The new Nikon D3X has now been out in the real world long enough for some reviews.
First up ids the blog post / review by Joe McNally : A Monster of a Camera. And while Joe loves the image quality and feel of the camera, he does bring up two important points; the camera creates MASSIVE files and is slower than the D3.
It feels and acts exactly like a D3, except slower, due to the size of the files it is pushing. My D3’s are buffer upgraded, and even shooting NEFs on consecutive high, they rock and roll. The D3X is, well, more suited to a waltz….
Here’s where I see this camera playing huge. Most of the covers of LIFE, Sports Illustrated, Time, or Newsweek— what I would call the newsstand magazines— I’ve shot over the years were shot 6×7 medium format. As opposed to the Geographic, which has historically let a cover evolve naturally out of a coverage, those magazines often specifically assign a cover, either the subject or the theme.
Anyone who says the D3x is overpriced, well, they just doesn’t get it. This is a camera that produces quality revealing at the very least $20k medium format backs that can’t accept the biggest and grandest arsenal of lenses medium format can only dream of.
Final images from the D3x…freakin stunning!!!! D3x is for everyone…NOT freakin even! Does Moose love it? Final file, hell yeah! Firing rate, crayons are faster and I can’t draw.
Both these mini-reviews tell me the same thing, if you shoot magazine covers, or very high end product, fashion or portraiture then you will probably want one. If you shoot event, sports, concerts then the slow frame rate and monster file size will be a hinderance, and the D3 or the D700 is the better way to go. One thing I have not seen yet, is a review of the ISO at the 1600 + range.