Nikons new D3X tested

[pastanley]

by popular photography: http://www.popphoto.com/cameras/5700/nikon-d3x-camera-test-bottom-line-page3.html
Lets hear everyones take ....

[Ivoryplum]

Heres a side by side comapared between the D3X, 5D Mark II, and 1Ds Mark III. In that order.
Please note when comparing ISOs, 1Ds doesn't have ISO 50.

http://www.popphoto.com/assets/image/2009/W4/12120091364.jpghttp://www.popphoto.com/assets/image/2008/W50/1211200817052.jpghttp://www.popphoto.com/assets/image/2008/W7/211200815480.gif

Full credit of above images go to popphoto.com (www.popphoto.com)
Moderators, if this is against the rules, please delete.

[Vascilli]

Heres a side by side comapared between the D3X, 5D Mark II, and 1Ds Mark III. In that order.
Please note when comparing ISOs, 1Ds doesn't have ISO 50.

Full credit of above images go to popphoto.com (http://www.popphoto.com)
Moderators, if this is against the rules, please delete.
Wow, the 1Ds III does very well against the D3x, considering it's a generation behind.

[picturecrazy]

Heres a side by side comapared between the D3X, 5D Mark II, and 1Ds Mark III. In that order.
Please note when comparing ISOs, 1Ds doesn't have ISO 50.



huh? As far as I know, I've used ISO50 (L) on my 1Ds3 many times... ?

[silvex]

Wait...my 20D has better ISO...J/K I am just impersonating the herd that will show up any second. The 5DMkII ISO it is just out there...for now...untouchable! It also seems like the 1DsMKIII did well...VERY well indeed. For those ranting about the 5DMkII poor frame rate. The D3X does 5fps at 21mp (12bit), whereas the 5DMkII does 3fps at 21MP...but 14bit...:)

It seems like the 1DsMkIV will have at least the same ISO handling of the 5DMkII, but with a higher MP and most likely remain at 5fps. At these incredible specs from both Nikon and Canon. I think we will be reaching a plateu. More MP are not making ANY camera "better". So I think the race will be who has the highest FPS with the most accurate color renditition (moving to 16bit?).

[fritzd]

Comparing the results for 1Ds3 and D3x and ignoring 5D2, it seems that 1Ds3 performs better. =)

[Ivoryplum]

huh? As far as I know, I've used ISO50 (L) on my 1Ds3 many times... ?

What I should've said is it wasn't tested for. And didn't want people to just start from the top ISOs and be comparing 50, 50, 100.
Sorry for not being clear.

[Ivoryplum]

The D3X does 5fps at 21mp (12bit), whereas the 5DMkII does 3fps at 21MP...but 14bit...:)


I believe the 5D Mark II does 3.9fps.

[Synenergy52]

Interesting!

[WillOPhotos]

5d mkII = best value for money :p

[BCBryce]

5d mkII = best value for money :p

Agreed. Makes me want to buy one more now! :D

[tekkie]

so basically the only real diff is the AF, the 5D MKII chokes there compared to the other 2 :(

but for 1/3 the price I can live with it :D

[tekkie]

lol I love how the article says you maybe disappointing with ISO 6400 on the Sony... really? I think most people would be with anything above 800 when they realize they could have gotten the 5D MKII or the D700 for around the same price

[condyk]

Not if you drop the D700 in there.

[HaroldC3]

Wow, it has the same noise level at ISO50 than the 5DII at ISO3200?

[smorter]

Are magazines still credible?

[vpnd]

popphoto caters to nikonians and is 20 iq points behind other mags. I don't read often because I usually end up swearing at the mag because they smoke crack while writing it.

[SuzyView]

Some of the members have reported this as an NON-EOS topic, but the Mods have discussed this and decided that the comparison between the models is valid and will leave this thread in place.

[BigBlueDodge]

Wow, the 1Ds III does very well against the D3x, considering it's a generation behind.


The 1DsMKIII is Canon's CURRENT generation premium camera. The 1DsMKII is a generation behind. Just because the 1DsMKIII was released a year before the D3x doesn't make it a generation behind.

The Nikon D300 was released a full year before the 50D, and you don't hear people saying that the D300 is a generation behind the 50D in the comparisons.

[silvex]

Wow, it has the same noise level at ISO50 than the 5DII at ISO3200? that is three stops (100-200-400-800) wait FIVE!!! :shock: good catch! wait...is it four? who cares....the 5D2 is the king of ISO....:)

[silvex]

Some of the members have reported this as an NON-EOS topic, but the Mods have discussed this and decided that the comparison between the models is valid and will leave this thread in place.

Suzy for Presidenta...:)

[silvex]

Are magazines still credible?
Huh? you mean playboy mates are fake? bw!

[tekkie]

Huh? you mean playboy mates are fake? bw!

in most cases there are a couple of pieces that are :D

[rnourse]

Not according to dxomark...

Just punch up the low light iso on the d700 vs 5dmkII. The D700 blows the doors off the canon. Not to mention the better AF, integrated flash, higher frame rate, better AEB, the integrated wireless flash controller and the ability to use either lens range.

I did play with the mk2 but in the end I gave it back. I just liked what was coming out of the nikon so much more I couldn't deny the obvious.

the 5D2 is the king of ISO....:)

[maverick678]

The same dxomark that rated Nikon D90 better in IQ than 5D ?. Oh yeah D700 doesn't have video or that doesn't count ?.

Not according to dxomark...

Just punch up the low light iso on the d700 vs 5dmkII. The D700 blows the doors off the canon. Not to mention the better AF, integrated flash, higher frame rate, better AEB, the integrated wireless flash controller and the ability to use either lens range.

I did play with the mk2 but in the end I gave it back. I just liked what was coming out of the nikon so much more I couldn't deny the obvious.

[Vascilli]

The 1DsMKIII is Canon's CURRENT generation premium camera. The 1DsMKII is a generation behind. Just because the 1DsMKIII was released a year before the D3x doesn't make it a generation behind.

The Nikon D300 was released a full year before the 50D, and you don't hear people saying that the D300 is a generation behind the 50D in the comparisons.
Current in the Canon lineup, but "last generation" relative to the D3x, being a year older as you say. Either way, a bit older, and still as good. I'm happy with it. :D

[silvex]

Not according to dxomark...

Just punch up the low light iso on the d700 vs 5dmkII. The D700 blows the doors off the canon. Not to mention the better AF, integrated flash, higher frame rate, better AEB, the integrated wireless flash controller and the ability to use either lens range.

I did play with the mk2 but in the end I gave it back. I just liked what was coming out of the nikon so much more I couldn't deny the obvious.

5DMkI/5DMk2 1368/1815 This should settle the xxD vs 5D ISO/IQ rants...:)
D700 2300 :shock:
D200/D300 583/673...not so hot as some claim...
1DMk3 ...1018
1DMk2N...975...
10D/20D/30D/40D/50D 571/736/721/703/834...:(


But the 5D is 21MP the D700 12mp... still the D700 has an impressive ISO handling.I wish the 40D/50D had that...:(

[beepclick]

5D Mk II $2700, 1Ds MkIII $6500, D3x $8000

I'm looking mighty good here.

[maxx9photo]

I think D700 has the best value on Nikon as of now.

[drisley]

My take is "who cares, this is a Canon forum" :lol:
J/K (somewhat)

[rnourse]

My take is "who cares, this is a Canon forum" :lol:
J/K (somewhat)

the thread is "D3X tested"...

[tedBalog]

Not according to dxomark...

Just punch up the low light iso on the d700 vs 5dmkII. The D700 blows the doors off the canon. Not to mention the better AF, integrated flash, higher frame rate, better AEB, the integrated wireless flash controller and the ability to use either lens range.

I did play with the mk2 but in the end I gave it back. I just liked what was coming out of the nikon so much more I couldn't deny the obvious.

D700 on left, 5D2 on right...

http://www.popphoto.com/assets/image/2008/W35/825200815411.jpg http://www.popphoto.com/assets/image/2008/W50/1211200817052.jpg

[fritzd]

D700 on left, 5D2 on right...

http://www.popphoto.com/assets/image/2008/W35/825200815411.jpg http://www.popphoto.com/assets/image/2008/W50/1211200817052.jpg

THe noise results look very good for the 5D2 judging from the fact that its 21mp. :)

[silvex]

D700 on left, 5D2 on right...

http://www.popphoto.com/assets/image/2008/W35/825200815411.jpg http://www.popphoto.com/assets/image/2008/W50/1211200817052.jpg
from these we can say that 5Dmk2 has better iso performance from 50-3200 and at 6400, then it is the D700 -- even at 12800/25600 is marginal. IQ 5Dmk2 at both 50-3200 and 6400, resolution the5Dmk2, color 5Dmk2, higlight/shadow d700, contrast 5Dmk2, AF d700...the D700 it is the best at AF and FPS, but ti does not have 21MP...:)



out of the seven tests: 5/7 5Dmk2 2/7 D700...so from these test the 5Dmk2 is the "clear" winner...

[rnourse]

Not so fast with the "clear winner"...

Its kind of humorous how things change to suit our needs.... for example the fact these reviews seem to come from popphoto. A few posts back there were some folks questioning the validity of the data provided by the magazine suddenly they're credible:

popphoto caters to nikonians and is 20 iq points behind other mags. I don't read often because I usually end up swearing at the mag because they smoke crack while writing it.

Personally I tend to agree. Not because I hate this magazine or any other.. I don't, but because they write and test primarily to sell product for their advertisers. I've read hundreds of reviews where I cant believe they're actually testing the same product or have the cahones to write the things they do. To be frank, I wouldn't trust these kinds of results as being anything more than anecdotal evidence. That's what forums like this are all about, separating fact from fiction.

But dxomark I trust... they're independent and they don't get any $$s from the manufacturers. Hence no conflict of interest. And their results are pretty clear:

http://www.nourse.org/canon-vs-nikon.jpg

Low light iso: 2303 vs 1815. Now somehow that seems like a more credible result for a machine with a pixel pitch that's 31% bigger!

I guess what I'm trying to say is that a conclusion is only as good as the assumptions and data it's built upon. And this data looks pretty much like the usual junk we see when a mainstream mag starts reviewing a new model, nestled between the pages of advertising taken out by the manufacturer.

Heavily biased...

[Bob_A]

Not so fast with the "clear winner"...

Its kind of humorous how things change to suit our needs.... for example the fact these reviews seem to come from popphoto. A few posts back there were some folks questioning the validity of the data provided by the magazine suddenly they're credible:

popphoto caters to nikonians and is 20 iq points behind other mags. I don't read often because I usually end up swearing at the mag because they smoke crack while writing it.
Personally I tend to agree. Not because I hate this magazine or any other.. I don't, but because they write and test primarily to sell product for their advertisers. I've read hundreds of reviews where I cant believe they're actually testing the same product or have the cahones to write the things they do. To be frank, I wouldn't trust these kinds of results as being anything more than anecdotal evidence. That's what forums like this are all about, separating fact from fiction.

But dxomark I trust... they're independent and they don't get any $$s from the manufacturers. Hence no conflict of interest. And their results are pretty clear:

http://www.nourse.org/canon-vs-nikon.jpg

Low light iso: 2303 vs 1815. Now somehow that seems like a more credible result for a machine with a pixel pitch that's 31% bigger!

I guess what I'm trying to say is that a conclusion is only as good as the assumptions and data it's built upon. And this data looks pretty much like the usual junk we see when a mainstream mag starts reviewing a new model, nestled between the pages of advertising taken out by the manufacturer.

Heavily biased...

Even more interesting is DXO's comparison between the 5D MKII and the D3X when it comes to dynamic range:

Canon 5D MKII - 11.9
Nikon D700 - 12.2
Nikon D3X - 13.7

While the D3X may not have the high ISO performance of the D700 or 5D MKII it blows the doors off of both of these cameras with respect to DR at lower ISO's (below ISO 200 for the D700 and below ISO 400 for the 5D MKII).

It's interesting that DXOMark rates the signal to noise ratio for the D3X and 5d MKII as pretty much identical though, with the D700 being a bit better than both cameras. Frankly, until I see actual images I wouldn't draw any conclusions. :)

[silvex]

Even more interesting is DXO's comparison between the 5D MKII and the D3X when it comes to dynamic range:

Canon 5D MKII - 11.9
Nikon D700 - 12.2
Nikon D3X - 13.7

While the D3X may not have the high ISO performance of the D700 or 5D MKII it blows the doors off of both of these cameras with respect to DR at lower ISO's (below ISO 200 for the D700 and below ISO 400 for the 5D MKII).

It's interesting that DXOMark rates the signal to noise ratio for the D3X and 5d MKII as pretty much identical though, with the D700 being a bit better than both cameras. Frankly, until I see actual images I wouldn't draw any conclusions. :)

And the noise of the D3X at 1992...:)

[K6AZ]

I see B&H has them in stock and it doesn't appear they're going too fast at $8k a pop. Nothing new, just a D3 with more pixels crammed on the sensor to keep pixel peepers happy. I sure have no desire to "upgrade" my D700 when the D700 version is released later on.

[LarryD]

What's really amazing is that so many people are comparing the 5D II, a $3,000 advanced amateur camera with both Nikon and Canons top-of-the line $8,000 dollar pro cameras, and they seem to be very competitive....

[K6AZ]

What's really amazing is that so many people are comparing the 5D II, a $3,000 advanced amateur camera with both Nikon and Canons top-of-the line $8,000 dollar pro cameras, and they seem to be very competitive....

A fair comparison will be when Nikon releases the D700 version at around the same price. The D700 is basically a D3 minus a few things like audio, grip, and dual card slots.

[mkuriger]

What difference does it make what camera you use? Great photos are the result of great photographers.

[disorder]

i'd trade my 5dMKII for a D3x :p

but who wouldn't?

[Tee Why]

What difference does it make what camera you use? Great photos are the result of great photographers.

Some sanity.
These are all great cameras, all capable of producing the best image quality out there.

Time to go out and shoot.

[rnourse]

Agreed!

Its much like my golf game... it's not really the equipment that's holding me back.

[silvex]

Agreed!

Its much like my golf game... it's not really the equipment that's holding me back.

What is it? The grass ? The gin and tonics? bw! J/K. I agree peeps tend to forget that it is the photog behind the viewfinder that decides on the photo.

[Karl Johnston]

Thank @#$% I changed from nikon and went with canon..

[Bob_A]

And the noise of the D3X at 1992...:)

So far we don't really know. I suspect it won't match the D700, but if you're not a low light shooter the extra DR of the D3X may be more important.

It's great that we're finally getting down to choosing cameras because of features and glass instead of sensor technology.

[jdizzle]

Looking at graphs and charts doesn't do a thing for me and what really matters is how the photog uses these tools. I played with a D3X and I didn't see much of a big difference in IQ with my Ds MK III. After doing that comparison, I saved my self alot of dough.

[Croasdail]

Agreed it is the shooter much more so than the camera that makes the difference. That said, it really says something when the only thing many focus on ISO performance and ignore focus speed and dynamic range (shadow detail). In the end though, if your images aren't living up to expectations, it is highly unlikely any of these cameras is going to help ya out much. And if you think the camera is making a big difference... well...