DPR's full D3x review
ASAAR
Be the first on your block to know, if not to own one.
Alfred Molon
> Highly Recommended, Recommended, or Highly Recommended, Just
>
> Be the first on your block to know, if not to own one.
>
> http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond3x/
Highly recommended, what else would you have expected?
The Cons are all acceptable, except for this one:
* No in-camera dust removal system
Why Nikon wouldn't introduce a dust-removal system in an otherwise
excellent camera is beyond me, especially considering that dust removal
systems are now available in many entry level models.
--
Alfred Molon
------------------------
Olympus 50X0, 8080, E3X0, E4X0, E5X0, E30 and E3 forum at
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site
Paul Furman
> In article <hrtqp4tol1kvtc6m9...@4ax.com>, ASAAR says...
>> Highly Recommended, Recommended, or Highly Recommended, Just
>>
>> Be the first on your block to know, if not to own one.
>>
>> http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond3x/
>
> Highly recommended, what else would you have expected?
>
> The Cons are all acceptable, except for this one:
>
> * No in-camera dust removal system
>
> Why Nikon wouldn't introduce a dust-removal system in an otherwise
> excellent camera is beyond me, especially considering that dust removal
> systems are now available in many entry level models.
I don't see that it helps at all with my D700.
--
Paul Furman
www.edgehill.net
www.baynatives.com
all google groups messages filtered due to spam
RichA
If anyone is going to spend $15k going to the Antarctic or some
extended African safari, that is definitely the camera to get, not one
one of the pathetic Canon "leaky boats." Also, Dpreview should
remember that the 1DsMkIII was selling for $8000 street for a few
months after it's inception, so it hardly started out at $6500.00.
The price of the D3x compared to the original price of the 1DsMkIII
seems very reasonable. If that Canon was worth $8k, then the D3x is
worth $10k, at least.
Celcius
"Paul Furman" <paul-@-edgehill.net> wrote in message
news:b9jnl.11037$pr6....@flpi149.ffdc.sbc.com...
> Alfred Molon wrote:
>> In article <hrtqp4tol1kvtc6m9...@4ax.com>, ASAAR says...
>>> Highly Recommended, Recommended, or Highly Recommended, Just
>>>
>>> Be the first on your block to know, if not to own one.
>>>
>>> http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond3x/
>>
>> Highly recommended, what else would you have expected?
>>
>> The Cons are all acceptable, except for this one:
>>
>> * No in-camera dust removal system
>>
>> Why Nikon wouldn't introduce a dust-removal system in an otherwise
>> excellent camera is beyond me, especially considering that dust removal
>> systems are now available in many entry level models.
>
> I don't see that it helps at all with my D700.
>
I used to think it was only a gadget when it came out on the XTi (I think
it's the one).
With my 5D II, it seems to work. I've changed the lens twice and checked for
spots... none. I was pleasantly surprised. Although, I suppose that if it's
damp or humid and I change lenses, it might be another story... In that
particular model, Canon made the protection plate very "slippery" so nothing
might adhere to it.
Marcel
David Kilpatrick
> In message news:MPG.2407c751c...@news.supernews.com, Alfred Molon
>
>> Why Nikon wouldn't introduce a dust-removal system in an otherwise
>> excellent camera is beyond me, especially considering that dust removal
>> systems are now available in many entry level models.
>
Had D3X and A900 si9de by side. Nikon finder = approx 1mm error top to
bottom (normal horizontal view) no lateral positioning error. Sony
finder = no perceptible error at all. Sony has anti-dust and moving SSS
sensor.
David
Pete D
"Larry Thong" <larry...@shitstring.com> wrote in message
news:HOSdnfC7X5VNRwDU...@supernews.com...
> Alfred Molon wrote:
>
>> * No in-camera dust removal system
>>
>> Why Nikon wouldn't introduce a dust-removal system in an otherwise
>> excellent camera is beyond me, especially considering that dust
>> removal systems are now available in many entry level models.
>
> dust shakers are nothing more than a novelty and don't work well. Reminds
> me of these crappy brushless car washes, they work, but not as good as
> doing
> it by hand. I turned that crap off in my 1D MkIII when I had it.
>
Agree, I have one D-SLR with and one D-SLR without, to be honest I am a lens
changing freak and rarely have a problem with dust.
Chris H
<alfred...@yahoo.com> writes
>In article <hrtqp4tol1kvtc6m9...@4ax.com>, ASAAR says...
>> Highly Recommended, Recommended, or Highly Recommended, Just
>>
>> Be the first on your block to know, if not to own one.
>>
>> http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond3x/
>
>Highly recommended, what else would you have expected?
>
>The Cons are all acceptable, except for this one:
>
>* No in-camera dust removal system
Hardly a killer problem.
I have cameras with and with in body dust removal.
BTW when the dust is "removed" where does it go?
--
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
bowzer
"ASAAR" <cau...@22.com> wrote in message
news:hrtqp4tol1kvtc6m9...@4ax.com...
> Highly Recommended, Recommended, or Highly Recommended, Just
>
> Be the first on your block to know, if not to own one.
>
> http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond3x/
Simply excellent, for sure. But I have noticed one very strange behavior
from the people in the DP Review forums; they keep comparing this camera to
the Canon 5D II. Aside from resolution, these two are on different planets.
One is a full-blown pro model, the other is not, and was never intended to
be. But that doesn't stop them.
Alfred Molon
> In message <MPG.2407c751c...@news.supernews.com>, Alfred Molon
> <alfred...@yahoo.com> writes
> >In article <hrtqp4tol1kvtc6m9...@4ax.com>, ASAAR says...
> >> Highly Recommended, Recommended, or Highly Recommended, Just
> >>
> >> Be the first on your block to know, if not to own one.
> >>
> >> http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond3x/
> >
> >Highly recommended, what else would you have expected?
> >
> >The Cons are all acceptable, except for this one:
> >
> >* No in-camera dust removal system
>
> Hardly a killer problem.
>
> I have cameras with and with in body dust removal.
>
> BTW when the dust is "removed" where does it go?
years or so.
ASAAR
> > http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond3x/
>
> Simply excellent, for sure. But I have noticed one very strange
> behavior from the people in the DP Review forums; they keep
> comparing this camera to the Canon 5D II. Aside from resolution,
> these two are on different planets. One is a full-blown pro model,
> the other is not, and was never intended to be. But that doesn't
> stop them.
Drat! Now we'll have to start examining D3x images for tiny black
dots. Yeah, the forums have their share of weird humanoids that
revel in arguing about how many angels can be thrown down a sensel's
deep well. But that behavior isn't much different than what we see
in the newsgroups from time to time. The D700x'll set 'em right.
Rich
@phaedsys.demon.co.uk:
> In message <MPG.2407c751c...@news.supernews.com>, Alfred
Molon
> <alfred...@yahoo.com> writes
>>In article <hrtqp4tol1kvtc6m9...@4ax.com>, ASAAR says...
>>> Highly Recommended, Recommended, or Highly Recommended, Just
>>>
>>> Be the first on your block to know, if not to own one.
>>>
>>> http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond3x/
>>
>>Highly recommended, what else would you have expected?
>>
>>The Cons are all acceptable, except for this one:
>>
>>* No in-camera dust removal system
>
> Hardly a killer problem.
>
> I have cameras with and with in body dust removal.
>
> BTW when the dust is "removed" where does it go?
Dust isn't the problem. Spots that stick, not dust, are. Oddly enough,
every DSLR I've used other than Olympus suffers from both, no matter how
careful you are or what ineffective dust control system it has.
David J Taylor
[]
> Dust isn't the problem. Spots that stick, not dust, are. Oddly
> enough, every DSLR I've used other than Olympus suffers from both, no
> matter how careful you are or what ineffective dust control system it
> has.
Nikon seem to have solved the problem quite well in the D60, from my
experience. I expect Canon have too, I imagine, although I have no direct
experience with that brand.
David
C J Campbell
You had a defective D3x. Thom Hogan had one with a similar error. Most
D3xs do not have this problem.
--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor
C J Campbell
> In article <hrtqp4tol1kvtc6m9...@4ax.com>, ASAAR says...
>> Highly Recommended, Recommended, or Highly Recommended, Just
>>
>> Be the first on your block to know, if not to own one.
>>
>> http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond3x/
>
> Highly recommended, what else would you have expected?
>
> The Cons are all acceptable, except for this one:
>
> * No in-camera dust removal system
>
> Why Nikon wouldn't introduce a dust-removal system in an otherwise
> excellent camera is beyond me, especially considering that dust removal
> systems are now available in many entry level models.
According to the head of Nikon marketing in the US (I cannot for the
life of me remember this guy's name), the D3x was designed at the same
time as the D3 and was intended to be released simultaneously. But even
the D3 was very late. He would not tell me what was wrong with the
cameras that they could not be released on time; only that the
engineers did not like the cameras.
Nikon's engineers are very conservative and do not like innovation --
they tend to do only that which works. So the D3x is really a three or
four year old design, which means it was designed before dust-off
features became popular.
This is typical Nikon. Nikon have launched very few innovations
throughout their history, typically introducing them only years after
other camera makers have them and, even then, experimenting with
innovations on their consumer bodies first. This is why Nikons have a
great reputation for being solidly built and having great glass, but
otherwise being a little stodgy. In fact, the D3x is a bit of a shocker
in having 24 megapixels.
This attitude of Nikon's really shows up in their endless line of "me
too" point and shoots, none of which have any features which make them
stand out from their competition.
Canon's engineers are almost as conservative as Nikon's. If these
companies are going to innovate, it will be with something major, such
as when they introduced the digital camera in the first place. Dust
shakers ... meh. Revolutionizing photography ... Nikon and Canon and
Kodak and Leica do that. But they don't do the small stuff.
This does not mean, of course, that these companies do not have their
spectacular failures when they do choose to innovate. Remember APS?
If you want the latest gadgetry, buy a Sony, Fuji, Olympus, or some
other piece of crap.
Bruce
>
>According to the head of Nikon marketing in the US (I cannot for the
>life of me remember this guy's name), the D3x was designed at the same
>time as the D3 and was intended to be released simultaneously. But even
>the D3 was very late. He would not tell me what was wrong with the
>cameras that they could not be released on time; only that the
>engineers did not like the cameras.
It is one of Nikon's strengths that the company prefers to complete the
development of its DSLRs before releasing them to the market. Although
I have been a happy Canon user for the last couple of years, I find
their policy of releasing less than fully developed DSLRs surprising.
The 1D Mk III was released with a very serious focusing problem that
took months to fix. My two supposedly identical 5D bodies focused very
differently with the same lenses; Canon couldn't fix it and I had to
send them to an independent, though Canon approved, workshop to have
them recalibrated. The 5D Mk II had the black spot issues, something
serious that should have been developed out of the camera long before it
got to market.
All this played a part in my decision to replace my 5D bodies with Nikon
bodies. Having tried the Canon 5D Mk II and the Sony A900 - and not
being particularly impressed with either - I'm already using a Nikon
D700 body as part of a mixed Canon/Nikon outfit. I will make a decision
on the second body when it becomes clear whether there will be a D700X
or similar model using the 24 MP sensor in a body that's smaller than
the gargantuan D3X, and at what price.
The alternative is a second D700. This camera is a big step forward
from the Canon 5D with lower noise, significantly greater dynamic range,
more detail in images from RAW files, vastly better high ISO performance
and an outstanding rear LCD which sets new standards. Detail appears to
be on a par with the 5D Mk II, whose advantage in the pixel count is
thrown away by smudging of detail, presumably down to noise reduction.
The Sony A900 offers more detail than the 5D Mk II but less dynamic
range and a lamentable high ISO performance - this is a real noise box
and takes us back to the dark days of 6 MP Sony CCDs in any number of
brands of DSLR, all of them mediocre by today's standards. The A900
looks as though it needs a lot more development; it was clearly rushed
to market to pre-empt the 5D Mk II (and the still anticipated D700X) in
order to shore up Sony's sagging product line.
I understand from my friend the Sony dealer that five lenses have been
dropped from Sony's development plans. Three would have been branded
Sony and the other two branded Carl Zeiss.
Sony Corporation announced historic losses just a few weeks ago, with
the photo division giving its worst performance for years. And this
accounting period was *before* the worst of the credit crunch. Sony has
nowhere near the 20% market share it had targeted for this time, and the
company must be wondering why on earth it bought Konica Minolta's DSLR
line.
Marry in haste, repent at leisure. ;-) I doubt Sony will repent for
long, though. If the Alpha line doesn't start contributing a profit,
and soon, Sony will be very quick to drop it altogether.
Alan Browne
> If you want the latest gadgetry, buy a Sony, Fuji, Olympus, or some
> other piece of crap.
tsk, tsk.
--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
-- usenet posts from gmail.com and googlemail.com are filtered out.
C J Campbell
<alan....@Freelunchvideotron.ca> said:
> C J Campbell wrote:
>
>> If you want the latest gadgetry, buy a Sony, Fuji, Olympus, or some
>> other piece of crap.
>
> tsk, tsk.
>:-)
ASAAR
>>> If you want the latest gadgetry, buy a Sony, Fuji, Olympus, or some
>>> other piece of crap.
>>
>> tsk, tsk.
>
> >:-)
If market and economic conditions further erode Sony's DSLR sales,
reducing its current minuscule market share, all isn't necessarily
lost. There's bound to be a white knight (or samurai) waiting in
the wings to come to the rescue, as Sony did for K-M. As Sony's
largest customer by far (consider all of those sensors), Nikon could
just be that benefactor, which should make Alan breath a lot easier.
:)
C J Campbell
> Well said!
>
> BTW> Did you check your D3x for the current parrot problems floating around
> the internet? Seems some units have a viewfinder that is 1º off level and
> there are a few hot pixels. Mine is good so the parrots are disappointed.
Thom Hogan had the viewfinder problem in his, but none of his
assistants did. I have not heard of any hot pixel problem.
Dimitris M
>> excellent camera is beyond me, especially considering that dust removal
>> systems are now available in many entry level models.
>
> I don't see that it helps at all with my D700.
If you had not the dust removal system, you will see it. In my D70 I had to
clean the sensor at least every 6 lens changes (by air, not wipe). In D300
and D700, after thousent changes, never needed to clean the sensor.
If you have problem in the D700, then it must be from moistured dust
particles or droplets that sticks to the filter and they can not removed by
shaking.
BTW, the shaking MUST be performed every time the camera switced on and off.
If you leave the dust for long in the filter, it will be not easy to remove.
--
Dimitris M