Nikon D3 Field Review in the East Pacific. PART 3

by Alexander Mustard Thursday, September 18th, 2008

SUMMARY
So will I buy one? I am not sure, I have been hanging on for an FX camera in the 18-22MP range as resolution is more attractive to me than high ISO. I miss it. It is a phenomenal land camera, and a very capable underwater one. For anyone who made the transition of film to DX, DX to FX is much simpler. The Subal ND3 is an excellent housing, but I’d strongly recommend the GS viewfinder. I was much happier than I expected to be with the AF modes, which work really well. Nikon’s biggest job for the upgrade is increasing the AF coverage of the frame, which is currently insufficient (although does exceed many cameras out there).

I think that my shoot definitely played to the strengths of the D3 and particularly with wide angle I felt I was getting images I could not with DX. I might have been less impressed had this been a tropical trip, where the benefits of the D3 over a DX camera would have been more marginal.

There is no doubt that the D3 opens up new possibilities for wide angle in dark conditions, and I felt I only began to scratch the surface of the creative possibilities on this shoot. Nikon D3 + 15mm, Subal housing. F14 @ 1/160th. ISO 800. Two Inon Z240 strobes.

The D3 excels at both macro and wide angle and I was satisfied with its performance with the tricky rectilinear wide-angle zoom, with the subjects I was shooting. That said, low ISO image quality (both for wide angle and macro) is very good, but not a step on from current DX cameras and even some that are several years old. If I were planning predominantly coral reef diving (low ISO wide angle and macro), the D3 would be hard to justify over a D300, for example.

It proved an excellent macro camera too, although not really offering any clear advantage over cheaper DX models. Nikon D3 + 150mm + 500D, Subal housing. F13 @ 1/250th. ISO 200. Two Inon Z240 strobes.

In evaluating the D3 I cannot ignore the D700, which makes the same FX arguments at a more compelling price. The only significant feature it does not equal the D3 for underwater photography is the 95% versus 100% viewfinder. Is this worth $2000? Plus it will travel lighter and take a smaller housing.

So should you get a D3? As I have said above, a lot depends on the type of diving you do. If you frequently shoot wide angle in dark conditions then the D3 will open up new images to you. If you dive mainly in brighter conditions or if you are a macro fanatic then the D3 will offer you little to justify the cost of FX over DX.

There is much passion invested in the D3: the handling of Giugiaro designed body, the feel of the controls beneath your fingers, its bristling reflexes and instant readiness. And as a result, investing in a camera such as this should not just be about dry facts and figures. It is an emotional decision too. For most people underwater photography is not a profession and I could completely understand anyone wanting to use the D3 just for the quality of its ergonomics and capabilities. You experience these with every frame you shoot, particularly in the Subal ND3. If you decide that this camera is for you, then you will not regret your purchase for a second.

To conclude. The D3 takes excellent macro and wide angle underwater photos. I love the D3’s screen (also on the D700, D300 and D90). I miss the Tokina! I miss the D3, now it is returned. FX is great and easy to adapt to. However, the advantages of FX really depend on what you photograph. If you shoot mainly in the tropics or shoot mainly macro then FX offers little over DX. However, if you shoot plenty of wide angle in low light, then the D3 won’t just allow you to take types of images you never could before, it will change your approach to photography in these conditions. This makes it a very exciting underwater camera.

A decorated warbonnet. Nikon D3 + 150mm + 500D, Subal housing. F13 @ 1/250th. ISO 200. Two Inon Z240 strobes.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Sincere thanks, once again to Ryan Canon at Reef Photo Video and Craig Jones for trusting me with the Subal ND3 and Nikon D3, respectively. I am incredibly grateful to fellow photographers Rand McMeins, Todd Mintz, Jeff Hartog and Allison Vitsky for helping me through the complex itinerary of this trip (UK-USA-Canada-USA-Mexico-USA-UK). I’m lucky to have friends like you and look forward to diving together again soon! Thanks Todd for lending me your buoyant StiX arms, John Davies for giving me that tub of o-ring grease that kept the expensive camera dry and also Carol Grant (who I didn’t get to dive with this time) for lending me your official Subal 105 VR port. I would also like to thank the dive ops, Mamro Adventures in Port Hardy, Marissa Dive Charters in San Diego and the guys from Shark Diving International and the fabulous crew on the Solmar V for our adventure in Guadalupe. Finally, I’d like to thank my photo-buddies on this trip for their excellent company, sense of humour and advice through the trip: Todd Mintz, Rand McMeins, John Davies, Allison Vitsky, Mike Bartick, Brett and Stephanie Tischler, Calvin Penfound, Marianne Lawrence and Jeff Hartog as well as everyone on the Solmar V.

- Alex -

FURTHER READING
Having suggested at the top of this piece that others using the D3 have been a little secretive of their opinions, I thought I should add some links to those who have shared their thoughts!
Jason Heller on the D3 in Sea & Sea housing – DPG - www.divephotoguide.com (coming soon)
Charles Hood on the D3 in Aquatica housing – UWP Mag Issue 44. www.uwpmag.com

Finally, there is a small gallery of some of the D3 images I took during this trip here.

I agree with Alex that Nikon's future moves seem much less clear than just a few months ago. The introduction of the D700, in essence a compact version of the D3 in many ways, puts into doubt what Nikon might do next. Originally, it seemed to me that a D3x, built on the same body as the D3 would be logical. BUT Sony has just introduced their 24+Mp chip in a compact body and Canon has upgraded the 5D with a 21+Mp chip similar to that in the 1DsMkIII. I bought a D3 when they were first announced, but now feel that the D700 may be a significantly superior camera for underwater shooting, not because of its smaller size, but because it has an independent flash compensation control which allows you to vary the output of i-ttl strobes without altering the ambient light reading, which is what happens when you use the normal "global" compensation. I consider this a huge advantage for the D-700, but we'll have to see if any of the housing makers put in a control to access this. And put in the control in a way that would be most conveniently used. In housings, controls are what separates the good from the mediocre. Fred
Posted by divegypsy on 2008-10-05 08:23:37 Thanks Fred. I agree about the 70-180mm for those lucky enough to have one. It really comes back to the fore on FX. With so many divisive rumours flying around I really don't have a feel for what Nikon are going to do next. Hi-res FX seems obvious, but in a D3 or D700 body, or both? Or maybe there is weight in the MX rumours, now the Leica is a reality. Alex
Posted by Dr. Alex Mustard on 2008-10-05 05:09:30 Hi Alex, Nice review. I'm happy that you made the point of indicating that the angle of coverage of a full-frame fisheye, like the Sigma 15mm combined with a 1.5x is similar to the 17-35mm lens at 17mm. But it does lack the zoom to 35mm capability which can be very useful when a subject is a bit farther away. In the macro department, Nikon's vintage 70-180 Micro-nikkor zoom offers a flexibility none of the fixed focal length macro lenses offer and can be used with Nikon's T5 and T6 close up lenses to allow focusing closer than the .75x of the lens alone. That lens and its versatility are one of the main reasons I have held out for a full-frame digital camera. And like you, before I spend all the money on a new housing and i-ttl strobes, I will hold out for a higher resolution FX sensor camera. D3x?. On the other hand, Leica's new S-class camera, with its 30x45mm 37 Mp sensor also sound quite interesting, especially as it would be combined with Leica lenses designed specifically for that sensor. Fred
Posted by divegypsy on 2008-10-03 05:24:44 Thanks for this article Alex. A very good read.
Posted by Stephen Colquitt on 2008-09-21 01:21:27 Hi Andy, Yes. I use AF on almost all my shots. With a dioptre attached a wide angle lens won't focus on objects more than a metre (few feet) away on land. But once underwater it focuses very well. Alex
Posted by Dr. Alex Mustard on 2008-09-20 02:46:18 I should clarify - not on wide angle zooms - and you mentioned the 10-17.
Posted by andydives on 2008-09-20 02:22:27 Great review Alex, Thanks for all the info. Are you using AF on wide angle with diopters? That has never worked for me.
Posted by andydives on 2008-09-20 02:16:21 Hi Michael, Objectively I agree, but emotionally the D3 is hard to resist once you try it. Its a lovely camera. Be careful! One thing about hi-ISO is that throughout the trip I did not shoot any long exposures/blur images. Which I know are something you do a lot of. I think as more people go to these high ISO capable cameras - we will see different types of creative shots becoming more popular. Alex
Posted by Dr. Alex Mustard on 2008-09-19 05:39:03 Alex, Thanks. Excellent, thorough review. IMO, no need to upgrade from the D2x for now, especially wide angle, re. Tokina benefits. Thanks for reconfirming this. Can see myself buying the D3 for topside though, Best, MPO
Posted by Michael on 2008-09-18 19:51:27 Yea, I did...;-)
Posted by randapex on 2008-09-18 15:27:10 Rand, did you see the jellyfish comment on Part 2? Alex
Posted by Dr. Alex Mustard on 2008-09-18 14:36:33 Fantastic article Alex. Strangely enough for me, it was your loan of the 150mm sigma that excited me as much or more as the fine results you were getting from the D3. The Warbonnet photo above is a great example of the type of shot I don't have using my existing kit. Can't wait to go back next year. Thanks for your company and advice. Rand
Posted by randapex on 2008-09-18 13:52:36 The other solution is just to not dive with people with DX cameras and the Tokina - then you don't realise what you are missing.
Posted by Dr. Alex Mustard on 2008-09-18 10:04:12 My first problem with the TC on Tok is that my zoom gear would no longer line up and remedy not easy. Also Tok is prone to some nasty CA if given a chance - I think a TC would make that much more prevalent. Hopefully Pentax will go to FF digital at some point at they will get Tokina to design them an up-to-date 17-28mm Fisheye zoom. Here's dreaming...
Posted by Dr. Alex Mustard on 2008-09-18 10:02:48 Nice review Alex. As you're so attached to the Tokina 10-17 have you ever thought of adding a teleconverter and shooting with it on full-frame? I have a Canon 5D and I've just been messing around with the 10-17 plus a 1.4x teleconverter. On land at least it seems to give pretty sharp results, even in the corners. There's just the tiniest bit of vignetting at 10mm with the 1.4x converter (mind you I have cut the lens shade off- a slightly delicate and dicey operation!).
Posted by Ferg42 on 2008-09-18 09:31:14