Steve Perry wrote:
I tested this when I got my D3x. I shot some ISO 800 / 1600 images, upsized the D3 to D3x size, and the D3x was just a tad better.
Sold the D3 and haven't looked back.
What I'd really like to see is a D3x vs D3s comparison done the same way. D3s should easily win, but by how much is the question. If it's significant, I might have to pony up for one (but I'd really like another D3x - my wife is gonna kill me).
At issue is whether the design change between the original and new 70-200mm is significant in practice. I can't say for sure yet, as I haven't fully tested the new lens and won't for a bit yet (I've got too many other things that you've been asking for me to finish first). It strikes me, though, that the primary thing that is being compromised here is perspective. For very close subjects, you're simply going to have to move a bit closer with the new 70-200mm. That's going to give you better sharpness, brightness, and less vignetting, but it's also going to change your perspective. The unanswered question is whether this is enough to cause real issues for most shooters. My guess is no, but it's only a guess at the moment. Bottom line: the new 70-200mm is going to change some shooting habits somewhat (you're going to get closer to near subjects), but that doesn't make it the terrible update that some seem to think it is. ...Show more →
? 