Nikon D3 full frame DSLR unboxed
By Evan Blass 
posted Dec 4th 2007 12:24PM
posted Dec 4th 2007 12:24PM
[Thanks, Andrew]
posted Dec 4th 2007 12:24PM
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.
Hi, Im a wedding and portrait photographer in Queensland Australia and am currently a Canon user (5d's). I am so tempted to switch to Nikon because of all the great reviews on the d3. Has anyone else switched to Nikon from Canon and if so waht is your opinion of the d3 and are you glad you changed?
Thanks for your help.
Regards
James
http://www.artographyweddings.com.au/
See Nikon D3 Full Frame DSLR and others review at http://cheapdslrnow.com/
Dont drop it!
It's a pro camera. It's designed to survive bumps and drops.
I needs this camera.. badly...
'51-point autofocus'
wow!
Tell me, O' Engadget, where do we sign up for our chance to win this marvelous device? ;)
You sign on a personal check made out to Engadget for $5,000. You're odds of winning the camera are 1:3 though, so I'd just assume buy it.
Nice box.
Meh, looks like all the other Nikon boxes. C'mon nikon, when are you gonna admit that dichromatic boxes like Canon's are vastly superior to your monochromatic boxes!
/sarcasm off
This picture looks kooky. Somehow, the camera itself seems like a miniature. Trick of perspective, I guess, but it's bizarre. (Or maybe the drool is getting on my screen)
Yeah, unfortunately they couldn't figure out how to use the camera to take a picture of itself.
i have a D300. i don't need full frame sensor. or 3400 $ difference.
I want one. Badly. I want this camera in a D300 body even worse though.
This really is beautiful performance wise, I just wish they would take a tip from Leica and stop making them look so ugly.
I'm with Charlie Taylor. As a graphic designer, I appreciate that Canon's machines don't interpolate the crap out of the photos you take. When Canon says you have 12.1 megapixels, you actually have them - unlike Nikon and others, they're not among the companies that "predict" pixels after you take the shot.
Before buying your next high-end dig cam, read this article: http://www.istockphoto.com/article_view.php?ID=158&Page=1
Read a little too fast. Charlie was being sarcastic. *Fail*
Still, my point remains valid!!! =P
Please explain to me how Nikon uses interpolation in it's dSLRs. Thanks.
Where did you get from the article you linked that Nikon interpolates?
Please check your facts on Nikon.
I believe that you're talking about something Nikon's D1 line used to do. DPReview discusses this on the first page of their D2X review (the must current info I could find on this topic):
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/NikonD2X/
The D1X had rectangular photosites which were interpolated to create square pixels. Since then, Nikon has moved to square photosites. The CMOS layout is the same as Canon's.
The article I linked to was implicating Fujifilm far more than it was Nikon, but to my eyes, all the photo comparisons were drastically in favor of Canon's rigs.
Maybe the dSLRs are much better - hell, for $5,000, I'm sure they must be.
Still, I think interpolation is a widespread problem among camera companies and what you see on a stat sheet is not always what you get megapixel-wise when you get the pictures into Photoshop. That's all I'm sayin'.
Um, please name a digital SLR that interpolates that is currently manufactured.
I don't think one exists from any company.
Oh boy, let me clarify. Interpolates megapixels into a higher number, not interpolates at the sensor filter.
Digital SLRs are not the $89 Vivitar 14 megapixel hunk of junk you see at your local Wal-Mart.
As JE mentions in a comment below, Canon and Nikon both use Bayer filter (GRGB) sensors that require interpolation by a demosaicing algorithm to get a complete image. Nearly all digital camera manufacturers user Bayer filter sensors so just about any digital camera you pick up, including Canon, interpolates an image. The only brand I know of that uses Foveon sensors is Sigma with the SD14 being their latest model to my knowledge.
http://www.dpreview.com/learn/?/key=Color_Filter_Array
http://www.dpreview.com/learn/?/Glossary/Camera_System/sensors_01.htm
The other interpolation your link refers to is different and is the kind thats used by point and shoots for their "digital zoom" which is similar to cropping images with software on your computer. I've never seen a dSLR that has a digital zoom.
http://www.dpreview.com/learn/?/Glossary/Digital_Imaging/Interpolation_01.htm
What your linked article says about the Fuji S3's sensor resolution is true but the SuperCCD in the S3 (now an S5) is a specialty sensor designed to give greater dynamic range and is aimed at portrait and wedding photography. Canon and Nikon don't use this type of sensor so the 6.1MP versus 12.3MP issue doesn't apply to their cameras.
I WANT!
My Precious!
Too bad its not actualy "Full Frame" its close to it... but not full frame like my 5D.....
5D sensor = 35.8 x 23.9mm per Canon's website specs
D3 sensor = 23.9 x 36mm per Nikon's website specs
Enjoy the cropped-frame teeny-tiny sensor on your not-quite-full-frame 5D, sucker!
And to the earlier poster who doesn't understand interpolation - Nikon and Canon both use sensors with Bayer filters that require interpolation. You misunderstood the article you linked to: the sensor that uses the least amount of interpolation is the Foveon sensor.
I'm sure the Nikon won't have vingnetting in the edges of the frame like the Canon full-frame cameras seem to suffer from.
Incorrect. They are both full-frame, no-crop sensors. But the D3 has a larger sensor and better pixel pitch:
Canon 5D:
35.8 x 23.9 mm CMOS sensor
Nikon D3:
36 x 23.9 mm CMOS sensor
Are you talking about a .1 mm difference. Get real. Too bad your 5D isn't actually "full frame" like my Mamiya 645ZD.
i'd like a ZD back, but it doesnt do ISO 25,600 equivalent!!
i don't need the D3(yet) but i do want it so bad. i'd rather drop the 5Gs on some fast glass for now though.
nathan.wong: Vignetting is usually a function of the lens, not the sensor.
Jordan, I agree that vignetting is a function of the lens, but Alex was making it sound like having .1 less frame space is inferior to Canon. However, Canon's lenses seem to vignette with "full-frame" Canon cameras, so that makes the Canon useless when shooting anything with an evenly toned blue sky. Since Nikon lenses (non-G) are designed for full-frame film vignetting should be kept to a minimum.
Nikon lenses (non-G) are made for full frame so they won't vignette? Nathan what are you talking about. You are implying that Canon's lenses are not designed for full frame? Your statement strikes me as absurd. All lenses can be prone to vignetting and it's often a matter of trade-offs. Plus go back and do your homework. Kodaks DCS-14N was known for horrible vignetting.
Digital also plays an effect in vignetting hence so many newly designed lenses.
Alex, with your intellect you're probably better off sticking with Canon anyway.
Scott, notice I said "should be kept to a minimum." I've used Nikkor primes for over 20 years and I don't exhibit any vignetting that's noticeable. I know all lenses have some to a degree, but from the posts of many Canon users, especially ones that own the expensive "L" series on their digital cameras, have said that vignetting was unacceptable, especially for a lens that costs so much.
Re: Vignetting in DSLRs.
Because DSLR sensors have color filters and micolenses in front of the actual sensors, they are sensitive to angle-of-incidence... shine light in at and angle the microlens wasn't designed for, and it'll vignette. How does that affect you? Full frame sensors have a higher angle-of-incidence from the center of the optic axis, so they're more prone to do this. So, you'd think that they could just design the microlenses to point more inward the further from the center of the sensor, and that would solve the problem, right? Well, if you've got a zoom lens, the angle will vary with zoom setting, so you can't optimize it easily. I'd guess there are lots of ways to solve it... smaller sensors, special lenses (but that invalidates the lens you have already bought), and software-correction (at the expense of dynamic range in the corners) - none are particularly good.
The things I'd do for this camera. The dirty, degrading things... :-(
You're a welcomed customer in the gray market.
What camera do you use to take pictures of a $5000 camera?
He used a Nikon D80.
They need to use the D3 to take a photo of the D80... Let's compare.
Wow... that was supposed to be a joke.
...And a darn good one! You beat me to the original post (Had to not confirm the post I sent in...)
That must be a Massive table...
i need to take a photography class. I have a d70 my uncle gave me that ive taken great photos with (compared to point and shooters atleast) But i dont really know what im doing. Are there any good tutorials online (or books) about the D70?
Here is a good place to start. It's an interactive guide to using the D70
http://www.nikondigitutor.com/eng/d70s/index.php
Will it blend?
Vile Canon heathen!