Nikon's 70-200 VR, 300 f/4, and 80-400 are all available on Adorama's website (at least at the time I checked), assuming you want new. But you are right, it has been frustrating to get anything Nikon lately in the pro line. All the new releases has dropped the availability of much of the other lenses, some of which were replaced.
And to second what was said, 11 fps is available without auto-focus tracking, not without auto-focus. I'm not sure what I would use that speed for, or even 10 fps, but who cares? The 1DMkIII is an awesome camera at 10 fps, but it doesn't do it with full frame. I guess there is the big difference. I just wish I could afford one of those. Guess I better buy a lottery ticket or something.
As to 11 fps, this is without tracking. It is the same as shooting with 9 FPS withöut the Lock On function enabled. Thus is aquires the autofocus at the beginning of the burst but then will do the bast available focus without the Lock On feature. ( At least this is my understanding of it)
timbop wrote:
I think the key point you are glossing over is that it will do 9fps with AF, and as mentioned 9 vs. 10 isn't really significant. What is significant is that the D3 is FULLFRAME 9fps, as opposed to 1.25 cropped 10fps.
.....................
Can't think why I would want 9-10 fps without some crop. FPS is about action. Action is typically about reach. I want pixel density for reach. I thought that was a Nikon advantage.
I think FF on the D3 is more about the camera being an all around camera. The low pixel density is a minus for sports and wildlife.
A 20mp D3x with a 9 fps 12mp crop mode would be a true all around camera. I imagine Nikon thinks that too.
A 1.5 crop mode from a 20 mpix FF sensor would have less than 9 mpix.
Rainer Raffalski
Can't think why I would want 9-10 fps without some crop. FPS is about action. Action is typically about reach. I want pixel density for reach. I thought that was a Nikon advantage.
I think FF on the D3 is more about the camera being an all around camera. The low pixel density is a minus for sports and wildlife.
A 20mp D3x with a 9 fps 12mp crop mode would be a true all around camera. I imagine Nikon thinks that too.
Info on the japanese website mentions 9 fps for FX mode, 11 fps for DX mode. So the frame rate does not depend on focus tracking, but on the size of the output. Or so it seems.... And yes, I understand Japanese
I was thinking that by the time the D3x came out we could forget about a DX mount on a full frame camera. Oh, sorry, an FX camera. Who's going to be shooting the D3 with a DX lens? The DX mount is only on the D3 for show.
brunobarolo wrote:
A 1.5 crop mode from a 20 mpix FF sensor would have less than 9 mpix.
Rainer Raffalski
I was thinking that by the time the D3x came out we could forget about a DX mount on a full frame camera. Oh, sorry, an FX camera. Who's going to be shooting the D3 with a DX lens? The DX mount is only on the D3 for show.
and yet Again you show how little you really Know about anything when it comes to Nikon
DX is Not a Mount. there are lots of DX lenses out there that are professional quality not the sort of kluge that EF-S is
dcmiller wrote:
Can't think why I would want 9-10 fps without some crop. FPS is about action. Action is typically about reach. I want pixel density for reach. I thought that was a Nikon advantage.
I'd LOVE a FF 1DMk3. If the 1DMk3 were 12MPixel FF with ISO12800, I'd have one right now, and I doubt there would be much ballyhoo about the D3 in the Canon world. I think we're all familiar with the benefits of larger sensors, so I won't sing the praises, except to say the only time a crop is useful is when you can't get the reach you need optically. Often the case for wildlife photographers, but not so much for sports photographers. Heck, my 100-400 is longer than I need for racing photos even on my 5D!
Besides, if you want a really dense sensor, there's always the D300... 12MPixel, 1.5x, 8fps, $1900.
BTW, I saw some high ISO samples from the D3 posted in another thread. I'm skeptical about these because the lack of noise looks completely amazing, but here they are anyway:
CKrueger wrote:
I'd LOVE a FF 1DMk3. If the 1DMk3 were 12MPixel FF with ISO12800, I'd have one right now, and I doubt there would be much ballyhoo about the D3 in the Canon world. I think we're all familiar with the benefits of larger sensors, so I won't sing the praises, except to say the only time a crop is useful is when you can't get the reach you need optically. Often the case for wildlife photographers, but not so much for sports photographers. Heck, my 100-400 is longer than I need for racing photos even on my 5D!
Besides, if you want a really dense sensor, there's always the D300... 12MPixel, 1.5x, 8fps, $1900.
BTW, I saw some high ISO samples from the D3 posted in another thread. I'm skeptical about these because the lack of noise looks completely amazing, but here they are anyway:
I'll believe that when I see it from Phil, but if it's true, holy crap! That's less noise at ISO12800 than my 5D at ISO1600!...Show more →
Any idea what it says? I get the ISO numbers and that its a 100% crop, but the rest is just question marks (which is appropriate).
It seems like the right way to leak information out, from a marketing perspective.
dcmiller wrote:
I'm sure someone has an example of a practical use of 11 fps without AF, but I don't.
Imagine an athlete doing the High Jump. You know exactly where the person is going to be as he/she tries to go over that bar. All you need to do is focus on it once, and wait for the moment to happen. Then shoot away at 11 fps, giving you the biggest chance of capturing the exact moment.
You don't always need focustracking to get the right focus, sometimes it's best to pre-focus, and try to capture the object as it passes through.
But why complain about something the camera can do(i.e. shoot at 11 fps)? Because you think it's just a misleading marketing tool? Ultimately it comes down to physics: with a blackout time of 74ms (1D MkIII has 80ms), that means 11X74 = 814ms of blackout time per second. That leaves less than 20ms in between shots to focus. That's 0.02 seconds.
dcmiller wrote:
Can't think why I would want 9-10 fps without some crop. FPS is about action. Action is typically about reach.
First you can't think why you would want it without some crop, then you say the DX mode on the D3 is just for show? Nikon should have made a 1.3X/8Mp crop mode on it, just for laughs. Don't forget that until very recently the 1D MkIIn was the ultimate sports camera, I guess a lot has changed since that makes the D3 more of an allround camera, and a lot less desirable for sports than a 1D MkIII.
dcmiller wrote:
Can't think why I would want 9-10 fps without some crop. FPS is about action. Action is typically about reach. I want pixel density for reach. I thought that was a Nikon advantage.
I think FF on the D3 is more about the camera being an all around camera. The low pixel density is a minus for sports and wildlife.
A 20mp D3x with a 9 fps 12mp crop mode would be a true all around camera. I imagine Nikon thinks that too.
The D3 will produce fantastic 5MP files for sports work. Those of us that have used the D2H and find it to be perhaps the most under appreciated pro DSLR of all time, know just how nice those 4MP files are when enlarged, not to mention how great they are to process. Now we have that option with 3-4 stops of better ISO performance and a little more resolution. The resolution leaves little room for post-capture cropping for sure. But if compositions are nailed in camera, then 5MP is plenty of resolution since most clients looking for event prints or editorial licenses will not need more resolution than that. Few of my print requests exceed 8x10 and most are smaller.
The D3, when used alongside the D2X, provides tremendous flexibility. My D2X gives me 7+ MP RAW files with 2X crop. Talk about reach! I like to carry two cameras for event work. So, the D3 / D2X combo provides 5MP DX, 7MP 2X, and 12MP FX and DX RAW files at very high frame rates.
DvdM,
You example is practical but not realistic. Who would bother? 9ps with Nikon with AF, 10 with Canon. Both are fine. Nikon knows this. My point is that it in the camera to make the camera look better in spec.
turnet,
certainly for smaller prints the older better cameras are fine. And for newspaper work file size was adequate years ago. But is Dx mode on the camera because of useful functionality, or because Nikon sold its user on DX as the new modern size while the technology matured enough to produce a FF camera (sorry FX)?
My point is that it in the camera to make the camera look better in spec.
Yeh, it might be just marketing hype...so what. Every manufacturer produces marketing hype. The Canon 40D somewhat weather sealed body is just hype. You either have weather sealing or you don't. It's Canon's way of saying we have something that competes against the D200.
chez wrote:
Yeh, it might be just marketing hype...so what. Every manufacturer produces marketing hype. The Canon 40D somewhat weather sealed body is just hype. You either have weather sealing or you don't. It's Canon's way of saying we have something that competes against the D200.
Thanks for making my point:
Nikon says for the D200:
"Additional sealing for dust and moisture add to the D200's strength."
and for the D300
"advanced dust and moisture protection"
So neither camera has weather sealing. Why were you guys claiming the D200 was weather sealed? Live in La La land with the vague and misleading statements Nikon makes, but spare yourself pretending you're thinking critically.
dcmiller wrote:
Thanks for making my point:
Nikon says for the D200:
"Additional sealing for dust and moisture add to the D200's strength."
and for the D300
"advanced dust and moisture protection"
So neither camera has weather sealing. Why were you guys claiming the D200 was weather sealed? Live in La La land with the vague and misleading statements Nikon makes, but spare yourself pretending you're thinking critically.
Dude, there definitely an air of someone living in lalaland.......
As you said, the D3 is an all around camera. But THAT'S THE POINT. You get the capabilities of the 5D AND 1Dm3 (OK 1 frame per second less than m3 and the effective sensor size of 1dm2n) rolled into 1 body, for a little more money. Or, a TRUE baby m3 in the form of the D300. Look at it with an open mind, and you will recognize that the D300 has this distinction - at least on paper: PRO AF, weather sealing, 8fps (1D mark 1), lens microadjustment, ISO 6400.
If the D300 delivers on its' specs then it is Canon who exaggerated wrt 40D being a baby 1dm3.
Nikon has always tried to build an "all everything camera" in their pro body. The D2x can do sports although not as well as a Mark II, and it can do studio work although not as well as the DsII. Canon has addressed these as two seperate markets with two seperate requirements. Nikon has chosen a different path. Note; I did not say the wrong path, just a different path. There are many who believe Canon is milking their customers with the two pro bodies although I am not one of them
Very few people and businesses will jump from Canon to Nikon because of the D3. The cost to do so is just too great plus in 24 months they would have to jump back. Pictures from the Mark II and Mark III cameras did not lose IQ because of the introduction of the D3 and most people know that. Of course there are always some with too much disposabel income, or too much credit, or both that will move to Nikon. To them I say good luck and can I see your for sale list before anyone else.
To the Nikon faithful who have stuck with Nikon over the years, I am happy for you. The D3 looks really great and I'm sure you will be happy with it. Nikon has much to be proud of with the D3. To me it is in keeping with Nikon's "all in one" camera design, but again many feel that is a good selling point.
I'll stick with Canon. I have had great success with them over the years so I will just have to learn to say "the D3 isn't that much better than a MK III."
i seriously hope it is a "bit" that you are playing wrt all these contradictory and troll like comments, if not please seek professional help and i am not talking about a photo class
