Swap Nikon D3 for M8?

[kennekam]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

First, it doesn't increase the length of the lens, nor does it make the critter you are shooting larger. It simply crops the image for you. People confuse this all the time.

 

If I had the money, and it appears you do, I would keep the D3 and if you really want, I would swap the D300 with some cash for an M8 for your walk around photography. This is what I am doing. I also have an D300, and I am keeping that as a backup to the D3 when I shoot wildlife.

 

Good luck

 

DBK

 

The thing is that the D300 puts 12mp under the cropped area whereas the D3 has only 5mp.

[kennekam]

The only similarity between the D3 and M8 is that they are both digital cameras. Trying to compare them just doesn't work. The M8 is not, and never will be, a wildlife camera. I know, some people have made great wildlife images with them on safari, etc., but unless you want to go through visoflex or spotting scope/heavy duty tripod regimine, the lenses just aren't long enough. It is, however, a wonderful landscape camera and there is ample evidence of that in the photo forum. It is also an excellent travel camera since you can carry a fairly small, lightweight kit with everything you need--especially when comparing it to a D3 system.

 

I shoot professionally, so have to maintain a good DSLR system for certain kinds of assignments. If that were not the case, I'd shoot with the M8 exclusively.

 

I would not use the M8 for wildlife, the D300 is for that. The M8 would be an alternative to the M3 for walkabout and street photography where the D3 is too large and obvious

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[kennekam]

Kennekam,

I would be interested how often you use the d3 and how often the d300 and in which regards you see the d3 ahead of the d300.

I have a d300 besides my M8 and struggle with myself weather I should add the d3 or not. (reasons for D3 where to use the 85 and 28/1.4 in FX and high ISO...however d300 High iso doesnt look bad at all)

Regarding youe question:

IMO the M8 is great up to ISO 640 in color and 1250 in b&w, but ahead not so good. File quality With those ISO is great. SImplicity of the M8 is great too.

For moving subjects I see an AF-camera as the better tool.

The M8 and D300 complement very well IMO. What you give up if you sell the D3 is probably the great high ISO.

I dont know what you shoot mainly. If it was indoor sports I would rather keep the D3.

If its street, people, landscape I would probably rahter go the d300+m8 way.

cheers, Tom

 

The D3 is a wonderfull camera and it produces great shots especially at high ISO. However I find I am using the D300 more when shooting wildlife as it copes better with the desert dust and extends the reach of my long lenses.

 

I am developing an interest is street photography and find the large SLRs too obvious. On more than one occasion I was stopped from taking pictures with the D3 whereas no one stopped me when shooting in the same locations with my D50 or M3.

 

I know the D3 and M8 are different animals. My question is on how the quality of the images compare. Are we comparing BMW with Merc or BMW with Ford?

 

The IQ from my M3 is great. Is the M8 on par?

[jrc]

I have both a D3 and an M8. The image quality is so good on both that an argument about which is better comes down to personal preference. The D3 is, of course, a much more flexible camera. But if you walk around too long with a D3 and the *really terrific* 14-24, you are asking for back problems. The D3 with the 70-200 could be used as a sledge hammer. I love them anyway, but they're not really walk-around outfits.

 

I don't have a D300, but I do have a D2x, which is larger, but about the same in terms of image quality and has the same crop-effect. The combination of the D300 and the D3 seems to me to be a terrific combination for somebody interested in wildlife, nature or landscape, especially since so much wildlife shooting is done around dawn or dusk when you could really use the high ISO of the D3. I wouldn't give up either one, if that's your main interest. Or maybe, sell the D300 and use the money to buy a longer lens.

 

If you're just thinking about street photography, I'm not sure I'd jump right in and get an M8. Instead, take a look at something like the new Pentax K20D with some of their pancake lenses. You could get a body and a whole set of very good lenses for the price of one new Leica lens. You could easily spend $20,000 for a good Leica street-shooting outfit...which is a lot, if you're not sure where you're going with the street photography.

 

JC

[Guest s.m.e.p.]

Well, for girlies who love little handbags little dogs and little cameras a M8 is much better than a Nikon D3. Real man need no toy, they need a tool... so keep the D3!

[carstenw]

Well, for girlies who love little handbags little dogs and little cameras a M8 is much better than a Nikon D3. Real man need no toy, they need a tool... so keep the D3!

 

Then again, real men don't take pictures of babies

[haroldp]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The D300 really can provide a form of 1.5 X magnification as compared to the D3. Since they have about the same pixel count in their different sensor sizes, the D300 has smaller photosites, and therefor higher pixel density.

 

The effect of this in situations where the longest lens you can use still does not fill the frame, is that a given focal length will put the image over more pixels in a D300, than in a D3.

 

As long as the lens resolution holds up, you will then get more detail and 'enlargeability' (is that a word ?? ).

 

I believe that it is also the case however that the approx. 5.5 micron photosites of a 12MP APS/C sensor are already stressing the resolution of any but the best lenses, and the steadiest hold or mounting.

 

The aggressive AA filters used in DSLR's will also exacerbate this effect, since they basically will not allow the lens to outresolve the sensor.

 

The net is that if you can get enough focal length to fill the frame, than the D3 will be superior. However if you cannot, than with the same length lens, the D300 is the better choice.

 

Regards ... Harold

[gmaurizio]

Then again, real men don't take pictures of babies

 

I hope you are not serious.

[gmaurizio]

Then again, real men don't take pictures of babies

 

Real men use 8x10 field view cameras, and carry all the necessary accessories in a large, heavy, black piece of luggage. That is what real men do.

And they scan the self-developed negatives with a Heidelberg drum scanner, convert to CMYK and send it to a manual print press.

[marknorton]

I have both the D3 and the M8 and I would not trade one for the other. They are different tools for different jobs. If I could have only one, it would be the D3.

 

I'm a full frame convert and it's strange how a cropped camera is accepted as a disadvantage at the wide end but seen as an advantage at the long end by making a lens appear longer than it is; I can achieve the same angle of view by cropping the FF images down to 1.5; of course, I then only have 5MP but since the D3 has at least 3 stops noise advantage over a D2X, those 5MP may well be cleaner with lower noise and less camera shake. Which do you prefer? 12 noisy, smudged MP or 5 clean sharp ones?

 

If counting MP is your game, the D3 has more of them than the M8 but as we know, MP is not the whole story.

[adan]

Seem to me everyone is missing the OP's point, which is that he HAS TWO SLRs that he finds duplicative. He's keeping the D300 to do "SLR" stuff with - and wants to know if he should swap his large heavy excess SLR for an M8 for things that don't require long lenses, since he's still covered there.

 

IMHO - the D3 will outperform the M8 in available darkness, where its ability to shoot in light 2-3 stops dimmer than the M8 with comparable noise (and comparable f/stops) will be obvious.

 

For long/macro/AF lens stuff, you have the D300.

 

For carrying around, in reasonable light, with lenses up to about 100mm-equivalent, the M8 will do at least as well as the D3, in a smaller, lighter package.

 

Pretty much boils down to how important really-low-light work is for you, when just walking around. If your walkabouts mostly involve late hours and dark bars, stick with the D3.

 

If not, the M8 has a lot to offer (in the less is more sense).

[gmaurizio]

For carrying around, in reasonable light, with lenses up to about 100mm-equivalent, the M8 will do at least as well as the D3, in a smaller, lighter package.

Not sure I quite agree here. The D3 can use wide lenses wide open (like the 14-24mm F2.8 that have NO EQUIVALENT with the M8), fisheye lenses, real zoom lenses (of fantastic performance), autofocus at 9/11 fps (for real fast moving targets) and excellent macro capabilities with live view focus checking. The M8 cannot do those things. Of course, you pay a price in weight and heft, but the image quality is as good as any professional application needs for sizes up to 11x17 in the commercial word. The M8 is not quite a competent player in these fields, of course it can do the job, but at a severe price workflow-wise and from the cost perspective.

[gwelland]

I'm another one of M8 / D3 crowd and as described by others, the two systems are complementary. I used to shoot a pair of D2X's and can certainly understand the desire to keep the D300 for the extra reach (albeit crop) with longer lenses.

 

The discussions here about M8 & D3 image quality being comparable are obviously being posted by people who don't have D3's! My experience with the D3 with the latest 14-24, 24-70 lenses, plus 70-200 VR & 200-400 VR's is that the camera is simply outstanding and possesses an ability to capture low light images in a way that my M8 & Leica glass just simply cannot compare. In available light the M8 is excellent so long as you're shooting ISO 320/640 but beyond that I find the noise objectionable not just when pixel-peeping but also in large prints. This is the area where the D3 simply leaves the M8 in the dust. The new glass is every but as sharp as my 28 & 75 Summicrons. My 50/1.4 and 85/1.4 can actually be focussed accurately and front/back focus are simply not issues at all. I wish I could say that about my Noctilux and two M8 bodies that either front or back focus ...

 

However, as wonderful as the D3 is, the M8 is fantastic for street/walk about photography when you don't want to drag around the bulk of the DSLR. Whilst I don't subscribe to back-ache issues of others, I don't under-estimate the size and bulk of the D3 and zoom. I managed to break the lens hood on my 14-24 within a week due to the size of the lens/body combination going through a doorway (super glue and gaffer tape are wonderful things at times though!).

 

So long as you don't expect the same phenomenal low light, noise performance, accurate white balance, almost flawless metering and auto-ISO freedom of the D3, the M8 will not disappoint I love my M8's and Leica glass so don't get me wrong but it will be a compromise between size/weight and utility. They produce first rate results but it's a tough comparison with the D3. YMMV

[Eikonphoto]

I'm another one of M8 / D3 crowd and as described by others, the two systems are complementary. I used to shoot a pair of D2X's and can certainly understand the desire to keep the D300 for the extra reach (albeit crop) with longer lenses.

 

The discussions here about M8 & D3 image quality being comparable are obviously being posted by people who don't have D3's! My experience with the D3 with the latest 14-24, 24-70 lenses, plus 70-200 VR & 200-400 VR's is that the camera is simply outstanding and possesses an ability to capture low light images in a way that my M8 & Leica glass just simply cannot compare. In available light the M8 is excellent so long as you're shooting ISO 320/640 but beyond that I find the noise objectionable not just when pixel-peeping but also in large prints. This is the area where the D3 simply leaves the M8 in the dust. The new glass is every but as sharp as my 28 & 75 Summicrons. My 50/1.4 and 85/1.4 can actually be focussed accurately and front/back focus are simply not issues at all. I wish I could say that about my Noctilux and two M8 bodies that either front or back focus ...

 

However, as wonderful as the D3 is, the M8 is fantastic for street/walk about photography when you don't want to drag around the bulk of the DSLR. Whilst I don't subscribe to back-ache issues of others, I don't under-estimate the size and bulk of the D3 and zoom. I managed to break the lens hood on my 14-24 within a week due to the size of the lens/body combination going through a doorway (super glue and gaffer tape are wonderful things at times though!).

 

So long as you don't expect the same phenomenal low light, noise performance, accurate white balance, almost flawless metering and auto-ISO freedom of the D3, the M8 will not disappoint I love my M8's and Leica glass so don't get me wrong but it will be a compromise between size/weight and utility. They produce first rate results but it's a tough comparison with the D3. YMMV

 

I agree entirely. I use both - and love both. But will I carry around my D3 except when on assignment - not normally. They are different animals but very complementary. It's nice to see a post from someone who actually owns one for a change.

[grober]

I don't care how wonderful Nikon may be. There is just some brand intolerance that I cannot overcome.

 

Leica will never rank with the marketing geniuses of this planet but, by golly, that sure got me with the handling feel of the M.

 

-g

[KM-25]

I am headed to DC for a advertising shoot soon. I am bringing the D3, D300 and my trusty M3 with black and white for fun shots. The M8 is staying home because I am still thinking about selling it and don't want to mark it up more, for the time being anyway.

 

Funny thing, I have the 200-400 too and when I shoot wildlife, I end up getting my best and most salable shots when they are not boring dead center of the frame mug shots of animals that you often see posted all over the net. My best wildlife shots come at 200mm or less, so I really don't understand this whole "better reach for wildlife" thing.

 

I would never expect the D3 to be my street machine nor would I be able to count on the M8 as a high end advertising rig.

[lct]

...I know the D3 and M8 are different animals. My question is on how the quality of the images compare...

The last iteration of the French mag Chasseur d'Images (#301, 15 Feb. 2008, page 133) compares them among various digital bodies in terms of sharpness and resolution (so called 'fine detail rendition') taking into account smearing and various digital artefacts.

Not sure how they did this actually (raws? jpgs? with what lenses?) and there are apparently mistakes in the resolution charts but the sharpness results might be of some interest eventually.

 

[mooky]

Real men use 8x10 field view cameras, and carry all the necessary accessories in a large, heavy, black piece of luggage. That is what real men do.

And they scan the self-developed negatives with a Heidelberg drum scanner, convert to CMYK and send it to a manual print press.

 

Ah yes,,,,how true...........

[mooky]

,,,and then break out the Leica to keep the shooter's eye in tune....

 

Really, isn't it the ultimate reason to have the M?? To keep the eye sharp and then go to the D3 or whatever else......at least, it has always been that refreshing change of 'seeing again' that has kept a Leica 'round my neck and in hand first. Even after everything else has been put away what inspires to see is what is the best for me...a Nikon certainly is a nice piece of kit and can take nice images - but it's not a Leica.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[wag]

I have a 5D and an M8. Am considering trading the 5D for D3. Would never trade M8 for D3.

2 distinct platforms that work well together. Think of them separately and buy glass separately and you'll be very happy. Rationalize one for the other and you'll never be happy.

Wag