|
yfjameslo (July 27, 2008 at 1:33 pm)
Well basically yes but it gives photographers an easier option when taking photos in extremely low/high angles.
carnival66 (June 15, 2008 at 3:43 am)
they are so expensive, i would so get one, they're five thousand dollars, but i'm sure it's worth it.
poophead125 (June 12, 2008 at 3:51 am)
Doesn't live view mode kinda defeat the purpose of an slr?
HMFRiverdale (June 11, 2008 at 6:14 am)
Yes. . .and until you've actually seen the shots taken @6400 ISO, you won't believe what this machine can do.
I have had one since early Feb.08.
dryan2 (June 11, 2008 at 4:35 am)
do you actually own a D3
dryan2 (June 11, 2008 at 4:35 am)
w/o light photography doesnt exsist
HMFRiverdale (June 11, 2008 at 4:24 am)
the only thing that matter is available light. . . and the D3 allows me shot more with less.
Lenses are important, but lenses are worthless hunks of junk w/out light. . . . the D3 can do more with less of it.
dryan2 (June 11, 2008 at 4:20 am)
lenses are more important to the photographer tho
HMFRiverdale (June 11, 2008 at 4:16 am)
For a real pro, $20G in lenses is irrelevant if your in competition with someone with superior equipment.
I never said the D3 will dominate in the number of photogs who will be roaming Beijing, but it will dominate in the aftermath of Beijing in the quality of the shots taken.
Again, its really an very unfair contest. . . the D3 is so far ahead its not funny.
dryan2 (June 11, 2008 at 4:07 am)
i personally hope that the d3 will dominate, but i just dont think it will. there are so few pros who use canon aswell as nikon. When you have $20,000 in lenses you dont change your manufacture |
