I have a d3x and find I`m limited by lens choice. I`ve been looking for 35 and 50mm lenses which, whilst at f1.4, have: 1. high contrast, 2. high sharpness, 3. excellent bokeh. I couldn`t find ONE with all these qualities combined. Only Leica makes such a lens. Lens choice is the greatest determinant of image quality, so I`ll probably buy a Leica 50mm summilux on a sony nex7, then go full frame, either hopefully with something similar to the nex, or sell the d3x and go M9/10
Still retains a DDB343343252GJJFDHJFDH-SGDSGJSJGJSJGDSG JJK IMAGE REFINEMENT ROBOTIC 457475374-GHGHERTERTJERJTJRETJEJJRV VSDCDCOWFOWMFWEMFOWOF2M35I23G5NH49G3NN9FN2D73TB4G.
I bought this camera 8 months ago along with the 14-24mm, 24-70mm, 70-200mm all f2.8, 50mm ( f1.4 ) and a 105mm f2.8 macro as I wanted a high res camera for the work that I do which is portraits, landscapes and macro work. The results from this set up are amazing. It cost me a lot of money but am beginning to get that investment back. The camera performs admirably at 1600 ISO when coupled with the 50mm wide open at f1.4 in low light conditions. Happy shooting lads and lasses.
Wonder how often Ansel argued about one camera manufacturer being better than another? I wonder if he commented on the camera body review for any of his cameras on youtube?
....or was he simply out there making the best photographs possible with the equipment in his hand?
I really hae to cmit in terms of video Canon has the edge, but if it's about photography (what a DSLR is about i think) NIKON DESTROYS ALL OTHER BRANDS!!
@nosaeRfOecioV Sure if you want to spend $5000 for a body. 2 grand for a suitable computer, $1600 for PS and LR an colormunky and other programs and add ons. couple hundred on SD cards etc.etc. then yeah you might be able to beat film in rez and quality. And if Nana Pelosi spends enough on Plastic Surgery she can look like Britney Spears too. Digital has it's place but if film was dead then people wouldn't be paying a premium for it. And Kodak would not be developing new kinds of it. =)
@frogsoda It's not dead, it's just a niche product now. Exactly like record players. They're nice and retro, but they don't actually do anything better than hi-res digital recordings. In fact it could be argued that records are less true to the original given the imperfections of the format. You could get an excellent digital 'system' for far less than you speculate that is on par with film.
@belloclic Digital is more convenient and easier for novices to use. But that does not make it better. It has it's place but when it comes to quality, don't think so. BTW I shoot Medium and large format. I can get a MF digital back for around 35 Grand. They'll even through in the camera body for free. yay
its actually the same sensor as the sony sensor. identical 24MP as the sony's. of course those nikon numbnuts won't be telling the truth about their sensors whereabout. native iso is starts at 200 and that's the same as sony. don't get conned by nikon as they are making crap gear!
Wrong again. I challenge you to find a Sony body with the same performance as the Nikon D3x. You won't because one doesn't exist. The sensor in the D3x is not exactly the same as a Sony sensor despite the origins. It's that simple.
@nosaeRfOecioV nikon sucks you moron. color were badly produced. and nikon cameras dont incorporate dual processor unlike canon and sony. fuck you, faggot
@Xyb3rTeCh Clearly you're not a photographer, but your mastery of the english language is simply astounding. Words I never knew existed! You must be highly educated.
@Xyb3rTeCh Dual processor? Funny it takes Canon two processors to do the same thing tha Nikon does with one. Oops. (I'm joking by the way.) Nikon was slow to upgrade their processor to the Expeed 2, but it's here, and it works well. 14bit raw, you have a point.
If I swithched to the sony, I`d have to buy a new set of lenses, which would negate the extra cost the d3x has over the sony, so this point is irrelevant
based on my experience... you need this camera if you are printing for billboards, your in to the megapixels for the DPI needed to great a clean look for big prints, but if your up to magazines and other small stuff 12.3,12.1,10 megapixels and other lower types are fine... hope it helps for people who are buying cameras and i agree with all the people here who says it is the person behind the camera who creates the image not the camera
I am a Nikon User but I can a sure you that Canon is more advanced cameras and lenses was than Nikon, Even buying the cheapest camera in the market out of any un known manufacturer , it is still better than a product made by Nikon.
Nikon even stole my money by selling a charger with batteries for my F5 for 2500 USA dollars from their Head Office.
@a65cw What are you basing this on? Not reality. Nikon has always been known for superior bodies as far back as the F5, which was considered the BEST film camera body in the world for 35mm on most accounts. Nikon has a far more advanced metering system than Canon. More advanced flash system. I could go on, but there's really no point. You're simply wrong....and don't get me wrong, I like Canon.
I switched from my canon system to Nikon, that was the most sever mistake I have every made in my life, neither Nikon cameras or lenses are of quality comparing them to other Manufacurer, Nikon will take your money and never give you an assistant afterward.
@a65cw what a load of crap!! i used canon the quickly switched to nikon and im much more impressed! nikkor glas is the best around at the moment! FACT!!
As much as you'd like to think that, the facts simply don't support your assertions. Not in the least. Nikon's latest full-frame bodies took the industry by storm, and have received the highest praise from every major camera magazine and online site on the planet. Nikon's latest lens releases perform as well or better than their Canon counterparts on every level. Prove me wrong.
MergiD, get your facts straight. D70 is a 6 mega-pixel DSLR. Regardless, these Canon vs Nikon debates are totally silly. I own a D3x and a Canon1Ds MkIII. Goggle my name, you'll see. The fact is all systems have their strengths and weaknesses. Most pro photojournalists & sports photographers choose to use Canon. Many studio and wedding photographers are using Nikon. Fact is... cameras are strictly tools. It's still the person behind the viewfinder that matters the most. That much is clear.
all u people that say dslr's arent meant to do video are hilarious. why are they using 5dmkII's for features??? no one has professionally used a nikon d300s d3000 d5000 or d90 to do any sort of video work, you know why??? because they are aweful. canon>nikon in every way shape and form
why buy a camera to just take pictures when you can buy camera, camcorder, mp3, mp4 player, webcam, digital voice recorder and flash drive all in one!!? great for youtube for easy uploads as well
its the latest technology and at the best price.
take a look at my video presentation for more info and how to get yours.
this camera is meant to take pictures, it wouldnt be any good if it was able to capture video too, the best thing is having a good photo camera and then a video camera, but never both in one :)
I'm not scared because Sony is trying to get in this arena, I do respect Sony because have done a lot in the electronic world, however, you can be good in all area, if you good on something, stuck to that, SAMSUNG tried making DSLR cameras and compete with this giants and fail. By the way, I have only one Nikon D5000, but love my Lumix GH1 and the FZ35. Feel no way.
however, canon will never be better than nikon, I have a D70 and the pictures I take with it are just awesome, even though my camera is 6 years old and has only 10 megapixels, so imagine the D3X with 24.5 megapixels and the technology it has, and even if canon gets a camera like this one, by then nikon will have created even a better one.
No offense but Nikon is the best brand of Cameras, I think that is clear :)
@MeriGD Saying that Nikon is better than Canon is stupid. You can take awesome pictures using a 50-year old camera, too. Image quality is not the only thing that makes camera good. For instance, there are more accessories and lenses availible for Canon.
@Retsiprooksus right, why do you want a thousand bad lenses if the cameras quality is not that good, when with a nikon with two lenses and the quality of the camera you can already take perfect pictures.
and saying that accesories are more important than the quality of the camera, THAT IS STUPID.
@MeriGD From what you said it seemed like you've never owned a Canoon youeself. How can you compare your Nikon with a Canon if you've never had it? I didn't say anything about the quality of a camera, i just said there are more important things than image quality, like the mentioned availibility of accessories, ease of use, price etc. If only IQ made camera good, only Hasselblads would be considered as cameras.
@MeriGD doesn't matter what camera you use, its the photographers. All cameras are good, and people who rely more on gear and brands rather than skill are in a dream.
I think you angle this the wrong way. You're pictures woundt be better if you had 24,5 megapixels and all the new technology. Its still the photographers eye that counts. Michael freeman would still beat the crap out of me in a competition if he had my 8,2 mp canon camera and I had his d3.
@MeriGD I own a D700 and I can tell you Nikon sucks in few ways especially in the lens variety department. and my GOD are there lenses expensive? they are totally overpriced.
also I believe for the low res the camera backs should be cheaper especially when you consider Canon gives you many more features for the your $.
@skate000mike, Imagine their business if they had not a large crowd of stupids who's ready to pay a huge price, and then thinking they got the best camera . Anyway lense is the first point and please let compare Canon L series to other lenses in the market.... And what to say about cmos that Nikon is starting to implement many years after Canon. To improve images probably... :)
@MeriGD I've seen excellent and so good pictures (even beauty pictures) taken with a Samsung L110 or Canon A470. - of course a Camera is better than other but: better for what- for who. :))
@MeriGD hey, suck my dick will ya? nikon is the worst brand ever. canon and sony is the upper hand. nikon makes crappy gears and their sensors is not even their own made sensor. they use sony sensors in their bodies. so that makes nikon sucks since they are not using their own technology
If you really think Sony is above Nikon in bodies, lenses or knowledge of manufacturing lenses and bodies, then I can say for certainty that you have no idea what you're talking about. Your english is nearly as bad as your camera knowledge. Ouch.
I don't agree with that. Who says that 6 year old canon's don't shoot ' awesome ' pics? Canon and Nikon are both equal. If one brand had really been better, the other would have been out of business for a very long time now. They compete very intensivly.
@MeriGD hey asshole! Nikon is just next to canon, its just that they have a new release of d3x.. but sooner you might drop your jaw for an upcomming new Canon Dslr which the rumors is 25MP.. what you think.. think equal .. dumb ass!
@kendric69 Wrong kendric. Nikon started in 1917 as a merger of three optical companies. Canon didn't start until around 1933. Guess who made Canon's lenses for their first bodies? Can't think of the name? I'll give you one more guess....NIKON. Ouch. Didn't see that one coming, huh?
@GMSamuelRhine Both cameras have their pluses and minuses as with products of all types that compete for market share. One simply has to way those differences and decide which is best for their needs. Both Nikon and Canon make excellent gear capable of producing amazing photographs.
The lens is unmistakably the Nikkor 14-24 f/2.8.. doesn't take filters because of that bulbous front element, but is one heck of a capable and crisp lens. Most primes can't touch it.
You say Sony sucks? One of the largest electronics company in the world? The one that is world leader in video! The one that took over Konica Minolta? Also the company that has a partner ship with one of the best lens manufactures in the world to make af lenses, Carl Zeiss? Sony also has the a900 and a850 the cheapest full frame cameras. Oh ya Sony sucks, guess you didnt know that Nikon uses Sony sensors lol... Besides it doesn't matter what camera you use, its the photographer!
Sony doesn't suck, but when it comes to SLR's they are learning. They have the money to pour into research, and continue to improve....BUT the ergonomics and functionality of their cameras is behind both Canon and Nikon. Zeiss makes some great glass, and arguably some of the best in the world....BUT that's not enough to rocket Sony ahead of the two strongest players in the game. Nikon and Canon simply have more experience. Additionally, the sensors are not nearly the same in the end.
@skate000mike, Imagine their business if they had not a large crowd of stupids who's ready to pay a huge price, and then thinking they got the best camera . Anyway lense is the first point and please let compare Canon L series to other lenses in the market.... And what to say about cmos that Nikon is starting to implement many years after Canon. To improve images probably... :)
@skate000mike and why the fuck nikon still priced its fucking over priced d3x while you can get the exactly the same sensors built by sony? i dont think nikon sensor were different than the sony. nikon in fact gets their sensors from sony. and nikon is bullshits.
@Xyb3rTeCh You're dead wrong. It's not 'exactly' the same sensor. An Internet savvy 4th grader could find that out with 10 minutes of cyber-research on dad's computer. Please list the Sony body that performs equally well in terms of noise at higher ISO's than Nikon's full-frame bodies. I won't hold my breath.
@skate000mike dont get sony wrong. their new SLT cameras are much economical and has a huge improvement in ISO. your fuckin fact is wrong. sony A55 shoots 10fps with fullhd functions with continuous AF which pawns nikon bloody piece of crap camera. nikon sucks big time, you know that? only faggots like you dont know how to spend your money
@Xyb3rTeCh The A55 is great if you want terrible image quality above 400 ISO, barely average auto-focus for sports, slow buffer clear times, and a clunky menu system. The 10fps number is high, but you're also limted in that mode to no live-view and no exposure control without losing the ability to focus between shots. Not as useful in real life situations as it sounds on paper.
Even though I'm not a professional and own a D90 with a number of lenses I'd still rather have a D3 than a D3x even disregarding price. From everything I've seen the D3's iso capabilities are unbelievable and it's as though most people have been tricked into forgetting how big 12mp actually is. If you need billboard size files just get a medium format as you are probably working for a studio anyway.
The D3 and the D3x are totally different cameras aimed at different end users. The D3 for sports, action and all sorts of shooting, while the D3x is a more highly concentrated camera aimed to steal the hearts of medium format shooters.
14-24mm f2.8 and it's almost twice the price of the D90 lol. and also... it wouldn't really be worth getting for the D90 because it's a full frame lens... The D90 isn't a full frame camera... you'd be missing out on the full potential of the lens. However the D90 is fantastic and well done for buying it! Look for wide angle DX lenses for it though.
i work in photography, and let me assure everyone i have a d300 with a battery grip, it looks the part, it plays the part, costs nothing compared to these babies, dont be fooled by this nonsence, its all in the eyes, if your gona spend money spend it on the lense!!!
Don't be fooled into thinking your D300 is directly comparible to a D700, a D3 or a D3x. Your camera costs a hell of a lot for a very good reason. I have a Canon 50D and I know its an inferior product to the 5D mk2 and 1DS mk 3. Still a very good camera, like the D300 but not in the Pro class.
ok good point and your quite correct, but would you agree after spending all that dosh you then have to buy top notch lenses or that money you spent on the camera is wasted, if you buy top notch lenses and put them say on a d300 your gona get a very decent camera outfit,,, ok i think i was a small bit wrong, of course d3x is a better camera but is it worth it really!!!! cost more than my car!!!!!!!
) I am not saying your camera isn't good. It's very good. It's just not a full frame pro camera. I'd say at low to medium ISO settings no one would be able to tell the difference in quality. I have seen shots taken with a D3 at ISO 25600 and the results were amazing, something a cropped frame sensor just cant match. It all depends on what you need the camera for I suppose :))
I was shooting at 25600 earlier today... crazy how good it is. I mean it is very noisy but acceptable in many cases(example: news paper publish) seems more like equivilant 6400 ISO on any other camera lol.
guys, this cameras from 08, relax
13neirad 1 week ago
I have a d3x and find I`m limited by lens choice. I`ve been looking for 35 and 50mm lenses which, whilst at f1.4, have: 1. high contrast, 2. high sharpness, 3. excellent bokeh. I couldn`t find ONE with all these qualities combined. Only Leica makes such a lens. Lens choice is the greatest determinant of image quality, so I`ll probably buy a Leica 50mm summilux on a sony nex7, then go full frame, either hopefully with something similar to the nex, or sell the d3x and go M9/10
snifnscratch 2 weeks ago
1600 ISO is a joke!!!
Harrycat 3 weeks ago
Comment removed
snifnscratch 2 weeks ago
Jesum Cro Thats almost as Big as Chuck Norris' cock
Rubby213445 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
i found information of the upcoming D4 and D800 from here:
canonandnikonnews.blogspot.com/
Antietep 1 month ago
as long as you're not taking arrows to the knee, you should be able to take ok pics.
redandbluebeater 1 month ago
Does it have sensor cleaning?
helthuismartin 4 months ago
@helthuismartin no
CEEPMDEE 3 months ago
pff 1600 ISO lol
8element 5 months ago 2
Still retains a DDB343343252GJJFDHJFDH-SGDSGJSJGJSJGDSG JJK IMAGE REFINEMENT ROBOTIC 457475374-GHGHERTERTJERJTJRETJEJJRV VSDCDCOWFOWMFWEMFOWOF2M35I23G5NH49G3NN9FN2D73TB4G.
hermannnitsch342d 5 months ago
Haha.... You hold a camera to $5500 in your hands, but can only film it in 360p
Osteballer 8 months ago 22
@Osteballer Actually, it doesn't record video. At all.
diezam 8 months ago
@Osteballer it's a camera! it's not trying to grab the standard consumer by throwing in a full hd video mode to sell a shoddy camera.
Slikone2 5 months ago
@Osteballer and who cares? this camera is not made for fimography... it's a photocamera not a videocamera
heyJustephan 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Best camera ever as far as pictue and video quality
MrCanonpowershot 8 months ago
Fantastic camera, I couple this body with a range of f2.8 lenses ( all Nikkor ) and the results are exceptional.
geordieboy65 9 months ago
I bought this camera 8 months ago along with the 14-24mm, 24-70mm, 70-200mm all f2.8, 50mm ( f1.4 ) and a 105mm f2.8 macro as I wanted a high res camera for the work that I do which is portraits, landscapes and macro work. The results from this set up are amazing. It cost me a lot of money but am beginning to get that investment back. The camera performs admirably at 1600 ISO when coupled with the 50mm wide open at f1.4 in low light conditions. Happy shooting lads and lasses.
geordieboy65 9 months ago
I have been using D3X for almost two years. It has got best resolution and the its perfect picture I love it......
ROYUS1 10 months ago
i noe this is lame but i misread preview as pervert
ynopasswrd 11 months ago
GIVE ME THE CAMERA....I'LL GO AND WORK FOR IT....EVEN IF IT TAKES THE REST OF MY LIFEEEEE....!!!!
kUlGeNiUs 11 months ago
Best camera ever as far as pictue and video quality
xskater69x 11 months ago
Wonder how often Ansel argued about one camera manufacturer being better than another? I wonder if he commented on the camera body review for any of his cameras on youtube?
....or was he simply out there making the best photographs possible with the equipment in his hand?
nosaeRfOecioV 1 year ago
I really hae to cmit in terms of video Canon has the edge, but if it's about photography (what a DSLR is about i think) NIKON DESTROYS ALL OTHER BRANDS!!
Spaeckli 1 year ago
@Spaeckli nikon only destroy shits
Xyb3rTeCh 1 year ago
The back of this camera looks exactly like my Nikon D2H. A 5yo, $4000, 4MP doorstop.
Digital sucks out loud.
frogsoda 1 year ago
@frogsoda
Digital has surpassed film in both resolution and quality. Like it or not, it's here to stay.
nosaeRfOecioV 1 year ago
@nosaeRfOecioV Sure if you want to spend $5000 for a body. 2 grand for a suitable computer, $1600 for PS and LR an colormunky and other programs and add ons. couple hundred on SD cards etc.etc. then yeah you might be able to beat film in rez and quality. And if Nana Pelosi spends enough on Plastic Surgery she can look like Britney Spears too. Digital has it's place but if film was dead then people wouldn't be paying a premium for it. And Kodak would not be developing new kinds of it. =)
frogsoda 1 year ago
@frogsoda It's not dead, it's just a niche product now. Exactly like record players. They're nice and retro, but they don't actually do anything better than hi-res digital recordings. In fact it could be argued that records are less true to the original given the imperfections of the format. You could get an excellent digital 'system' for far less than you speculate that is on par with film.
belloclic 1 year ago
@belloclic Digital is more convenient and easier for novices to use. But that does not make it better. It has it's place but when it comes to quality, don't think so. BTW I shoot Medium and large format. I can get a MF digital back for around 35 Grand. They'll even through in the camera body for free. yay
frogsoda 1 year ago
@nosaeRfOecioV And that's only after spending BILLIONS on Research and Development.
frogsoda 1 year ago
OMFGG the D3x is sooooooo expensive -____-
it would be my dream to get this camera!
Jonathansernel1 1 year ago
that ISO range really sucks it dont go to high. how would one get a camera like this if your just basically an artist? do you get sponsored or what?
GMSamuelRhine 1 year ago
It looks pretty hideous but it takes amazing photos :3
Nattacus 1 year ago
just listen to all the fanboys. like PC v Mac. Go fuck yourselves.
alanbstard4 1 year ago
If I can afford it, I'll take the Nikon D3x anytime!
elyserva 1 year ago
its actually the same sensor as the sony sensor. identical 24MP as the sony's. of course those nikon numbnuts won't be telling the truth about their sensors whereabout. native iso is starts at 200 and that's the same as sony. don't get conned by nikon as they are making crap gear!
Xyb3rTeCh 1 year ago
@Xyb3rTeCh
Wrong again. I challenge you to find a Sony body with the same performance as the Nikon D3x. You won't because one doesn't exist. The sensor in the D3x is not exactly the same as a Sony sensor despite the origins. It's that simple.
nosaeRfOecioV 1 year ago
@nosaeRfOecioV nikon sucks you moron. color were badly produced. and nikon cameras dont incorporate dual processor unlike canon and sony. fuck you, faggot
Xyb3rTeCh 1 year ago
@Xyb3rTeCh Clearly you're not a photographer, but your mastery of the english language is simply astounding. Words I never knew existed! You must be highly educated.
belloclic 1 year ago
@Xyb3rTeCh Dual processor? Funny it takes Canon two processors to do the same thing tha Nikon does with one. Oops. (I'm joking by the way.) Nikon was slow to upgrade their processor to the Expeed 2, but it's here, and it works well. 14bit raw, you have a point.
belloclic 1 year ago
O.O 24 mega pixels OMFG OMFG
pablowito 1 year ago
@pablowito you can get a 24MP camera with a cheaper price tag. check out the sony a850 or the canon 21mp 5dmk2. its cost 1/4 of that crappy d3x
Xyb3rTeCh 1 year ago
Nearly 2 years after its release, why are there no decent, indepth reviews of the d3x?
snifnscratch 1 year ago
@snifnscratch Its a D3 with 25 mp
JogBird 1 year ago
anyone know what that cap thingy is called? that thing that plastic thing that kinda extenends the lens a bit and what is it used for?
kendy4 1 year ago
@kendy4 its a lens hood
CooperLiam 1 year ago
He is GAY
OglanciMuslum 1 year ago
PUT THAT STRAP ON!
willcitoman97 1 year ago 35
hmmmm nikon come on why to much expansive make it lower litter bit lol 4kusd it's ok every one can afford
sa2ideas 1 year ago
That guy in the back really enjoys his job.
kiezel87 1 year ago
24 megapixels is NOT double the resolution of a 12 megapixel. Check your facts.
DigitalDRY 1 year ago
pfft...Olympus bitch
buddylee1983 1 year ago
If I swithched to the sony, I`d have to buy a new set of lenses, which would negate the extra cost the d3x has over the sony, so this point is irrelevant
snifnscratch 1 year ago
$13888 sing dollar for this dslr camera awesome .
SAA6153U 1 year ago
based on my experience... you need this camera if you are printing for billboards, your in to the megapixels for the DPI needed to great a clean look for big prints, but if your up to magazines and other small stuff 12.3,12.1,10 megapixels and other lower types are fine... hope it helps for people who are buying cameras and i agree with all the people here who says it is the person behind the camera who creates the image not the camera
treehousedigital 1 year ago
i would kill for that camera, it's fucking gorgeous.
TheSar112233 1 year ago 2
I am a Nikon User but I can a sure you that Canon is more advanced cameras and lenses was than Nikon, Even buying the cheapest camera in the market out of any un known manufacturer , it is still better than a product made by Nikon.
Nikon even stole my money by selling a charger with batteries for my F5 for 2500 USA dollars from their Head Office.
a65cw 1 year ago
@a65cw What are you basing this on? Not reality. Nikon has always been known for superior bodies as far back as the F5, which was considered the BEST film camera body in the world for 35mm on most accounts. Nikon has a far more advanced metering system than Canon. More advanced flash system. I could go on, but there's really no point. You're simply wrong....and don't get me wrong, I like Canon.
belloclic 1 year ago
I switched from my canon system to Nikon, that was the most sever mistake I have every made in my life, neither Nikon cameras or lenses are of quality comparing them to other Manufacurer, Nikon will take your money and never give you an assistant afterward.
a65cw 1 year ago
@a65cw what a load of crap!! i used canon the quickly switched to nikon and im much more impressed! nikkor glas is the best around at the moment! FACT!!
quickshooter100 1 year ago
@a65cw
As much as you'd like to think that, the facts simply don't support your assertions. Not in the least. Nikon's latest full-frame bodies took the industry by storm, and have received the highest praise from every major camera magazine and online site on the planet. Nikon's latest lens releases perform as well or better than their Canon counterparts on every level. Prove me wrong.
nosaeRfOecioV 1 year ago
gret camera..... :) but any way dosnt matter what camera you have rather who is behind it !!!
eakiboz 1 year ago
what currency is he referring to aust dollars, us dollars, uk pound
Newyork1969 1 year ago
Comment removed
ppolgar 1 year ago
MergiD, get your facts straight. D70 is a 6 mega-pixel DSLR. Regardless, these Canon vs Nikon debates are totally silly. I own a D3x and a Canon1Ds MkIII. Goggle my name, you'll see. The fact is all systems have their strengths and weaknesses. Most pro photojournalists & sports photographers choose to use Canon. Many studio and wedding photographers are using Nikon. Fact is... cameras are strictly tools. It's still the person behind the viewfinder that matters the most. That much is clear.
ppolgar 1 year ago
@ppolgar my D70 is not 6mp it is 10mp ¬¬
I know that the important thing is the photographer, but still, there is no brand same as Nikon.
How can I goggle your name? ppolgar?
MeriGD 1 year ago
Comment removed
ppolgar 1 year ago
i want that camera ; ( i aint got money .. gotta save alot DAMNNNNNN!
areus1989 1 year ago
Wow, that camera is a beast. Nice mate.
MacMike1000 1 year ago
itd be funny if he dropped it
diveinme 1 year ago
@diveinme I would kill myself if he drops that camera lol
MeriGD 1 year ago
9 frames per second , you can make a movie with that!
With the biggest flash memory , it can!
cjgan80 1 year ago
all u people that say dslr's arent meant to do video are hilarious. why are they using 5dmkII's for features??? no one has professionally used a nikon d300s d3000 d5000 or d90 to do any sort of video work, you know why??? because they are aweful. canon>nikon in every way shape and form
mpcpro424 1 year ago
Comment removed
MeriGD 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
why buy a camera to just take pictures when you can buy camera, camcorder, mp3, mp4 player, webcam, digital voice recorder and flash drive all in one!!? great for youtube for easy uploads as well
its the latest technology and at the best price.
take a look at my video presentation for more info and how to get yours.
wholesaleelectronic 2 years ago
@wholesaleelectronic
Image quality.
This is why NASA uses This camera instead of a point and shoot.
agun17 1 year ago
@wholesaleelectronic lol/ then u will grow up u will learn that people have jobs, and some works as photographers ^^
yumagetbullet 1 year ago
Christ ! ... is that the worst attempt at advertising i've ever seen ? .. yeah pretty much ! - seriously, get a clue dude
Barsopen1970 1 year ago
I cannot find no where, so I ask:
(dose this baby capture video?)
It would be great thou.
Thanx in advance.
shpixi 2 years ago
absolutely not. the price would have ballooned another $1000 if it did. DSLRs were never meant to record video.
gunkydood 2 years ago 2
certainly not.
this camera is meant to take pictures, it wouldnt be any good if it was able to capture video too, the best thing is having a good photo camera and then a video camera, but never both in one :)
MeriGD 1 year ago
wow what a beast!!!!
AJgovind1 2 years ago 2
Sony cant compete in this arena, this is Nikon-Canon boxing area!
gotDesign 2 years ago
why do you say that?
i think sony are competing and seem to be doing better.
then again maybe your just scared that the sony will do much better and your dont want to see your hard earned cash wasted.
photoproluke 2 years ago
I'm not scared because Sony is trying to get in this arena, I do respect Sony because have done a lot in the electronic world, however, you can be good in all area, if you good on something, stuck to that, SAMSUNG tried making DSLR cameras and compete with this giants and fail. By the way, I have only one Nikon D5000, but love my Lumix GH1 and the FZ35. Feel no way.
gotDesign 2 years ago
however, canon will never be better than nikon, I have a D70 and the pictures I take with it are just awesome, even though my camera is 6 years old and has only 10 megapixels, so imagine the D3X with 24.5 megapixels and the technology it has, and even if canon gets a camera like this one, by then nikon will have created even a better one.
No offense but Nikon is the best brand of Cameras, I think that is clear :)
MeriGD 1 year ago 32
@MeriGD Saying that Nikon is better than Canon is stupid. You can take awesome pictures using a 50-year old camera, too. Image quality is not the only thing that makes camera good. For instance, there are more accessories and lenses availible for Canon.
Retsiprooksus 1 year ago
@Retsiprooksus right, why do you want a thousand bad lenses if the cameras quality is not that good, when with a nikon with two lenses and the quality of the camera you can already take perfect pictures.
and saying that accesories are more important than the quality of the camera, THAT IS STUPID.
MeriGD 1 year ago
@MeriGD From what you said it seemed like you've never owned a Canoon youeself. How can you compare your Nikon with a Canon if you've never had it? I didn't say anything about the quality of a camera, i just said there are more important things than image quality, like the mentioned availibility of accessories, ease of use, price etc. If only IQ made camera good, only Hasselblads would be considered as cameras.
Retsiprooksus 1 year ago
@MeriGD doesn't matter what camera you use, its the photographers. All cameras are good, and people who rely more on gear and brands rather than skill are in a dream.
Logo10 1 year ago
Comment removed
TubeSakis 1 year ago
@MeriGD d70 is a 6MPixel camera, but still a good one
TubeSakis 1 year ago
@MeriGD
I think you angle this the wrong way. You're pictures woundt be better if you had 24,5 megapixels and all the new technology. Its still the photographers eye that counts. Michael freeman would still beat the crap out of me in a competition if he had my 8,2 mp canon camera and I had his d3.
MagZ1905 1 year ago
@MeriGD the D70 is 6.1 megapixels not 10
DGPHOTO1 1 year ago
@MeriGD I agree. Canon cams are pretty good, and the video is better, but if you want an SLR with the best pictures, go for a Nikon.
Ishcoa 1 year ago
@MeriGD the megapixels have nothing to do with quality.. megapixel is just a statistic of the SIZE of the picture you may take.
DustinBodenVEVO 1 year ago
@MeriGD and that is a very bias opinion
DustinBodenVEVO 1 year ago
@MeriGD your 100% right :) i have the D70s and the pictures are just faultless :) what lens do you use?
westonsuperphotos 1 year ago
@MeriGD don't forget the lenses are the best of all Dslr outfits. i choose nikon over canon long ago cause of sharp lenses.
erictjie 1 year ago
@MeriGD I own a D700 and I can tell you Nikon sucks in few ways especially in the lens variety department. and my GOD are there lenses expensive? they are totally overpriced.
also I believe for the low res the camera backs should be cheaper especially when you consider Canon gives you many more features for the your $.
+ Canon has better lenses that cost alot less
CEEPMDEE 1 year ago
@CEEPMDEE yesss! its totally true. its the fact that nikon sucks for their lenses. and those nikon won't be reducing their price that quick.
Xyb3rTeCh 1 year ago
@Xyb3rTeCh Tens of thousands of actual Nikon professional shooters would argue with your point-n-shoot self.
belloclic 1 year ago
@CEEPMDEE
Liar.
nosaeRfOecioV 1 year ago
@nosaeRfOecioV ? no lie my friend... Why must the lenses cost sooooo much?
okay maybe canon lenses are not totally better than nikons but still... NIKON LENSES ARE WAY OVERPRICED.
+ for the money they are asking the lenses are far from perfect.
Canon just gives you more for you money.
CEEPMDEE 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@skate000mike, Imagine their business if they had not a large crowd of stupids who's ready to pay a huge price, and then thinking they got the best camera . Anyway lense is the first point and please let compare Canon L series to other lenses in the market.... And what to say about cmos that Nikon is starting to implement many years after Canon. To improve images probably... :)
bernaro 1 year ago
@MeriGD I've seen excellent and so good pictures (even beauty pictures) taken with a Samsung L110 or Canon A470. - of course a Camera is better than other but: better for what- for who. :))
McLaranium 1 year ago
@MeriGD it's the man behind the gun that is able to take good pictures :)
kinyitz025 1 year ago 5
@kinyitz025
Yeah but gear is really important too
audun0905 11 months ago
@MeriGD hey, suck my dick will ya? nikon is the worst brand ever. canon and sony is the upper hand. nikon makes crappy gears and their sensors is not even their own made sensor. they use sony sensors in their bodies. so that makes nikon sucks since they are not using their own technology
Xyb3rTeCh 1 year ago
@Xyb3rTeCh
If you really think Sony is above Nikon in bodies, lenses or knowledge of manufacturing lenses and bodies, then I can say for certainty that you have no idea what you're talking about. Your english is nearly as bad as your camera knowledge. Ouch.
nosaeRfOecioV 1 year ago
@MeriGD
I don't agree with that. Who says that 6 year old canon's don't shoot ' awesome ' pics? Canon and Nikon are both equal. If one brand had really been better, the other would have been out of business for a very long time now. They compete very intensivly.
123456789rienn 1 year ago
@MeriGD hey asshole! Nikon is just next to canon, its just that they have a new release of d3x.. but sooner you might drop your jaw for an upcomming new Canon Dslr which the rumors is 25MP.. what you think.. think equal .. dumb ass!
kendric69 1 year ago
@MeriGD think of this.. Canon is a longtime "CAMERA BRAND" and nikon starts from "APPLIANCES" fcuker!
kendric69 1 year ago
@kendric69
Your knowledge of history is, well, wrong. Nikon MADE lenses for canon before you were born. Try again.
nosaeRfOecioV 1 year ago
@kendric69 Wrong kendric. Nikon started in 1917 as a merger of three optical companies. Canon didn't start until around 1933. Guess who made Canon's lenses for their first bodies? Can't think of the name? I'll give you one more guess....NIKON. Ouch. Didn't see that one coming, huh?
belloclic 1 year ago
@MeriGD There are uses of other camera brands who would debate that point.
BarbarosDerby132 1 year ago
@MeriGD yeah, you're so right. i have a nikon D100 (which was made 8 years ago) and it can compete with my friends' canon eos. lol
Muvviiitme 1 year ago
@MeriGD canon is as good. the 5d.
i'm a nikon fan, but canon are ahead video wise in hdslr
alanbstard4 1 year ago
@MeriGD and canon is always going to have a better lens selection, which really does make the difference. Just saying, if were going to be bias here
FreelancedWhale 1 year ago
@FreelancedWhale
More lenses doesn't equate to better lenses. 14-24mm as one example.
nosaeRfOecioV 1 year ago
@MeriGD ur just a Nikon fanboy & MP lover. sadly you know nothing about cameras and MP.
jasonfoe 1 year ago
@MeriGD Personally i prefer nikon but its not really better they're both just as good. i just picked favorites with nikon
GMSamuelRhine 1 year ago
@GMSamuelRhine Both cameras have their pluses and minuses as with products of all types that compete for market share. One simply has to way those differences and decide which is best for their needs. Both Nikon and Canon make excellent gear capable of producing amazing photographs.
nosaeRfOecioV 1 year ago
@MeriGD nikon D70 has only 6,1 megapixels
FauLtLiN3 1 year ago
@FauLtLiN3, You can download software updates, like with the D100 is only like 5mp I think but you can download an update to make it 10mp.
175myles 1 year ago
@MeriGD fuck you
Xyb3rTeCh 1 year ago
@Xyb3rTeCh Well spoken my friend. Well spoken. (Rolling my actual eyes)
belloclic 1 year ago
The lens is unmistakably the Nikkor 14-24 f/2.8.. doesn't take filters because of that bulbous front element, but is one heck of a capable and crisp lens. Most primes can't touch it.
likeawhispr 2 years ago 2
what kind of lens is on that?
Jaaakeeeee 2 years ago
Nah, it's only $5,000+
Obeijin 2 years ago
5 and a half grand in his currency. In america it is $8,000.
bigpunch20 2 years ago 2
I must have been thinking of the D3.I've seen the D3X as low as $6.500 for the body. "Low as" ? LMAO ! I'll keep my F3-HP.
Obeijin 2 years ago
f/8 and be there.....bra
brickit26 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Nice can, rediculous price!
I'll go for the Sony A950 :)
GottaLaunch 2 years ago
No dont!
sony sucks!!
skate000mike 2 years ago 13
I got the A700 :)
Indeed sony still has noice issues but I'll wait with upgrading to FF when they'll release the A900 follow-up.
GottaLaunch 2 years ago
@skate000mike true i got a sony camera (DSC T-7000) and it sux :s
flaminski 1 year ago
@skate000mike
You say Sony sucks? One of the largest electronics company in the world? The one that is world leader in video! The one that took over Konica Minolta? Also the company that has a partner ship with one of the best lens manufactures in the world to make af lenses, Carl Zeiss? Sony also has the a900 and a850 the cheapest full frame cameras. Oh ya Sony sucks, guess you didnt know that Nikon uses Sony sensors lol... Besides it doesn't matter what camera you use, its the photographer!
Logo10 1 year ago
@Logo10
Sony doesn't suck, but when it comes to SLR's they are learning. They have the money to pour into research, and continue to improve....BUT the ergonomics and functionality of their cameras is behind both Canon and Nikon. Zeiss makes some great glass, and arguably some of the best in the world....BUT that's not enough to rocket Sony ahead of the two strongest players in the game. Nikon and Canon simply have more experience. Additionally, the sensors are not nearly the same in the end.
nosaeRfOecioV 1 year ago
@skate000mike sony has one great issue.....noise
but sony sensors are quite good for they price the only limitation is the sony-zeiss lens ..
TelisRafa 1 year ago
@skate000mike, Imagine their business if they had not a large crowd of stupids who's ready to pay a huge price, and then thinking they got the best camera . Anyway lense is the first point and please let compare Canon L series to other lenses in the market.... And what to say about cmos that Nikon is starting to implement many years after Canon. To improve images probably... :)
bernaro 1 year ago
@skate000mike they have carl zeiss lenses you ignorant fuck
Xyb3rTeCh 1 year ago
@skate000mike sony ain't sucks, your mom sucks
Xyb3rTeCh 1 year ago
@Xyb3rTeCh okay "sony aint suck" ?? wtf how old are you...
skate000mike 1 year ago
@skate000mike and why the fuck nikon still priced its fucking over priced d3x while you can get the exactly the same sensors built by sony? i dont think nikon sensor were different than the sony. nikon in fact gets their sensors from sony. and nikon is bullshits.
Xyb3rTeCh 1 year ago
@Xyb3rTeCh You're dead wrong. It's not 'exactly' the same sensor. An Internet savvy 4th grader could find that out with 10 minutes of cyber-research on dad's computer. Please list the Sony body that performs equally well in terms of noise at higher ISO's than Nikon's full-frame bodies. I won't hold my breath.
belloclic 1 year ago
@skate000mike dont get sony wrong. their new SLT cameras are much economical and has a huge improvement in ISO. your fuckin fact is wrong. sony A55 shoots 10fps with fullhd functions with continuous AF which pawns nikon bloody piece of crap camera. nikon sucks big time, you know that? only faggots like you dont know how to spend your money
Xyb3rTeCh 1 year ago
@Xyb3rTeCh The A55 is great if you want terrible image quality above 400 ISO, barely average auto-focus for sports, slow buffer clear times, and a clunky menu system. The 10fps number is high, but you're also limted in that mode to no live-view and no exposure control without losing the ability to focus between shots. Not as useful in real life situations as it sounds on paper.
belloclic 1 year ago
all i need is this and a Leica M9 and i will be fine
lsmith1981 2 years ago 4
Even though I'm not a professional and own a D90 with a number of lenses I'd still rather have a D3 than a D3x even disregarding price. From everything I've seen the D3's iso capabilities are unbelievable and it's as though most people have been tricked into forgetting how big 12mp actually is. If you need billboard size files just get a medium format as you are probably working for a studio anyway.
martinaee 2 years ago 4
you hit the nail right on the head.
someguy6481 2 years ago
The D3 and the D3x are totally different cameras aimed at different end users. The D3 for sports, action and all sorts of shooting, while the D3x is a more highly concentrated camera aimed to steal the hearts of medium format shooters.
geonlansis 2 years ago 2
When Nikon unveiled the D3x with its bank-breaking US$7,999 price tag, the question on everyone's lips was...?
KamikazeKoscki 2 years ago
I was in shock when it said 8 grand for this camera i go for the 1000 SJ Nikon great deal 425.
SaberTanker22 2 years ago
i was wondering what kind of lense are those on the d3x i want that on my nikon d90
Timleerocks 2 years ago
14-24mm f2.8 and it's almost twice the price of the D90 lol. and also... it wouldn't really be worth getting for the D90 because it's a full frame lens... The D90 isn't a full frame camera... you'd be missing out on the full potential of the lens. However the D90 is fantastic and well done for buying it! Look for wide angle DX lenses for it though.
DemonicGenocide 2 years ago 2
File size is something VERY few users consider when getting better camera's now days.
It may seem good in one respect, but file handling becomes a much bigger pain in the ass when you start having 50 MB nef files.
martinaee 2 years ago
lol yeah the D3 is bad enough... at 14-bit compressed NEF i'm getting like 400 frames per 8gb card. Fantastic camera though...
DemonicGenocide 2 years ago
i own a D3X but.. Why is this diffrent? i baught it for Malaysian money 30,000 Ringgit , and i had a 300-500 lense , Fish eye , and a 14-34 lense..
wixpotom 2 years ago
i dont know. i have leica m8.2 and d90 now.
but i really want d700 and d3x.
tokioexpialidocious 2 years ago
congratz, now shut the fuck up. Nobody cares. Thank you.
21Kobe12 2 years ago
i dont think its worth it to buy this camera i rather to buy a few lenses than to have 1 camera
naignik 2 years ago
god. im dying to get this.
all i have is D90
--'
tokioexpialidocious 2 years ago
lol ure funny I wish I had a D90! I'm in the market of buying a new camera and I can't make up my mind :(
Desolatorx2 2 years ago
get canon 50d ;)
homersimpson587 2 years ago
such a nice camera
oneandahalfasians 2 years ago
i would wait for the D4. :P
fallenembers08 2 years ago
wait for the D7
HerrMannelig 2 years ago
not worth it.
Get a D700 or a D3.
A D700 is like a mini D3 with anti-dust.
Q124R 2 years ago
atleast you have a d90, i only have a d60 :(
epod15 2 years ago
i work in photography, and let me assure everyone i have a d300 with a battery grip, it looks the part, it plays the part, costs nothing compared to these babies, dont be fooled by this nonsence, its all in the eyes, if your gona spend money spend it on the lense!!!
carlosvandangos2 2 years ago
Don't be fooled into thinking your D300 is directly comparible to a D700, a D3 or a D3x. Your camera costs a hell of a lot for a very good reason. I have a Canon 50D and I know its an inferior product to the 5D mk2 and 1DS mk 3. Still a very good camera, like the D300 but not in the Pro class.
stubones 2 years ago
Sorry, a hell of a lot LESS.
stubones 2 years ago
ok good point and your quite correct, but would you agree after spending all that dosh you then have to buy top notch lenses or that money you spent on the camera is wasted, if you buy top notch lenses and put them say on a d300 your gona get a very decent camera outfit,,, ok i think i was a small bit wrong, of course d3x is a better camera but is it worth it really!!!! cost more than my car!!!!!!!
carlosvandangos2 2 years ago
) I am not saying your camera isn't good. It's very good. It's just not a full frame pro camera. I'd say at low to medium ISO settings no one would be able to tell the difference in quality. I have seen shots taken with a D3 at ISO 25600 and the results were amazing, something a cropped frame sensor just cant match. It all depends on what you need the camera for I suppose :))
stubones 2 years ago
I was shooting at 25600 earlier today... crazy how good it is. I mean it is very noisy but acceptable in many cases(example: news paper publish) seems more like equivilant 6400 ISO on any other camera lol.
DemonicGenocide 2 years ago