Ah...the portrait version of the D3.
No thanks. I like the fps of the standard D3.
Only thing that's bent me about it is the tiny buffer that they're charging $500 to increase. That should be a recall item, IMO.
Printable View
Ah...the portrait version of the D3.
No thanks. I like the fps of the standard D3.
Only thing that's bent me about it is the tiny buffer that they're charging $500 to increase. That should be a recall item, IMO.
http://a.img-dpreview.com/news/0812/...x_50_front.jpg
What are the two buttons that both look like the depth of field preview buttons on the left (in this view) of the lens mount?
They can be programmed however you like. I have mine programmed with the first one as exposure lock and the second one activates the in-viewfinder "artificial horizon."
$8k!
wow... the things I would do with $8K....
$8k would buy me the 300mm f/2.8 and a sweet studio lighting setup.
Or it could pay off a credit card.
No more gear for me for a good while.
OK, that is pretty hot. Both the multiple programmable buttons and the artificial horizon. The only thing I have in my viewfinder is dust ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyBoeingJets
There is no question it is expensive, but to keep it in perspective, the only cameras before this and the 1Ds MkIII that were at all comparable in terms of resolution and image quality were $18,000 645 digital backs, and the only "features" of those bodies are auto focus. And it isn't frames per second, it is seconds per frame :) So while a $8K 35mm SLR body is ridiculously expensive, an $8k digital back is ridiculously cheap. I know that the pixels are a lot smaller on the 35mm than the 645, but the bodies themselves are a lot more versatile.Quote:
Originally Posted by HeShootsNScores
Also, I don't think that $8k price ($7K for the Canon equivalent) will hold for very long. Currently the difference between the 1D MkIII (which is the same body as the 1Ds but with a 1.3x crop sensor) and the 1Ds MkIII is around $3K, which is more than the whole cost of the 5d MkII, which has the same size but updated version of the 1Ds sensor. Certainly there will be people who need the features and the sensor of the 1Ds MkIII (or the D3x) and are going to be willing to pay the price, but when you can get the same body or the same (even better) sensor for $3K to $5K less, that is going to put a serious dent in the number of bodies you can move for $8K. Once the 5D MkII really starts shipping, look for the price of the 1Ds MkIII to fall, that might drive down the cost of the D3x.
Then what ever comes out next will be at the $8K price point again ;)
I agree that it is pretty impressive but it doesn't get me real excited the way the introduction of the D3 did. Once you start getting upward of 12 mega pixels, I'm pretty happy with resolution. When you get to 24 mp I think you need expensive glass to get real value from it, and the workflow with such huge files means a whole new system.
With the D3 they went after Canon in photo journalism and sports photography. Now they are countering Canon in the commercial/fashion niche.
I will be very interested to see some images taken with this camera. My understanding is that this uses the same sensor as the new Sony A900 which sells for just $3K. The rumors I heard were that they would package that sensor in a midrange D800/D900 model rather than the pro level D line. So if it is the same Sony-built sensor as in the Alpha, what makes this camera worth $5K more?
It was the D3's ground breaking high ISO performance that really got me going last year. That and the Fx format. Because the D3 uses a home-grown Nikon sensor, there is nothing out there quite like it. The only thing I didn't like was the size and cost. Fortunately, now there's the D700. That would be my next purchase if I had the money.
So who has Flickr streams? FBJ I got, I don't think I have anyone else. Deader, HeShoots, PuckMonkey, RinkRat? Anybody?
I'm at Flickr: SamPage's Photostream
