Cancelling my D3 order? Anyone else?

[warren_ix]

I suspect that the weathersealing is even more useless, because a
Nikon is so heavy it will not float?

:-D

I will have to wait for the D3f - floating edition. LOL!

 

[Dennis2958]

Try Roberts Imaging.

http://www.robertsimaging.com/

I ordered my D3 (NPS) the middle of November and received it in their fist batch on Dec 1. I would call and have them walk you through the process of using your NPS number. Nikon even emailed me to tell me they had shipped my camera to them. It all went smooth as silk. Oh, they charged $4,725 and that included shipping.

Good luck..............

 

[Anastigmat]

I'm seriously considering cancelling my D3 order.
The reason is that I am getting more more evidence that the IQ might
not be what I wanted, especially in terms of sharpness.
It's quite clear to me that low ISO sharpness IS NOT on par with the
5D (in fact it is absolutely identical to the D300 despite the bigger
sensor and potentially better use of higher space frequencies). The
brave efforts put up by some members here to boost the D3 resolution
thru super-sharpening tricks just don't make the cut (pun intended)
High ISO is certainly excellent, but I don't need it so much plus it
does not seem to be significantly better than the 1DMkIII up to 6400
ISO or the D300 itself up to 3200 ISO.
All in all what I'm reading here and in other forums is really
underwhelming compared to the hypo we were pushed to expect.
It's a big chunk of money and I'm not sure I want to part with it if
all I get is a marginal improvement over a D300.

Give a visit to the Luminous Landscape. There is an article comparing D3, Canon 1DS MKIII and D300 ISO noise at 1600. The D300 is not even close to the other two.

I will probably wait for a D3x or a D300FX if they ever come out.

The article in Luminous Landscape cited informed sources that it will be 24mp, full frame, and should be released in early 2008.

(BTW can you imagine the horrid depreciation of a D3 if either camera
mentioned above really comes out?)

Unlikely. The new camera will likely cost even more than the D3. The Luminous Landscape article argues that the high pixel count full frame Nikon will have noise levels similar to the D300 since the pixels would be about the same size. So here we go again. The megapixel race. More pixels and more money for more noise, and people will line up to get the camera with more pixels.

 

[tsotjbn]

Hello:

If you look at the 5D compared to the D3, the 5D does look sharper and even better to at low ISO. If you photograph alot with low ISO, and you are not heavily invested in Nikon lenses, and if you have to "think" about the purchase, then it is probably better to wait for the next Nikon FF or the next Canon, or even the 5D because of the cost. The next Nikon should be better in the resolution department later or on the next go-around but you may regret the purchase when comparing with Canon, so you shouldn't buy it and wait, the camera is apparently NOT that much better at "normal" ISO's.

If you have an unlimited budget, a lot of Nikon lenses, can make more money as a professional, or just want a new camera, then the D3 is a good way to go. It's better not to regret the decision though. BTW, can I have your place in line.

Good luck.

 

[Bernard Languillier]

Unlikely. The new camera will likely cost even more than the D3.
The Luminous Landscape article argues that the high pixel count full
frame Nikon will have noise levels similar to the D300 since the
pixels would be about the same size.

This comment is highly speculative.

The technology used in the D300 and D3 sensors is clearly different, and nobody outside Nikon can IMHO accurately predict the noise levels that we should expect with a possible 24MP D3x.

It won't be very far from the D300, but then again, the 5D, 1ds3, D3, etc... are a bit better but the gap is not huge in actual prints.

The D3x will be somewhere around there, but nobody can say today whether it would be closer to the D300, or closer to the D3, and this is what needs to be known.

Cheers,
Bernard

 

[Jake Loves Good Glass]

You mean like the horrid depreciation of any camera once some new camera/technology comes along? Look what happened to the 1DS when the Mark II came out. Look what is happening to the Mark II now that the Mark III is floating around. If you are seriously looking to buy any electronics and thinking that they are going to hold their value then you have some very serious issues. No electronic device holds it's value for long. Your other complaints are valid, and it sounds like the camera may not meet your needs. So go get a depreciated 1DS Mark II and be happy already.

-Jake-

 

[gonzalu]

searched high and low for this sort of comparison / proof and can find NONE at all... would you kindly post links so I can see for myself? I also almost bought a 5D just before the D3 was announced and I am still in waiting mode. Not because of sharpness, but because I need a 200-400mm f/4 more at this time But when the time comes for me to go D3, I would like to have a lot of facts before committing to it or a D300

Thanks
--
Manny
http://www.pbase.com/gonzalu/
http://www.mannyphoto.com/
FCAS Member - http://manny.org/FCAS

 

[tsotjbn]

for what it's worth:

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d3/sharpness-1.htm

Don't shoot the messenger.

 

[Poss]

I shot my 5D in (not so light) rain in a number of ocasions with no ill effects. Heck I took the full Niagra Falls spray on my ancient 20D (and I have the shots to prove it) and suffered no failure.

The fact 5D has no weather sealing does not transform it suddenly into a "water collector". Granted I would nor RINSE the camera in the sink (like I've seen some E1 owners doing) but I'm not putting it away because a few rain drops either. Conversely I would not shoot in pouring rain a 1D without adequate additional protection.

--
Bogdan

Life is beautiful

 

[kevm14]

Check the RAW-converted D3 file at IR instead of the jpeg:
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/D3/FULLRES/D3hSLI00100acr.HTM

My god, MUCH better. Why can't Nikon figure out how to do JPEG sharpening like Canon? Do they have something against high frequency detail?

 

[gonzalu]

I have nothing against Ken Rockwell and don;t hold hatred towards him like most people do. But in this particular case, these tests seem horrible to me. Even the 5D looks bad. It is also highly suspect that the test is of a single image kind and no other versions are shown, nor other examples, nor the original, nothing ... just his post and his opinion and that's final

If this is the only substantial info on this subject out there and if it is what the OP is basing his decision on, I would highly recommend either waiting for more proof or doing a trial run on your own.

I am once again saddened by the passing of Nikon House in NYC :-(

Cheers
--
Manny
http://www.pbase.com/gonzalu/
http://www.mannyphoto.com/
FCAS Member - http://manny.org/FCAS

 

[Georgi]

Shouldn't you get one and try it out for yourself before deciding or try to borrow one?

I mean, tests are tests and not entirely conclusive..

 

[Georgi]

but would the store do it?

 

[WBirch]

...claim to use ISO 3200 and 6400 as a breaker of getting a cam or not
no matter the brand.

Who has published an ISO 3200 or 6400 image of any importance anywhere
in any publication?

Just asking.

============================

I'm seriously considering cancelling my D3 order.
The reason is that I am getting more more evidence that the IQ might
not be what I wanted, especially in terms of sharpness.
It's quite clear to me that low ISO sharpness IS NOT on par with the
5D (in fact it is absolutely identical to the D300 despite the bigger
sensor and potentially better use of higher space frequencies). The
brave efforts put up by some members here to boost the D3 resolution
thru super-sharpening tricks just don't make the cut (pun intended)
High ISO is certainly excellent, but I don't need it so much plus it
does not seem to be significantly better than the 1DMkIII up to 6400
ISO or the D300 itself up to 3200 ISO.
All in all what I'm reading here and in other forums is really
underwhelming compared to the hypo we were pushed to expect.
It's a big chunk of money and I'm not sure I want to part with it if
all I get is a marginal improvement over a D300.
I will probably wait for a D3x or a D300FX if they ever come out.
(BTW can you imagine the horrid depreciation of a D3 if either camera
mentioned above really comes out?)
I would appreciate your comments.
I know this kind of reaction was expected but I believe there are
some hard facts to support it this time.

 

[Leos]

If you don't have much investment in Nikon glass, buy the Canon 5D
but be aware of its somewhat weaker construction and never ever take
it out in the weakest of rain.

The 5D does not fail in these conditions. Lots of people using their 5D's in light rain without issues. Some had their cameras fail when shooting on a sunny day. Doesnt mean all cameras of same make and model will fail in sunny weather does it ?

but as I often shoot in early morning damp conditions, I could see that camera
failing all too easily.

Get real

 

[surfworx]

I would'nt say high ISO is a breaker or not, but I was able to use a D3 yesterday. The pictures will run front page of the newspaper I work for. 6400 ISO to be exact.

What I found, as a working PJ, is that in situations of marginal light, I'm either going to setup SB's and Pocket Wizards on stands and try and watch my gear around people, and shoot with the D2XS or I just put a D3 into auto-ISO and manual settings and confidently shoot away.

In marginal light, with a D2XS, you have to watch your ISO and shutter speed very closely - as well as WB. With the D3 you can shoot on the fly and be very, very confident of sharp, colour balanced and bright pictures.

I doubt I'll buy a D3, but I can say with complete certainty that having useable images at high ISO is extremely beneficial. I love the D2XS in good light, but you don't always get the conditions you want - which is where the D3 excells.
--
Derrick

 

[tissunique]

I think, with respect, you are talking rubbish. Why not go for a D300 and have done with it. You suggest you may go for a higher pixel D3 when it comes out while at the same time worrying about the price of a D3... Just go away
Tony

 

[DY]

quoting MR. Interesting.

DY

You might want to check this informal comparo of the 1DsMkIII, D3 and
D300 out . . .

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/comparison.shtml

"I see comparable resolving power and clarity (not absolute
resolution, of course), and at least a one stop noise advantage to
the new Nikon (D3). Possibly there's a bit more shadow detail in the
Canon (1Ds MkIII) frame though (look at the iris). The Nikon D3's low
noise edge is also apparent at ISO 3200. The speeds of ISO 6400,
12,800 and 25,600 are also possible on the Nikon D3, but not on the
Canon, so there's no comparison to be made at these levels. And of
course at the same magnifcation level the 1Ds MKIII provides a larger
image because it has more pixles. There's no free lunch."

The D3 is an AMAZING camera.
--
Cheers,
Joe

 

[Busterman]

Hi Leos

I am being very real, . No slight intended on the Canon 5D. I think it is a marvelous camera but it is not weather sealed and I am only reporting what I have seen and heard. The dealer does not have any vested interest in putting me off Canon as I was going to spend similar cash as the D3 plus 24-70 on the 5d and 17-40 f4L, 70-200 f4L IS and the 300 f4L IS.

The lack of weather sealing and the stories of poor build quality on some examples put me off after my experience with the !D MkIII. In terms of price and image quality the 5D is currently the best value DSLR out there today. It is good to hear that some folk take their 5Ds out in light rain without problems but obviously this is not to be recommended.
--
Busterman
http://www.pbase.com/busterman2006

 

[John Schulte]

....well, it has been a long time figuring this one out- and for me, I did the right thing.

I have the D300 and figure I had better get to know it a lot better before spending more money........ of course, I will miss the D3 for its obvious strong points but I made a list of what made the D3 a 'must have', and after careful consideration the list grew very short for me why the D3 would do more for me than the D300.

It comes down to the use of the camera, the tool you have- and the needs you have.

maybe later I will revisit this, but for now, the D300 is plenty to keep me going for a long time. Good luck to all- In the meantime, I am preparing for the inevitable move to the FX format, paring down my DX lenses... it will happen, just not today. Maybe after the reviews come out in 6 months or so, I might be swayed... who knows?

No regrets.

Now, someone will get a camera sooner than expected! Enjoy!

Warm regards to all;

John