Nikon D3, how good is it for weddings? A review by Marc Williams

In another thread, Nadine asked that I do a review of the Nikon D3 for wedding work. Okay, here ya go:

 

I've been shooting Canon for years now. Great system. Prior to that I used Nikon 1DXs, so I'm familiar and practiced at the control

layout and ergonomics as much as I am that of the Canons.

 

Recently I sold a 1.3X crop factor 1DMKIII and replaced it with a FF Nikon D3. This is Nikon's first FF camera. What I was most

interested in was the reported high ISO performance of D3, and the fact that

Zeiss makes fully auto coupled manual focus optics in the F mount ... which I would use for personal work, not weddings.

 

For now, I have retained a Canon 1DsMKIII which produces larger files than the D3, but is noisier at really high ISOs. That may well

change soon as I am beginning to use a Hasselblad H3D-II/31 for

wedding images in need of large files. The Canon 1DsMKIII cannot compete with this Medium Format camera in terms of Image Quality

... and the AF speed and ISO performance of the H system has

improved exponentially in the past year or so ... to make it useable even the lowest light. Admittedly, this is NOT the usual gear

scenario for wedding shooters ... so we'll stick with just reviewing the D3.

 

With AFS lenses the D3 is plenty quick focusing. Some of the older lenses need updating. But the newer AFS Nano-coated Nikon

lenses are spectacular performers. I secured the following AFS optics: 14-

24/2.8G ED, 24-70/2.8G ED, 100/2.8 Macro VR (which I use with a 1.4X), and 200/1.8 VR which is a 280/2.8 with the 1.4X ... and added

non AFS 85/1.4 and 135/2. The 85/1.4 is slower focussing, but

faster than my Canon 85/1.2L MKII. The Canon 135/2L is better optically and in AF speed than the Nikon 135/2DC.

 

I like the ergonomics of the Nikon a bit better than my Canon. But I always did. I like the on-off switch and light switch on the shutter

button. I like the feel of the Nikon in hand better. What I didn't like on

the D3 is that there's no provision for a hand strap like there is on the 1 series Canons. I had to use an add-on to get a hand strap on the

Nikon.

 

Batteries are the same size as those for the MKIII Canons ... but you have to remove an outer battery cap on the Nikon to swap

batteries ... and extra step when you don't have time for extra steps. The

good news is that I've not had to swap batteries even after 8 hours of shooting.

 

LCD readout on the Nikon grip was designed for partially blind people ... huge lettering I can see without putting on my reading glasses

... much better than my Canon MKIII.

 

Menu navigation is is better organized, more intuitive, and faster than that of my Canon.

 

Since Canon added the direct focus-point navigation to the joy-stick via a firmware upgrade, it's the equal to the D3 which uses the main

control wheel on the back. In fact, the flaw of the Nikon is that if the

image review is on the LCD when you go to move the focus point it scrolls the images rather than moving the focus point. I've done this

waaaaay to many times in my rush to change focus points. Gotta

tap the shutter button first before moving the focus point.

 

Flash ... no contest. Nikon was more consistent shot-to-shot than my Canon.

 

Image Quality: IMO for most wedding work the D3 produces files with plenty of resolution even after cropping. But this is based on the

fact that most wedding prints are 8X10s. At 17X22 the Canon

1DsMKIII starts to show its stuff. However, I think the Canon 1DsMKIII AA filter is to aggressive and softens the image details to much.

There are a lot of landscape shooters that agree with me on this

point. I may have the AA filter replaced by Life Pixel ( www.lifepixel.com ).

 

ISO performance: I've found the Canon 1DsMKIII to be less capable than the 1DsMKII in higher ISO noise performance ... especially

noise in the darks. Not as bad as the 1Ds, but not as good as the

1DsMKII. It is here that the Nikon pulls way ahead. I have shot ISO 10,000 shots that were quite nice with the D3. You really have to

pay attention to exposure, but if you do, the images look very good.

ISO 2000 is a no brainer for the D3 and look as good as 800 from the Canon.

 

I'm late for work now and don't have time to proof this post, so forgive any type-os ... I will post some shots when I get back.

 

-Marc

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Marc,

 

Thanks for posting your opinions. I've shot 7 weddings with the D3 now and it is a incredible tool for wedding

photographers, especially when combined with the 24-70 which is my primary lens. My partner shoots with a 5D and

1D Mark III so I get a good chance to compare the cameras in action and there is no question in my mind, who's

the champ.

 

Paul

The Nikon battery life is decent: almost three weeks of use on a single charge.

 

 

 

I have done one wedding with the D3. With strong window backlight, the small spot meter (with a SB-800) seemed to give the best results. [i'm not sure if the white dress had some confusing info for the metering system, but once I had good images, it was 'small' spot meter for most of the wedding.]

Nice review Marc!

 

We've had our D3 for a little over a month (6 weddings) and it definitely lived up to all the "hype". Post processing takes less time since the files need very little work. The 5:4 crop is another GREAT feature that takes all the guess work out of framing all those possible wall shots (formals).

Thanks, Marc.

Hi Marc,

 

Here's my opinion of the D3 for weddings. I've done 5 weddings now and a few other things.

 

Low Light Leader - This is for sure. At ISO3200, photos are great. lots of the time now I have the camera set for Auto-Iso with 3200 as the max. This is a great setting for the reception. It just works. And I'm surprised at how little light the D3 needs to focus.

 

Scene recognition - I love this feature and it works ( most of the time ). For the bridal portraits, couple formals, family portraits it identifies the faces and the entire scene correctly. However there are times it does not work, the bride walking down the isle, dance photos where there are people everywhere,

 

4x5 crop - Great - I use the 14 bit color ( increase file size) and then the 4x5 crop (reduces files size). And I never have to guess about fitting everybody in.

 

Live View - I never thought I'd use it. But I found it convienent for over-head dance shots.

 

Auto-Iso is extreme accurate - It does get a little confused by lots of Green leaves in the back ground. I'm now trying out the Prophoto ColorRight to set custom white balance.

 

Flash - I've been sold on using the SB800 on a bracket with the origianl Fong Lightspear. For all the controversy, it still works and I don't have to buy something else.

 

With the D3, I believe my post processing in Lightroom has been cut in half.

marc - I confess I skipped to the ISO performance. that's the only thing I care about :-)

 

would you consider sharing a high ISO file or two? perhaps at 2000, 3200 and 10k ISO? just an idea. I prefer seeing files from an actual situation compared with a lab test :-)

Conrad, while I am not a professional wedding photographer, when I reviewed the D3 for photo.net, I arranged to be a 2nd shooter at a friend's wedding:

http://www.photo.net/equipment/nikon/D3/D3-review

 

And you can find additional images from that wedding in the following folder:

http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=814998

 

All but one image in that folder were captured with the D3. The only one captured with a D300 is the one when the bride and her father started the procession. The lens and ISO used are specified in each case. There are a number of 3200 and 6400 images.

It's not the D3 but the just announced D700 which I expect will be the camera of choice for many wedding photographers.

 

Same sensor, same high-ISO performance, lighter, cheaper, onboard flash for CLS triggering, sensor cleaner. And available soon....

 

WOW, go Nikon!

"Same sensor, same high-ISO performance, lighter, cheaper, onboard flash for CLS triggering, sensor cleaner. And available soon.... "

 

But no second CF slot, and you needto add the MB-10D and a second battery for a vertical grip , grater battery capacity and higher FPS.

Same sensor does not necessarily mean the same high-ISO performance. A lot of that also depends on the electronics around that same sensor, and the D700 is almost a year newer. Potentially, again, potentially, the D700 can be even better, but we need to judge by actual side-by-side test results.

Shun, those are some remarkable photos. It appears that in many cases one can just "trash the flash" and turn up the ISO. The implications are staggering for all indoor and low-light photographers.

 

--Lannie

Having tried out the D3 on one wedding, this is not a camera I would want. The show stopper for me was the loudness of it's shutter. While the D300 borders on the acceptable, the D3 goes way beyond. Nikon didn't think about wedding photographers when they designed this camera.

 

Also the new 12-24/2.8, while being a nice piece of glass, has limited use for my wedding work and is much too large to additionally lug around. I prefer my 10.5 fisheye: small, sharp and effective for those few special shots.

 

"It appears that in many cases one can just "trash the flash" and turn up the ISO.". While "Nikon affiliate" Mike Colon may be preaching this, and it may indeed work if you shoot all b/w, in color it usually isn't true. The spectral quality of low light is usually so bad that the color casts are unacceptable, even with RAW color temperature tweaking. Brides do want good color, even in low-light situations.

 

On the other hand, I recommend upgrading to the new SB900 flash if you've been using the 800 or 600.

you mean 14-24/2.8. There is no 12-24/2.8.