DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Hardware and Software >> D700 vs D3x
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 11 of 11, (reverse)
AuthorThread
08/22/2009 12:19:52 PM · #1
So let's create a hypothetical situation:

You are told that you need to chose either the D700 or the D3x as the camera you will use for the rest of your life. Either one you chose will be given to you for free, and you can NEVER sell it or buy another camera. (it will be replaced if broken though, so durability shouldn't play a role in the decision)

Which do you chose, and why?
08/22/2009 12:27:00 PM · #2
I choose the D700. Her's why:

1)Better in low light situations, I need that for many situations I shoot in.
2)Faster burst rate. Again I need this for the sports I shoot.
Those are really the only reasons. I don't shoot a lot in the studio, so the D3x really isn't needed for me. I know its a fantastic camera, but it just doesn't fit my needs. I'm a firm believer in having the right tool for the job.
08/22/2009 12:33:00 PM · #3
1Ds mark III..................;p
08/22/2009 01:53:55 PM · #4
Originally posted by alans_world:

1Ds mark III..................;p


No, the question was which camera you would rather have not the one you are getting rid of...:)
08/23/2009 04:03:45 AM · #5
Definitely D700, based on this graph from Dpreview,

' . substr('//www.janbelina.com/CameraNoise.gif', strrpos('//www.janbelina.com/CameraNoise.gif', '/') + 1) . '

the noise level is much higher on the D3x then the d700. D3x has noise of 2.4 while D700 has noise of 1.3. Thatís 85% more noise!
08/23/2009 07:21:41 AM · #6
Then why would anyone buy the D3x at all?
08/23/2009 08:05:43 AM · #7
Originally posted by NikonJeb:

Then why would anyone buy the D3x at all?

If you need the resolution, but I think that for most people the 12MP of the D700 is more than enough.
08/23/2009 02:26:08 PM · #8
The D3X has more Mega Pixels, so you can crop in and get 8x10's, in more zooomed in levels. But if they' re noisy it's not a good thing. American Photo magazine says about it's Camera-of-the-year, that it has better looking shadow areas "filmlike grain", when zoomed in, then the EOS 5D Mark II.

It's a tradoff for Speed/Higher-ISO vs Massive Sized raw files.

That reminds me... Earlier this year the Playboy Playmate, also had some Megaboobs, but she couldn't perform well at all, in the "Dancing With The Stars" TV show.

[ADDED]
Given those 2 choices, I'd choose the Nikon D700, but if I could have my lenses swapped, too, I'd pick the Canon EOS 5D Mark II. Yeah, it's slow 3.9 fps at 21.1 MP, but has 1080p HD video, too! Fusion, merging of Video/Stills is the market/consumer trend.

Message edited by author 2009-08-23 14:51:56.
08/23/2009 03:12:06 PM · #9
You can reduce noise at a cost of sharpness, and you can increase sharpness at a cost of resolution. It's not obvious from the points raised above whether you could drop a D3X image down to 12Mpixels and have it be as clean as a D700's image. Meanwhile, you get lots of pixels when you have enough light. Also, looking more closely at those graphs, the D700 is only less noisy at low ISO. At higher ISO they're about the same. I have a D700 and the noise under ideal conditions is not noticeable. I could double it and still not notice. It's performance at high ISO and low light that I'm worried about. In those conditions, the D700 is a hair better, but like I said, you can lose some noise if you're willing to drop to the D700's resolution.
08/23/2009 04:05:38 PM · #10
The plots state that the "noise level" on the y-axis is the standard deviation in luminosity. Thus, it is NOT fair to compare different resolutions. If the 24 MP images from the D3x are resized down to 12 MP, then the standard deviation will go down by a factor 1/sqrt(2) = 0.7. Starting at a value of 2.4 (according to Jas), the absolute level will then end up at 1.68. That's just 30% more than the noise level of the D700, which is not bad at all.

All under the assumption that the noise is "white".
08/23/2009 08:51:33 PM · #11
Originally posted by labuda:

So let's create a hypothetical situation:

You are told that you need to chose either the D700 or the D3x as the camera you will use for the rest of your life. Either one you chose will be given to you for free, and you can NEVER sell it or buy another camera. (it will be replaced if broken though, so durability shouldn't play a role in the decision)

Which do you chose, and why?


Personally i would go for d3x, there is no substitute for resolution.

Low light situation could be better handled by fast lenses, but if it is not captured it is not captured.

i have been brooding over this question for some time and i concluded that a900 is best camera for me (because can not afford d3x). I could buy a900 but then i have no budget for lenses to put on it.

it seems sony is going to come out with cheap a850 and 90% chances that i would settle for it. (I am trying to collect enough cheap m42 lenses by that time).
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 11/28/2020 11:38:04 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2020 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Proudly hosted by Sargasso Networks. Current Server Time: 11/28/2020 11:38:04 PM EST.