Comments on: Nikon D3x sensor – made by Sony, designed by Nikon (part 2)

By: Lou

Lou — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 23:54:24 +0000

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/big-three.shtml#con

the truth is here, save your money and by a A900 or a 5Dmk2.
You get almost the same for just peanuts compared to the D3X

By: sosss

sosss — Mon, 22 Dec 2008 22:01:43 +0000

of course they are plenty sharp, D300 have higher pixel density

By: [NR] admin

[NR] admin — Fri, 12 Dec 2008 14:42:16 +0000

Thanks Kalvin – I will post this separately.

By: kalvinhui

kalvinhui — Fri, 12 Dec 2008 11:17:58 +0000

everybody knows that they are sharing the same heart but different processor! and most people doesn’t agreed with the price of 3dx…too pricy?says that sony is selling such a high resolution camera with affordable price but nikon doesn’t!

http://masterchong.com/v3/sony-alpha/nikon-d3x-vs-sony-alpha-900-iso50-iso6400-100-cropped-comparison.html

i have attached an address that show what is the different between sony a900 and nikon d3x. see the ISO perfomance from 50 to 6400!! WOW….the outcome was such a big big different! what i wanna say is…D3X is definitely worth for the price of 8kUSD! and it’s professional camera for studio!

this also means that the sensor is important as heart but the processor is as important as your brain! your brain is to control your everything!

think twice before you start booming…..

hehhe…….have a good day!

By: Pablov

Pablov — Wed, 10 Dec 2008 17:27:43 +0000

probably, but I don’t think it will happen soon.

By: [NR] admin

[NR] admin — Wed, 10 Dec 2008 14:06:10 +0000

Alex, not true – if you show me a reliable source that confirms that, I would agree with you. Just in the last 2 weeks we started to get official statements from Nikon on who exactly makes the sensor. Before that was just guessing. Please correct me if I am wrong.

By: Keep Trying

Keep Trying — Wed, 10 Dec 2008 13:57:45 +0000

If you keep telling them that maybe they will listen. I doubt it. Please keep trying though.

By: Marco34

Marco34 — Wed, 10 Dec 2008 10:18:47 +0000

Has one a chance to see a Dxxx with 24 mp in a camera cheaper than D3x???

By: Pablov

Pablov — Wed, 10 Dec 2008 10:06:25 +0000

Even considering the D3x and 1Ds Mk III are different range cameras than D90, 5D MK II, etc, Nikon just used the D3 body and features to put a higher res sensor (with its electronics to process the images, of course) and asks $3.000 more than the D3 for that.

That’s why it seems too high for so many people, even many who have the D3.

- Besides that, I would also like to see the Image Quality of the D3x compared to 5D Mk II (and A900), since both are FF sensors, have similar MP count, and are the latest DSLRs released by Nikon and Canon (I know are different camera bodies, etc, but I’m refering only to the IQ delivered by them)

By: Pablov

Pablov — Wed, 10 Dec 2008 09:51:17 +0000

Thanks a lot for your answer.

By: alex

alex — Wed, 10 Dec 2008 08:20:24 +0000

sure was manufactured by sony. nikon doesn’t have a manufacturing sensor plant. they build the machines that do sensors which sony 99% probably is using to make nikon’s sensors. just like they make the machines used by intel to make cpus. so basically your intel cpu is 100% exclusively made using nikon equipment.

what’s the big deal here. everyone knew that.

By: alex

alex — Wed, 10 Dec 2008 08:17:29 +0000

another sony fanboy lurking around here

dude, for the 10th time, 1ds and d3x are a type of cameras no one else does.

5d and a900 are in a different range for different applications.

what you say is just like “my p&s camera has 12mp, your d80 has only 10 so my p&s is better”

By: raio

raio — Wed, 10 Dec 2008 07:41:17 +0000

The image quality of the Nikon sensor has to be better than the A900 one to justify the crazy asking price for the D3x; otherwise Nikon could get a problem with the demand for the D3x. Let’s wait for the reviews, also compared with Canon`s D5 II.

By: Micah

Micah — Wed, 10 Dec 2008 05:58:35 +0000

Uh, I haven’t seen D3x raws yet–I’m dying to!

There are however jpeg samples on Nikon’s international site that appear to be processed with beta versions of NX. They look quite good to me, but I’d still like raw files to play with meself. I’ve played with A900 raw files and they look just like the jpegs–fine detail is irrecoverably smudged. The nikon files don’t look like this to me…

http://imaging.nikon.com/products/imaging/lineup/digitalcamera/slr/d3x/sample.htm

By: Pablov

Pablov — Wed, 10 Dec 2008 05:25:58 +0000

are the RAW files from D3x on-line for downloading?
can you post the links? Thanks.

By: Chad

Chad — Wed, 10 Dec 2008 04:41:25 +0000

I haven’t seen any D3X files, but when I saw some basic A900 files I laughed.

By: Micah

Micah — Wed, 10 Dec 2008 04:26:03 +0000

Well something is different, and not just in jpegs. The d3x raw files look better than anything I’ve seen or been able to make with an A900. I perceive less noise and better detail at 100% from the D3x files I’ve seen.

Does anybody else think the A900 files look like crap, but the D3x’s don’t?

By: bigmouth

bigmouth — Wed, 10 Dec 2008 04:23:26 +0000

wait till you get the real reviews out from various sources. you can say anything you want but in the end, i suspect that most people will say it performs almost identical as that of A900.

By: somebody

somebody — Wed, 10 Dec 2008 03:34:11 +0000

“thanks for posting this interesting post”
I think I’d have needed a preview button, haha

By: somebody

somebody — Wed, 10 Dec 2008 03:32:57 +0000

thanks for posting this interesting post

This sounds like marketing…

about Nikons “own” sensor:

as mentioned above: “in accordance …” – sounds like: nikon watched, sony did

also:
“the D3X’s unique sensor design was carefully blueprinted ” yeah. nice! by whom? nikon? (or maybe just sony )

I also wonder if the lenses are sharp enough for almost 25MP.