read anyway
 
sts2 said:
Short version of the question I'd like to ask your advice on: how much improved low light performance will an old D3s or D4 give me compared to a D800/D810 for my line of work? Think: fast movements, stationary, very poor lighting.

The reason for asking instead of just looking at DXO mark scores is because I find that in the real world, high iso performance ranges from 'fine' to 'unacceptable' depending on how much light is available. All modern cameras are great at iso 6400 in good light, but frequently the details fall to pieces in poor light.

Long version: I'm a hobbyist turned "parttime pro" that shoots strength sports almost exclusively (CrossFit, olympic weightlifting, powerlifting). These are sports characterised by often fast & explosive movements, and are performed mainly indoors (in poorly lit venues). Athletes don't move around much; so while the action is fast, it's quite stationary. Besides covering competitions I also do studio shoots under controlled lighting conditions.

My instagram/website are probably the best places to get a sense of my kind of work: https://www.instagram.com/barbellphotography/
http://www.barbellphotography.com

I use a D800, and 90% of the time wide open at f/2.8 (or 1.4 when I can use primes), and with a shutter speed not slower than 1/250th (preferably faster). I often have to reach ISO 3200-6400 because of the poor lighting in some venues. Sometimes the light is actually so bad, the AF cannot lock on with anything other than the centre point! But because most of those shots get downsampled for internet usage, the noise is actually "ok" most of the time.

But I would like to have better low light performance, if it could be significant. How much real-world benefit will I get from the somewhat older D3s or D4? Or even a D500, although I prefer FX and most of the time don't need the "DX reach"

Please keep the following needs in mind:

- Focus speed & accuracy are extremely important. The D800 is good, but I do feel it could be better
- High frame rate would be nice, but I can do fine with 4 fps... a little experience fills in the blanks. I wouldn't say no to 10 fps but I don't need it.
- High resolution is important for me because of the studio shoots, less important for competitions. But if I would get an extra body, I'd still use the D800 for studio shooting
- The "high ISO" shots are usually delivered to my client digitally for facebook albums or websites, so downsampled considerably
- I do crop my "favorite shots". The 36mp gives me a lot of headroom which I probably don't need, but I would be afraid 12mp is a bit on the low side.

Any advice is much appreciated!
Click to expand...
A Nikon D4 will do the job of course, but if you want something between the D4, D800 and D500, try the D750. It is excellent in low light, gives you 24 megapixels, 6.5 FPS, Great low-light AF (-3EV, which is slightly better than the D4 at -2EV), light, small,.... it's an excellent all-around camera and cheaper than a D4 or D500 brand new at this point. I'm surprised you haven't looked into it, because it can handle just about anything you throw at it.

The D500 is great in every single way, except that it doesn't have the high ISO IQ that the D4 or D750 have.

Here are a couple of high ISO shots with the D750:

ISO 7200
ISO 7200

ISO 10,000
ISO 10,000

ISO 12,800
ISO 12,800

ISO 12,800
ISO 12,800



--
https://www.flickr.com/photos/jpivkova/
https://500px.com/dreamsourcestudio
https://www.facebook.com/DreamSourceStudio/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
 
Last edited:
I think they would do a great job, but don't think you NEED it based on what I've seen on your site...which is great by the way.
 
sts2 said:
Any significant advantage of a D4 over a D3s, you'd say? Used prices of the D4 are still pretty high in the Netherlands, D3s's are far cheaper.
Click to expand...
Could you, please, provide links to online camera shops in the Netherlands that sell new and used equipment?
 
I'm going to cop out here and say, rent! It has gotten so easy and cheap (and fun) to test these multi-thousand dollar items that I haven't purchased a new lens in years without going that route. You can do the same with cameras.

I moved from a d3s to a D5 and opted for a D500 as a second body. I shoot a lot of fast moving sports where tracking and AF speed is paramount. The D3S and D4s I've used are awesome. But the AFS system, as I'm sure most here have read , shared by the D5(00) literally changed the game for me.
 
Lol!!! Good one. :D
 
sts2 said:
Any significant advantage of a D4 over a D3s, you'd say? Used prices of the D4 are still pretty high in the Netherlands, D3s's are far cheaper.
Click to expand...
The D3s was a classic and used prices held up well. Sensor progress has been slowing greatly. I found beyond more pixels and better JPG engine the improvements were slight. I am told the D4s offered significant focus improvement but found the D3s/D4 plenty good. No question the D5/D500 biggest improvement is the focus, FPS, JPG engine and pixels. Real sensor improvement is stagnating as limits are getting reached.
 
If you were seeking to upgrade right now I would look at the D810 to replace your D800 - it is particularly cheap pending the release of a successor - this is my go to camera for 3/4 of my shots. Much has been written on the differences between the D810 and the D800 and so I won't bore you with that argument now - but pls try it. I also recommend using it with its battery grip with an ENEL18a. Oddly you get a higher fps with the CL setting, than with CH.

The D810s sensor is by far the best of all the camera I own in particular if you are able to add a little light/a key light when needed. Its colour depth / dynamic range is the best I have used and gives you lots of options in Lightroom etc. to play with exposure and h/s.

The D4s has slightly better low light performance and much higher fps than the D810, but I got hung up on 16mp and my need to crop in a long way on BIF and other wildlife. Too a point that I almost stopped using it.

Looking at your shots I would doubt that a DX camera (including the D500) would give you the quality of images you are seeking -- I bought a D500 and took it on a number of trips, while enjoying the extra reach and higher fps, I found the images much harsher/stiff than any image from my Fx sensor cameras.

I just traded a D4s in for a new D5 -- and cannot wait to try it in the field. It is clearly far superior to the previous versions, it has a 20mb image size, greatly improved low light capabilities and the images seem much more pleasant to me than the D500. Try one (XQD version) and then consider trading in your D3s and D4.

SO -- I think you pick your gear for the shot you are seeking to take -- I suspect during a lift you may need really fast fps to capture the action at the point the shot is most optimal; but I have shot very low light wildlife with my D810 and the pictures just seem to be better.
 
Nice, thanks. Hadn't considered that indeed, I guess once you're used to the pro bodies you kind of look at those options as the only alternative. But those are some really nice shots and they look super clean!

I'd consider the 1/4000th shutter speed and 1/200th flash sync limiting for a main body, but those are irrelevant for low-light shooting... I'll take a look at it, thanks!
 
ajm057 said:
If you were seeking to upgrade right now I would look at the D810 to replace your D800 - it is particularly cheap pending the release of a successor - this is my go to camera for 3/4 of my shots. Much has been written on the differences between the D810 and the D800 and so I won't bore you with that argument now - but pls try it. I also recommend using it with its battery grip with an ENEL18a. Oddly you get a higher fps with the CL setting, than with CH.

The D810s sensor is by far the best of all the camera I own in particular if you are able to add a little light/a key light when needed. Its colour depth / dynamic range is the best I have used and gives you lots of options in Lightroom etc. to play with exposure and h/s.
Click to expand...
Yeah believe me, a D810 is also on the list, but most likely as a replacement for the D800 when it's time to retire it. I'm absolutely crazy about that sensor.
areallygrumpyoldsod said:
The D4s has slightly better low light performance and much higher fps than the D810, but I got hung up on 16mp and my need to crop in a long way on BIF and other wildlife. Too a point that I almost stopped using it.
Click to expand...
"slightly better" low light performance than the D810? I would expect the difference to be significant (i.e. >1 stop)
areallygrumpyoldsod said:
Looking at your shots I would doubt that a DX camera (including the D500) would give you the quality of images you are seeking -- I bought a D500 and took it on a number of trips, while enjoying the extra reach and higher fps, I found the images much harsher/stiff than any image from my Fx sensor cameras.
Click to expand...
That's probably the best way to describe the FX vs DX difference. Haven't tried the D500 but I have a D7000 and find there's just way less room to manipulate the raw files than with the D800... far more than the ~1 stop advantage you see in the charts.
areallygrumpyoldsod said:
I just traded a D4s in for a new D5 -- and cannot wait to try it in the field. It is clearly far superior to the previous versions, it has a 20mb image size, greatly improved low light capabilities and the images seem much more pleasant to me than the D500. Try one (XQD version) and then consider trading in your D3s and D4.

SO -- I think you pick your gear for the shot you are seeking to take -- I suspect during a lift you may need really fast fps to capture the action at the point the shot is most optimal; but I have shot very low light wildlife with my D810 and the pictures just seem to be better.
Click to expand...
Well the thing is, yes it would definitely help, but when you do this a lot you get the hang of timing the shot manually pretty well. That's why high fps isn't at the top of my list of needs.
 
I'm checking mainly on www.marktplaats.nl which includes ads both from retailers and private individuals. Prices seem to hover around:

D3s - 1500-1800 EUR (http://www.marktplaats.nl/z.html?query=Nikon+D3s)
D4 - 2000-3000 EUR (http://www.marktplaats.nl/z.html?query=Nikon+D4)
D4s - >3000 EUR (http://www.marktplaats.nl/z.html?query=Nikon+D4s)

And you need to look carefully because those include some specimen with rediculously high shutter counts. I wouldn't want to shell out over 2k on a body that has seen 350.000 clicks but is advertised as "as good as new because new shutter"

Actually for this kind of deal I'd rather buy used from a hobbyist who likes fancy cameras than from a retail store that has lots of trade-ins from pros. Even though I still take good care of my gear now that I use it professionally, it does see a lot more abuse than before those days.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

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