Nikon D3 review posted at DP Review

[ChrisA]

Good news for all of us with dreams of one day owning such a beasty camera system!

In ten years a camera with D3 specs will be selling at an afordable price.
In ten years only the lowest priced entry level SLRs will have DX format sensors and everyone else will be shooting with 24MP FF cameras

I also predict that we will have some kind of on-camera control that will allow our 24MP camera to shoot at 12 or 6 MP just like now we have an ISO adjustment. That way we can trade resolution of low noise to suit the shot. Asonomers have been able to do this with their camera for decades. It is not exotic tech. just depend on how you clock the charge off the CCD chip.
They can it "binning" More here http://www.ccd.com/ccd103.html
You'd need to be clever to use this with a byer mosaic filfer but I can think of a few ways to get it to work

 

[SolracSelbor]

Its an interesting discussion, I'll add my 2 pence

Do you think amateurs are able to stay truer to the 'art' of photography, because they are not limited to the professional constraints of fulfilling a brief? Do you think pros have their creative vision undermined because of market trends dictating what images 'should' look like?

I also feel many amateurs make better images than pros, purely because they have a greater will to create images, as doing can be seen as a welcome diversion from the 'day job'?

These are good questions, which I wish I had the answers to. I would probably answer yes to both questions and agree to your statement simply because I do not believe that creating something for the sole purpose of monetary gain is "true art", IMHO.

Repeated exposure to any given stimulus causes a reduction in its desired effects. If you ride a roller coaster a million times it isn't as fun as the first. This applies to professional photographers as well. After a while, the professional looses some of his/her desire to shoot a beautiful and meaningful shot. However, hobbyists retain this desire simply because they don't do it as much.

 

[Digital Skunk]

1. There is to date no definitive statement from either Nikon or Sony that Sony fabricates the sensor for the D3. We do know that Nikon doesn't fab their own sensors, but there has been at least some speculation that the D3 sensor isn't fabbed by Sony.

2. Even if Sony did fab the sensor, it's more likely than not that it's a Nikon-designed sensor rather than a Sony-designed sensor.

I didn't catch that, thanks for clearing it up for us. It has been confirmed that Sony didn't design the sensor, that is a fact. There is no info on who makes the sensor for Nikon though. The sensor is by far the biggest improvement and breakthrough in photo tech. Given that much of the features on the D3 and comparable models have been freeloading off of Olympus and Minolta, the chip in the D3 is truly original.

These are good questions, which I wish I had the answers to. I would probably answer yes to both questions and agree to your statement simply because I do not believe that creating something for the sole purpose of monetary gain is "true art", IMHO.

Repeated exposure to any given stimulus causes a reduction in its desired effects. If you ride a roller coaster a million times it isn't as fun as the first. This applies to professional photographers as well. After a while, the professional looses some of his/her desire to shoot a beautiful and meaningful shot. However, hobbyists retain this desire simply because they don't do it as much.

WTF!!!

I don't know what to say about this, just saying that it's whole-fully wrong isn't enough. It's almost insulting and I really mean that.

 

[SolracSelbor]

WTF!!!

I don't know what to say about this, just saying that it's whole-fully wrong isn't enough. It's almost insulting and I really mean that.

Chill out buddy, I don't mean to offend you at all. It's a basic principle of psychology no matter how false you think it is. Sure, there are professionals who absolutely LOVE every single moment of photo shooting and try their most hardest to get a beautiful image, and your probably one of them. The cold hard truth is that some arent. Look at college football players vs NFL football players (or whatever sport). The difference between the two is simple -- Passion vs Commitment, respectively. Who's gonna play harder, a college kid with nothing more than the love for the sport or a long time pro who, granted, loves the sport but also has a 25 million dollar deal to keep playing....

 

[compuwar]

Chill out buddy, I don't mean to offend you at all. It's a basic principle of psychology no matter how false you think it is. Sure, there are professionals who absolutely LOVE every single moment of photo shooting and try their most hardest to get a beautiful image, and your probably one of them. The cold hard truth is that some arent. Look at college football players vs NFL football players (or whatever sport). The difference between the two is simple -- Passion vs Commitment, respectively. Who's gonna play harder, a college kid with nothing more than the love for the sport or a long time pro who, granted, loves the sport but also has a 25 million dollar deal to keep playing....

More NFL pros play hurt than college players. There's an argument that it takes more passion and commitment to play for years and years when hurt, through tragedy and when your body is failing than it does in the prime of your life when it's more of a glamorous thing than it is a career. Besides, doing anything well takes passion AND commitment, they're not polar opposites on the same scale.

 

[Digital Skunk]

....

Sorry about the attitude, but I don't believe that it's a "Pro" vs "Amateur" thing. It's is most likely based on a person by person basis. If a pro hates their job their images my not be up to par. That shooter may have gotten that way over time.

On the other hand there's a pro that loves their job, and has been loving it sense the day they started shooting. Not everyone would be getting bored of their job over time, even start lacking in performance due to longevity in their careers.

 

[Hmac]

Here is an interesting viewpoint by Preston Mack, a freelance photojournalist and sports photographer detailing his experience with current Nikon vs Canon professional cameras. The piece is on Sportsshooter.com. It summarizes many of the things I've been reading at DPR on both the Canon and Nikon forums.

He likes the D3...I was amused at his "Mac-like" statement...The D3 "just works".

http://www.sportsshooter.com/news/1967

 

[AlaskaMoose]

Here is an interesting viewpoint by Preston Mack, a freelance photojournalist and sports photographer detailing his experience with current Nikon vs Canon professional cameras. The piece is on Sportsshooter.com. It summarizes many of the things I've been reading at DPR on both the Canon and Nikon forums.

He likes the D3...I was amused at his "Mac-like" statement...The D3 "just works".

http://www.sportsshooter.com/news/1967

Well, photographers have been switching back and forth for one reason or another. It's like driving cars: some enjoy driving Corvettes, while others enjoy driving Ferrari's, etc. Here is one that switched from Nikon to Canon:
http://www.opendigitalphotography.c...-for-birding-wildlife-nature-photography.html

Canon and Nikon have been competitors for years, and Nikon has finally caught and surpassed Canon's in the high ISO/low-noise arena, but don't believe that Canon will just sit there doing nothing. Canon will just boost the high ISO/ low-noise levels to its existing full size sensors. These two will continue improving their products on a race to the end, where one will be in front for a short period of time, and then the next. The consumer is the one to benefit as the technology trickles down to the entry-level cameras.

 

[Digital Skunk]

Nikon wasn't far behind Canon in low noise. It's really just been a leap frog type of scenario, with Nikon putting out the D2h which had better high ISO noise performance than the 1D, then the Mark II surpassing that, then the D3 surpassing that.