D3X official specs


Status
Not open for further replies.
Seems like the only advance is the large MP rating. Everything else seems to lose to the D3. I'm happy with my D3, D3x not needed at all.
 

i jsut read the specs........it seems that it is on par with the previous D3, and everything seems to be losing to the D3, esp the ISO.Only the Megapixel wins. How come the max iso is so low at 6400 for a " Today Pro Body " only? I guess it is for landscape and studio mainly? But again i feel that still some wildlife photographers will use this body.......
 

Seems like the only advance is the large MP rating. Everything else seems to lose to the D3. I'm happy with my D3, D3x not needed at all.

same thoughts as vince..
still very happy with my D3.
 

same thoughts as vince..
still very happy with my D3.
some sympathy for those who don't have a D3 already... pls... :cry:

my layman comparison. although a lot of things are the same, highlighted below are some differences.

D3x and D3
EXPEED image processing
selectable 12-Bit or 14-Bit
3inch super density 920,000-dot VGA color monitor
51-point auto focus with 3D focus tracking
100% vf coverage

D3x
Effective Pixels 24.5 million
Image Sensor Nikon FX format (35.9 x 24.0 mm) CMOS sensor
Sensitivity ISO 100 to 1,600 in steps of 1/3, or 1 EV, plus LO-0.3, LO-0.7, LO-1, HI-0.3, HI-0.7, HI-1 and HI-2
Top Continuous Shooting Speed at full resolution 5 frames per second
Battery Life (on a fully charged battery) Approx. 4400 shots
Weight (without battery, memory card or body cap) Approx. 1,220 g

D3
Effective Pixels 12.1 million
Image Sensor Nikon FX format (36.0 x 23.9 mm) CMOS sensor; total pixels: 12.87 million
Sensitivity ISO 200 to 6,400 in steps of 1/3 EV, plus HI-0.3, HI-0.5, HI-0.7, HI-1 (ISO 12,800) and HI-2 (ISO 25,600); sensitivity decreases approx. LO-0.3, LO-0.5, LO-0.7 and LO-1 (ISO 100)
Top Continuous Shooting Speed at full resolution 9 frames per second
Battery Life (on a fully charged battery) ??
Weight (without battery, memory card or body cap) Approx. 1,240 g

- D3x and D3 information from nikonusa.com -
 

Last edited:
some sympathy for those who don't have a D3 already... pls... :cry:

with the current price,it's like buy 1 D3 n get a 2.8F lens free compared with what we paid when it 1st came out.lol.. :)

i feel now is the best time to get a D3 for those who r eyeing it.
 

I just saw the official Nikon jpegs, I must say I haven't been wowed over by IQ for some time, not because I'm picky but because I had thought that IQ had more or less reached a pleatau with the current batch of sensors on the D700/D3/5D/5Dmk2, which by themselves are already very good.
 

with the current price,it's like buy 1 D3 n get a 2.8F lens free compared with what we paid when it 1st came out.lol.. :)

i feel now is the best time to get a D3 for those who r eyeing it.

Interesting.. what is the market price for D3.. is D3 going to compete with the Canon 1DsMkIII or the 5DMkII.. I cant really make the difference reading the specs..
 

Interesting.. what is the market price for D3.. is D3 going to compete with the Canon 1DsMkIII or the 5DMkII.. I cant really make the difference reading the specs..

Even D3 price drops, I think the price is still on the high side. Perhaps you can call up the usual shops for a price check.:)
 

Anybody managed to get hold on some D3x photo files? Jpegs? Raw?

From the microsite, it looks really quite amazing when going 1:1 into the pictures.
 

Just saw the full specs - I'm right, only the 24MP wins. Everything else is equal to or lousier than the D3. Slower frame rate, lower ISO etc. :P Ihoped to see a high flash sync speed but well was disappointed.
 

Picture quality Nikon against Canon at twenty plus mp ....aaaa.... should be around the same ba ..

one plus to canon is that they proof long ago full frame is the way to go for a 135mm DSLR camera , so if we need to talk about the 1ds or 5d mark 2 , the quality should be good la , what the differnent with a 24mp and 21 mp camera .. cannot see the different ba ...

notice that everyone was not very excited with nikon new D3x pricing or the spec ..

I think that canon had plan this long enough to play down any powerful strike by nikon .

Canon 1ds mark 3 can easily get at $10.5 to 11 k now ...he he he .. but who's care everyone more interested to the friendier 5D mark2 selling $3.7 to 4k now ..

I remember 15 years ago my boss had to borrow us his nikon FM2 for us to practise our photography skill , when I look back those transparency most of the picture look really good got feel one la ... he he he .. it is the time we play our time on slow hand forcusing compare to now everything so fast you dun even give a dam but shoot first then edit them in the computer ... what I think nikon better make us a high mp camera with everything mechanical and cheap cheap so no need to worry so much like the old days ..



just happy happy share share la ...
 

Just saw the full specs - I'm right, only the 24MP wins. Everything else is equal to or lousier than the D3. Slower frame rate, lower ISO etc. :P Ihoped to see a high flash sync speed but well was disappointed.

IMHO, Perhaps based on the specification, there are quite a few things that D3X looks not as good. I'm not from Nikon, though I use Nikon, I don't consider myself a lover for it. But I think D3X is a different beast from D3. From the specs, it's not trying to take over D3, but in fact, another option and perspective for different areas of photography. At high pixel count, obviously it's going to be excellent for landscape photography. But when driven towards landscape photography, who actually uses anything more than ISO100 when you can ? In fact, which photographer will want a more noisy image at ISO800 even when your camera can function almost noiseless at it ? It's almost noiseless, not noiseless. :bsmilie:

I just realized in studio photography, it's not even common to use high ISO because lighting is always quite sufficient. Hence high pixel count means better quality when blown up.

As high pixels count means much large filesize, with the current processing system that most photographer have, it will means much slow workflow and given tight deadlines, it might not be a good solution to have high pixel count after all.

Next is does ISO400 of D3X means same as ISO400 for D3 ? Might not be too. D3 can drive at ISO6400 and even to ISO25600, but the colours and noise at that kind of ISO is heavily compromised. Until we see some good reviews on the image quality of D3 versus D3X, it might be still too early to make a conclusion. Don't u agree ?

Just my 2 cents worth. :)
 

Just saw the full specs - I'm right, only the 24MP wins. Everything else is equal to or lousier than the D3. Slower frame rate, lower ISO etc. :P Ihoped to see a high flash sync speed but well was disappointed.

same thoughts as vince..
still very happy with my D3.

Seems like the only advance is the large MP rating. Everything else seems to lose to the D3. I'm happy with my D3, D3x not needed at all.

I feel quite frustrated at all these comments. It really shows ignorance. But it's a typical mindset, to always only compare numbers. Big equates to good, small equates to bad.

D3 is catered to sports, photojournalism - hence it's high fps, low MP count and high usable ISO

D3x is for studio use, advertising (medium format backup or replacement) - hence it's high MP, LOW ISO

so please, think about what you want to use it for before saying "lose to" this "lose to" that. The D3 base ISO is 200, can be boosted to 100. D3X has ISO 50. Once again, different purposes.

If you want 9 fps for sports, get the D3. You won't be needing 24.5mp anyway.
 

I'm even more frustrated at the stereotypes that D3 is for sports and D3x is for studio.

FYI, I've been using the D3 for portraitures, both outdoor, and indoor - the low MP helps alot in fast processing and I don't see why anyone needs more than 12MP FF.

The D3 helps also when I go out to take events, having higher ISO and faster fps. Note, I do not take sports.

I do admit that the D3x wins in the low ISO department, but one stop hardly justifies the extra price tag. That is in fact, the ONLY feature that I'll be using if I go for the D3x.

YMMV.

I feel quite frustrated at all these comments. It really shows ignorance. But it's a typical mindset, to always only compare numbers. Big equates to good, small equates to bad.

D3 is catered to sports, photojournalism - hence it's high fps, low MP count and high usable ISO

D3x is for studio use, advertising (medium format backup or replacement) - hence it's high MP, LOW ISO

so please, think about what you want to use it for before saying "lose to" this "lose to" that. The D3 base ISO is 200, can be boosted to 100. D3X has ISO 50. Once again, different purposes.

If you want 9 fps for sports, get the D3. You won't be needing 24.5mp anyway.
 

a.. there's one question why nikon not worried about the high price they set ..

almost all big studio in singapore already change their camera collection to canon since canon mark 2 arrived .. most waited for nikon action but since nothing appear nikon stuff was off loaded to buy canon .. our studio brought 2 brand new set of canon 1ds mark2 with all important lense , if need to change of course buy back those same investment ba but after using the pro camera most important is the image quality and i think 5d mark2 is there lo .

Nikon nikon better set your singapore price at $9000.00 sgd then every canon pro user can come back to you la ..

he he he ...
 

I'm even more frustrated at the stereotypes that D3 is for sports and D3x is for studio.

FYI, I've been using the D3 for portraitures, both outdoor, and indoor - the low MP helps alot in fast processing and I don't see why anyone needs more than 12MP FF.

The D3 helps also when I go out to take events, having higher ISO and faster fps. Note, I do not take sports.

I do admit that the D3x wins in the low ISO department, but one stop hardly justifies the extra price tag. That is in fact, the ONLY feature that I'll be using if I go for the D3x.

YMMV.

as i said, studio and advertising or medium format replacement/backup. i don't think i need to explain why you would need 24.5MP for that. sigh.
 

actually there's a clip showing the printing enlargement quality of a nikon D700 and 135mm film base camera .. I forgot the link .. those got it maybe can share share ..

the print size was amazingly big billboard .. Nikon D700 at 12mp is so good liao la ..

maybe Nikon D3x is for picture biiboard which can cover a fifteen storey building lo ..

he he ...
 

There's a site dedicated to the new D3X

The shots are amazing... especially the details...

Check them out here: LINK
 

Which was what I was trying to tell the "frustrated" user. Perhaps they need to print a billboard viewable from airplanes hahah :P

actually there's a clip showing the printing enlargement quality of a nikon D700 and 135mm film base camera .. I forgot the link .. those got it maybe can share share ..

the print size was amazingly big billboard .. Nikon D700 at 12mp is so good liao la ..

maybe Nikon D3x is for picture biiboard which can cover a fifteen storey building lo ..

he he ...
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top