PShizzy
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off
|
 p.3 #8 · Preseason NBA with the D3 | |
Al,
The Suns start tomorrow night on the road, but Thursday, they host the Hornets. I also have access to a few more goodies, so I will have pretty much the kit you describe. BTW, good luck with your season. I see your work on SS a lot. Very cool.
The 400 is a great lens and full frame is perfect for basketball, but the weight makes it difficult, at least for me, to react as fast as with the 300 to anything I see. The 200-400 would then seem to make more sense, but at f/4, the viewfinder gets DARK. Also, the zoom ring is a little tough (which I've gotten info from others that this is how it is), which sucks because I had hoped to handhold and zoom in and out, much like the 70-200.
I'll be using 2 D3's, a 300 2.8 and 70-200 for the most part, and a 24-70 and 14-24 for pregame and candids.
Yamil hit it on the head. I've had a good chance to shoot under a variety of conditions, from HS football (at 10K ISO), to a daylight soccer game, to preseason NBA, to NCAA football. In my unscientific opinion, the 1D III really gets out of the gate faster, blasting off that first shot with unparalleled speed. But after that, a sequence can become very hit or miss. And people have told me that my 1D III's are better than theirs, which is scary. The D3 can be a little slow to focus (relative to the 1D III), but once it locks it, it's really sticky. It tries it's best to track a subject, and rarely if ever gives me the WTF shot.
The WTF shot is one where for a sequence, the 1D III will focus within a relative distance range, relating to the subject. Some may be a touch off, some on point, some off, some on. But then, every few shots, you get one, that looks like it's focused on the subject, but only because everything else is so out of focus, that the main subject sorta has the focus by default. It's annoying. To me, this is most common with my 70-200 2.8.
In general, I can say that the primes, especially the 300 and 400 are on par. But the zooms are a different matter. And the tracking ability trumps the first shot speed.
IQ wise? I think in daytime, the Canon has some amazing quality in its file. But I shoot 95% plus of my images at ISO 2000 and up. 800 to me is basically daylight. At those ISO's, I'd say the image quality is about the same, with the Canon being a little noisier because its NR is chroma only, and it tops out at 3200 native. The Nikon tops out at 6400 native, with extended mode allowing third stops to 12800 before making the jump to 25600, which is almost a gimmick ISO.
Regardless of what happens, I think I'm going to stay with dual systems, by consolidating my lower end gear and selling that off, and sticking to best of breed equipment. I still plan on receiving a viking funeral with my 300 2.8 IS (which is still my favorite lens. The 300 2.8 VR is also excellent, but didn't shake my faith in the Canon prime).
Max
|
I rather have a little less IQ and have it Sharp!!