 "Great camera for professionals" | 2009-11-03 |
| - Reviewed By User: A2ZY9OSL3B2FVC |
| I am a New York wedding photographer and this camera has helped me push the envelope when shooting weddings. The high ISO is great for getting shots in churches that do not allow flash and for getting creative with natural and artificial lights. |
| |
 "D3 is not worth it" | 2009-09-25 |
| - Reviewed By User: A2Q55L79Q2Z8GC |
| Where do I start? It's mediocre camera at best in professional world. My Nikon F5 is just as fast and produces perfect quality photos as opposed to D3 as well as being useful in places like Alaska where you can't easy charge your battery on D3. My Sigma SD14 outperforms D3 in quality and color accuracy at ISO100 RAW. My Hasselblad and 45 View cameras can never be touched in image quality by D3. The only OK aspect of D3 is it's performance at 3200 or so. However, the image quality is so bad that only a desperate journalist may want to use those photos professionally. They do have a lot of noise at 3200 when blown up large, so only small size prints can be made successfully with D3 at 3200 ISO. Even though D3 can take photos up to 25,000 ISO, they are not really usable. Most photographers will be better served by other cameras. If you must have low light capability, D700 is way cheaper and just as equal to D3 in low light. D3x would be a better camera if you are willing to spend over $5,000 on a body. And if you want to see just how bad D3 is at high ISO, use 50mm/1.4, 24-70mm/2.8 or another high quality lens, and those lenses will expose weaknesses of the sensor in terms of image quality. |
| |
| "Most Excellent (and then some)" | 2009-05-23 |
| - Reviewed By kmferron |
Pros:
Image quality
Full frame 35mm film-size sensor
Low digital noise, even at high ISO (ASA) ratings
Two SD card slots
Three image modes (24x36, 5x4, and DX)
Even faster high speed shooting at DX mode
Incredibly manageable noise at ISO 6400, even ISO 8000...
Excellent image quality with Jpeg settings on Large size and Basic compression
Efficient battery use
Consistent exposures
Precise interval timing at a host of rates
Cons:
Shutter sound catches attention
No self-cleaning sensor (which is a dust-attractor)
Heavy body (some colleagues bemoan this - yet they won't part with theirs)
Eats up CF card space, especially with Raw and TIFF writing
Difficult to shoot with Nikon DX cameras
The DX lenses are made to smaller image sensors which can lead to vignetting.
Professional price tag
You've read how fast the camera is, how the focus works, and much else on other concerns, so I just wanted to point out the things I enjoyed or wanted changed with the D3. The main thing to keep in your arsenal is a can of compressed air; the full frame sensor loves to catch dust, especially when you have to change lenses all the time. I now use my other pro camera - the Nikon D2HS - as a lens holder. The image quality isn't even in the ballpark with the D3, so I want the best images possible, especially in low light conditions. Otherwise I need to keep changing lenses which can expose the camera's innards to dust or micro metal (a natural occurrence whenever anyone changes lenses on any camera with the metal mounts). But I heard that Nikon didn't have a vibration mechanism to clear off particles for build reasons.
The other pain is that the D3 has the full frame sensor. We have a mix now, of DX lenses (for those cameras with the smaller sensors) and FX lenses (and older film lenses, some of which I never let go of). You can't use, say the 9mm DX fisheye lens without seeing major vignetting, making you have to set the camera to the DX setting (which does yield a lower image size).
I used to rarely shoot at sensitivity ratings of anything higher than 800 ISO unless I couldn't manage an image otherwise. While I still bristle for a moment when I set the D3 at ISO 3200 (I still like going a smudge less, to ISO 2500) I now shrug and know that the image I get will do just fine. I've simply grown up with digital cameras since those days in the 1990's with the Nikon N90 was morphed into the Kodak NC2000. Imagine the images they made when your card size was 128MB! Blech.
But I also had the Nikon F5 film camera in my hands back in the day, having to give it up for the Nikon D1 body, the first production pro Nikon digital camera. So much has changed since then, including my experience and feelings about that age-old preference between film and digital cameras. I understood then that digital photography was a necessary evil in order to get something posted or printed quickly, as opposed to taking film to the one-hour lab. So I will make a "film vs digital" stand at this point, with this camera, with no regrets: With the Nikon D3, I will say that I prefer the D3 to the film F5 camera, hands down. I also prefer the D3 to film, so digital to me is no longer evil. Ask me to elaborate and I will, but not in this review.
This is a professional camera at a professional price. Heck, I sure didn't buy it for myself, and our staff only gets one D3 per staffer. So even large businesses may bristle at the price. This camera spoils me. I want images that are this nice all the time. You can't shoot more than 38 pictures in a film camera. And even with film rated at ISO 1600, I truly believe that the D3 can match or beat film quality (noise vs grain structure). While I haven't found anyone who has, I think it's high time we start comparing film to digital images. |
| |
| "Review from someone who didn't pay for the camera" | 2009-05-22 |
| - Reviewed By rbenjamin |
There is a tendency for people to always give good reviews to things they paid a ton of money for. My father in law owns this camera and paid for it. He and I are both pretty avid photographers and he let me borrow the D3 for a few days.
There is no doubt that this camera takes very high quality photos, but its size and weight gets in the way.
I'm not going to dwell on the details. You can look up the specs yourself. The major benefit from this camera is that its image sensor is very sensitive to light. That means you can get away with better f-stops than you could otherwise. The color is richer and you can avoid artificial light in most indoor situations.
This thing is HEAVY. Nobody should buy it online without holding one first. I am an average size guy and am pretty athletic. My wrist was killing me after holding this for a couple of hours. Add a large zoom lense and it is impossible.
My advice would be that anyone purchasing this find one to borrow or rent before paying big money for it. You might find that you don't like it. I can say that for 99% of my shooting, I would probably never chose this camera over others half its price.
For average hobyists, there is absolutely no reason to buy this. In fact, some of the detailed settings can be so confusing - it is difficult to take good photos at first. If you are a pro - or simply must have the top of the line camera - the picture quality you will eventually get from this will not disappoint. |
| |
| "Purchase from Cameta Camera" | 2009-04-26 |
| - Reviewed By User: A1S6ON9K878HYI |
| Cameta Camera provided excellent customer service for this purchase. The camera was refurbished and came with dust spots on the sensor. I did not notice them until I was on a trip, about two weeks later. Cameta's customer service responded immediately to my e-mail with an offer of a full refund or exchange. I am impressed with their overall service so I am doing an exchange. I consider them to be an A+ company. |
| |
| "Disappointing" | 2009-04-15 |
| - Reviewed By User: A2TY0CQHU090LQ |
| Paid a lot of money for this camera, and was very disappointed with the noise issue i experienced. On top of that the color was not natural for the subject being captured. Just disappointing. |
| |
Expedited Available
