D3 full frame owners- Do you miss the crop?

[Bob Miller]

Hi! I have a NiKon D-300 now and am considering buying the D3s for its full frame advantages and higher ISO capabilities. I do alot of wildlife and bird photography as well as landscape and macro. I was wondering if some D3 owners could respond to these questions
1) Do you miss the crop factor alot when shooting wildlife?
2) Is a full frame really going to give me more quality in landscape and macro
3) is the Higher ISO capability mostly hype? What ISO in the D3 would be equivalent to ISO 400

All comments welcome!

[Lance Peters]

1. no
2. take a look at the current discussions re cropping.
3. No Hype - D3S I would go to 3200 ISO in a heartbeat - Have not had a D300 - my best guess would be 800 ISO - Real differences are at 1600 and over.

[Fabs Forns]

D300 is noisy at ISO 800.

[Ákos Lumnitzer]

While I don't have one; I have access to the use of a D3 on a regular basis and it made me want a FF Canon 1Ds body more than a 1D!

1 - I don't miss crop, just use long glass! :)
2 - I certainly believe so
3 - No hype there.

[James Shadle]

I do not miss the crop. I have found the D300 and D3/D700 are two completely different tools. The D3/D700 being the most versatile.
Landscapes are wonderful. DOF can be an issue on large magnifications with full frame.
While I will not hesitate to use ISO 800 on a D300, the D3/D700 is at least a full stop better in ISO performance.

[allanrube]

Re: 1 - it all depends. I used FX in Florida shooting birds, bu there in NE I have been using my DX body.

[PeterCollins]

I have a d2x and have held back from upgrading to a d3 as i dont want to lose the crop factor...

a 70-200 F2.8 with a 1.4x converter on it is alot cheaper then the equiv FX focal length

I do mainly airshows and bird photography so i dont mind missing out on the wide angle stuff

although i do wish for more ISO performance, the 300s apparently is a little better, but the D700/D3s are where the ISO performance is at its peak comes at a cost of needing longer more expensive glass

[John Chardine]

I'm on the Canon side but I remember when I just had the 5D because I had sold the 50D and did not have the mkIV yet, I really missed the ability to crop with the 5D. This has all to do with pixel density and not the size of the sensor (said many times before here at BPN). The 5D and the Nikon D3 and D700 are 5-6 mp cameras if you cut the FF sensor down to DX/1.5 crop. With these bodies you are just not laying down a whole lot of pixels over small detail in the image so you better get the crop right in the camera.

[Grant Eldridge]

I picked up a used D3 in January and I thought I would be using my D300 in conjunction with it, just because of that crop factor....well I haven't used it once. I find I much prefer the D3 feature set, image quality, and very high ISOs, with no hesitation shooting as high as ISO2500. With the D300 you can shoot at ISO800 without too much in the way of noise so long as you expose correctly, with the D3 you need extra carewhen approaching ISO 3200. With a D3s you will never look back, all you have to do is find one ;)

[Desmond Chan]

I also prefer to shoot D700 whenever it's possible. I don't think the use of full-frame necessarily means more expensive glass needed. You do have to get closer to your targets. Then again, even if you use a 1000mm lens, there will always be something that's too far for you.

[Troy Lim]

I got rid of my D300s a month after I used it. I love shooting during the sunrise, catching the gold light.
With D3s, you can have 1.2x but losing the mp. I never used it on mine.
Agree with Lance, ISO3200 without hesitation. Same with D3.
Good luck in deciding.