Nikon d3s announcement - 720p only, absurdly good low light, high price

In my experience the 7d is no good above 640

The D3 should get a couple more stops

---

All debate is pointless until real people are really playing with it

Good point above about the 7d actually resolving 700px

If you have done stills work with the 'crummy' 12mp D3 files they are scary close to 22mp hassy files after a bit of work and also a good run for the 16mp canon files

it seems to me that 1080 needs 150mbs and 720 66mbs - so all the cameras are short apart from we know nothing about the D3 data rate

all is conjecture

S
 
From DP review

The file format enables a unique ‘Save Selected’ frame option that enables the user to shoot video freely, secure in the knowledge that a still image of a key moment can be transmitted as well.
Click to expand...

That's why. Makes sense if you're worried about frame grabs. MJPEG itself doesn't neccessarily kill the video automatically, though it does sound dubious.
 
This seems retarded thinking from nikon

how many news stills shots are sharp at 1/48 th

how much 24p looks good at 1/250th

I hate the way they are spreading BS to 'pros'

S
 
As both a semi-pro photographer and filmmaker who will not be able to afford this camera anytime soon...here are my thoughts.

Nikon's loyalty is with their still photographers and rightfully so. The d3's ability to shoot ISO 120 000 is absolutely insane...And the fact that at ISO 12000 the shots from the d3s look cleaner then those from my D80 at ISO 1200 is also unbelievable. I don't see this camera replacing anybody's RED anytime soon, but I can imagine it may turn some Canon users for photojournalistic purposes. If I had the money, this would hands down be my still camera of choice.

Who knows maybe the new and "improved" MJPEG won't be as bad and 720p will actually be 720p.
 
Thier loyalty is to their pockets surely

this seems a fail if this cam cant make me want to get rid of my D3 which is a great tool in todays economic climate - I have the cash but do I want to spend it

I wouldnt pay the trade up losses for a couple of stops of light

Quality motion I would pay for

The D3 is just a great still cam already

S
 
a few things:

It’s what we need, now.
Francois Marit, Photo Technical Manager at global news provider, Agence France Presse, said: “Since we started using the Nikon D3, we have also been exploring movie capture to see exactly how it can help us. Now the D3S gives us exactly what we need, the ability to shoot pictures and movies with one piece of professional equipment. This enables us to transmit complete packages of still images and movie clips from the thousands of news and sports events we cover every week, and will really give us the edge in both online and print formats”

FX format HD movies
The D3S delivers a new look and feel to the emerging trend of DSLR movie capture and exploits the creative depth-of-field effects offered by the large FX-format sensor and the benefits of wide aperture NIKKOR lenses, the lens of choice for the world’s leading photographers. Instant and intuitive in use, the D3S’s D-movie function is prioritised for high productivity.

Movies are captured at 720p/ 24fps in motion JPEG with stereo sound using the input jack. The file format enables a unique ‘Save Selected’ frame option that enables the user to shoot video freely, secure in the knowledge that a still image of a key moment can be transmitted as well.

Acclaimed autofocus tuned for movie capture.
Completely configurable to set up, but extremely simple to use, Nikon’s acclaimed high-density 51-point Multi-CAM3500 AF system, with 15- highly sensitive cross points, provides users with an industry leading system for tracking fast moving subjects. The D3S contrast detection AF system has also been tuned to provide autofocus support during movie capture and Live View.



New and improved D-Movie function
From well-lit scenes to extremely low-lit situations, the D3S’s D-Movie mode delivers unique versatility. The newly refined D-Movie offers HD quality (1,280 x 720 pixels) Motion-JPEG movies at 24 fps. By controlling the aperture from the widest f-stop to the smallest, the large FX-format sensor renders low-noise images with beautiful bokeh effects from a large selection of NIKKOR lenses. High-Sensitivity Movie mode allows users to shoot at up to ISO equivalent of 102,400in places too dark to see clearly with their own eyes. D-Movie footage is easy to trim in-camera by simply selecting the starting and ending point. An extra bonus for sports and news photographers is the ability to save selected movie frames as JPEGs for immediate printand web publishing needs. The D3S has both an internal mono-aural microphone and an external stereo microphone input, enabling higher fidelity audio recording.
 
not to much improvement Rolling Shutter.......
 

Attachments

  • D3s.jpg
    D3s.jpg
    245 KB · Views: 0
Last edited:
I'm not sure why (seeing as I'd benefit from them doing otherwise) but I kind of admire Nikon for continuing to focus more on perfecting low-noise capture of still images and not shoehorn more video-camera style features into this. I think video is simply there because, like the D90, there's already liveview and it's not prohibitively costly or difficult to implement some kind of 24fps capture of it. Video on this camera is simply a nice perk, something for the "just in case" moments where you really want/need to take a video of something and all you have is a stills camera. It is not a convergence type device, it's a stills camera with video tacked on mostly as a courtesy.

I would totally buy one if I were a rich dude because the low-light stills are going to be amazing.
 
Luis Caffesse said:
For video capabilites...yeah, sounds like it.
As a still camera? - doubtful.
Click to expand...

That's what I meant, I should have clarified, thanks for doing it for me.

But even from a still prospective, the 5D Mark II is still a competitor, and is around half the price.

Best.
 
artforme said:
That's what I meant, I should have clarified, thanks for doing it for me.

But even from a still prospective, the 5D Mark II is still a competitor, and is around half the price.

Best.
Click to expand...

The 5DII? No, not by long shot. From still photography perspective the 5D range is always incredibly flawed due to the AF. This is still the reason why the 10MP 1.3xcrop 1DMkIII is still positioned above that camera. My major gripe is that the spot meter isn't linked to the outer focus points, so for instance, you can't hold the camera in portrait mode and meter off the face of a model. If you shoot exclusively from the center AF point there is no problem, but the outer points are worse then most of Canon's entry-level cameras. They are eight horizontal-line sensitive at f/5.6, which makes focusing search in low light and is worse then even Rebels.

The D3s isn't a video camera, nor is it meant to be. This isn't aimed at indie filmmakers, its aimed at professional sports-wildlife-action photographers. Looking at the press release it looks to be like the video functionality is meant as a backup. So you can keep it running and still photograph over it. If you missed a shot you can take a frame grab.

Not to say I don't share everyone's disappointment with the lack of 1080p video functionality, but the D3 sensor has always been a Nikon design, and not a Sony-based sensor. Its Nikon's own internal division that is that made those famous JFET LBCAST sensors. I'm suspecting this is their work.
 
Steve I would also add it will be a camera for journalist too and the video would be something they can use to report a story. You take a great picture, but just think if you had some video to go along with it.
It is a pretty awesome camera and like you said it is not a video camera. None of the HDSLRs are really video cameras. They are DSLRs that can also shot video. IMHO
 
Steve Castle said:
The 5DII? No, not by long shot. From still photography perspective the 5D range is always incredibly flawed due to the AF. This is still the reason why the 10MP 1.3xcrop 1DMkIII is still positioned above that camera.
Click to expand...

As a still photographer myself, I disagree. I shoot Canon and have the 5D and the 5D Mark II, I wouldn't trade either for the 1DMKIII. I need big files and I need full frame. Of course I shoot primarily landscape photography, perhaps your statement is more true of sports photographers who need fast shutter speeds and actually prefer a crop factor, but I have had no problems with portraits either. We'll just disagree on camera positioning.
 
Buck Forester said:
As a still photographer myself, I disagree. I shoot Canon and have the 5D and the 5D Mark II, I wouldn't trade either for the 1DMKIII. I need big files and I need full frame. Of course I shoot primarily landscape photography, perhaps your statement is more true of sports photographers who need fast shutter speeds and actually prefer a crop factor, but I have had no problems with portraits either. We'll just disagree on camera positioning.
Click to expand...

Well, if you're taking landscape a 5D/5DII is fine, and you really don't need AF. Mountains and oceans aren't the most mobile subjects, and you're likely going to shoot at infinity, probably long-exposure on a tripod, and maybe bracketed shots for HDR.

The 5D/5DII isn't a professional still camera. It doesn't mean you can't use it as one. Its great for video, but AF in there isn't up to par to most professional needs. But it doesn't mean it won't suit you, a camera is a device that is should accommodate what you are trying to do. There are cameras that are jack-of-all trades, but they are an Ace in none.

If you are predominately taking landscapes you'd be a fool to trade a 5D/5DII for a 1DIII- just like you'd be a fool to trade in a 1DIII for a 5DII if you are taking photography with any degree of fast motion where you need decent AF.

But again, that's the point. A medium-format digital Hasselblad/Mamiya/Leaf/Phase One also has slow-piss-poor low light performance, mediocre AF, and is cumbersome. The trade-off is high MPs, and in studio lighting you really don't need all those things. The camera needs to suit your needs.

The D3s is an action camera, ISO performance is paramount; high-shutter speeds, variable lighting conditions. It's not a video-centric camera, and its not aimed at filmmakers. You can make the argument that photojournalism is slowly moving towards video, and frame captures are becoming more frequent, and that argument does hold water. It may be the direction Canon will move toward in the 1DMkIV that is rumored to come out within this month. But even video won't replace that one great shot that still-photography offers.
 
@Steve

You of course bring up some great points. But even those features you listed can mostly be found on Cannon's 7D, which is only around 1.7k usd.

Sure professionals can justify spending over 5k usd on a camera, but much of the marking of the D3 seems to be aimed at pro-summers, and from a pro-summer perspective I would say the 5D gives you more for you money, or the 7D.

But like you said, paying 3k usd more for a camera that will help you have the competitive edge over other professional photographers is not a big deal.

Most people on these forums are not photographers, needless to say.
 
artforme said:
@Steve

You of course bring up some great points. But even those features you listed can mostly be found on Cannon's 7D, which is only around 1.7k usd.

Sure professionals can justify spending over 5k usd on a camera, but much of the marking of the D3 seems to be aimed at pro-summers, and from a pro-summer perspective I would say the 5D gives you more for you money, or the 7D.

But like you said, paying 3k usd more for a camera that will help you have the competitive edge over other professional photographers is not a big deal.

Most people on these forums are not photographers, needless to say.
Click to expand...

Er... D3(s) aimed at "pro-summers"? I'm assuming you meant "prosumer"?

I don't know how you define prosumer, but to me it's someone that is likely an advanced amateur.

I can say, it's definitely not marketed at them. The D3(s) is targetted at the working Pro and the wealthy "advanced" amateurs. Which is why it is set to the price point that it is.

The advanced amateurs are more likely to go with either the D300(s) or the D700 if they have the cash for it.

The D3 for Nikon, is like the 1D series is for Canon. Both are designed and tested to be rugged and designed to last in many many conditions. Ranging from the extreme cold, to the extreme heat, dusty to muddy etc etc...

It's also designed to last, facts are the D3/1D have their shutters rated to last for more actuations than the Nikon D300/D700/Canon 5D/7D.

For a professional still photographer that it important. The D3 is rated at 300,000 actuations and the D300/D700 is tested to 150,000 with the D90/D5000 tested to 100,000.

Source: http://support.nikontech.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/16492

Although these are the tested amounts specified by the manufacturer it is entirely possible that the shutters will fail long after that number or even before that time as you can see here: http://www.olegkikin.com/shutterlife/

Let's say a working pro photog could get through say 50,000 frames per year on average (not real data, but just an example). That would mean the D3's shutter will last for 6 years before it needs to be replaced.

This is one of many reasons why this is an expensive camera.

Also, it's got much better weather sealing compared to the lower models. Even the D300(s) has better weather sealing than compared to the D90 (not sure there is actually any on the D90). The D300(s) is also made of magnesium alloy, whereas the D90 is made of a mixture of plastic and aluminium alloy (same as the D5000 I believe).

I recently upgraded from the Nikon D70s (which is 2 generations behind the D90) to the Nikon D300s and I can tell you that the difference in how it feels is just remarkable. The D300s is just really solid.

Heck, i'd probably rate myself as an "advanced" ameuter as far as still photography goes. But just using the D300s makes me realise why the heck it is so much more expensive than the D90 and I'd imagine if you ever used the D3(s)/1D cameras you'd realise the reasons why it is more expensive. Not to say that you can't get great shots/videos with cheaper DSLRs. But heck, they are priced/designed that way for good reasons.

For me, video is still a novelty. But joined these forums to explore the "new" feature on this upgraded camera.

Is the 5D/5D Mk II a Pro camera? Well, if a pro is using it to do paid work then i'd say yes it is. Same goes for the 7D.

The way I look at it, Canon's top camera lineup is kinda like this:
* 1D series (including 1D Mk III and Mk IIIs... top of the line)
* 5D series
* 7D series

With Nikon's being:
* D3 series (inc D3/s and D3x... D3x with more megapixels, D3/s with more grunt/speed... So both geared towards a different segment of the top end of the market)
* D700 (second camera for many pros, especially those who want to remain with a full framed sensor, or an only body )
* D300 (advanced amauters, working pros who want/need a cropped sensor for extra reach etc).

As far as market segment goes, the D700 and 5D are probably aiming at similar markets, whilst the D3 and 1D would go head to head. And of course, the D300 and the 7D.

Anyway, i've gotten quite off topic now, especially for a place like this.

Don't get me wrong, I can see where everyone's coming from. Why add a feature to a top end still camera if it isn't top notch (1080p)?

If the D3s didn't have video it'd barely rate a mention here, except perhaps the question of "why does it not have video?".

I think what's clear is that whilst Canon has gone full bore into video for their DSLRs, Nikon has gone the cautious, cautious/wait and see approach. Which for you video guys a bit of a kick in the pants (to be honest). But i'm sure they'll catch up with hopefully the next iteration if the demand is there.

Oh well, unfortunately you can't win over everyone with just the one device.

@artforme: Sorry, don't mean to pick on yah. Just trying to put out some of my thoughts on it. I'm sure everyone else already has expressed most of their thoughts on this issue :P

End of the day, this is still primarily a still photog's camera.

Thom Hogan has some good thoughts along those lines on his website regarding this (towards the bottom labeled Nikon V1). The gist of what he says I absolutely agree with, if Nikon/Canon etc really want to blow the so called "HDSLR" market out of the water. Then they need to design it at specific market (eg: primarily for video, and photography as a secondary). Basically, something derived from their top line DSLRs, but with video being the primary focus.

(Sorry for the long post everyone, hopefully it all kinda makes some sense)
 
artforme said:
@Steve

You of course bring up some great points. But even those features you listed can mostly be found on Cannon's 7D, which is only around 1.7k usd.

Sure professionals can justify spending over 5k usd on a camera, but much of the marking of the D3 seems to be aimed at pro-summers, and from a pro-summer perspective I would say the 5D gives you more for you money, or the 7D.

But like you said, paying 3k usd more for a camera that will help you have the competitive edge over other professional photographers is not a big deal.

Most people on these forums are not photographers, needless to say.
Click to expand...

Willl has pretty much summed it up very proficiently, so I won't repeat the technical stuff.

But there is also a HUGE difference in pro-equipment and non-pro equipment on the matter of support. If you do this for a living, are a sports photographer or photojournalist, any major sporting or news event Nikon and Canon will be there at site, at the event.

Canon has CPS (Canon Professional Services), Nikon has NPS (Nikon Professional Services), if one of your bodies break, they'll be there to fix your equipment, give you a loaner, while you do your job. If you need a $10,000 Nikkor 600mm f/4G because the press area is farther then you expected, NPS will lend you one, and be there so you never have to worry about the equipment.

Not enough lenses? you're covered. Not enough bodies, accessories, batteries, anything? You're covered as well. Need technical help?- they have a crew there.

This is a crucial difference, and this is another reason why Canikon dominates this industry, because they back up their professional products.


NPS backup equipment for the 2002 Winter Olympics.
dscn0464.jpg
 
Steve Castle said:
The 5D/5DII isn't a professional still camera. It doesn't mean you can't use it as one.
If you are predominately taking landscapes you'd be a fool to trade a 5D/5DII for a 1DIII- just like you'd be a fool to trade in a 1DIII for a 5DII if you are taking photography with any degree of fast motion where you need decent AF.
Click to expand...

I guess you got me a little confused here (which isn't difficult to do!). If you say the Canon 5D II isn't a professional camera, but you'd be a fool to trade it for a 1DIII (which you say is a professional camera) for shooting landscapes, then I'm not following your logic. Are not professional landscape photographers professional enough? :Þ

If you are a professional "landscape" photographer, and the 5D II is better suited than the 1DIII, why call it a non-professional camera? I guess it's semantics because I do make a substantial part of my living shooting landscapes and I chose the 5D II because, in my opinion, it is the single best landscape camera on the market today, better than Canon's flagship series. Does that make me or the camera non-pro or that I'm using a tool not really suited for true professionals? I'm a wee bit lost.

The 5D II is weatherized, very well built, I've never had any problems with focus (auto or manual), it's full-frame, shoots RAW and is 21 heckapixels so I can make larger-than-life sized razor prints. It's awesome on skin tones for portraits and it's incredible for landscapes. I wouldn't prefer to use it for the Indy 500 or covering a basketball game, but it'd still do a good job there too with fast lenses and a skilled shooter. It has the latest DIGIC 4 sensor, self-cleaning, and it's also light enough to take on extended backpacking trips. I think it's simply the best digital still SLR camera on the market for landscapes that a 'professional' can buy, bar none. I don't care about the price-point or how it lines up with Canon's other offerings, it is what it is. Plus it happens to have 1920x1080 high-def video thrown in for good measure.

As for Canon or Nikon professional 'services', that's not an issue at all for me. I carry two bodies on important shoots, as I'd think most pros would, so if one malfunctions I don't need to rely on a 'professional services' service thing to give me another while it's being fixed. To me that's where the extra $$ is going for the higher priced lines and I don't want it. I have a full selection of Canon L series glass suited for each type of shoot and I carry what I need (bodies, lenses, filters, accessories, batteries, etc.). But that's just me. And (knock on wood) so far I've done pretty well and luckily each year gets better despite the tough economic times of late. The 5D II is a fantastic 'professional' tool.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top