billh Posted October 11, 2007 Share #1 Posted October 11, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) If you look at the D3 images and compare them to the D300 images at the same ISO, the difference is remarkable. Both are 12 mp cameras. Is this difference due to fewer pixels spread over a larger area? If so, I would rather have a noiseless 12 MP camera than a noisy one at twice the pixel count. You have to scroll to the bottom of the page to see the files to download. http://focusphoto.free.fr/blog/?p=23 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted October 11, 2007 Posted October 11, 2007 Hi billh, Take a look here Pixel density and noise. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
sdai Posted October 11, 2007 Share #2 Posted October 11, 2007 ISO 3200 on a 1Ds Mark 3 isn't really too bad ... take a look at these, Bill. 1Ds Mark 3 Beta Shots Don't get me wrong, I've already put my money down for a D3 ... my dealer says it's only too late. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
amcmaster Posted October 11, 2007 Share #3 Posted October 11, 2007 Is this thread meant to be on a Canon/Nikon site, or am I just missing the Leica content? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wparsonsgisnet Posted October 11, 2007 Share #4 Posted October 11, 2007 There is another, and sometime dense, thread about pixel density on the Forum, as it relates to "our" camera(s). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
amcmaster Posted October 11, 2007 Share #5 Posted October 11, 2007 I remember living through another very long set of interchanges (12 September and on ...........headed "Nikon D3 files (through ISO6400)" looking for Leica relevance, and the only connection I could find was the character set "D3".............. I often thought of asking if I was missing something then, but failed to communicate.......so now I wonder. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdai Posted October 11, 2007 Share #6 Posted October 11, 2007 Well, the trick is ... if you're not interested then skip it ... why bother??? Many of us Leica shooters also own Canon and Nikon gears, so what's the problem??? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
amcmaster Posted October 11, 2007 Share #7 Posted October 11, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) I too, own and use Canon and Nikon gear. This site, however, is as stated in its setup, "The Leica Digital Forum is for discussions about Leica's Digital cameras." If I want to deal with Canon, Nikon, Jaguar, Ferrari, or other non-related technicalities, I go elsewhere. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
amcmaster Posted October 11, 2007 Share #8 Posted October 11, 2007 Or, indeed, Barnack's Bar. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdai Posted October 11, 2007 Share #9 Posted October 11, 2007 I hope you were the moderator so this type of threads could never appear ... 5 posts in your forum history and 4 of them are forum policing and 1 on 4/3. That's very on topic. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
amcmaster Posted October 11, 2007 Share #10 Posted October 11, 2007 Cheers. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdai Posted October 11, 2007 Share #11 Posted October 11, 2007 Cheers too. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlesphoto99 Posted October 11, 2007 Share #12 Posted October 11, 2007 I too, own and use Canon and Nikon gear. This site, however, is as stated in its setup, "The Leica Digital Forum is for discussions about Leica's Digital cameras."If I want to deal with Canon, Nikon, Jaguar, Ferrari, or other non-related technicalities, I go elsewhere. Why the need to nanny. Just don't read the thread. Some people ask about hard drive storage. Last I heard Leica's not making hard drives but it's still pertinent and informative. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
amcmaster Posted October 11, 2007 Share #13 Posted October 11, 2007 Fair enough. I just got fed up reading my way through the last long series about the Nikon D3 looking, naively for a Leica connection. Most stuff about hard drives, Apple Macs, PCs etc. has one, but this did not. It wouldn't be good to get too Leica-fixated, but I thought there should be some tenuous link. I don't intend to continue the debate. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
billh Posted October 11, 2007 Author Share #14 Posted October 11, 2007 ISO 3200 on a 1Ds Mark 3 isn't really too bad ... take a look at these, Bill. 1Ds Mark 3 Beta Shots Don't get me wrong, I've already put my money down for a D3 ... my dealer says it's only too late. Do you mind telling me why you made this choice? I did try the D2x AF, and as you predicted, it was not as good at tracking speed as the 1D2 or 1Ds2. I shot over 1000 images, and none of the fast moving subjects were in focus. The 1D2 and 1Ds2 get some of these in focus, but it is a smaller percentage than I would like. The image quality from my 1Ds2 is great, so I don’t feel too much temptation to change to the 1Ds3. I’ll try a 1D3 this weekend, but according to Canon, the actual speed of the AF seems to be the same as the the 1D2. "Predictive AF can track a subject approaching at about 31 mph up to about 26.2 ft. away with an EF300mm f/2.8L IS USM lens.” Page 20, http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EOS-1D-Mark-III-Digital-SLR-Camera.pdf The tempting part of the D3 is the low noise and the possibility of better AF than Canon, but then I have to buy new long primes and get used to a 70-200 zoom that rotates in the opposite direction of the Canon lens. I also use Leica lenses on the 1Ds2 - will they also work on the Nikons? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdai Posted October 12, 2007 Share #15 Posted October 12, 2007 Do you mind telling me why you made this choice? It's actually some other folks who made the decision for me, Bill ... I originally decided to pass this one in order to save money for the phantom R10 and perhaps the 5D upgrade, but then I got a call from friend asking why (again) there were 2 dealers using my name to hold cameras from them ... so why not give it a shot? and I can buy back the 105 DC lens I've always loved a lot, I could sell it easily if I don't really like it anyways. But now it's really too late, I'm at far behind in the line. From what I've heard from friends in Japan ... it is really a camera perhaps a lot of Canon shooter will fall in love with, Nikon seems to understand why they were beaten by Canon in the past decade, what is really needed by photographers in today's market and they are using a lot of younger engineers and even decision makers in the planning stage right now. Kawaji Kouhei ... the D3 guy. the actual speed of the AF seems to be the same as the the 1D2. The AF processor of 1D3 is in a totally different class, one limiting factor now is the ultrasonic motor in lens. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
billh Posted October 12, 2007 Author Share #16 Posted October 12, 2007 ... The AF processor of 1D3 is in a totally different class, one limiting factor now is the ultrasonic motor in lens. In a totally different class from the D2x? I am trying a 1D3 this weekend, and have spent a lot of time exploring the various AF settings, and people's success (or lack of), so hopefully there will not be a lot of wasted time. One thing I will explore is the capability to set fps speeds for both low and high. It may be that at a lower fps setting, the AF will have a better chance of keeping focus, plus I can try the 5fps of the 1Ds3 to see if that is perhaps quick enough. Do you know when you will take delivery of the D3? Have you talked with anyone who has used both it and the 1D2/1D3, who has expressed an opinion of the AF performance? I think the problem I have is the relatively unusual nature of the (fast, erratic) subjects I am photographing - not many people are doing this, and it is the only area I have an AF issues. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdai Posted October 12, 2007 Share #17 Posted October 12, 2007 I meant the 1D3 AF sensor and processor are in a totally different class from the 1D2, Bill. Turn on the camera and navigate through the Custom Function menus then you'll know what I'm talking about. The fps setting shouldn't affect AF performance, you could check the Cfn settings for tracking sensitivity, in fact, both cameras can do more fps than advertised, just fill your buffer with a burst, count the number of shots and divide it by the time gap found in EXIF between the first and last shots. I've no clue to the delivery schedule of D3 ... and I don't believe anyone could tell you seriously how its AF could compare to the 1D2, 1D3 because ... the 51 AF is a first time on a Nikon, without a manual, proper instruction and extensive practice ... every genius would have problems just to figure out how it's working. Don't believe the "beta testers" on dpreview. LOL Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.