Nikon D300 and D3 announced

It's now official. The competition between Canon and Nikon is going to heat up even more. The two new Nikons are 12 megapixel cameras - not quite the megapixel monster of the Canon 1Ds MkIII, but should stack up closely to the 40D and 1D MkIII. Nikon's big megapixel model will possibly be introduced in early 2008. The Nikon D3 is geared toward sports shooters and photojournalists, but its 9 fps might make wildlife photographers also take notice. Nikon also introduced some new lenses 14-24 f/2.8, 24-70 f/2.8, 400 f/2.8, 500 f/4, 600 f/4. The teles all have VR.

We are living in some interesting times!

Nikon D3
http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/content_page.asp?cid=7-8742-9083
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0708/07082312nikond3.asp

Nikon D300
http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/content_page.asp?cid=7-8742-9084
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0708/07082313nikond300.asp

As Nikon shooter (D2X) and owner of some nice wide angle glass, I'm happy to finally see a full-frame sensor, but disappointed that it's only 12 MP. Certainly a capable and impressive camera and, for anyone looking to move up from a mid-level Nikon body, these will be quite attractive. But, this probably seals the deal for me - time to seriously think about moving over to the Canon MK III.

I haven't read the article to know what the bells & whistles Nikon added, but, the D3 seems to have the same critical specs as the 5D (at least relative to landscape shooters) but for twice the price. The enclosure will no doubt be very robust - more robust than the 5D - but I'd have a hard time choosing a $5000 Nikon D3 over a $2500 Canon 5D... especially given that it would likely be impossible to distinguish a print from these two units. There's no way I'd upgrade from a D2X.

I think Nikon wildlife shooters might be more impressed with the D3's new capabilities, but from this landscaper's perspective, this feels like a wet noodle. Especially so given the intro of the MK III.

Exactly my thoughts Rick!!

I wish D300 was atleast 1.3x with little more pixels.

I think this really sets the stage for the 5D II. Canon has an opportunity to pull way ahead with the most affordable FF available, plus all the latest digital processing technology.

I don't really care too much about live preview and some of the other newer wiz bang features. But Digic III, 14 Bit processing, and Highlight Tone Priority look interesting. I also think the FF CMOS sensor can handle more resolution. So I may have to just wait this one out and see.

I think that this announcement combined with the 1Ds MkIII almost allows Canon to actually delay a 5D II a little while longer. They need to let the MkIII brothers gain their share of the market, and the introduction of a 5D II anytime soon would really eat into sales. Hard to say how far along a 5D II is, but I think they have a little more breathing room now.

Unless the D3 delivers some *really* phenomenal IQ, I think most people are gonna be kind of 'ho hum' about it. Nikon shooters will either be pretty excited, or a bit disappointed like Rick is. I don't see many Canon shooters jumping ship for the D3, but Nikon shooters that are itching for a little more progression in MP's might look at this as the last straw? Given the time it has taken for this body to be released, it seems like it's been ages. Canon has just been pushing the envelope for a while, and I think many were hoping Nikon would deliver something a little better. Of course - we'll see what the pixel/print peepers have to say once all these new toys hit the street! Side note - I think the dual CF slots is a cool idea!

The more I think about this, the more I'm mystifed. The two big enhancements are higher fps and a full frame sensor. Okay, higher fps is great for sports and wildlife, but going from a 1.5x to a full-frame sensor wouldn't be seen as a positive by those groups, would it? A 300mm lens becomes a true 300mm instead of the 450mm it used to be. They seem to contradict each other.

The rest of the enhancements are interesting, but not at all what I consider significant enough to 'wow' people. The discussion on "Picture Control" seems just downright silly - "photographic communities" of D3 owners getting together to "develop their own Picture Control settings for specific subjects and conditions"???? Are they serious? Sounds like something more appropriate for a $300 p&s camera line. How 'bout automated upload to our Google web albums?

I'm a loyal Nikon user of 12 years, and I absolutely love my D2X, but to hear Nikon say that they have "eclipsed the competition with the D3, a cutting edge camera that will change how professional photographers take pictures,” just after Canon announces the MK III...??? Obviously this was written and distributed prior to Canon's annoncement, but it sounds just plain ridiculous.

Dude, where's my camera!?

Rick, I don't think the D3 is aimed at the landscape shooter anyway. Looking at the specs and the new lenses released, it seems to me geared more toward the photojournalist and sports/wildlife photographer. However, now that they have joined the FF club, its only a matter of time until they release a high mp DSLR. Maybe next year. However, should you be looking to dump your Nikon gear and move to Canon, let me be the first to say you have a potential buyer with this fellow forum member.

My geuss is that many Nikon pros were asking for a lower noise camera, and 12MP/FF is the combination that gets them there. I think lower noise & high ISO capability along with the high fps are the selling points for this camera. If I needed a high fps/low noise camera, though, I'd just get a 40D & call it good.

Yeah Rick. They're trying to sell these things to "professionals". Not some pixel junky landscape shooters.

I hope that this will drive the development of a replacement to the 5D, but like others, I'm not certain that it will. True, there is competition in the FF arena now, but I think for it to have really affected Canon's decisions regarding the 5D, the D300 would have needed to come out as a full frame system too. The D3 is just too expensive.

That said, I think the D3 does offer some impressive features. 9 frames per second on full frame is gonna be pretty nice for a photojournalist who would use shorter focal lengths. One of the problems I see with Canon's 1.3X cameras is that on the wide end, the lenses don't line up. This Nikon comes right in line with the 1DMkIII, but but has higher resolution and a full frame sensor. But as with all things, there is a tradeoff and the telephoto shooters lose the "extra" reach.

I am very surprised that Nikon didn't at least hit the mark of the 1DsMkII in MP count though. While I don't believe that pixels count for everything, it puts this camera at roughly the same MP count as the original 1Ds, implying that Nikon is 2 generations behind Canon. While obviously in many ways that count, this isn't the case many buyers place too much emphasis on MP count these days. I suspect the MP count was pre-determined 9 frame per second rate as the the max pixels they could process at that burst rate. It just seems like an odd decision. Clearly this camera falls into place between the 1DMkIII and 1DsMkIII as a distinct alternative.

As a side note, did anybody see the 14-24mm f2.8 they released? I'll bet that'll run a pretty penny, but if it is similar to their 17-35 in quality it should be one heck of a lens.

I feel your pain Rick. The D3 might be something I would consider if I made my living only on shooting from the sidelines of football games, but for landscapes it seems to fall very short in light of Canon's announcement this week. We want to make really big prints!!! However, comparing the D3 with the 1DS MkIII is comparing apples and oranges. The D3 is more likely Nikon's answer to the 1D(no S) MkIII which was announced a few months ago. This means that Nikon is again running a bit behind Canon in terms of when it announces its new models - a frustrating situation for Nikon fans without question, and that has been going on for several years now IMO.

It looks like Nikon shooters still have a wait in store (up to 6 months maybe?) until the company's higher megapixel answer to the 1DS is announced, if it happens. I guess this gives us time to save our $$$ and make sure the new 1DS doesn't experience the autofocus problems that have been reported in the 1D. I am looking to update my glass and digital bodies sometime in the next year, but can wait a few more months. If Nikon doesn't step up by the middle of next year I'll be in line with you for a Canon.

This is getting VERY interesting! And next up---the new Sony DSLR's.....and one which is also FF as well. The new Nikons use the new Sony CMOS which will also be in the Sony DSLR's. I think Canon just really took a big fire across the bow from Nikon....the 40D just was eaten alive I think from the d300....

As a Nikon user for 30 plus years, and currently a D2x user, I feel Nikon has seriously missed the mark with the D3. Nikon has been losing pro photographers for a number of years, and this release will do nothing to regain lost pro's. Additionally, as a Nikon user that purchased DX lenses on the premise that Nikon was committed to the smaller format AND not going full frame, I am more than a little annoyed at the money I spent on glass for the format. A good friend of mine, is even more annoyed, he purchased a D2Xs earlier this year and would have never spent the money on the APS format if he knew Nikon was about to release a full frame sensor. Although rumored, why wouldnt Nikon be honest and say it was soon to release a full frame sensor. Unless the image noise and quality are significantly better than Canon, not just the same, this is a "oh well" release, too little too late.

I totally agree with Doug about the target audience for these two cameras. The D300, no doubt targets the 40D area, but it is a much more capable camera in just about every area for only a few hundred dollars more.

The D3 is a 5D for sports, PJ's and wedding shooters. Same MP, but at 9fps. That's just as fast as the new 1DMkIII, more MP, full frame, etc, etc, etc. If these cameras deliver the IQ (and the D3 should easily do that with those huge pixels), Canon will have to seriously upgrade the 5D to take it on. The best thing is the price, $3k less than the new Canon. That can only put pressure on them to stop coasting.

These two cameras will definitely help us Canon folks.

I'm surprised they didn't label this the D3H instead of the D3. It's clearly a camera along the lines of the H models, built for sports and low-light shooting.

I'm not sure from the review whether it's a 12-bit or a 14-bit sensor ("12-channel output" vs. "14-bit processing", both in the announcement text...). Assuming 14-bit, that's rather a lot of improvements in the low-light department: 14-bit, low noise, and much faster ISO possibilities. Combined with the 9fps (11fps w/out AF) and better AF tracking, this camera was designed for sports and event shooters. Looks like us landscape folks have to either fork out $8000 plus lenses to Canon or wait for the D3X (or whatever they're going to call it).

Les, the 12 channels is 12 data paths off the sensor to the memory card for the high frame rate. Both new cameras are 14 bit and with 25,600 ISO you are in serious low light territory (those huge pixels allow this). I'm sure this will be somewhat noisy, but who would have even considered this development?

Craig, I wouldn't exactly call a 14-bit, 21MP 35mm camera "coasting" - though it's a bit hard to coast through an $8000 purchase.

The D3 is a big letdown after Canon's 1DsMkIII, but considering it should have had an H on the end of its name, I'll wait for a little while before griping too much. The D300 on the other hand sounds like Nikon really stepping up to the challenge - again - in the prosumer market.

Finally, the lens announcements are welcome. Getting VR on to the big telephoto lenses fills a huge gap that Nikon had with Canon. Now if Nikon could figure out how to do a real tilt/shift lens...

WTF do you do with 25,600 ISO equivalence? For that, you could almost use it for nighttime natural light photography - handheld. (Especially when you add in the underexposure ability of a 14-bit RAW image...)

why wouldnt Nikon be honest and say it was soon to release a full frame sensor.

Because then folks wouldn't buy the D200 or the D2X. Nikon (just like Canon and everybody else) is interested in one thing and thats selling cameras now. If someone is considering purchasing the D300 or D3, maybe they should wait until a FF competitor to the Canon 5D is released. Its gonna happen sooner than later, but Nikon isn't going to tell anyone about it now as it would cut into the sales of the D300 and D3.

I agree Les. The D3 is more like the D3"H". For next wildflower season, I'd welcome some more tilt/shift lenses too.

Hmmm, I'm interested to see what ISO 25,600 is going to look like. The new 922,000-pixel resolution LCD is interesting too considering the LCD on the 1DS MkIII is 230,000. What a way to check the focus on your photos!

I'm glad to hear that others dont see what all the fuss is about with the D3. I was looking through the forums over at dpreview and there are several people talking about how the D3 is a Canon killer. While I admit it looks like its a good camera (especially for sports and wildlife) as a landscape photographer I am underwhelmed.

To me the 1DsIII looks like a much more appealing camera. I put an order in for one on Tuesday and cant wait till it gets here. Only a few more months!!

andy

Andy,

It is going to be very interesting to see where folks on this forum put their $$ after all the dust settles.
I look forward too seeing your photos from the new 1DsIII.

- Derek

Too bad money is the issue, it would be nice just to buy into medium format!

Andy

After new Nikon product announcements, I like to read Thom Hogan's thoughts. His initial reaction to this announcement can be found HERE.

Craig, I wouldn't exactly call a 14-bit, 21MP 35mm camera "coasting" - though it's a bit hard to coast through an $8000 purchase.

Oh, it's total coasting. They could have easily made that sensor 27MP. They already make a sensor at that pixel density in the XTi with great success so extending it to full frame could have been done, but instead they milk the customer as usual. Want to bet on the MP count on version 4?

I've always been a Canon owner, but their practice of dumbing down their lower end camera's to prevent cannibalizing their more expensive cams is going to cost them. These two camera's do the cannibalizing for them. Better to do it yourself if you ask me.

Derek, I think for the photog's here, neither of these Nikon camera's really fill their need for really high MP, unless you stitch. The 5D is probably still the best option for a landscape photographer that doesn't stitch and wants full frame. Let's be real, $8k is silly money reserved for high priced studio and fashion photographers so the 1Ds3 isn't a viable option for any landscape photographer.

While I agree that Nikon missed the boat with the D3 in the MP count, I also agree that Canon should have had the foresight to spec the 40D with a 12MP sensor guessing that Sony would be right behind them with the same. Furthermore, that Sony sensor will probably go straight into a competitor to the XTi forcing Canon to put the XTi replacement before a 40D replacement again and possibly cannibalizing sales of the prosumer body.

Regardless I'm enthusiastic about the 40D as released and am considering an upgrade to this body. The new features at that price point are very attractive to me. I think a 5D replacement might be announced in the spring, so I might hold out until then. There are speed features in the 40D that I'd only use occasionally, but would be a nice improvement, but I'd love to have the image quality of the 5D or its replacement.

As a D200/D80 shooter with lenses from 12-24mm to 600mm, I'm rather committed to Nikon. I don't bother keeping up with what Canon is doing, so much as asking if Nikon's current offering meets my needs. I've never felt that the D200 held me back from making the images that I envisioned and will likely just keep shooting my current cameras. I have made 24X36" prints that look great and know that I can go larger - from a 10 megapixel. I guess I'm thinking of skipping this generation altogether and waiting for the technology to settle. It seems that an affordable 16 megapixel FF with some anti-dust feature isn't far off. I might be tempted by Canon if I only had 2-3 Nikon lenses, though.........

Yesterday, Canon's news had me thinking that 5d and 1d-series bodies would be flowing like milk and honey on eBay. After today, this should be good news for some of you fed up nature/landscape Nikonians!

D3.

Nikon is obviously catering to the "speed" crowd - although it's an interesting way to introduce your first FF body. If I were a speed shooter, I think I'd be more concerned that the focal range that I had become familiar with was now being significantly reduced - with not a lot of *serious* new benefits to overcome this fact. Big photo sites? But what do I know really, Mr. Landscape guy. Are the FF and other nifty features really worth such a dramatic change in the way you've used your lenses for years - where a familiarity with your equipment can make or break a shot? A "changing of the guard" for Nikon ... or maybe just trying to catch up. If anything, Canon can REALLY coast now. Like Dave said, SURELY something that *really* makes sense for FF cannot be far off in Nikon world.

Interesting week, thoughts and discussions. I appreciate my 5d that much more this week.

Yes,

With all these new wiz bang featured bodies coming out the 5D is still my first choice right now if I were to go out and buy something.

I am even considering picking up a mint used 5D from Fred Miranda or Ebay, then selling it sometime early next year prior to the next 5D II coming out. I bet once the frenzy settles 5D used prices will stabilize until the next version comes out. Hmmm....

Derek,

I have every intention of dumping my 5D next year if the next version looks that much better (for me the critical step would be >16MP). But what I always think is I would rather have one 5D now and generate images from it over waiting for the next generation. The way I look at it is just like my computers, which are basically worthless devices that I replace every 2 years or so due to tech improvements, digital cameras are poor investments (probably not as bad as my computers though). If you want an investment get some LF gear. My Nikon 300mm M f9 has gone up in value a ton since I bought it last year.

With that said I still think the 5D is the best game/value for the money that you can get. And I am psyched to have it for the upcoming Fall season

The real key to buying gear is to never let your wife know what gear you already own.

RichieV

The real key to buying gear is to never let your wife know what gear you already own.

...or own so much gear that she couldn't possibly discern that you've added more (as is the case with Richie).