D3s or D800 to purchase?

[cardens]

<p>I have seen this question asked here, but my situation is a little different, so I am just looking for some input/advice.</p>

<p>First - I have been a professional wedding photographer for 5 years. As of last year we began cinematography in our studio as well. <br>

I shoot weddings with a d700. I shoot cinematography with D7000's.<br>

My d700 has been worked non stop for about 3 years and although it still does the job, it is time for a replacement. With the recent release of the d800 I thought that would be the answer. However I rented one for a weekend and the file sizes range from 20-40 megabytes per image. So that got me thinking if I get the d800 i will need to buy more storage (external drives) as well as invest in more DVD's (cases stickers etc) for the brides final product. Also more than likely invest in more RAW on both my imac and macbook pro.<br>

Considering my internet is DSL ( no other option) just the uploading for albums and prints would be a factor with the file size. On a side not I LOVED the product it produced with filming a wedding.<br>

Before the d800 came out I was leaning toward the D3s. Now after more consideration am leaning that way again. <br>

The d800 draws me because it is "new" technology and the images are more detailed (that a photographer could see anyway).</p>

<p>Any input on or ideas on this situation would be of much help.</p>

<p>Thank you</p>

<p> </p>

[Andrew Garrard]

<p>Veronica - they're <i>very</i> different cameras.<br />

<br />

The D3s is extremely high speed and extremely good in low light. The resolution, obviously, is exactly the same as the D700, and the dynamic range isn't all that special.<br />

The D800 has extremely large dynamic range and huge resolution, but it's slow. In low light it's comparable to the D3s if you downsample and smooth a bit, but probably not better.<br />

The handling of the two is also going to be very different, at least by default.<br />

<br />

I suggest that if you use your D700 with a battery grip for speed, and you're often at the high end of the ISO range, the D3s may be your better option. If your D700 is bare, the frame rate is usually low, and you're usually in decent light, I'd consider the D800. Bear in mind that the D800 might be a better replacement for the D7000 than the D700, since its crop mode is similar (except the frame rate).<br />

<br />

Are you printing 12MP images without upsampling them? If you're creating higher-resolution intermediates for printing anyway, the D800 may not hurt you; if you're not, you can always downsample the D800 images except for the largest shots, and have more leeway for cropping. I'd not let the DSL connection dictate much.<br />

<br />

Hope that helps. Others with both cameras or a pro wedding business may advise better...</p>

[ShunCheung]

<p>Veronica, I am surprised that you need to upload RAW files for your clients to review? I have a D800E myself so I understand that storage issue, but that is only our (as photographers) issue. For clients, they always review downsized JPEGs.</p>

<p>Again, at this point with those D600 rumors flying, I would say wait another month and half or so and see whether Nikon has more alternatives. By Photokina (September 18), we should know the details about new cameras. There might not be another new FX body this year, but at least you know more by then.</p>

[waltflanagan]

<p>Why does your D700 need replacement? Why not another D700? Are you looking at a used D3s? New ones are not that cheap. What is your budget? Why not a D4?</p>

[cardens]

<p>Thanks Andrew. A few very good points there. I currently use the battery grip on the d700 and am always using available light and pushing my ISO capabilities.</p>

<p>I apologize Shun, I worded that wrong, I do upload smaller samples for previews. But I was thinking for print orders the images sizes will be larger even in jpg.</p>

<p>Walt - My D700 is at over 225k clicks right now and I have noticed things starting to not work as well as it they once did. My AF is way slower then it used to be. If I was not looking for a camera with video capabilities I would probably just go for another d700. But I really want to have that on my next camera so when I am filming weddings I have an extra (better) body for that.</p>

<p>I am looking at used d3s's. Something under 5k clicks. New ones are going for about $6000. Which is not in my budget.</p>

<p>As far as the D4, I do not see it being worth the return in my circumstance. My clients will be getting the same end product and putting out that kind of money just does not seem worth it to me at this point.</p>

<p> </p>

[Peter_in_PA]

<p>I'd wait for the new "D600" or whatever if I were you.</p>

<p>But if you got a D800, you don't HAVE to use the maximum resolution for everything. Shoot at max res, then downsample to what's required for the prints, and not more...</p>

[joseph_smith3]

<p>Veronica, this article on the D 800 and D 800E especially the comments about using the crop factors and lenses needed for image quality may have a bearing on your camera choice.</p>

<p><a href="http://www.naturescapes.net/docs/index.php/category-equipment-reviews/34-equipment-reviews/512-ej-peiker">http://www.naturescapes.net/docs/index.php/category-equipment-reviews/34-equipment-reviews/512-ej-peiker</a></p>

<p>Joe Smith</p>

[eric_arnold]

<p>probably not what you want to hear, but the d7000 has better video than the D3s and the d4 has nikon's best DSLR video implementation to date. i have a D3s, but if i was doing pro video work, i would get a D4 which has 1080p and a newer, better implementation of video. the D3s is only 720p and the video feature is somewhat of an afterthought. you're limited to 5 minute clips, compared to 20 minutes with the d4. the D3s doesnt even have a dedicated video record button! if the D3s and D4 had equal video capabilities, that would be one thing. but they clearly don't.</p>

 

[owen_omeara]

I agree with Eric. In your situation I would jump on the d4 in a heartbeat if I could ford it. The video from that camera is

outstanding and the high ISO ability are the best around. Good luck.

 

-Owen

[elliot1]

<p><em>"</em><em>I LOVED the product it produced" </em>Isn't that what you really want/need? The other 'issues' you bring up are easily resolved.</p>

[paul_k1664875007]

<p>Hi Veronica</p>

<p>I still shoot with a D3 and since about a month and a half with a D800</p>

<p>The differences between the D3 and D3s (video, dustshaker and for me most importantly as I also shoot catwalk about 1-1,5 stop better high ISO) were not enough to make me upgrade from the D3 to the D3s (I rarely shoot catwalk over 3600-4000 ISO)</p>

<p>The announcement of the D800/E on the other hand for me was enough reason to sell my back up D3, as I looked forward to the DX crop of 15 megapixel (very usefull as I also shoot surf, as I then no longer need to shoot with a 600mm, excellent lens but too big and heavy to comfortly run around with all day long), with video as an added bonus, and I was pleasantly surprised to discover the AF and high ISO were on par with the D3.</p>

<p>The D3s obviously is the better camera as far as top high ISO, AF, and professional feel of the total package (like built quality, 2 CF cards and battery life) is concerned. Relative negatives are the 'only' 12 megapixels, and apparently not top notch video.</p>

<p>The D800 does not have the snappy AF, and top high ISO of the D3(s) and not the same built quality either (but apparently is similar to the D700 as far as the last item is concerned). But yes, the FF higher resolution is absolutely something you can't ignore and for some kind of pictures can be decisive, and not as good as the D3/D3S also implies it's still a very good camera (don't believe a the negative 'reports' you find on the forums of some sites on the net)</p>

<p>I also have shot my fair share of weddings with the D3, so I think I can make a statement on the D800 as a wedding camera, and make a comparison between it and the D3(s)</p>

 

<p> I think the D3s and D800 are both excellent camera's for shooting weddings, but if you want to make a very critical judgement with for each a different purpose.</p>

<p>The D3 and D700 (which have similar high ISO performance) and the D3 are the number one choice for the PJ part of a wedding shoot, the high ISO shots in eg church, or behind the scenes photography. For the formal shots the 12 megapixel will do, but leaves little room for cropping and with big enlargements maybe not optimal resolution for details.</p>

<p>The D800 on the other hand has more then enough resolution for big enlargements, and cropping, and the AF and high ISO will do quite nicely, although not as outstanding as the D3/D700 and D3s. The improved video is an added bonus, and with the grip (either the expensive, but very solid, original one, which I got, or the cheap knock off one which according to many reports do the job just as good) make a very nice package for which you dont even need the D4 battery. The 4 fps for the D800 compared to the 9 fps of the D3 IMO is not relevant for wedding photography</p>

<p>On the other hand the high resolution does have its disadvantages.Yes you will need bigger CF cards, a faster computer if you like me have a system that can handle the 12 megapixel files nicely, and yes it puts higher demands on the lenses you use (I found out my trusty workhorse 2.8/80-200 AFD push pull zoom couldn't handle it, and had to upgrade to a 2.8/70-200 VR2)</p>

<p>But I still have a D3 next to the D800, and IMO the two complement each other quite nicely. For weddings you could use the D800 for the formal and group shots, and for the PJ part the D3 (in your case the D700) is still a viable option.</p>

<p>So my suggestion is to, for the moment, get a D800 to extend part of your wedding photography (high resloution formal and group shots and the likes), and hold on to you D700's for the rest.</p>

<p>Maybe in future get a second hand D3s (although many relatively lightly used secondhand ones are on the market right now being sold by non pro photographers) and if/when money allows maybe a D4 (which in the longer term wil no doubt drop in price)</p>

<p>Yes, you will have to take a long hard look at your iMac and Macbook, and storage, but the cost of the extra DVD's should not be a factor to be taken seriously into account. I don't know if with your remarks on uploading the albums and prints you mean that you do this with the final prints in the full resolution, but if, as I suggested, you don't shoot everything with the D800 but also with (for the time being untill you get a D3s/D4) the D700, that might not need to become a major problem. Anmd also, if a D800 shot is downsized to 12 megapixel, the high detail still remains intact while the size obviously won't be as bothersome as in the original size</p>

<p>My two cents</p>

 

[cyrus_procter]

<p>The D3s's video is unuseable as a professional video camera, and that comes from experience as a cinematographer shooting a feature length film with 3 D3s's as the primary cameras. The D7000 is great, but the D800 is really video king amongst DSLRs. The D4 sadly, spits a very soft image in FX and DX, only in CX is its video really sharp, but in that case, just get a nikon V1, will give you the same results as the D4 video wise (Except for the HDMI uncompressed out of course).<br /><br />In terms of video my rates would be:<br>

<br />D800 (for uses with uncompressed video, its irreplaceable)<br>

D7000 (Good but about the same as almost all other DSLRs)<br>

D4 (Great video mode, but soft at FX & DX, extremely disappointing but I suppose for the right thing not unusable, i.e. weddings maybe better with a softer video, but I hate anything I can't take off, I prefer as "raw" video as possible and soften it in post if I decide)<br>

D3s (really good if you want to post a home video clip on youtube, but you don't need a $5000 camera for that, your smart phone will do just fine) Ok so its not quite that bad, but if you are doing any kind of professional video, I would sooner shoot it on my iPhone, no joke. One of the main reasons actually has nothing to do with its 720P video mode or nasty motion-JPEG only codec (which for still photographers would be equivalent to shooting the D3s in small-basic-ccompressed-JPEGs), its because there is no true manual mode, you can trick the camera into setting a manual mode, but while you are shooting when exposure changes occur the camera will vary the shutter and ISO without showing an indication (your setting swill not change on the LCD screen), and this will often result in dropped frames, basically, unusable for professional video.</p>

<p>I would wait to see what the D600\D400\D7100 produce video wise. Also have you ever considered doing something like a D3s + keep your D7000 for video only? Because there is no good PJ styled camera Nikon makes that also has amazing video. The only real professional DSLR Nikon makes with good professional video is the D800, IMO</p>

[ShunCheung]

<p>While one can certain use a D800 as a wedding camera, IMO 36MP is simply an overkill and it carries the burden of 36MP, which means you need more memory cards, a faster computer for post processing, and more disk drives for storage. Although you are not exactly shooting sports, I still prefer to have more than 4 frames/sec as occasionally I need faster during a wedding. However, for the purpose of displaying to your client, you are going to downsize to small to medium-sized JPEGs; therefore, whether you are starting from 12MP, 24MP or 36MP should not make much difference.</p>

<p>Barring another natural disaster (God forbid), I have little doubt that Nikon will have more new cameras and lenses to announce before Photokina. Unless you must buy something immediately, I think you are better off waiting a few weeks and then decide. Nikon may or may not announce something new that meets your needs better, but at least you should have more information.</p>

[Andrew Garrard]

<p>Shun: I think that's the first time I've ever seen you suggest paying attention to rumours (even very educated ones)!</p>

[orcama60]

<p>My pennies for the D3s.</p>

[orcama60]

<p>Veronica, I respect everything everybody said about the D800 which should be use only for landscaping not for wedding. Read what Thom Hogan have said about this camera, the pros and cons and who should have it. I don't think that you need the D800 .. just because it is the newest camera in the market. I do believe you should go for the D3s or probably the D4. Also, you do not want to crop the D800 and read what Thom Hogan is saying about that. Thom is a professional photographer and Nikon expert. You should not rely on anybody else but him before you buy a camera but if you want to have the newest, then go for. <br>

Beside, I am not going to get into technical details about the D800. Thom Hogan will explain much better so he is the expert not me. But if I had enough money to buy a camera now, I would never get the D800 but probably the D3s or D4 or probably wait for the rumored D600 / D400. </p>

[cyrus_procter]

<blockquote>

<p>Thom is a professional photographer and Nikon expert</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Lol! Oh what a coincidence, so are good portion of the people on this forum ;-)</p>

[ilkka_nissila]

<p>As others have pointed out the D800 is a relatively slow camera, and while it keeps up in most regular photography, in some situations at events its buffer is easily filled; I can imagine for example that during the ceremony this would happen. I find that I often run against the problem that it simply becomes unresponsive until it clears the files to card even though I use 95MB/s SD cards with the D800. What is nice is that the D800 is somewhat quieter than the D700, so you can expect it will create a bit less distraction during the ceremony (the D4 should be still better). The D800's AF works a bit more surely in the dark than the earlier generation's; I find it hunts less in indoor available light. However, because of their larger buffer (in terms of number of frames), I think the D4 and D3s would be better suited for much of wedding work, especially in available light and in the church and reception. I find the fact that the D800 has such a small buffer annoying, even though I know it should be easy enough to adjust to it by shooting fewer frames, in practice it hasn't been so easy after having used a fast camera (the D3 in my case) for many years.</p>

<p>The D800 on the other hand is great for formal photography and general outdoor work if the pace of the action is not fast, and while I haven't yet shot group shots with it, I imagine it will excel there. 12MP is too little for high quality large prints of large groups IMO. I have used the D3X for groups with lighting and the difference is remarkable. However, if large prints are not made, or if the customer is not interested in them then I imagine lower resolution will suffice. Personally I think it is a good idea to have one high resolution camera for formals and if traditional formal photography is your genre then definitely the D800 is your camera.</p>

<p>I got the D800 because I wanted a quieter (mirror slap!) high ISO capable camera than the D700 and a bit more resolution; the D4 would have been a better match for my needs but it wasn't within my budget. I love the D800's output but I do not like its ergonomics (I'd like to throw the MB-D12 to the birds, it has weird bumps and feels unbalanced with the camera, and don't let me get started about the viewfinder) and the computer storage upgrades to deal with 36MP files will be a financial issue for me in the long run. However, one cannot complain about the image quality. It's first rate. If you do not shoot a lot of frames at each wedding (instead, taking a more "designed" than "captured" approach) then probably the D800 is ideal for you. I am always looking to optimize my shots with respect to the subject's expressions and focus in candids and use wide apertures a lot, and that's why I end up with a lot of frames, which then translates to long post-processing times. I am getting faster storage but it's not cheap to make this issue go away, if it ever truly goes away. Still, it is clear that higher resolution is the future and new sensors will be designed to deliver that, even though, somewhat paradoxically, presentation media is moving screens that are 3MP or 5MP at best (instead of prints on paper which used to be the norm). I am just rolling my eyes in thinking about the way the world works here. :-)</p>

<p>I am not sure if I made the decision any easier. Ideally one would have both a fast camera, and a high resolution camera, at events like weddings. However, in the absence of unlimited funds we have to choose. </p>

[ShunCheung]

<p>As we have said over and over, the D800 is intended to be a slow camera, perhaps best on a tripod as a "medium format replacement." However, I think Ilkka must be capturing a lot of consecutive shots to fill the D800's buffer. That only happened to me once early on in March when I first got the D800 test sample. I was using dual CF/SD memory cards in the backup mode capturing humming birds. My SD card was an "out of date" one I bought a year ago for the D7000. Its write speed is now considered slow for those massive D800 files. As soon as I removed that SD card and used CF only, the buffer full problem was gone. I have since bought a 45MB/sec SDXC card to work with my mid-speed CF cards, and I have yet to fill the D800/D800E buffer again, but of course when I shoot wildlife, I tend to use other cameras.</p>

<p>I would say using a D800 for weddings is a bit like a "soccer mom" taking kids to school and going grocery shopping in a big pick up truck designed to tow trailers. It can work that way but you may find the truck using a lot more gasoline than a passenger sedan or mini van.</p>

<p>If the D800 happens to fit your well, great. If not, as I suggested to Oliver Racz, you are better off waiting a bit and see whether something newer will arrive, maybe soon or maybe not: <a href="00aaOp">http://www.photo.net/nikon-camera-forum/00aaOp</a><br>

If you cannot wait, getting another D700, perhaps used, is always an option to bridge the gap until something that is a better fit shows up.</p>

<p> </p>

[cardens]

<p>Thank you everyone for the awesome responses. I am thinking at this point I am going with the d3s and may just buy another d7000 for video (since I want a 3rd camera). Eventually buy a d800 for video (maybe in a year or so).<br>

The d3s has the speed I want for photography and when compared to the d800 (in terms of photography) is exactly what I need.</p>

<p>I don't need a slow camera that will take up tons of space for weddings. It may just give me an additional headache.</p>

<p>Thank you again everyone</p>