It seems my wife has ordered me a D3S from Adorama as a Christmas gift. They told her they had 50 on order and 42 on backorder and she should get by Christmas. She knows I like the biggest, best, newest on the market. I am actually waiting to see the specs on the new D90 replacement, she doesn't know though. Should I leave the D3S on order or pickup the new D90, aka D7000. I am just getting into photography more seriously doing portraits and composites along with landscapes, buildings etc which is my passion. My mother is a professional wedding photographer, using a D700, and my wife know my mother is wanting a D3S because she said it is the best, so my wife ordered me one. I do love my wife and with her new job, the money isn't a big deal.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
My wife just ordered me a D3S Nikon for Christmas
- Thread starter trjwv
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The D3S has godly low-light performance, but the price difference is huge. If paying 2x as much doesn't phase you, you will not be disappointed by the D3S. Even at it's max ISO of 102,400 the photos are useable. I'd say they look better than my Canon 7D does at ISO 1600. With an f/1.2 or 1.4 lens you basically have a night-vision camera.
You will have to upgrade all of your DX lenses but otherwise go for it. The D3s is the best out there!
just bought the 10-24mm f/3.5-4.5G ED AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor Lens
looking at the new AF-S NIKKOR 28-300mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR Zoom Lens to be the main lens on the D3S. I think these 2 lens should be ok. Any other suggestions.....
thanks
I'd spend less on the body and more on your lenses. The 10-24 will visibly vignette at all focal lengths unless you shoot the D3S in DX mode. Superzooms like the 28-300 (or the DX-equivalent 18-200) tend to be full of compromises and don't really excel at anything except allowing the photographer to avoid carrying more than one lens.
Study the articles and equipment reviews that are available on the web and develop an informed opinion of your needs based on what you know of your photographic objectives and the realities of your budget. There is a huge amount of information out there that is well worth your effort to study. There should be a stickied thread at the top of this forum with links, and the last time I looked at that thread the links are good ones.
In terms of what I have spent my money on, this page lists my gear: http://www.coates3.com/docs/photo_gear.html. I bought the longer telephoto lenses used - used is a good way to save quite a bit of money and lens technology is a whole lot more stable than sensor and body technology.
(edit: A D3S is definitely a cool gift, but you would probably be better served by a D300s/D700 accompanied by a couple of solid lenses appropriate to a DX/FX body)
This is going to seem like an obnoxious comment, but if you're just getting into photography and you're using a D5000... a D3s, while it is certainly THE BEST at what it does, may be just be too great of a jump without both the experience and lenses to take advantage of it.
As a previous poster said, your DX lenses are for all practical purposes useless on that camera. A really good sensor in a camera is also going to make any mediocre lenses you may have look even worse.
What I would do is get a credit for the camera (or sell it for MORE to somebody who REALLY needs it). So let's say you get $5500 to spend. Ditch the D5000 and get a D300s or the D90 replacement... then get some ridiculous lenses. I mean, you'll have $4000 or more left over. Go treat yourself to a Zeiss or the new 85mm 1.4 (or an old one). You can use older mechanical lenses on the D90, and older ones on the D300(s) (which can meter them). Go nuts. When you're ready to step up to a D700/D3sx, these lenses will work great on them, and you'll know how to use them, especially if you get some MF glass!
Again, my opinion if it were my money.
As a previous poster said, your DX lenses are for all practical purposes useless on that camera. A really good sensor in a camera is also going to make any mediocre lenses you may have look even worse.
What I would do is get a credit for the camera (or sell it for MORE to somebody who REALLY needs it). So let's say you get $5500 to spend. Ditch the D5000 and get a D300s or the D90 replacement... then get some ridiculous lenses. I mean, you'll have $4000 or more left over. Go treat yourself to a Zeiss or the new 85mm 1.4 (or an old one). You can use older mechanical lenses on the D90, and older ones on the D300(s) (which can meter them). Go nuts. When you're ready to step up to a D700/D3sx, these lenses will work great on them, and you'll know how to use them, especially if you get some MF glass!
Again, my opinion if it were my money.
Alright, well you need to sell all your DX lenses and you can get any of Nikon f/2.8 lenses thought it will really blow your wallet to get all 3 (but if money is not a problem, then full steam ahead!), or and I actually like what Nikon did, you can go for their new f/4 FX lenses. It wont be as sharp as the f/2.8 but it's cheaper and it has VR, coupled with D3s amazing high ISO performance, I think it will do just fine.
Nikon lens link (look for FX, f/2.8 or f/4)
Good luck with ur purchase! and you have a
wife. Makes me wish my future wife will be something like that
Nikon lens link (look for FX, f/2.8 or f/4)
Good luck with ur purchase! and you have a
wife. Makes me wish my future wife will be something like that 
I don't think it's obnoxious- it's the truth. Frankly the D3s is far too much camera for you (you admit to being a beginner, and don't even seem to realize the issues of DX lenses on FX bodies) and even if you can afford it no problem, it's a complete waste of money for you to get it at this time. I would suggest something more modest perhaps a D700 to get you started on full frame (still a bit ambitious but it's the lowest FX camera available which would help with subjects like landscapes or architecture), and then a set of good lenses. You should not be pairing a D3s with the 28-300 as your "main lens". And you should not use any DX lens on it. Period. I know you can, but really if you have the money to spend for a D3s, you should not be cludging your existing DX lenses onto it.
+1 on this one. I have a D700 and I would be hard pressed to justify a D3s. If you don't know the difference between FX and DX (which admittedly you don't) and you are looking at a D7000 in comparison with a D3s then you buy just to show off your camera. Sorry I am harsh but that is the reality. you won't get better pictures out of the D3s than you are getting from your D5000! the D3s is just MORE camera, at your stage it is definitely not the BETTER camera. But hey it's your money and you will spend more on new lenses once you get the cam since none of your current ones will work as they were designed to. Oh and while the 28-300 lens is good, you are SAVING on the lens vs. the body. It should be the other way around!
I'll just add that I use a D300, and even after one year with this camera and lots of years shooting film, I haven't even managed to get all I can out of it. There's more to getting great shots than just a big full-frame body and super high ISO capability. You would be able to grow quite a bit as a photographer before you'd "outgrow" a D300s, believe me, so I'd also recommend getting the D300s and some good glass, and then shoot a ton of photos to learn as much as you can. You'll know when you're ready for a D3s without having to ask any questions.
You do know that the Nikon D3S doesn't have any scene modes (landscape, portrait, sport, etc.)? It only has 4 exposure modes:
- Program [P]
- Shutter-Priority
- Aperture-Priority [A]
- Manual [M]
I also hope you're not someone who likes to crop their photos. Photos taken with DX lenses in DX mode will have around 8 megapixels ...
- Program [P]
- Shutter-Priority
- Aperture-Priority [A]
- Manual [M]
I also hope you're not someone who likes to crop their photos. Photos taken with DX lenses in DX mode will have around 8 megapixels ...
Really? Ouch!
Edit: You're of course right, from dpreview:
Image sizes (DX format) • 2784 x 1848 [L; 5.1 MP]
Ouch x 2... Any advantage or disadvantage to using FX lens on a DX cam. May look at the new D7000, if the specs are good when announced, and build my FX lens collection. I have access to FX lens collection my mother has for her D700 that I can borrow when not in use. I shoot in P and M modes mostly. I am looking to purchase a good FX lens if I stay with the D3S so any suggestions. Adorama states the b/o won't be filled until November/December so I have time to cancel my wifes order if I change my mind. If not what lens would you suggest as a good all-around lens for the D3S.
Hard to say no to a D3S when the money's (BONUS) is there now. Money may not be there later so I am thinking real hard on this one.
I see no reason why you shouldn't have the best if you can afford it and figure you'll grow into it. However, if it means you won't have the lenses to go with the camera, then it's just silly. As I've said before, that would be like hitching up a wagon to a race car.
FX lenses will all work on DX, and very well in fact. More likely to have corner to corner sharpness because only the sweet spot middle part of the image circle is used. Great choices are 24f/1.4 (if you can afford this), 35f/2, 50f/1.4, 60f/2.8 macro, 85f/1.4, 105f/2 DC, 135f/2 DC, 180f/2.8, 200f/2 (if you can afford it,) 80-200f/2.8, 70-200f/2.8 VRI (fine for DX,) 300f/4 AF-S, and on and on.... all work spectacularly with DX bodies... and will move with you to FX later if you make that move. And a couple great lenses for DX would be an 11-16f/2.8 Tokina, a 12-24f/4 (either Nikkor or Tokina) and a 17-55f/2.8. All should be sellable if you need to get rid of them when you move to FX...
You'll have the ability to make far better photos if you take a fair part of that investment in a D3s and put it into optics, as everyone here is saying. Pros still use DX equipment, so it's a bit early in the game for you to become an equipment "snob." Walking around with a D3s with a consumer lens will just look silly and anyone who knows anything about photo gear will just shake their head and put you in that special category of folks with too much money and no idea how to spend it...
You'll have the ability to make far better photos if you take a fair part of that investment in a D3s and put it into optics, as everyone here is saying. Pros still use DX equipment, so it's a bit early in the game for you to become an equipment "snob." Walking around with a D3s with a consumer lens will just look silly and anyone who knows anything about photo gear will just shake their head and put you in that special category of folks with too much money and no idea how to spend it...
It doesn't exist. This isn't a camera where you just mount a do-it-all lens and hang it around your neck. This a bulky piece of equipment that requires forethought and a purpose.
I'm just going to quote myself here and just add that you should consider the types of photography you want to excel in and use that $ to buy the best possible lens you can get. Pretty much all lenses will work on a DX camera (again, see what I said about metering/focusing).
+1 here. The D3s is a specialized tool. It is not an "ultimate point and shoot" camera. Do not underestimate its size/weight and expect that you will carry it everywhere. Despite all the things it can do automatically (meter, focus, etc), it is not an automated camera. As mentioned above there are no scene modes, no presets, nothing. You will need to be deciding on some photographic parameters pretty much every time you click the shutter.
Can you give some details on what shooting experience you have, what types of photography you are most interested in (I see you have already listed these), how serious about photography you really are, do you print, do you view on the web only, etc.
I think that if you have the money, there is nothing wrong with getting the D3s even if you are a beginner. BUT...
Do consider that it is a HUGE camera. In my opinion, a D3s if for people that live out of photography or that are very serious photographers. There is no way you'll be taking this camera with its lenses on a vacation, for example.
Why not consider a D300s or a D700? The latter is full frame and smaller than the D3s, and it also has a built-in flash.
Or if you are keeping the D5000, and just want the D3s for experimenting and playing with the best Nikon camera, then go for it. I certainly envy you.
Don't mean to be rude but it sounds like you have more money than sense.
The D3S will weight several times more than the D5000 although if you really do have that much money maybe you can hire someone to carry it around for you as well.
If you're someone who likes the newest and best, get the D700(0).
D700 is still pretty much the highest rated camera on DXOmark.com (best) and you can get your newest fix from the D7000. Come to think of it buy both if you want. You can keep your DX lenses for the D7000 and buy..I don't know for the D700. The main rule in photography is invest in glass, not cameras. Good lenses for the D3s will be both huge and obscenely expensive. Buying the 28-300 for it is like buying a new pc, then running win 3.1 on it.
The D7000 will have better video than the D3s, and being a replacement of the D90 (class leading in low light iso for APSC cameras) you'll have the best available there too.
Personally for you I think you should just get the D7000. It'll be an awesome camera.
The D3S will weight several times more than the D5000 although if you really do have that much money maybe you can hire someone to carry it around for you as well.
If you're someone who likes the newest and best, get the D700(0).
D700 is still pretty much the highest rated camera on DXOmark.com (best) and you can get your newest fix from the D7000. Come to think of it buy both if you want. You can keep your DX lenses for the D7000 and buy..I don't know for the D700. The main rule in photography is invest in glass, not cameras. Good lenses for the D3s will be both huge and obscenely expensive. Buying the 28-300 for it is like buying a new pc, then running win 3.1 on it.
The D7000 will have better video than the D3s, and being a replacement of the D90 (class leading in low light iso for APSC cameras) you'll have the best available there too.
Personally for you I think you should just get the D7000. It'll be an awesome camera.