Hi everyone, this is my first post in the forums, but I'm an avid reader of the blog. I have a dilemma right now, I desperately need (ok want, but it would make life a lot easier) a pro-style camera body, and I'm debating wether I should invest in a D3S or buy a D3 used, but in very good condition for around 3500 USD. I don't care about video, and I don't think I need 100,000+ ISO at the moment, but I can see how it could help. Right now I'm using a D90, but its not nearly as rugged enough or fast enough for the wildlife photography that I'm doing (I'm still trying to get dirt out of the buttons from my most recent trip photographing a wild bobcat family in a remote area of the Badlands). I know about the consequences of using full frame for wildlife, but its not a huge problem for me because I shoot mainly larger wildlife, and I haven't heard great things about the d300/d300s, so should I buy the D3 for the next year or two until the D4, invest in a D3S, or keep the D90 until the D4? I think if I take good care of the D3, it shouldn't lose a TON of value by the time I want to sell it for the D4, but I could really use some advice. Thanks everybody. Joe
D3, D3S, or wait?(23 posts) (11 voices)
Welcome to the forum Photokid.
Why not a D700? I'd get that and then invest in awesome glass. You can't beat the rebate prices that expire very soon if you are not interested in video.
Thats another option, but I would need the vertical grip, but that might be the way to go. Once I switch to FX I'm going to want to sell the old 70-200 2.8 for the updated version anyways... Thanks for your input:)
The D700 is a great camera. It uses the same sensor as the D3 so you'd be getting a new camera for the price of the used D3. It is slightly larger with the vertical grip than a D3(s) but for some people that's a good thing. I recommend you try it out.
What bad things have you heard about the D300S? .. From what you say you shoot, I would think the D300S would be a great fit, better than the D90. Maybe wait a bit as you already have a camera that is doing most of what you want. (Fight the NAS symptoms just a bit longer !! and get the D400 ! when it comes out !) but if you really cant wait. I would think the D3S is a better option over a D3 as a D700 gives the same IQ. Only you know best what gear suits you and I can see a D3S could be great for you due to its rugged build. You may not need to upgrade the old 70-200 Vr yet.. Stick a 1.7TC on it and all those weaknesses go away.
I'm just not sure where the D90 is lacking here. . .but I *guess* if you were to buy something right now, the D700 makes the most sense. . .
I couldn't justify the jump from a D90 to D700 (was an additional $1700 which I guess seems nominal now). . .but might be a worthwhile investment while the rebates continue!
It all really depends. I hope this isn't too intrusive but are you selling your photographs? If not I would stick with a D300s with an MB-D10 since I'm not to sure that is has any faults that really pertain specifically to your form of shooting. You can get 8FPS from it, the image quality should be noticeably better and its also constructed from magnesium alloy meaning it should stand up against the terrain. Also if you act now you can get one for only $1200, save yourself almost $2500 and purchase the new 70-300mm VRII lens. Try your best to fight the urge to buy the most expensive, new DSLR out there.
Dude , you're 13 years old. Unless you are selling your pictures, or getting them published to National Geographic or any other wildlife magazine, I would stick with the D90 or D300.
bank the money or spend them on lenses, or women
Dont judge him by his age. I checked out his website were he has posted pictures and they are honestly amazing. Great work mate, your shooting is better then some professional photographers who carry a D3x.
No, I think it's great that he's so serious about it. But I remember when I was 13 years old too, changed my interests a lot.
to the OP
If you really think that the gear you are using now isn't adequate enough for your needs by all means go for it.
Yeah, and some of the biggest name pro photographers today started when they were 13, so what is your point?
I started SLR photography at 12 and never went far from it... A good photographer doesn't need to be a 40 year Old Brooks Grad. His great work speaks for itself.
Although I shoot with a D90 and the thing looks like it's 20 years old (cuz I take it through dirt, water, and every element in between) I never had a problem with it except the darn frame buffer... Avoid the D300s and go straight for the D700. The D300s is a great camera but isn't that much more impressive than the D90 and $1000 more for the metal body and AF points alone isn't enough for many...
And Joe as for that note on your blog, you really don't need to aspire to be a nature photographer. You already are one.
PB PM: You obviously don't understand what I'm trying to say...I suggested that he at the age of 13 is taking better photographs then those taken by some 40+ year old professionals. I never suggested that no professional photographer had ever started at a young age...
I wasn't even commenting on your post...
You really have some fantastic shots.
I currently use the D700 and an older D200 plus many of the pro-spec lenses. I am most certainly not a wildlife guy but have attempted to shoot the scattered whale or sea bird. From my experience, I would suggest you stick with the cropped sensor format camera. My longest lens is the 70-200 2.8 and even with a 1.7x teleconvertor I often find it wanting on the D700. On the D200 it is a different story…..I get a 178 – 510mm lens at f4.5. Reach is very important in wildlife photography….even for whales, and they don’t get much bigger than that. Unless you want or are able to invest in the 300, 400 or 600mm fast lenses, I recommend the D300s with your current 70-200 and the TC 17. Just my two cents.
normally I would d90 should be fine for You, but I've seen Your pictures and You have a lot of potential kiddo, so if Your parents are smart enough they should get You d3s and a nice 500 or 600 lens, if You don't own one already. if You do than d3s is a camera for You. If You don't have any of this lenses so far, than get one before You upgrade Your camera, as this will benefit Your photography more - You can also get a small upgrade to d300 (refurbished from adorama will cost You around $1100)
for any of You having problems with a 13year old kiddo taking snaps, look at his photos first, and than judge
Joe, please take a look at the P-A-D thread and contribute :)
Thanks everyone, I really appreciate that you all took the time to look at my blog( although I still have to add the photos from my most recent trip) I know the d90 is a great camera, but I think I need a camera that at least has a metal body. I started selling my photos when I was 10 at local hostpital exhibitions and have made a few thousand that way, but I've only done two exhibitions and they were over 3 years ago. I've spent the last couple years trying to learn as much as I can about photography. I think I'm ready to start selling my photos again and I've already met some great people that have been trying to pass my blog around to many potential buyers. I know this might sound pretty stupid coming from a 13 yearold;) but I really appreciate that so many people don't judge me just on my age alone. As for the glass, my dad has been a huge help, and right now he rents a 500 or 600mm lens whenever we go a big trip. This year I'm also entering several photos into the Natures Best Photography contest in the youth division and my dad says that If I get in he will personaly take up a third job to pay for a 500 or 600mm lens;)
@Adamz, I'd love to contribute to the PAD, but should I post on the flickr acount or the thread?
Thanks again everyone. Joe
holy crap, just saw your blog, you ARE damn good. . .
Umm, I recant previous comments, I think you'll see the MOST benefit from the D3x due to its ability to squeeze out ALL details. . .the D3s would be fine (and cheaper too), but overall DR isn't equal. . .
Looks like majority of your shots are between ISO 200-800, so the D3x really doesn't suffer much there. . .
You've got a great eye Joe - nice shots!
I suggest posting your images on flickr to get extra publicity. As far as the camera, I would still suggest that you get the D300s which has a metal body and use the extra money to help your dad pay for that insane $10,000 lens (assuming you're going with a Nikkor). The only advantage of the D3(x)(s) would be the image quality, and the amount of noise on high iso's but since you've only taken one dark image that I know of (star trail) I don't think its worth the extra $2000. If you get the MB-D10 grip you can shoot 8 frames a second, the image quality will still be amazing, you have a side shutter release button (just like the D3 series), and it will give you something to look forward to. If you want to see the images that a D300 can take, take a look at Conor Quinlan on flickr. I think he's 18 years old and has recently bought a used D3 but almost all of his flickr images are from a D300. http://www.Flickr.com/QQQQCon or http://www.Youtube.com/qqqqcon
Joe, wish You all the best!
as for the P-A-D thread, just add it to both PAD and flickr :D
as for D3x - was also thinking about this one, although it's performance with higher iso (1600) is will not match d90
Thanks everyone, as much of a dream come true a d3x would be, investing in big glass is my first priority. I think the only thing stopping me from a d300s is that I don't know if I want to spend $1000 for a metal body and better iso, right now I have a vertical grip on the d90 almost all of the time. Although Ive heard that the d300S's autofocus is considerably better than the D90's
iso is the same as on d300s and d90, so the difference is only the magnesium alloy and slightly better AF
Hi Joe !
I just so you're pictures and I have to say they are great. I am not into wild live but the shots of those animals looked stunning. Certainly you have talent, so keep it up my young friend.
I know you mention that you're are not interested on the video but since you already have got some money saved from the photographs that you have sold I would recommend you the D3s.
Seeing some of you're animal shots I thing you can get some intersecting video footage as well which you can sell as stock footage. They are plenty people out there that want video footage of different animals.
Who knows, maybe one day David Attenborough will contact you for you're amassing shots.
Which ever way you go the important thing is that you have a talent and on you're hands any camera will do.
You must log in to post.