Thanks for the clarification. I obviously feel that the Mark 4 fell short, that is why I have the Nikon gear for field sports and cannot wait to see how it does for basketball with the 70-200. The overwhelming consensus is that the D3s is better at higher ISO\'s. Additionally, I cannot quantify this, but I feel that the AF is a little more consistent relative to my Mark3.
As for people thinking that more MP\'s are more important, well that is just a marketing ploy for the uninitiated. It is like power tools and horsepower. Sears can sell a 3 HP table saw and people think that it is very powerful. However, it really is the torque that it develops that is more important.
Good luck with your ongoing decision to switch.
Jim
Jul 28, 2010 at 07:35 PM
Previous versions of J4644's message #8701866 « Canon 16-35 f/2.8ll vs. Nikon 14-24 f/2.8 »
