D3 is it the best D-SLR to date (1 Viewer)

I have been testing the D3 all week and in my opinion it is far better than any of the Canons, and this is from a dedicated Canon pro. The high ISO performance is better IMHO than the 1D MK3, so is the autofocus. The images also have a much better dynamic range, one look at the histograms compared to the 1DS MK3 show that. I have been shooting both cameras alongside each other and I have given up the MK3 as it is too slow to do much. If you want to follow my shooting tests then check out the First Looks on the main Warehouse Express site, sorry but am not allowed to post them here.

I am actually happy that Nikon have done this and really got it right with both the D3 and the D300 as it will hopefully give Canon a kick. It doesn't really matter to me whether people shoot Canon or Nikon as a good photographers can shoot with anything but I am really glad to see that the D3 is now at least on a par with the best Canon has to offer. And Nikon has the 200-400 which is damn attractive for the kind of photography I do. Anyway just wanted to add my 2 1/2 p worth!

Andy Rouse said:

I am actually happy that Nikon have done this and really got it right with both the D3 and the D300 as it will hopefully give Canon a kick. It doesn't really matter to me whether people shoot Canon or Nikon as a good photographers can shoot with anything

Click to expand...

Agree wholeheartedly on this point, the closer the competition the better it is for all of us (irrespective of our loyalties); especially if Canon are pushed into bringing the prices of their high end bodies down to something more in line with the Nikon prices!

a.dancy said:

I would not want to argue the point with Nigel regarding DOF if I am understanding the point that Nigel is making save that I do actually like (some) pictures with a very shallow DOF. The circumstances are limited where it is appropriate (in my view) but I feel that seeing less detail can sometimes give you more.

AD

Click to expand...

I like shallow DOF images too Adrian, but the area of shallow DOF has to contain the point of interest in the image for it to work.
Also I don't have any problem with competition from others (pro or amateur) Its good, it pushes us on to keep trying something newer and different, thats got to be good for wildlife photography in general (the old 'what punk did for rock music' analogy).
My only concerns are over some of the problems that might come about as a result of increased pressure on some species by those who have more concerns about getting the shot than they do for the subjects welfare, the problems with groups of several photographers sitting within feet of a Dipper nest in Derbyshire, (no hide, and a stressed out bird desperate to feed young) this year being an example............ but all this is straying off topic.

Straying off topic maybe Nigel but making a valid point and well made. As you know Nigel shallow DOF pictures are one of my trademarks, I feel that where appropriate they highlight the beauty of a subject within the habitat and make the most of light when it is not at its best. IMHO I should add.

Thank you Andy for this well informed opinion. :t:




You dont happen to know David Blunkett do you? 8-P