Buy a new Nikon D3 now or wait?

[tomcarter]

Thinking about purchasing a new D3 before I embark on my next world photo adventure, though it seems lots of impressive cameras are emerging lately, most with more mpx than the D3. Should I hold off, or will the D3 remain as the standard in photojournalism?
Thanks!

[Adaptive]

Don't get caught up in the megapixel hype. More megapixels doesn't mean anything.
A pro can take better pictures with a 5 megapixel camera than a novice with a 40 megapixel camera.
megapixels aren't a magical solution to make your images any better than what they already are.

8megapixels is all you really need for most jobs in the world today.
I've seen billboards on the interstate made from images taken by a (12? megapixel) D2x.

What are you currently shooting with? You should be asking yourself and others: "will full frame and higher pixel density benefit me in my area of interest in photography?".
If yes then the D700 is just as good as the D3 and at about a 50% discounted price. But without the "cool status" of the D3. If you just want to look cool get a Hasselblad.

Asking only about megapixels makes you sound like a newbie amateur, go to ritz and stand there by the sales counter for 30 minutes.
Every random person & soccer mom looking to buy a new point-and-shoot asks about megapixels before anything else..

[Legitimate Name]

Adaptive is right. It's the photographer that makes the camera, not vice versa.

[savona]

Times change so quickly with this new gear its not worth trying to keep up. I say if what you have does the job, leave it be. Unless a new piece of equipment is going to seriously change your productivity, keep what you have.

[studio206]

i say if you're going to waste time and money buying every new SLR that comes out, invest in a medium format camera with a digital back. they are better in every way although more expensive but for under 10g you can buy the mamiya 645 with digital back and then later upgrade to either a leaf back or a phase back. i use a hasselblad h1 at school which has been out dated for awhile and still takes a better pictures. so in my opinion, instead of trying to keep up with nikon's and canon's war, i would rather invest the money into something that isn't going to be outdated for years to come.

[jstuedle]

I've shot the D3 for 2 years now and won't do without it. The D700 is nice, but the D3 fits my hands, takes more abuse, built like a tank, and the image quality is outstanding. The D3S with its higher ISO is more capable in very low light, but the D3 at 6400 does a very good job with fast glass in all but the darkers situations. IMHO, the D3 is a long term keeper.

[Adaptive]

Yeah I have shot with D3 a few times and my second shooter (weddings) uses a D3.
I love seeing the different photos we get me shooting 1dmk3 or 1dsmk3 and him shooting D3.

We are both jealous of eachothers cameras and love how both of our cameras excell in different aspects of the job.

[LuisV]

Well the question is a bit open ended. Buy now or wait.... for what? A new D3? It's already out in the D3s. This means, at least, another 18 months to 2 years before a D4.... or whatever.

These questions always garner varried responses. The end result is always the same.... "it depends on your needs".

So, having said that, I will tell you what I think having shot with numerous Nikon SLRs. If you have the budget, then go pro. While the D700 is a wonderful body, it is not a D3s. I am not going to justify the price delta. It really depends on whether or not you feel it's worth it. For me it is...... for you it may not be.

Once we are over the price issue, the pro body offers a number of benefits. One is durability. I shot the D2X for 5 years before I got (just bought it) the D3x. The D2x is still being used. The D2x has roughly 150K images run through it so far and it has many more to go. Suffices to say it is an investment. Just like a great lens.

The D3 is significantly faster than the previous versions. 12MP full frame 9fps is awesome. 130 shot buffer. Dual CF slots to handle UDMA cards. (You can take advantage of cards like the SanDisk Extreme Pros at 90mb/s - camera may not write that fast but it will definately be faster than the older cards) This is MUCH better than having one CF and one (much slower) SD slot. The full frame sensor will give you better low light and/or high ISO response. The AF system is AWESOME! The ergonomics of the body are second to none..... you can go on for a while about this camera.

The MP crap was answered and I agree. 12MP is awesome. I sold hundreds of 12MP shots from the D2x printed to sizes exceeding 24x36. You are more than fine. Unless you have a overwhelming need for pixels vs. speed, then the D3 is the way to go.

In the end, it boils down to you....... if you can take advantage of the capabilities a camera like this gives you.... if you can afford the price tag... if you can afford the added products to help you (memory cards, tripods and heads, lenses, etc, etc).... and you are not going to swap the body in a year when the new D4 comes out (which is inevitable) then.... definately go for it. I come back to the same thing..... look at it as a long term investment and you'll do fine......

If you plane to swap in a year when the added pixels or 12fps camera comes out..... then I would go with the cheaper D700 because you will lose less money.

[studio206]

this is an old post that's why.

[LuisV]

ROFLMAO!

Too funny.... I only saw the recent answer on the post and did not see the original post date of the thread....

Oh well......answer is still true.....