D3s vs d3x, which do I get? Or something else

[Mashburn]

I have a 7200 & 7000. But I'm wanting a full frame because of its better performance of ISO control and also because of being full frame so I can get closer to the subject (like weddings).

Here is what is important to me.

1. ISO control.
- I shot at night of the milky way.
- high school football games with poor lighting.
- ufc MMA fights with decent lighting.
- weddings inside and outside.
- light painting (hobby)

2. Printing.
- according to the print size chart for d3s I cannot go above 9x11 ...... While the d3x has twice the size.
-my largest print was like a 16x10. And it came from my d7000. But with getting into weddings more and more. I know someone is going to want one image out of 3000 and want that one printed at 24x30.

3. Detail
- wedding dress
- landscape and/or micro.


I like how d3s has a cleaning sensor in the camera.
I don't care about fps. For my sports I do fine enough at 5. It's just the way I shoot. I usually have a good idea what's coming. And with practice practice practice, you'll get the basketball coming off the finger tips for the future and it becomes muscle memory. There might be sometimes I want the complete follow thru, but that's too rare. Therefore fps is not a deciding factor for which camera to get.
I don't care for quiet mode or video. 99% of the time I never use them. Even on wildlife, and its because I'm so far away from the subject.


So what is y'alls thoughts? Have the capability to shoot at 12,000 + ISO with no problem OR have better prints and detail?

Also 90% of my pictures are on the computer. They get printed. But the prints make me money. But they are usally 8x10 to 5x7.

 

[jaomul]

D3s because its faster and iso is better, though both are excellent,

What do you mean you can get closer cos its fx?

 

[jaomul]

As an after thought?What lenses for your d7200 do you have?

 

[Mashburn]

D3s because its faster and iso is better, though both are excellent,

What do you mean you can get closer cos its fx?

I am leaning towards the d3s as well. Simply because of how it handles noise. My prime reason is for getting it for night/low lighting.

As for getting closer. On a DX camera or it's cropped 1.6. While fx is not. Therefore if I was in a small room I could throw on a 35mm and get the shoot I want without making it look like a wide angle. While on dx in a small room I would use my 11-16 tokina and yes it gets the area I want but it's a wide angle look............ So at 35mm on a fx camera of something that is 35mm away, I get the shoot. While on dx I have to step back 56mm (35mm x 1.6)...... And sometimes I can't step back because it is to small of a room, or because there is church pews and I don't want those in thfxshot with people sitting there as well.

My lenses I have are
70-200 vr 2 f/2.8
35mm 1.8 (the cheap Nikon. But it does good enough for me)
50 mm 1.8 (cheap and same as above)
Tokina 11-16 f/2.8..... I'm unsure what I'll do with it. Because it's a DX lens. And it vignettes below 14 on a fx. And if I add filters it does worse (unless I do the filters that slide over the camera instead of the ones that screw on).

I'll be getting a 35mm or 50mm sigma art lens.

 

[jaomul]

I dont know, i'd add a nice 50mm and a fast standard and leave it at that, but that just me. There is merit in this length lens thing, but buy the right lens and it works on your format. So you have to use a 24 on a crop to get 35 on fx, who cares, as long as you are aware of how to use it to minimise perspective distortion etc

Anyway, back to fx, if 6 fps is enough I reckon a d750 with battery grip is a good option

 

[jaomul]

With a bit of care the d7200 can perform well at high iso- this shot (I'm to close at that focal length but its ok for an example) is at iso 9000 and I think its usable enough

 

[Mashburn]

750, ISO quality is not that good above 6400. Good camera there is things I like and dislike. But it's not for me.

Thanks for the idea

 

[jaomul]

750, ISO quality is not that good above 6400. Good camera there is things I like and dislike. But it's not for me.

Thanks for the idea

Not sure where you got that idea, the d750 is an excellent high iso camera, but you're the one buying

 

[Mashburn]

With a bit of care the d7200 can perform well at high iso- this shot (I'm to close at that focal length but its ok for an example) is at iso 9000 and I think its usable enough

It is. But it's in decent lighting. But when it's in low lighting it's 1600 with a max of 3200 of noticeable noise. Go text it at a high school football game at night.

But during the day time events. 9000 ish is where I stop at.

It's just that I'm shooting a lot at night. Because during the day time, I'll stick with my d7200.

 

[Mashburn]

750, ISO quality is not that good above 6400. Good camera there is things I like and dislike. But it's not for me.

Thanks for the idea

Not sure where you got that idea, the d750 is an excellent high iso camera, but you're the one buying

I tried it at a night game. As well as the d810.

 

[jaomul]

Just beware so, the d3s is supposedly a fraction of a stop better at higher iso, and this advantage may even be reduced when you resize your photos. I don't believ you'd really see it in prints.Be sure you are getting what you need before dropping the big wad of cash that a d3s will set you back

 

[astroNikon]

According to just the ISO numbers, the d3s is better than the d4s, which is better than the d600, d800e, d4, d750, d610, d810, d800, then d700 in that order.

whereas the d3x and d3 are below the d700 in ISO scores.

If you have the change, look at the d5 too.

 

[Mashburn]

According to just the ISO numbers, the d3s is better than the d4s, which is better than the d600, d800e, d4, d750, d610, d810, d800, then d700 in that order.

whereas the d3x and d3 are below the d700 in ISO scores.

If you have the change, look at the d5 too.

D5 is way too much for me. I'm trying to stay around 1500-2500 or less. And I don't mind used

 

[astroNikon]

I assume you know the d3s is an older 12mp camera. DR is not as good as the d750 (from what I've read) plus all the technology in it is older - battery type, memory card types & sizes, etc.

but it is 11 fps and built like a tank

 

[Solarflare]

750, ISO quality is not that good above 6400. Good camera there is things I like and dislike. But it's not for me.

?????????????

The D3x ends at ISO 1600. 6400 is the absolute maximum, its Hi2 for this camera. Meaning the image was still taken at ISO 1600 and the result is just muliplied by 4.

The D750 ends at ISO 12800. Its not glorious looking, but its still somewhat useable; much better than what my D600 offered, anyway. And its Hi2 is 50k !

The ISO performance of D750 and D3s arent that far apart, the D3s simply also allows Hi3.