| |
Nikon D3x reviews
You can find here the most interesting reviews / ratings from the well-known expert sites about the Nikon D3x Camera. Here are the reviewers:
|
- 02 January 2010 - |
|
- 0 |
|
- 15 August 2009 - |
|
- 5 |
|
- 20 July 2009 - |
|
- 0 |
|
- 25 May 2009 - |
|
- 0 |
|
- 27 April 2009 - |
|
- 0 |
|
- 22 April 2009 - |
|
- 5 |
|
- 16 March 2009 - |
|
- 4.5 |
|
- 04 March 2009 - |
|
- 0 |
|
- 19 February 2009 - |
|
- 4.5 |
|
- 13 January 2009 - |
|
- 4.5 |
DigitalCameraReview 's conclusion / rating - 02 January 2010 |
Given the D3x's cost and specifications, it's clear that this is a highly specialized camera that will appeal to professionals who need or want large image files.However, photographers whose work demands highly detailed images (or advanced amateurs with a hefty bank account) won't be disappointed with the D3x's image quality and highly sophisticated feature set....
DigitalCameraReview's rating: |
|
- 0 |
Complete review here
TrustedReviews 's conclusion / rating - 15 August 2009 |
It pretty much goes without saying that the Nikon D3x is an incredibly good camera, with the kind of performance, rugged reliability, versatility and most importantly image quality demanded by the top professionals. It is big, heavy and quite breathtakingly expensive, but if you're the sort of photographer who needs to have the very best then ask the picture agency you work for to buy you one...
TrustedReviews's rating: |
|
- 5 |
Complete review here
CameraLabs 's conclusion / rating - 20 July 2009 |
Like the D3 before it, the Nikon D3x is a very serious piece of kit. Both cameras exude physical confidence with tank-like build quality and superb ergonomics. The viewfinder delivers a huge view with 100% coverage and a wealth of information, while the VGA screen ensures images look their best whether in playback or Live View. The dual Compact Flash slots allow invaluable backup configurations that make you wonder why such features are reserved for top-end models only. Then when you fire-off a burst of frames, even with the slower D3x, its hard not to be impressed by the sheer amount of data being processed.
So its no surprise to find the Nikon D3x, like the D3 before it, is a very successful and satisfying tool for the professional, but what about the image quality? When we went into this test we of course expected excellent results from the flagship Nikon DSLR, but we were surprised not just by its ultimate resolving power, but also the comparative quality of its main rival in terms of images anyway...
Complete review here
Imaging Resource 's conclusion / rating - 25 May 2009 |
We haven't completed the write-up of all our results from the Nikon D3x yet, but have certainly seen enough to come to a pretty unequivocal conclusion: The Nikon D3x produces the highest image quality of any camera we've tested to date. Its combination of resolution, color fidelity, and noise performance puts it at the very top of its class. Not only does the Nikon D3x sport an amazing 24.5 megapixels of resolution, it manages to wring more detail out of those pixels (particularly in its NEF-format RAW files) than anything else out there. The D3x also offers surprising speed, capable of 5 frames/second at full resolution, and up to 7.5 frames/second in its 10.5 megapixel DX crop mode. And then there's build quality: The D3x is built like the proverbial tank; well-suited to most anything a busy pro might care to dish out to it. The high-end SLR market often seems like a perpetual game of leapfrog, but for now, the Nikon D3x sits at the top of the heap, as the ultimate digital SLR...
Imaging Resource's rating: |
|
- 0 |
Complete review here
DigitalCameraInfo 's conclusion / rating - 27 April 2009 |
Reviewing the Nikon D3x is a difficult task, as the camera is designed with a very specific type of user in mind. With a body that costs $8000 paired with a $2000 24-70mm f/2.8 lens, this camera is a substantial investment, a business expense rather than a personal purchase. In terms of image quality performance, the D3x did well, but scored slightly lower overall than the far less expensive Nikon D700. Where the D3x shines is in the breadth and depth of its control and customization options.
If you're working in a studio, with a consistent, known setup, this amount of customization is invaluable. The ability to tailor the camera to ideally fit your situation means less time is spent tweaking controls on the fly, and more time spent getting the shot you need, knowing that it'll turn out properly. Over the course of a days shooting, let alone weeks or months, this turns into a serious saving in time and energy. Keep in mind though, if you don't need all 24-megapixels, you can pick up the D3 for $5000 which has an identical body, faster continuous shutter speed of 9 frames per second, a higher maximum ISO, and offers similar levels of control.
Performance:
Overall, the D3x performed well in all our lab tests, though white balance and dynamic range were slightly lower than expected. It excelled on the resolution test, especially in terms of image sharpness. Apart from this last test, it consistently scored slightly lower than the Nikon D700, probably due to additional pixels packed into the same-sized sensor, or possibly that the D3x processes the data less as Nikon expects professional users to do more tweaking themselves. If all you're worried about is pure performance, the price excess on the D3x doesn't seem worth it, as you can getter similar or better results with a much less expensive camera.
Components:
The D3x hardware is top notch universally. The color LCD is crystal clear and sharp with 920,000-dots, and the two monochrome displays do an excellent job providing ready access to pertinent information. The viewfinder is a little uncomfortable with the default eyecup, but offers 100% field of view, and has a built in shutter to prevent light leaks. The D3x can take two CF cards at a time, and has very lengthy battery life. All the buttons, ports and padding feel exceedingly tough, like they will take years of heavy use.
Handling:
As much as one can use the term "ergonomics" for a camera that weighs 43 oz without lens or battery, the D3x is nicely balanced and reasonably easy to handle. The buttons are well placed, large, and clearly labeled. Dials and switches are all easy to reach and robust. However, given the high weight of the camera, we're much happier having it on a tripod than strapped around our necks for any length of time.
Controls:
The level of control the camera gives you is what separates the D3x from the other cameras we compared it to. Functions include changing the size of the center-weighted metering zone; in-depth battery status information; seven different fluorescent white balance presets; multiple self-timers; four stored sets of shooting settings; and a high degree of customization of button functionality. The D3x allows you to set your camera up just the way you like it to fit your particular needs and preferences...
DigitalCameraInfo's rating: |
|
- 0 |
Complete review here
PhotographyBLOG 's conclusion / rating - 22 April 2009 |
It's fair to say from our findings that the Nikon D3x is pretty much a re-badged D3 with twice the pixel count but a slower continuous shooting speed; therefore the D3 remains alongside it as a valued component of the range in its own right. It's worth noting too that no other Nikon DSLR currently comes close to matching the D3x's pixel count indeed the D3, D700 and D300 all offer a 'mere' 12 megapixels, modest by comparison. There are also a couple of things that, despite the level of excellence on offer, the D3x obviously omits however: namely any form of built-in image stabilisation and, unlike Canon for a change, there's no dust prevention/sensor cleaning offered on powering the camera down either. Playing with the camera over a test period of a couple of weeks (and having VR optics supplied instead of having to buy them) it's easy to overlook this and move on, but over time I'm not so sure.
That said, in the area of scrutiny that accounts for the most namely the images themselves the level of 'improvement' from one DSLR to the other is not overly dramatic. The D3 is still clearly a very good camera and whether that slight edge of extra detail justifies another couple of grand spend has to come down to personal choice and experience. If, clearly, your advertising or fashion work means that you regularly don't get out of bed for less than £10k, then a body-only D3x is still going to seem like a veritable bargain even at full £6,000 asking price. As it is when compared to a medium format camera/ digital back set up which you would have formerly needed to achieve such a high pixel count. Moreover, for such a high end camera the D3x is surprisingly intuitive to use, controls feels just right, are clearly marked, reasonably sized and the camera responds instantly to each button press or rotation of command dial. As should be, it provides the photographer with their own virtual 'wingman', leaving the user to get on with the business of taking photos...
PhotographyBLOG's rating: |
|
- 5 |
Complete review here
WhatDigitalCamera 's conclusion / rating - 16 March 2009 |
With the D3x Nikon has finally joined Canon in the exclusive 20 Megapixel Club, and it was worth the wait. The D3x is a stunning camera that pushes the boundaries of DSLR performance to a new level. It isn't perfect, though, in particular, the omission of any form of built-in dust control is a major disappointment.
Is it better than the D3? Well, that depends. If you shoot landscapes, or work in the studio, then yes it is. If you shoot sports, or in dimly lit jazz clubs, you're still better off with a D3. It's horses for courses. The bottom line is that if you want the finest image quality at the highest possible resolution, the D3x is now the best camera of its kind. To better it you'll have to blow £10k on a medium format outfit, or wait and see what Canon does next...
WhatDigitalCamera's rating: |
|
- 4.5 |
Complete review here
Luminous Landscape 's conclusion / rating - 04 March 2009 |
What we're left with then is a superb camera that will appeal to the dedicated Nikon user who has been patiently waiting for Nikon to reemerge to its well-earned place as a leader in imaging technology. For them, as long as they can afford the price of admission, the D3x is an almost total winner. For others the price will mean a wait for a smaller, lighter and less expensive camera one akin to the D700, which is a class leader in every respect. A D700x at a competitive price would take the world by storm, even in these hard economic times. But with the D3x's sensor costing a $4,000 premium at this time it's hard to see how a D700x is to be expected any time soon.
As for this whole generation of big-bodied cameras, the Nikon D3 series and the Canon 1 Series, something tells me that we may be seeing the end of an era. If Nikon can overcome the sensor price challenge and produce a competitive D700x, and Canon has the balls to move their 5D series upmarket in terms of build quality and features, it'll all be over but the shouting. But then there's now also Sony, who could be an industry spoiler in the months and years ahead....
Luminous Landscape's rating: |
|
- 0 |
Complete review here
DPReview 's conclusion / rating - 19 February 2009 |
So all in all the penalty you pay for industry-leading image detail and resolution is a fairly small one. For those who really need the D3's blistering continuous shooting speed and night-vision high ISO capabilities the D3's twelve megapixels will probably do the job, and the D3X is not the optimal tool for their trade. For those photographers whose work genuinely benefits from the D3X's staggering resolution, the slower frame rate and reduced high ISO performance compared to the D3 are a compromise they will easily be able to live with.
We can't conclude this review without speaking about the D3X's (to many users) most obvious disadvantage, its hefty price tag of $8000. This is not only a lot of money in absolute terms, it's also approximately $1500 more than the current street price of the D3X's most obvious direct competitor, the Canon EOS-1Ds Mark III (plus it would almost buy you two D3s). Can a camera be worth this much money? It's a rather philosophical question. It certainly will be to the professional who requires massive file sizes to sell his pictures, it could be to the serious (and wealthy) amateur who spends hours marveling at the D3X images' fantastic detail, and it's almost certainly not for everyone else. You also need to keep in mind that the camera itself is not where it stops. You can only really make use of the D3X's capabilities with high quality (and therefore costly) lenses and, depending on when you last updated your computer equipment, some investment might be required in this area as well. Our well specified office PCs certainly took their time when processing the D3X's sizeable RAW files in Capture NX.
However, if you can afford the D3X, you will buy yourself the best image detail that's currently on the market and a very versatile photographic tools. We've used it in the studio and on location, for portraits and for sports, in daylight and in dim clubs and and on every occasion we were amazed how easy it was to achieve good results with the camera. Therefore, despite its eye-watering price tag, the Nikon D3X without a shadow of doubt earns itself our highest award...
Complete review here
byThom 's conclusion / rating - 13 January 2009 |
Well, Nikon's not going to like my answer this time around. My answer is "no, most of you shouldn't." Sure, there are a few of you that can justify the extra price for the pixels, and the pixels themselves are very nice, arguably better than the Canon and Sony offerings in my initial testing. As I've written above, the D3x is probably the best DSLR in terms of image quality so far. But the problem is value. There simply isn't US$5700 worth of value in a D3x over a D700. The bottom line is that Nikon still needs to compete with a D700-type body in a high pixel count camera, which means that we'll have a D700x sometime within a year. If that camera is equal to or less than US$3999, then I would be able to recommend it if it has D3x levels of quality. But the D3x itself seems a bit out of place. It's a big, heavy, expensive camera that feels a bit like a big SUV does when gas is US$4 a gallon. Yes, it's nice, but it's probably just not worth it for most people. Wait for the less expensive crossover...
Complete review here
|
|
Comments (5)
Video reviews (3)
Camera info
Digg
del.icio.us
Reddit
Google
Home