< ! --Digital window verification 001 -->

Camouflaged Nikon D3(x?) prototype? (updated)

This picture was submitted anonymously to NR (click on image for hi-res):
Cannot confirm the authenticity of the image or reliability of the source.
Comment from a reader:
Differences from D3:
1. No red triangle below the second command wheel.
2. The function button appears to be located closer to the vertical grip. On the D3 its higher up.
3. The rubber strap holding the flashsync/remote protection cap appears to be solid instead of two separate straps.
4. It looks like the shape of the timer-lamp is a little different.
5. The shape of the vertical grip looks slightly different (but that could be caused by the angle at which the picture is taken).

But it could just as easily be an older picture of a D3 prototype (instead of a D3x).

This entry was posted in Nikon D3x. Bookmark the permalink. Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.
  • Calvin

    what’s the difference between this prototype and the original D3 ?

  • D

    That is the question that everyone want to know :D

  • Bryce

    That could be anything, even an unbadged D3 unit. Then again why would they remove the name “Nikon” and not the “fx” also most of these are not de-badged from the factory, usually gaffer taped up by the photographer who has it. I vote fake.

  • Aspegic

    There appear to be a few differences:
    1. No red triangle below the second command wheel.
    2. The function button appears to be located closer to the vertical grip. On the D3 its higher up.
    3. The rubber strap holding the flashsync/remote protection cap appears to be solid instead of two separate straps.
    4. It looks like the shape of the timer-lamp is a little different.
    5. The shape of the vertical grip looks slightly different (but that could be caused by the angle at which the picture is taken).

    But it could just as easily be an older picture of a D3 prototype (instead of a D3x).

  • Tim

    I think this is fake. The upper portion of the body, including the VF housing, is cast and the Nikon logo is a cast, recessed feature. The tooling for castings are usually really expensive. It wouldn’t make sense for Nikon to make other set of expensive tooling without the logo just for prototypes. Here is a picture of the casting from DPPreview: http://a.img-dpreview.com/reviews/NikonD3/Images/mgbody.jpg

  • isa

    Hm. Design differences between this one and my 3D: the LED, the battery compartment door, the rubber cover next to the LED, the Fn button seems to be lower, the plastic around the top LCD display seems to be much less “wavy” and the overall contours look a little more… “bulky” I think. Less “round”. Oh and my FX sign is yellow/golden not white. If it is an old D3 prototype it should mainly have the same features as the production version, shouldn’t it? I#m not sure about the missing labels. It’s not unheard of that prototypes don’t feature labels and logos. Although I know that they are “usually” covered with tape. greets, isa

  • isa

    Oh yes that casting issue is a good point. Never thought of that. I thought they are just….. dunno, carved in there or something (making skipping that step easy and simple).

  • http://photo.solstices.ca Loa

    Much more important than the question “Is it a fake”, is this question: “Even if it’s real, does it reveal something new about a D3x?”

    Nobody has any doubt whatsoever that Nikon is working on a body that would be bigger/better/different than a D3. That’s simple economics.

    Does this picture add anything new? If so, what?

    Loa

  • pixdude

    I do remember that when Nikon came out with the D1x then, it was differenciated by a different color of the grip underneath the shutter release. The D1 and D1h were red, the D1x was grey. So by seeing this picture, it just popo-up in my mind, and it might be that some D3x are already studied on the field !

  • Rob

    Fuji changed the colour of the red bit on their D200 based S5 Pro…

    http://www.avi.com.tw/digital_camera/digital-camera-fujifilm/fuji_image/fuji_S5PRO_FRONT.jpg

    and to not have Nikon engraved may mean a third party company wants the body design – Fuji again perhaps?

    There are a lot of differences, lowering the function button is a good idea, and if it can change into a DOF preview button automatically when used vertically that would be very useful.

  • eyrieowl

    the real question is, why does someone who is SO BAD at focusing have one of these fancy cameras…. ;)

  • J

    Interesting. aspegic’s points #2, 3, and 4 are for sure significant. This could be something, but somehow I doubt it. Diagnosis: “POSSIBLE, BUT UNLIKELY.”

  • thoms

    You are right about the logo. However, to top of the camera seems to be covered with a rubber coat which could mask the logo.

  • Douglas

    Focusing poorly on something like this is often done on purpos to throw the viewer off… much like what appears to be the case!

  • Douglas

    sorry to burst bubbles here, but it is sadly a fake… look at the lower right corner of the high res image, down by the remote there… you can clearly see spikes from very poor photoshop job that was blurred to hide it.

  • jwylie

    Yeah, you are right, and if you look up the right hand side of the body, from bottom right corner to top right, you also see some bumpy edges on the right hand side of the camera. More botched photoshopping. Not sure what it is or what it is supposed to be, but there has been some modifications made to the original image for sure.

  • skeller

    Note also that the “FX” badge is white instead of yellow as it is on the D3 & D700

  • Lars

    The shows no signs of doctoring. The artefacts others pointed out in transition to blown highlights on the lower rights are natural.

  • H

    1) Look closely at the space where the red area under the shutter release should be – it’s been cloned and then burned out.

    2) Look carefully at where the casting that says Nikon should be. You can still see the remnants of letters and smudge marks where it’s been cloned out (reasonably well).

    3) If you examine the whole right hand edge and bottom corner, you’ll notice lots of little clone marks. If they were real, you’d shred your hands holding it for long.

    4) I couldn’t say for certain, but there appears to be some evidencce for the function button having been cloned down there (suspicious marks just above it)

    Fake.

  • Anonymous

    i vote yes for poor photoshop job lol ive seen d3 prototype and it dont look like this at all except grey color triangle thingy and golden stickers on top of viewfinder so… heres a proof for bad photoshop job

    http://img241.imageshack.us/img241/8977/nikond3xlargene6.jpg

    the triangle thingy is still there but blacked out with blur and “nikon” logo spot dont have body texture and the line under the spot is blurred out on left

  • Rocker

    I vote that the dark area under the grey triangle is just a shadow because of the bodys contour. If it is shopped why should someone burn that part of the image? Simply turning the red to grey would do the trick?

  • ChrisL

    Its obviously photoshopped. See
    http://xkcd.com/331/
    for the reasons.

  • JohnnyBoy

    I say it’s the Fuji S6 or whatever….

  • Isa

    Hm, no EXIF info on that picture? Could have been of some interest…

  • Blog Admin
    Usually the EXIF data is not available when the image is hosted somewhere. I completely forgot to check this image – the EXIF data was there:

    DSC_0043.jpg
    Exif
    Make NIKON CORPORATION
    Model NIKON D200
    Orientation top, left side
    X Resolution 1/300 inches
    Y Resolution 1/300 inches
    Resolution Unit Inches
    Software Ver.2.00
    Date/Time 2008:08:03 15:57:16
    YCbCr Positioning Datum point
    Exposure Time 0.05 sec
    F-Number F5.6
    Exposure Program Aperture priority
    ISO Speed Ratings 800
    Exif Version 2.21
    Date/Time Original 2008:08:03 15:57:16
    Date/Time Digitized 2008:08:03 15:57:16
    Components Configuration YCbCr
    Compressed Bits Per Pixel 1 bit/pixel
    Exposure Bias Value 0
    Max Aperture Value F1.4
    Metering Mode Multi-segment
    Light Source Unknown
    Flash No flash fired
    Focal Length 50.0 mm
    User Comment ASCII
    Sub-Sec Time 00
    Sub-Sec Time Original 00
    Sub-Sec Time Digitized 00
    FlashPix Version 1.00
    Color Space sRGB
    Exif Image Width 2896 pixels
    Exif Image Height 1944 pixels
    Sensing Method One-chip color area sensor
    File Source Digital Still Camera (DSC)
    Scene Type Directly photographed image
    CFA Pattern

  • Back to top