It is important if you shoot lots of continuous shots (usually sports or BIF), especially if you shoot RAW, which generates larger files. It was expensive because it was an after-factory upgrade by Nikon.
If you're not shooting lots of continuous shots, it doesn't have much value.
amlsml wrote:
Buying a used d3. Is the buffer upgrade important if you only shoot Jpeg?
Congrats! but no, Andy...might help resale if it comes with but I've found no need in over 4 yrs of shootin' with mine.
i used it often enough in mine when shooting combined outputs. it was very nice to have. but as was said it is no longer an option available to have done.
I think he's asking is it worth looking for one with a buffer upgrade or not.
That said, I've had my D3 for about three years and I've never felt a need for it. When I shoot bursts I shoot at most 5-9 shots and then pause, no need for a buffer. YMMV
I had two D3 cameras and got the buffer upgrade on one.
It did help the resale, but even shooting sports I could not tell the difference.
It would be a whole lot better to get a D3s.
The point is moot because the buffer upgrades are no longer available, but some people use camera features that reduce the number of shots per buffer (e.g. long exposure noise reduction, perhaps lots of active d-lighting, certain jpg quality / ISO combinations, etc.) and might see a benefit. Slow CF cards would make a bigger buffer useful too because it takes more time to clear shots from buffer to card.
The D3s had the extra buffer space plus a lot of other advantages including sensor cleaning and better high-ISO performance. Might or might not be worth the extra cost to you, but was not so much extra when $500 had to be added to the D3 for the buffer upgrade.
Thanks, there are a few d3 for sale, some have had the buffer upgrade, i was wondering if it made any difference shooting one. I am mostly a sports Photog, looking for a second body to my D3s, appreciate the help.
You did say that you shoot only JPEG. If you're not shooting RAW, I don't believe you would ever see the difference, so I wouldn't pay much extra for the upgraded body in your shoes.
tis better to have a "not need" then to need and not have. but thats just me and you do have a D3s. and there was need and that was a week after getting the original D3. but then i also primarily do raw and as you said the item is for shooting jpg. now i have no worries as the era of "buffer upgrade options" is past
The double buffer was important for me but usually the price performance ratio would favor a D3s (which has both a double buffer and extra stop of Hi ISO over the D3). Unless you find some kind of a special deal.
If I remember correctly, my D300 can shoot 8fps for 100 shots without a hiccup in Jpeg. I think it depends on what in camera processing you have being done to your jpeg images that could have an impact on your buffer, but if my D300 can do 100 images (max amount before the camera literally stops from shooting) I don't see why a D3 couldn't do the same without a buffer upgrade.
The upgrade is not meaningful to a lot of people, you really need a specific application. I never needed the extra buffer even while shooting indoor basketball (I try to get the right shot(s), and don't like long bursts). If you only shoot jpeg, I cannot imagine a situation where the buffer is needed to get the shot, if you know what you are doing. RAW is another story.
but no, Andy...might help resale if it comes with but I've found no need in over 4 yrs of shootin' with mine. 