Should I buy a D3S?

[Joaquin Barbará]

Hi everyone, I have a quick question. I currently own a D7100 which I have been happy with shooting macro. I recently upgraded it from a D7000 and really liked it. A couple of days ago I went shooting BIF and the shallow buffer was a PAIN. I stood waiting for an ospray to get close and when it did the buffer got full after 5 frames, the osprey then happily flew away while I waited for the camera to write to the card.

I have been looking into either buying a second body or trading up. My current contender is a D3s. From what I understand it is a very good body, has a high frame rate and excellent low light image quality. I am looking for a little reassurance that this is a good move. The D4 is currently out of my budget.

Thanks in advance.

[Floyd Davidson]

Hi everyone, I have a quick question. I currently own a D7100 which I have been happy with shooting macro. I recently upgraded it from a D7000 and really liked it. A couple of days ago I went shooting BIF and the shallow buffer was a PAIN. I stood waiting for an ospray to get close and when it did the buffer got full after 5 frames, the osprey then happily flew away while I waited for the camera to write to the card.

I have been looking into either buying a second body or trading up. My current contender is a D3s. From what I understand it is a very good body, has a high frame rate and excellent low light image quality. I am looking for a little reassurance that this is a good move. The D4 is currently out of my budget.

Thanks in advance.

The D3S with lossless compressed files can shoot something more than 15 or so shots in a rapid sequence before the camera stops and needs time to write the buffer to disk. You can run those off in one high speed burst, or you can do that 1 shot at a time; but just like the D7100 the camera won't budge after that until it writes a couple of files to the disk. I've never used a D7100, but since the D7100 has more pixels it probably takes longer to write the same number of files (to cards with the same write speed).


The D4 can get better than 40 or 50 shots before it hesitates, and even when that happens it can write to disk fast enough that it just slows down a little rather than seemingly freezing up. So yes the D4 is what you'd like, but the D3S is workable if you are careful to ration consecutive shots over time.

In most other ways the quality of the D3S is equal to the D4. High ISO noise is the same. The D4 has greater dynamic range at ISO's below 1600, and of course it has more pixels.

The D4 is certainly the best camera available for your purposes right now, if cost is not a constraint. But the number 2 camera isn't far down the list, and that is the D3S. It rates highest of all in price/performance ratio value.

[Gary Irwin]

Joaquin, I understand where you're coming from...I went from a D300 (good camera...sold it too soon) to the D800 for the resolution (great!), but after being frustrated with the lack speed and no D400 on the horizon I finally bought a D4. Ok, so I'm a little nuts.

IMO a D3s will certainly fit the bill, but beware of the sever loss of resolution (and therefore effective reach) -- you're going from a 24MP DX sensor to a 12MP FX sensor, so you're going to have to get much closer than you currently shoot or use longer glass which always has trade-offs, especially when shooing BIF (weight, narrow FOV, slower AF w/TC's etc.).

Unless you need/want the D3s for other things, you might want to check out this post on Nikonians
http://www.nikonians.org/forums/dcbo...&mesg_id=25681

...a comparison chart of D7100 speeds with different formats w/high-speed 95MB/S Sandisk Extreme Pro UHS-1; With that combo you can get 17 frames @ 6 FPS in 12 bit and 1.3 crop mode before the buffer fills; Not great, but not bad, and should work well for BIF. In the mean time you can wait for the D400 .

Another alternative is to pick up a used D300 for a few hundred bucks -- still an excellent camera.

Just musing...

[Joaquin Barbará]

Thanks Gary, yes I am concerned about the loss of MP abd also the liss of the 1.5x factor when going from dx to fx.

My corrent BIF lens is a 300mm f/4 with a 1.4 Tc which gives a 420mm focal length x 1.5 crop factor = 630mm with 24mp. I would be goibg down to 420mm with 12mp.

Decisions, decisions, decision.

Then, there is always the d4 :)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Floyd Davidson]

My corrent BIF lens is a 300mm f/4 with a 1.4 Tc which gives a 420mm focal length x 1.5 crop factor = 630mm with 24mp. I would be goibg down to 420mm with 12mp.

That's a very significant concern! There just isn't any way the 300mm f/4 + TC will provide the same reach with a D3S that it does on a DX body, and at 12MP you can't crop much either!

A 400mm lens with either the 1.7x or 2.0x TC is pretty much the bottom end for lenses. An 80-400mm VRII, the new AF-S version, might work well enough (I haven't tried it and haven't done research on how well it can work with a 1.7x TC either). Any of the 400mm f/2.8 Nikkors will work well even with a 2x TC. And another possible option in the near future might be this 150-600mm zoom that Tamron has announce for availability in January.

The 400mm/500mm/600mm fixed focal length lenses are clearly the best options for image quality. They are also heavy and expensive. The zooms are far more useable, but they just don't match up for image quality either.

Decisions, decisions, decision.

Then, there is always the d4 :)

That and the 800mm f/5.6 lens...

[Gary Irwin]

I have to agree with Floyd here...420mm is going to be pretty short for 12MP on FX unless you're close to the subject or it's a big bird! I shot the D3 for a little while and it was fine with the 500VR+TC17EII = 850mm, but really nothing less was acceptable for birds in the wild around here. My current BIF setup right now is a D4 + 500VR+TC14EII (700mm) -- with the 16MP D4 I can I crop 50% and still get a good 1200 pix web image, but that's about it.

Unfortunately right now Nikon just dosen't have any fast DX body options, much to the chagrin of us wildlife enthusists. Canon's aging 7D is still the current reach+speed demon right now. All we can do is hope Nikon steps up and releases a D400 or some such that will fill the gap on the darkside.

Anyway, D3s' are very capable cameras but I'm worried it will leave you wanting for reach with only 420mm to work with. Longer glass would be a great companion but that's an expensive option; the 80-400VRII is excellent but it doesn't really take TC's well at the 400 end where you'd want to use it, so you're really talking about a big prime and big money.

BTW I'd recommend holding off on the D4 as Nikon Rumors are suggesting a new "D4-type body" coming soon. Could be a high(er) speed D4s or a higher resolution D4x...we don't know, but soon will.

[Joaquin Barbará]

Thanks guys, i will hold of on the D3s for now since it looks that it will not solve my problem.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Floyd Davidson]

BTW I'd recommend holding off on the D4 as Nikon Rumors are suggesting a new "D4-type body" coming soon. Could be a high(er) speed D4s or a higher resolution D4x...we don't know, but soon will.

Isn't that the question of the hour for the next 2 or 3 months! We might hope for a 36MP sensor with the speed of the current D4... Though of course some would rather have a 56MP sensor even if it can only shoot at 6 fps.

I'll be in hog heaven if whatever it is has at least 48 MP and at least 9 fps. Otherwise, it won't be all that long before a D5 comes along that does have all of that.

[Gary Irwin]

I'll be in hog heaven if whatever it is has at least 48 MP and at least 9 fps. Otherwise, it won't be all that long before a D5 comes along that does have all of that.

I think anything approaching high-speed 36MP+ is D5 territory, but a high-speed 24MP (i.e. D600 sensor) w/EXPEED4 would be interesting.