Nikon D800 main body - second body D800 or D3?

[ellie_smarks]

<p>Hello there,<br>

I use a D800 to shoot a variety of different events, functions and weddings. I need to buy a second body and am wondering wether to buy another D800 (which I am very comfortable with) or to go for a D3. Or something else you can suggest!<br>

Any thoughts?</p>

[richsimmons]

<p>If you get another D800 you'll never have to think about different button arrangements when you're switching cameras. One less thing to worry about. Files will be the same resolution too. My 2 cents. Also same batteries, grips, etc.</p>

[john tonai]

<p>I personally like to have the same cameras so I don't have to think about the location and operation of the controls. </p>

[dave_wilson1]

Well, IMO the good thing about having two identical bodies is that when things get crazy, you don't make a silly mistake

because of a different knob or switch. OTOH, I use all kinds of mixed up Nikon stuff and never have a problem. Be

realistic about how much money, or potential to, you're making. Then ask is it practical to drop another $3000 on a body

where a lower body or used body will do?

[savagesax]

I hear the D3s is a really fine camera regarding pixals. The nature pros really love the lack of pixals when enlarging. National Geographic photographers and the editors like them a lot.

 

Instead of this wedding site, ask the Nikon site how people like this "S" model.

[rick_m.]

<p>When you said, "for wedding photography" you pretty much answered your own question. Then you said, "variety of events". So here is the deal. Obviously money is no issue. You are talking about two $3K cameras. So what does the D3 do that the D800 doesn't? The main thing is that it has a faster frame rate. This coupled with a stout body and voice memo make it a great photojournalists camera. It is also a wonderful sports camera. At 9FPS and with fast autofocus it is about as good as it gets for sports. It is a 12 MP camera which IMO has a tremendous advantage over the D800, again for photojournalists. (It is my opinion that the D800 and Argus C3 are about equally capable cameras for photojournalists.) <br>

So that is my point. If $3K is where you want to be then the D800 is the right camera for you. If you shoot sports or fast moving subjects it would be nice to add the D3(s) to your stable because there is nothing fast about the D800. IF money is an issue you could even consider choosing a D7100 as your second body. The crop sensor expands your lens variety, it is wonderful in limited light and it doesn't weigh very much hanging around your neck. And off work you will really like having it.<br>

</p>

[ilkka_nissila]

<p>The D3s would give a slight advantage over the D800 in the lowest light, e.g. in candle light, at high ISO. It is also much faster than the D800 (9fps, and large buffer). Thus it would complement the D800 nicely in feature sets. It think it's probably worth going for the s model instead of the original D3, just for the extra high ISO image quality.</p>

<p>That said, there is a lot to be said for having two identical cameras so you never have to think about how it works or where the buttons are, when you always use the same model. So another D800 is a great idea as well. Also when you're working with both cameras at the same time i.e. one with tele, the other with wide angle, then you get the same high resolution images from both, so if you sell the high resolution images the client won't ask why the other files are so small (even though in practice the significance of this is usually small in event photography, except for formals etc. and shots that need cropping). </p>

[studio460]

<p>Unless you have highly specialized shooting requirements, for optimum speed/most-fluid shooting rhythm, try to maintain identical bodies. The ISO button, in particular, on the D800 vs. D3-series bodies are in waaaaaay different places.</p>

[ShunCheung]

<p>The D3 and D3S are mainly sports cameras. Between those two, the D3S has over a stop of better high-ISO results plus primitive video capability. They are also big and heavy. When I reviewed the D3 for photo.net back in 2008, I shot a wedding with it and my shoulder was sore for another day or two afterwards.</p>

<p>Unless you need 9 frames/sec for weddings, I think you are better off with another D800 or even a D600. The D600 uses dual SD memory cards and shares the same EN-EL15 battery with the D800. The D600 is somewhat smaller than the D800 but its AF system is also a bit inferior. I am quite happy with the D600's AF system but its 39 AF points cover a smaller area than the 51 on the D800, and some people are not happy with that with good reasons.</p>

[mccosh]

<p>I would also recommend the D600 as a second camera. As a wedding photographer I believe you should only be using single focus point with focus lock to always be in a position to focus on exactly the area that you want not what the camera thinks you want. Therefore the 39AF points against 51AF points is irrelevant. The D600 is a very capable camera.</p>

[ellie_smarks]

<p>Thanks so much for your help guys. I'm leaning towards another D800 for the ease of slipping between the two bodies as suggested above. Decisions are so much harder to make when they're gonna cost you a few thousand!!!</p>

[ellery_chua___singapore]

<p>There is a weight factor or maybe I am just getting old. the D600 is whole lot lighter so it would be kinder to you wedding days are roughly speaking 6 to 10 hour days. <br>

From a little experience I find that the low light focus capture of the D600 to be superior to the D800. I shot a beach wedding and the after sun set portion when the light level has dropped to a point where you can just see the subject, the d600 with a 24-120 afs f4 work like lay the focal point on subject, press shutter button, acquires focus boom shoot. No one instance of hunting. A d800 would have been hunting and hunting from previous experience. A d600 is on my 3rd to buy item list. Dam if only nikon would do a 24-85 f 2.8 ads VR this is lens for 80% of wedding work. The 24-120 is okay but it has issues , while sharp enough it is not a cutting edge lens in that respect. My older 28-85 afd does better way better.</p>

[eminavn]

<p>I have a Nikon D3s and D800 as a second body</p>