switching to nikon

<p>hallo "nikonians";<br>

coming fro "camp canon" i'm finnaly fond of their limited product line ( philosophy) , megapixelwar even in cropped sensors and sales-policy in general.<br>

i started with nikon at the age of 10; switched to canon as they were first in dslr, i don't regret this but since i recently handhold a nikon and all the levers and buttons still were at the same place, no relevant features hidden in custom-functions; I felt some spirit I missed all these years;<br>

i need a versatile cam; sure not just one body, but one to start with; so i could get a D3 for about € 2200.- i haven't seen the gear yet, the owner just stated that it's one year old and hardly used; ( is there an app to read the sutter-count ? ).<br>

i'd still have some highres canon for studio-work but would like to finally convert to nikon over some time.<br>

in addition i do lots of equirectangular panos; the d3 would really be hard to fit the head ( would work but rather on the edge );<br>

i don't need video ( i hate it ) and all the ponitandshoot stuff we have to pay for by inventing in a slr;<br>

my question for all who are into nikon for some time, would the d3 be still a good investment ( additional some 20 / 50 /80/ 300/ primes ) or would you suggest to start my "convertion" with something like the D700 or the upcoming D7xxx ?<br>

regarding lenses; am i correct that af-s is ultrasonic ring motor and af servo? what would be the difference between ed and e ?<br>

sorry for asking such things here but i just want to use my gear; I don't care about IS @ wideangles, superfast focus as i'm used to do it all "M";<br>

hope you are willing to give me a short insight and your point of view, how to change system best;<br>

thank you cheers;</p>

<p>Nikolai,</p>

<p>You can't hardly go wrong with a pro body. A D3 would be a great way to start on the conversion, if cost is not an object. If cost is indeed an object, a D700 will serve you very well. Although now discontinued, the D3 is still hard to beat, the D3s and the D3x provide incremental upgrades but I believe the original model is still a good investment. We'll be providing better answers if you tell us what is it that you are currently using.</p>

<p>You can get the shutter actuation count by examining the EXIF data of a picture taken with the camera. Do an internet search, there are many free/shareware programs that extract the full EXIF data, which contains a counter indicating the total shutter actuations. Photoshop and other image editing programs can also do this.</p>

<p>On the lens side, yes, AF-S is the USM equivalent and the preferred AF-drive system. ED glass is the way to go since it has a big impact on overall IQ. Most of the current Nikon line benefits from such features and others like Nano coatings and VR (IS). The prime line up is not completely up to date yet, but Nikon seems to be hard working at it, so far the 85mm seems to be only one needing upgrading (not that there's anything wrong with that lens). The 24, 50, 200 and upwards primes are all up to date with the latest technologies and superb optics.</p>

<p>Hopes this gives you a little insight.</p>

Is there any compelling feature on the D3 that the D700 doesn't have? It was twice the price when new and quite a premium to pay over the D700 for the extra FPS performance, 2 card slots and 100% viewfinder. I would hold out for the D700 replacement since it will be the next one to be updated.

The AFD versions of lenses focus very fast on the D3, D700, D300 etc, since it has a powerful af drive motor. The AFS versions of the lenses have the motor built in. You mention manual focus; one of the great things about the higher end nikons is that all the AI and AIS lenses work just as they did on the old manual bodies. There are loads of great lenses available for not much money if you shoot product, landscape, macro etc. and don't have to have af.

<p>Glad you finally came back into the light from the dark side. I don't know if I buy holding out for the latest upgrade. You get yourself in a vicious circle. Wait for the next and as soon as you take it out of the box, it will begin to be obsolete. A lot of the "upgrades" are nothing gadgets and really do not have that much effect on picture quality. Personally I don't see the attraction for video in a DSLR. If you want to do video, then get a <em>video camera</em>. </p>

<p>For a good bit less than you would pay for a D3, you can get a D700 and lose very little. Bells and whistles are often not very useful and in a lot of ways, just gadgets. The D3 and D700 share the same sensor and AF module, not to mention that the D700 has ultrasonic sensor cleaning, which the D3 does ot have.</p>

<p>As far as the older manual AI and AIS Nikons, that is all I have and they all work perfectly on my D700. The standard Nikon D700 screen is not that well suited, like most AF camera screens, for focusing manually and I do not trust the focus confirmation, it is clumsy and not always accurate. I got a microprism screen for the D700 from focusingscreen.com and it works perfectly.</p>

<p> </p>

To echo Scott's comments re: manual focusing, I also switched my screen for a spilt prism though I did ok with the stock screen as long as I wasn't shooting at f/1.4.

I would hold off purchasing unless you need the camera now - you are buying something 2 years old that will be imminently replaced and once it is the price will fall through the floor. I bought my D700 when it first came out and the price hasn't dropped much from the price I paid, I have had 2 years use out of it with minimal cost in depreciation so when it's replacement is announced I won't feel as bad taking the hit.

<blockquote>

<p>Wait for the next and as soon as you take it out of the box, it will begin to be obsolete. A lot of the "upgrades" are nothing gadgets and really do not have that much effect on picture quality. Personally I don't see the attraction for video in a DSLR.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>usually I'd wait ( have to admit ) but one of the reasons to switch is that i want to have a "real" cam again; seems like canon aims for the ultimate point&shoot hybrid-cam in the body of a slr; i don't want to pay for video and all these features people ask for because of lack of understanding, i don't need 80 super intelligent focus points, a dual procesor just to resample a pic that suffers from diffraction and noise;<br>

I read the reviews on dpreview that confirmed emilios statement, but i don't give very much to these "laboratory" tests; the only thing i'm interested in is dynamic range; I'd like to switch to nikon for personal usage first, we have plenty of canon stuff, would be hard to convert all the equipment and my fellows over night;<br>

i told this before, im searching for a versatile cam. one that handles the desert as well as one night on the ice, out of the studio to shoot some late afternoon panos ( that's what will be the hardest part as i don't know if the d3 will fit my gear ); i do a lot of work in the water ( no diving ) just a ewa 82mm bag as i don't even have to float ( watersports )<br>

well; pretty much my cam has to follow my mood. i'm aware that the upcoming d700 my only be weeks away, generally i'm not under pressure, i just got this offer for that d3 for about the same price the d700 would be, none knows what this cam will offer ( i'm sure it will feature video,... ) but on the other side the d3 is 2007, may be a good cam though but it is still a "digital device"; and in "digital time-scale" 3 years is a lot of time ?!<br>

thanks anyway for all your support;seems i have to flip a coin;<br>

cheers</p>

<p>Nikolai, at that price, and given your current plan, you should get the D3. You won't be dissapointed by the dynamic range, has less of the features you don't want and the other ones can either be ignored or turned off.</p>

<p>I was lucky enough to enter the Nikon system via a pro body, after owning several single-digit F and D bodies I can positively say they look, feel and perform like real cams should.</p>