Used D3S or new D800. Thoughts?

[john_mcclain]

<p>Hey everyone. I thought I would ask the forum this question that has been floating around my mind for a while. I'm a pretty non-specialized photographer, meaning I shoot just about anything. A large amount of my work is sports photography but this is not where I make most of my money. I also shoot weddings, portraits, events, concerts, all sorts. So, I guess you can say I have a diverse set of needs for my equipment.<br>

Currently, I shoot with a D3 and a D700. They obviously compliment each other perfectly due to the same sensor within them. I use the D3 as my primary sports body with the D700 as a second body usually with a super wide or mid zoom attached. For weddings, again the D3 takes the lead with the D700 as the second. For everything else I use the D700 primarily. <br>

Before going full frame I shot with a D300s/D90 setup. The low light capabilities of the D3/D700 were astounding when I first got them. To this day I still am amazed at some of the photos they can produce, but I am finding more and more that I require better low light performance for my photos. Dimly-lit gymnasiums and churches are the main reasons. So, I need to upgrade one of my cameras relatively soon.<br>

My thinking is this: the D3s is astounding in low light, we all know that. I have no problem shooting at ISO 6400 currently so I probably won't mind shooting at ISO 12,800 on the D3s. The body is exactly the same as my D3 so no learning curve there. And it still shoots at 12 MP so no additional hardware is needed to handle the files. At first, I thought this would be my clear winner for sports and weddings.<br>

Then I got to thinking about the D800... At first I thought that 36MP was overkill for a DSLR, especially for my needs. But there are little things I thought of: the D800 is supposedly about 1 stop better than the D3/D700 (usable 12,800 vs. 6400??) with better DR. The 36MP image when downsized to 12MP would be sharper than a native 12MP image. The DX crop mode would give me around 15MP which would be great for daylight field sports. The D800's video mode would make a great low-light camera for me ( I already have GH2's). <br>

I realize there are some compromises using the D800 as a sports camera like low framerate and huge file sizes. I would imagine that for sports I would only use it as a primary body when low light is an issue and as a second body all other times. For weddings, it would become my primary. Everything else will be a job to job decision for using the D3 or D800.<br>

<br />Based on all this, do you think the D800 would make a suitable replacement for my D700 and would satisfy my needs alongside my D3? Or would the D3s be a better choice? My thinking is the D800 would work, but I would love to hear your input. If I've left any info out that you'd like to know, please ask! Thanks for reading!!</p>

[studio460]

<p>I'm lucky enough to have both a D3s and a D800E. I only shoot my D800E for studio, portraits, and landscape (time-exposure cityscapes, actually). Basically, slow, careful stuff. Anything event-related or available light, it's the D3s.</p>

<p>Now, many tend to make the down-sampling argument in favor of the D800 (i.e., down-sampling a 36MP image to 12MP reduces apparent noise). But, I think that's the wrong test. I did the opposite, I up-sampled my D3s' high-ISO images to D800E-resolution, and made my comparisons. The D3s noise was like fine-grained sand. The D800E's high-ISO images had blotches of chroma noise at same ISO. I would guess, given a choice, most would prefer the up-sampled D3s image over the high-ISO D800E image.</p>

<p>That, and based on your comments, I think you may be better served with a D3s.</p>

[studio460]

<p>By the way, I shot an event with both the D3s and D800E. The control layout between the two bodies is so different (particularly, ISO and white balance), that I wouldn't recommend it, and I'm now looking for a second D3s body.</p>

[ShunCheung]

<p>John, with the D800E, you are stuck at 4 frames/sec if you capture the entire FX frame; there is no way around it. If I were you, I would get a D3S (or better yet, D4).</p>

[elliot1]

<p><em>"</em><em>... D800 would make a suitable replacement for my D700 and would satisfy my needs alongside my D3"</em> Yes, absolutely. That is the combination I use. While I rarely use my D3 anymore, it is certainly still an excellent/capable body, just as it was when it was first introduced, and I have no hesitation grabbing one over the other (although I do prefer the D800).<br>

<br>

<em>"</em><em>But, I think that's the wrong test."</em> Not for someone who typically make smaller prints. I did up sampling tests before I bought my D800 and found the D800 delivers more detail (IMHO) at any ISO compared to the D3 (not sure about the D3S but it is my understanding that there is little difference in IQ between the two). As always, a lot depends on post processing.</p>

 

[vivid_earth_photographics]

<p>Something I didn't consider until I got the D800 was what shooting with the 1.5x crop would actually be like with it. I love the camera overall so don't get me wrong. But when shooting in crop mode, that huge viewfinder gives way to having to compose within a small rectangle in the center of the viewfinder. You can either have framing line illuminate in red as you press the shutter or you can fog out the boarders that are included in only full frame shots. But either way, composing this way for long periods is really no fun I found. So I just shoot full frame and then crop if needed later. My conclusion is that crop shooting is for crop sensors--not full frame cameras.<br>

And fwiw, the only other thing I do not like at all about the D800 (and other new Nikon models) is the AF mode switch/button. Not fun to use. Hate having to take the time to fiddle more than with the old set up on the D300, for instance. </p>

[dan_south]

A D800 would not be my first choice for events, sports, weddings, or concerts. It's not a fast camera and the AF can be

unpredictable, especially with moving subjects. I think the D3s would be preferable.

 

For portraits, the D800 is a good choice, but be prepared to spend a lot of time fixing skin flaws, as that sensor records

every detail.

 

I recommend that you replace your D3 with a D3s first and then later consider a D800 for a high resolution option.

[elliot1]

<p><em>"</em><em> the AF can be unpredictable"</em> in what way?</p>

[robert_bouknight1]

<p>I think I am getting better overall results (AF keeper ratio, noise, (auto)white balance, and so on) this year shooting BBall in dismal light with a D800 & D600 vs. last year with a D3s. All 3 seem pretty close overall in bad light. What the D800 offers vs. your current setup are the benefits associated with more MP when the light is good.</p>

<p>Never had a D3, but the D3s was notably better than the D700 I had in poor light.</p>

<p>Wish Nikon would stuff a D600 sensor in a D800 body and jack the FX frame rate up a little to 6 or 7 FPS. Guess we will have to wait, am sure it would be a D4 killer. Wider AF array with more AF points would be good, also.</p>

[dan_south]

Volumes have been written about the AF on the D4 and the D800. After missing some critical shots at events - while

using f/2.8 lenses - I no longer trust the D800 for this type of shooting.

[studio460]

<p>Kyle said:</p>

<blockquote>

<p>But when shooting in crop mode, that huge viewfinder gives way to having to compose within a small rectangle in the center of the viewfinder . . . composing this way for long periods is really no fun I found.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Yeah, I tried crop mode on my D800E just to see what it looked like. It feels a bit awkward and unnatural.</p>

[studio460]

<p>Elliot said:</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>I did up sampling tests before I bought my D800 and found the D800 delivers more detail (IMHO) at any ISO compared to the D3 (not sure about the D3S but it is my understanding that there is little difference in IQ between the two)</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Not true when up-sampling. Especially with the lowered noise floor of the D3s, the comparisons were quite surprising. There was more detail in the 12MP D3s image, and more blotchy areas of chroma noise (severely degrading detail) in the D800E images.</p>

[kylebybee]

<p>How about the 24 mp D3X?</p>

[john_mcclain]

<p>Thanks everyone for your input! Weight has definitely shifted to the D3s side. I'm going to hold off for about a month or so to be sure and to feel out different deals. As it is, a used D3s in good condition is still more expensive than a new D800. Refurbished D800's are even less expensive. May end up renting a D800 and borrowing a D3s to do my own comparisons. Everyone shoots/post processes differently so I think it would be beneficial to see their differences when applied to my own work.</p>

[john_mcclain]

<p>Not that price will be the end-all deciding factor, but it certainly contributes heavily to the equation. Is the added low-light performance of the D3s versus the D800 worth the extra $1200 or more? If the difference is anything less than a stop of quality ISO performance, then I say no.</p>

[kgavin]

<p>If improved low-light performance is your goal, the D3s is the camera to get without question. I have a D800 and a D700+grip (my poor man's D3). This combination is the greatest thing in the world for me because I love portrait and landscape work, and my D800 is perfect for that. The D700+grip is my camera for shooting concerts, sports, and other quick moving things in low light. The D3s is a real improvement over the D3/D700, and the D4 is an even greater improvement over the D3s.</p>

[john_mcclain]

<p>Thank you for your response, Kenneth. This article is what got me thinking of the D800 over the D3s in the first place: http://www.sashdias.com/equipment-blog/nikon-d800-vs-d3s--iso.html The last comparison is the one that intrigued me. After downsizing to 12MP and noise reduction, the noise from the D800 looks nearly identical to that of the D3s with more detail to boot.</p>

<p>I never do noise reduction with my D3/D700 at ISO 6400 for sports but will do it for weddings. For the most part, 12MP is plenty for my print needs (in sports)so downsizing a batch of photos from 36MP would be no problem when necessary. Yes, I would have to add extra post-processing time into the D800 images to make them equal to the D3s but is that a deal breaker? No. I'd say about 80% of the time I'm shooting indoor sports I'm in good enough light that the D3 at ISO 6400 can handle it and I'm pleased with the results. The other 20% of the time I definitely need something better. I think I might be willing to have to add extra time behind the computer that 20% of the time with the D800 considering all of the added benefits that camera would add in other aspects of my photography. The added DR and higher resolution are features that I could utilize in my art prints, portraiture, and weddings for sure.</p>

[thomas_lozinski]

<p>If you need the speed get the D3s. I replaced my D3s with the D800 and a D7000. I use the D7000 if I need speed/sports. D800 for slow work. I do miss the D3s but not the weight of it. </p>

[kgavin]

<p>The D800 is a phenomenal camera, and you can down sample its images down to 12MP and get pretty stellar results. Some don't think it's optimal to do, but it works well when needed. Not to mention, the D800 has ridiculous dynamic range that you would be impressed with. Also, I shoot with my D800 at ISO 3200 without any noise reduction turned on and I'm amazed at the results. It's not D3s or D4 low-noise performance, but it does extremely well for 36MP...before any downsampling. So definitely go out and rent both the D3s and D800 to see what would work well for you.</p>

[studio460]

<p>John said:</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>Thank you for your response, Kenneth. This article is what got me thinking of the D800 over the D3s in the first place:<a href="http://www.sashdias.com/equipment-blog/nikon-d800-vs-d3s--iso.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">http://www.sashdias.com/equipment-blog/nikon-d800-vs-d3s--iso.html</a> The last comparison is the one that intrigued me. After downsizing to 12MP and noise reduction, the noise from the D800 looks nearly identical to that of the D3s with more detail to boot.</p>

</blockquote>

<p> This is yet another test shot under incandescent lights with most tones in the mid-area, with little chroma information. If shooting a scene with more intense chroma in the reds and blues, the D800's noise artifacts start to look much weirder. If possible, shoot your own tests with each body to make your final decision. Twilight, or magic hour is a good test with lots of deep-hued blues in the sky.</p>

[john_mcclain]

<p>Ralph, that is an excellent point that I never even thought of. I definitely will do my own testing to determine what's best for me. I'm very happy with the D3's noise performance at ISO6400 but need an extra stop of light. So, if the D800 can't give me the about same noise levels or better at ISO12,800, then the D3s it is!</p>

[eric_arnold]

<p>as a d3s owner, i sort of feel obliged to chime in. it's simply a phenomenal low-light camera and very good for sports and action--an application for which 36mp is most certainly overkill. i am sure the d800 is good for the applications ralph mentions, but for low-light event photography and PJ stuff, the d3s still reigns supreme. the only issue is really size/weight, but i've found that mounting it to a Kata backpack which allows you to clip the neck strap to the pack straps takes a lot of the discomfort out of the equation. not a perfect solution if you need to switch lenses frequently, but helps for walkaround situations.</p>

[studio460]

<p>I said:</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>Not true when up-sampling. Especially with the lowered noise floor of the D3s, the comparisons were quite surprising. There was more detail in the 12MP D3s image, and more blotchy areas of chroma noise (severely degrading detail) in the D800E images.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>This is <strong ><em>incorrect</em></strong>. My test was comparing a D7000 with the D800E crop mode (the D800E won!). My apologies to all for posting this erroneous information! Will clarify later!</p>

[studio460]

<p>John said:</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I'm very happy with the D3's noise performance at ISO6400 but need an extra stop of light. So, if the D800 can't give me the about same noise levels or better at ISO12,800, then the D3s it is!</p>

</blockquote>

<p>My apologies--I was mistakenly recalling a <em>different</em> test (see above post). The D800E <em>is</em> competitive at high-ISOs with the D3s, but with some caveats. Will clarify later.</p>

[john_mcclain]

<p>I'm gonna throw a monkey wrench into the equation haha. What if I consider getting a D600 while keeping my D700 and D3? It seems to be the wide spread opinion that the noise levels are about one stop better at high ISO's in the D600 when compared to the D3/D700. Combine that with a slightly higher MP count for cropping and awesome IQ as well. I might end up renting it first. If I like it, I may pick one up to supplement my current set up. Any thoughts?</p>