Uh oh! Looks like the British Journal of Photography isn’t going to be invited to next year’s big Nikon event. Well, their loss is our gain as they confirm the details we suspected for the D3s. The actual announcement is supposed to go up in about six hours, but hey, it’s out there in the open. What’s new? Well, before you read any further, consider that this camera has been priced at £4200, or around $6700, for the body only. This is a professional camera. But that said, features that start pro-only tend to trickle down in the next generation of prosumer and consumer cameras, so let’s take a look.
Perhaps the most eye-catching new feature is ISO boost that can take you up to an ISO of 102,400. You read that correctly: ISO of one hundred and two thousand, four hundred. I tend not to shoot over 800. I’m not a sports or action photographer so this doesn’t affect me, but this does mean shorter exposures in worse light. And hey, if they’re being printed on newspaper or spread on the web, no one’s going to notice a little noise if the shot is right.
HD video is… improved but not apparently by much. 1280×720 at 24p, plus ISO boost is available so low light might really be an option. One actual benefit of the throw-away-and-resize DSLR method of creating video is that it minimizes ISO noise due to the resizing. Onlookers are said to have noted high-ISO video from the D3s as looking natural, which I don’t doubt. Video from the D300s looked solid, though autofocus is still slow, loud, and inaccurate.
It’ll shoot 9 frames per second at full res, or 11 if you only use the cropped sensor size. Other features:
- 12 megapixels (honestly, you don’t need more)
- Improved viewfinder (probably brighter and closer to 100%)
- 51-point autofocus (standard and good)
- 14-bit A/D conversion and 16-bit image processing (why not)
- Twin CF slots (hmm)
Looks like a solid camera, but unless you really need that insane ISO range, I don’t see a lot here that necessitates a purchase. If you’re a Nikon man, the D300s should be sufficient, and if not… why are you reading this?
We may as well note here that speculation on this camera was way off. There are no unicorns mentioned anywhere in the article.
Ah, there is a new picture, this one of the back of the sucker. Also from Nikon rumors. Here we go:
I’m not familiar with Nikon rear-layout. Anybody want to step in?
[via Nikon Rumors]
Only 12mp, Only 720p, No 60p.. £4200! You must be kidding me, the Canon 7D has 18mp, 1080p 24p-60p for only £1700! Seriously, you could use the Canon 7D on any project from High Fashion spreads to Music Videos and get Pro results, Nikon is really falling behind in the Professional user category.
The D300s is a great camera, no question, but the reason to upgrade to the D3S is really to go full frame, not just for a super high ISO. Personally, I’d wait for the D700s which will hopefully be announced in the next couple of months.
@Jay, sorry, but I don’t think even Canon would claim the 7d is a “professional” camera. It’s direct comparison is the D300s in the “pro-sumer” category.
Yeah, I am biased because I am a canon man. But honestly… a pro camera with 12 mp? That is idiotic. I am sure they had to sacrifice mega pixels for fps and the ISO boost to 102,400…
While the mp is so low.. the ISO is nuts-in-your-buttz.
the MP is fine, though, and they’re got huge pixel wells so it’ll be really clear. unless you’re printing on the sides of buildings 12MP is more than enough.
Profesional image on 7d? that muddy fabricated noise reduction images from canon? canon lens is not capable reproduce that high resolution. canon is a kontol. you can enjoy error 99 later on.
Nikon traditionally haven’t bothered to try to impress with pixel counts, the emphasis being on quality rather quantity. How did Shakespeare cope without a word processor ?
D3 or eos 1DS Mk3 or eos 5D MkII? Well the 7d is out of the question because it’s not full frame and quite frankly the images are softer than a cozy sofa. The 5d MkII is the same camera that uncle roger has so that is out of the question too. The 1Ds Mk III weighs in at a squillion ifillion pounds and lets be honest at high iso’s aint that great. That leaves Nikon. The original D3 is still an amazing camera and covers an A3 double page spread with ease.
A raw conversion in Phase one has just done me an A0 print that looks fantastic.
The D300s is there as a backup and also if I wanted to shoot video, though why is beyond me.
I’m a photographer and not a videographer. Lets not get the two confused now.
Keep in mind this is the sports photography version of the D3; if you are a pixel-hugger, the D3x doubles the pixel count at the cost of slower auto speed and lower ISO. For the sports or action photographer, the combination of double the buffer size, 11 fps, and the insane ISO capability are unmatched. Can’t wait to see the noise performance at the higher ISOs, but those of us who shoot night sports or other action events are drooling. And, its just in time for both the Olympics and World Cup…