ISO performance: ISO 12800 as standard, expandable to ISO equivalent of 102400 (Hi 3)
Nikon FX-format CMOS image sensor with 12.1 effective megapixels
Improved D-Movie function including High-Sensitivity Movie mode and flicker reduction function
Nikon’s Integrated Dust Reduction System including Image Sensor Cleaning function
Incorporates Nikon’s original EXPEED digital image processing
Active D-Lighting with bracketing for up to 5 frames
Picture Control: Standard, Vivid, Neutral and Monochrome (Landscape and Portrait can be downloaded from Nikon website)
Quick response with approx. 0.12 seconds start-up time and approx. 0.04 seconds shutter-release time lag
9-frames-per-second shooting rate in FX format, 11 fps in DX crop (CIPA Guidelines)
Nikon’s original Scene Recognition System, utilizing 1,005-pixel RGB sensor, for more accurate autofocus, auto exposure, i-TTL flash control and auto white balance
Multi-CAM 3500FX AF sensor module featuring 51 AF points
Viewfinder with approx. 100% frame coverage and approx. 0.7x magnification in FX format
Durable shutter unit proven by 300,000 cycles of testing on fully assembled camera
Intelligent power management that lets you shoot up to approx. 4,200 frames per charge (based on CIPA Standards)
Easy-to-access Live View modes with dedicated button
Quiet Shutter-release mode for nonintrusive shooting
High-definition (approx. 921k-dot), 170˚ viewing angle, 3-in. VGA LCD monitor with tempered glass
Also a 85 Macro was released. D3s is nice but kinda like a D300s upgrade.
I can't afford it but I may very well do it anyway. Has anyone checked out the high ISO (read ISO12,800) samples? I want one now, and think I'll be pre-ordering.
reburns wrote:
Each to their own. I found the 14-bit 21MP with the resolution nearly of the D3x and nearly the high-iso performance in a small body inspiring and the results a joy to post-process.
After owning both the 24-105L and 24-70L, I'd recommend giving the 24-105 a miss, even though my 24-105 was cherry-picked and tack sharp. Seemed too much WA distortion and too slow to make it fun to use.
Hats off to Nikon for the new D3s.
I considered that option and tried the two lenses back to back. You are right that the 24-105 is not very good geometrically at 24 and I'd say also not as sharp (I had the pick of three copies - all the same).
But I didn't have much of a choice. I find the IQ of the 5Dmkii only ok past 2500. I mean it is good but much inferior to the D700 I used to have due to the color and quality of the noise. The F2.8 does not help me at all, except perhaps with focus. In my line of work because I tend to need 5.6 ... or a bit more when the light allows and there the IS is really nice to have, as is the extra reach past 70.
Mute point now. I don't care for the 5Dmkii very much ... and am going to swap.
So
Well, if you're happy with Nikon's offerings, then switch, but I would advise to wait until next Tuesday and see what the 1DMkIV has to offer. It may be a disappointment for some, but at least its worth waiting less than a week.
You may be right. It would be cheaper that way too, and I had completely stopped thinking about it. I hope that Canon holds the line with resolution though. But Canon would have to build a slightly refined mkV for me to go that way now. If they simply make a 28 megapixel body ... as great as that is for so many ... it would not be for me.
I asked the dealer to have the D3s here next week. If I don't have it by then ... it makes looking at Canon just a bit easier.
The D3s is a good evolution from the D3, I like the video and the really high ISO performance, and I can live with the price. It'll be a great complement for those with another higher- or lower-end camera to have two bodies.
I'm in. Plus, paying for the D3s and the 70-200 II will take me a little time, which gives me more hope that Nikon will have an AF-S 85/1.4G out by then.
Rodolfo Paiz wrote:
The D3s is a good evolution from the D3, I like the video and the really high ISO performance, and I can live with the price. It'll be a great complement for those with another higher- or lower-end camera to have two bodies.
I'm in. Plus, paying for the D3s and the 70-200 II will take me a little time, which gives me more hope that Nikon will have an AF-S 85/1.4G out by then.
xabi wrote:
New vibrating dust removal... I wonder if they can implement in-body stabilization like the sony.
spada wrote:
no way, they are in no rush to do such a thing. how else would they be able to sell their VR lenses then?
Easy... they'd sell the VR lenses to those people who understand that in-lens VR is more effective than in-body VR. Less mass to move in a small glass element, and more precisely-engineered VR for that particular lens, will always result in VR that produces better results.
But you're right about one thing: Nikon is in no rush to do such a thing. They understand that in-lens VR is more effective than in-body VR. Notice that the two market leaders, Canon and Nikon, both offer VR/IS in the lens because it's better, even though it does add more to the overall cost of the system. You want better images, you get better gear, and most of the time that means you do have to pay a little more for it. On the other hand, if your needs are met by those cameras that currently offer in-body VR/IS/OS/SS, then by all means buy those.
Just don't try to pawn off the idea that in-lens VR is just a way to screw the users by overcharging them for something that would work just as well if done differently. Just ain't true.
I think in-body stabilization would be great.
handheld 12-24 my 24-70 my older Lenses Tamron 300-2.8 Ai ..Tamron Macro 180 now that would be a great thing to have for handheld shoots that would give at least 2-3 more stops'
I Vote A Big Fat Yes
