A&P So...Heres what I can do..

Discussion in 'Lifestyle' started by adamlewis88, May 29, 2009.

  1. adamlewis88

    adamlewis88 New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2007
    Messages:
    5,392
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    Sell all my Canon equipment and end up with...

    D3
    14-24
    24-70
    70-200
    SB-900
    1.7x TC

    And a little bit of spare money...

    Thing that would suck is losing two bodies :(
    But I dont normally take two bodies when I go shooting anyways...

    Im so conflicted. Im really blown away with what the D3 does but the other part of me knows that the Canon stuff is still fine for me.
     
  2. SonicYan

    SonicYan Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2006
    Messages:
    10,259
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Orange County, CA
    Go with what you want. If the D3 is that good for you and you end up having a little spare money, why not?
     
  3. adamlewis88

    adamlewis88 New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2007
    Messages:
    5,392
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    Im getting rid of 6 lenses for 3 and a TC. Thats the only thing that bugs me.
    However, the only lenses I really ever use are the 16-35 and 70-200. I bought the 135 and 85 for low light (which, IMO, I can just turn up the ISO a click higher now), I never use the 24-105, and the fisheye is just a novelty really :hs:
     
  4. SugarCoatedSour

    SugarCoatedSour Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2004
    Messages:
    53,663
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Glenview, IL
    That's my dream setup :wtc:
     
  5. Jbrown

    Jbrown OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2006
    Messages:
    44,497
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Dallas
    I can paypal you money today for the 135 if the price is right :o
     
  6. adamlewis88

    adamlewis88 New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2007
    Messages:
    5,392
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    Haha I need to run it all by the boss first. Make sure its kosher. Ill let you be the first to know though :x:
     
  7. GlobeGuy

    GlobeGuy New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2004
    Messages:
    2,974
    Likes Received:
    0
    Dang, you pretty much getting the best that Nikon has to offer.

    You get discounts too don't you? IIRC you work for a camera shop?
     
  8. Keegan

    Keegan New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2008
    Messages:
    3,663
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    DC
    After shooting with a D3 during an indoor volleyball game this winter season I was blown away... I thought about the camera more than sex.

    It's very, very tempting to go from my 1D bodies/L glass to the D3, but some of the lens prices (aka 300 2.8) would kill me.

    Edit: May wait to see if 1D4 is announced in the next bit... but I've been seriously considering a D3 switch the past few months
     
  9. GlobeGuy

    GlobeGuy New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2004
    Messages:
    2,974
    Likes Received:
    0
    Btw, did the FW upgrade resolve that banding issue with the D3?
     
  10. adamlewis88

    adamlewis88 New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2007
    Messages:
    5,392
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    Yeah. I get pretty good discounts. Nikon stuff is still super expensive though. I probably wouldnt be able to do it without the discount. Its about $2800 less than I would pay otherwise.

    The banding stopped in JPG and I think its an ACR thing. Im going to try converting in View NX later. Apparently it does a better job. However, see below for my raw decision.

    I still need to play with it some more to be sure but there are a few things that REALLY make me want to switch so far...
    1. The auto focus in servo mode with focus priority virtually NEVER misses. Granted, Ive only had daylight to try this in, but Im heading to the skate park tonight to try it some more. With my MkIII, even with focus priority on, the first frame will normally be sharp, then the next couple will be a little off, then the next few will be sharp for the rest of the sequence. The D3 hasnt done that at all for me.
    2. One HUGE reason Id be willing to switch is just to back to shooting JPG and being happy. Dont get me wrong...RAW is great, but if I can shoot JPG and be happy with the results, Id LOVE to do that. With the D3, so far, thats exactly whats happening. Im totally happy with the JPG resutls.
     
  11. johan

    johan Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2003
    Messages:
    5,123
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Sahasrara; magnetic violet infinite
    Do it.

    You save a little money at the end, and by your own admission, you rarely shoot with 2 bodies.

    The Canon does the job just fine, but if you weren't interested in a change you wouldn't have posted this.

    Its about what you want vs need anyways.
     
  12. TheMarchHare

    TheMarchHare OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2008
    Messages:
    2,982
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Gon-Ju, South Korea to Californ-I-A
    what's your cannon gear? do want!
     
  13. tenplanescrashing

    tenplanescrashing Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2005
    Messages:
    9,287
    Likes Received:
    0
    He sold the cannon and only has the cannon balls left.
     
  14. ok_computer

    ok_computer OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2005
    Messages:
    15,615
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Edmonton, AB, Canada
    Pretty simple dude:

    -The D3 will give you better photos.
    -You're only losing lenses you don't use, but when it comes to the lenses you DO use, you're getting better ones.
     
  15. ok_computer

    ok_computer OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2005
    Messages:
    15,615
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Edmonton, AB, Canada
    Personally, I'd do this:

    Put a 17-35 on a D3, forget about the 14-24 and 24-70, and buy a D700 with a 50 or 85 on it to fill the gap and provide a second body.
     
  16. adamlewis88

    adamlewis88 New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2007
    Messages:
    5,392
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    Ah damn. I always forget about the 17-35. Honestly, I think Id like that more than the 14-24. 14 is cool for crazy wide stuff, but I like being able to get to 35 without having to change lenses...
     
  17. adamlewis88

    adamlewis88 New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2007
    Messages:
    5,392
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    buuuttt...

    The only thing about the 17-35 is that it looks like its not weathersealed :hs:
     
  18. ThexToddster

    ThexToddster New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2005
    Messages:
    20,748
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Woodcrest, CA
    Sounds like you should switch. If it's going to give better results than you get now and make it easier for you when editing, jump ship!
     
  19. adamlewis88

    adamlewis88 New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2007
    Messages:
    5,392
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    I dont think its necessarily going to give me 'better' results, but it just seems, so far, that it will make it less time consuming.

    Like today for example.

    I went to go take pictures at my fiance's bridal shower (were co-dependent...). I shot all day in JPG, used auto ISO when the light was all over the place, imported them in picasa, exported at the size I wanted, and then just did the sharpening in CS3 (I know it sounds like a lot, but normally Im dumping cards worth of CR2 files, wading through them in LR, making my adjustments there, fixing something to eat as hundreds of CR2 are converted to JPG, and then still sharpeneing in CS3).

    Much less work and I still get stuff I love

    [​IMG]

    AND..

    I dont have to worry about running NR progams. Thats a huge killer for me too especially when I shoot low light stuff.

    3200 with 'Normal' JPG NR
    [​IMG]

    7200 ISO
    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited: May 31, 2009

Share This Page