Nikon D3 gets the deep preview
By Nilay Patel 
posted September 23rd 2007 4:20AM
posted September 23rd 2007 4:20AM
posted September 23rd 2007 4:20AM
A look back on popular stories from today in a specific year.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
If only I had 5k laying around...
PS: First post. :P
boo nikon, canon is where it's at yo.
Nikon just KTFO Canon!
doh!
hmmm
Canon and the 1D Mark III are amazing. Now if only they'd own up to the faults with the initial batches...
Meh, i like the old fuji E serries of normal cameras, mostly because of their ability to focus millimeters from the lens itself, and i need that when im working on PCBs. dont know much about other cameras, just that the little cheep E550 and even the older E510 work wonders for what i need em for.
Why exactly would someone need such a large, expensive and high MP in a camera? making posters or something? You dont need 15MP for a shot of the kids at the beach, or am i not understanding something...
this isn't a 15mp camera, it's 12mp.
and the point of this camera is that it's got a huge sensor and low noise.
I was shooting 2 concerts with a nikon d2x and canon 5D. I'll be so happy when I can just bring nikon gear and not have to bring my gf's canons.
You can't even compare the two types of cameras because they are so different. It's like comparing a water gun to an M16. The reason some of us need bodies like these are complete control and highest quality possibe within that system.
They are too big sometimes though. I hate it that they draw the type of attention that the do. I always feel funny when I use my gear for family stuff and strangers are wondering what's going on.
If you're asking those sort of questions, then you're not the intended market.
It's like people wondering why we need a 35+ MP Hasselblad.
PS: time to show some Canon fanboism.
Nikon sucks! omgzzzz!!111oneoneoneoneon CANON 4 life!
So true. Who takes pictures of anything but PCB's and the family at the beach? And seriously, we all know that posters aren't created by humans. The robots and aliens took care of that ages ago.
That whole profession of photography where they take pictures for news, sports, publications, advertising, art, etc... a complete myth.
Bobs, you've had the courage and intelligence to say what we are all thinking. You need not ask if you're not understanding something. You actually understand better than all of us.
This is not a point and shoot. It is for serious people that earn money from photography... you know... like a photographer...
Is it just me, or is Nikon just a few hairs breath from the RED camera? It's totally possible for Nikon to release a lower cost competitor to the RED camera...so why not?
Nikon could possibly make a video camera that shoots at 9-12 MP and easily sell it for under $10K.
TF,
there are alot of reasons why Nikon, at this time, would be better served to keep their interests in digital photography. They certainly aren't uncommon with the motion picture industry, considering their optics have been relied upon quite heavily for feature films - see Panavision lens history for Nikon's influence.
Aside from that, making a digital motion picture camera requires a very different approach.
Sure, Nikon appears to have many of the components one would need to *start* production, but who would they go to fabricate the sensors? Or get the necessary codecs and image processors to ensure that there's industry support? Canon? Sony?
Highly unlikely considering the last thing either one of them wants in that market segment is more competition. Especially Sony, who's already losing ground in the pro-cinema segment to the RED 1 camera.
Canon is considered to be the most likely candidate to introduce a high end digital cinema camera on par with what RED makes.
1. Canon has deep experience in optics for both DSLRs and Digital Cinema cameras, which are currently being used throughout the industry - they are recognized world-wide.
2. Certain elements that have made their DSLR cameras so succesful have already been carried over to their current line of camcorders - indicating the trend may continue into a professional line.
3. Canon has no high end pro equipment to worry about canibalizing in the event that they choose to introduce a sub-$15g pro 35mmm digital cinema camera.
I'd like to see Nikon get involved in digital cinema, no doubt, but they don't have all the necessary pieces in place to do it right now.
Hi Porkchop Flavored Cupcake (My favourite flavour!)
" Especially Sony, who's already losing ground in the pro-cinema segment to the RED 1 camera. "
The RED camera doesn't have the backing of a major company like JVC/Hitachi/Panasonic/etc.
RED can literally come and go anytime. Even with Jannard's billions, the RED camera doesn't have the major industry push.
The reason why I think NIKON has an edge over Canon, is simple: Canon has TOO MUCH TO LOSE if they released a RED competitor. All their other cameras would suffer (read: not sell).
It's like how Sony has been royally screwing the public for years with their crippled cameras and 'incremental updates'. Sony could overnight release the camera everyone wants, but instead they'd rather 'eke it out' as slowly as possible and soak the public for every dollar.
It's stupid. XDCAM is stupid. Why release a 35mbps camera, and then later a 50mbps? Why not just DO IT RIGHT and offer a camera that can shoot at whatever data rate the user wants: PERIOD.
NIKON isn't in the videocamera business, so if they were to release a camera, they would have nothing to lose since it wouldn't compete against any of their other still cameras.
Camera tech that is optimized for stills don't seem to do so well for videos. Recording video requires a lot of expensive technology and development, they'd have to use RED's business model to charge as little as RED charges.
I'd consider the RED ONE to be experimental, it's not even feature-complete yet. RED can do what they do and as quickly as they do because they intentionally did without marketing and a huge corporate bureaucracy. They will have to add some of that though as they expand their product line. These are things that the established companies can't do. They have their tiered market segments to protect and they have too much of a bureaucracy to pull it off and sell it at those prices.
"Camera tech that is optimized for stills don't seem to do so well for videos. Recording video requires a lot of expensive technology and development, they'd have to use RED's business model to charge as little as RED charges."
I don't buy this. Nikon isn't some bottom of the barrel charity. They've got the bucks to throw around and they could easily release a 6-9 megapixel camera that records at 24fps onto a flash/disc based HD.
You're making it sound like it's impossible, when in reality it's completely possible.
i'd still prefer the new sony a700.
I think I'll stick to my 5D until the Canon release the 1Ds Mk3. It's all very nice looking at what the camera can do, though from experience with both brands, Nikon lenses can't even begin to compare with the quality of Canon ones.
Utter garbage. What an absurd and uninformed statement to make.
Both systems have great lens (and bad ones). Some Nikon's are more expensive than the equivalent Canon and vice versa.
Based on my personal experience with both brands (shooting both digital and 35mm), I prefer my EF 70-200 f2.8 L IS USM over my Nikkor AF-S 70-200 f2.8 ED-IF VR (admittedly, canon have also made some horrific lenses but they're not the sort I'd buy). I'm guessing from your comment your a nikon fanboy. Nikon users always get so snappy when you say anything bad about their cameras. I can't wait to get my hands on one of the new Sony Alphas, the Zeiss lenses are superb.
Yep, agree totally.
Guy, freedom of speech. As a canon user I'm quite happy to make an uninformed statement too and say nikon lenses suck. Go to any major sporting even and count the number of big white lenses you see taking photos :p
You are obviously not a real photographer or at least not a good one, so don't pretend you are just to sound credible. Making generalized statements like that is about as dumb as racism.
hey bob billy.. I'm dumb too but at least I can spell 'generalised'. To quote from you:
"I always feel funny when I use my gear for family stuff and strangers are wondering what's going on"
Whats going on is the circus act of you pretending to be a photographer too. Hey does that nikon have a 'green mode' setting so I can use one?
I love the feel of Nikons. I am really secretly wishing that I went with them instead of Canon, but only because I prefer the feel of the Nikon over Canon. Canon and Nikon both make great cameras and I am fully aware that my skill and CREATIVITY are the limiting factors in my pictures... not my camera and lens.
Regardless, I just upgraded to the 40D, so I was never in the market for this camera anyway. Even the D300 would have been tough to swallow.
nice that Nikon started making full frame cameras , but still way to go pro cameraman's may take sometimes to get used to Nikon becoz all are addicted canon already
Its great that they have finally released something competitive in the high end pro market, but I think its "too little, too late" at this point. As their flagship SLR I would expect something slightly more competitive with the 1ds Mark III. Instead they come out with something to compete with the 5D but $2000 more. We'll have to wait and see if they have a surprise up their sleeves.
The 5D and d3 are completely different products. I work full time as a photojournalist and while 5Ds are great cameras, I would never rely on a 5d to shoot a forest fire or any other news event that would demand a rugged and / or fast body.
Nikon actually made a great move making the d3 the way it is. The 1d mk3 doesnt have full frame and the 1ds mk 3 isnt as fast and cost a hell of a lot more. Nikon made a camera that offers something canon doesnt in this camera.
Canons great and if i wasnt invested in Nikon i might have switched. Im looking forward to the d3 and as a pro am glad they finally came out with a camera worthy of the Nikon name.
IMHO the competition on the pro digital front is just beggining
Some "leaked" test images from a German forum are showing that photos shot with the Nikon D3 plus new Nikkor 24-70mm lens are having less vignetting (and better color and tonality) than images from the equivalent Canon EOS 1Ds Mark II setup. Please see http://nikond3.dpnotes.com/nikon-d3-test-samples-from-nikon-fotografiede/ for details.
I AM NEW, BUT I WANT TO GET MORE INFOS BETWEEN NIKON D3 AND CANNON IN ORDER TO MAKE UP MY MIND TO DECIDE WHICH I CHANNEL I MAY GO FOR EVER.
As a Canon user, the best thing about this is to see their main competitor come out with a camera that can actually compete with Canon's top of the line. Hopefully it will spur Canon into updating their product line sooner (weather sealed 5D anyone?).