Nikon D3 in East Pacific

I am sure most have seen that I have posted a lengthy review of the Nikon D3 on the front page. Well I would also like to share this gallery of images from the trip taken with the D3.

The images are from the cold, rich waters of Port Hardy in Canada:

And the clear, blue waters of Guadalupe Island in Mexico:

Some of these images are in the review, others are not. I have also included a selection of topside images in the gallery to give more of an impression of the camera's capability. I also shot the D2X at both locations, so this gallery does not show my full portfolio from the trip.

Anyway, the gallery is here.

Alex

Great photos Alex, i like very much 27, 22, 24 and 03

I would very much like one! You may have already told us about this, but did you test out the high iso capacity of the camera very much?

Hi Stephen,

I was not able to test it that thoroughly because I was not able to find anywhere dark enough! Shooting with flash I found that in the dark waters of Canada I did not need an ISO higher than ISO 800. I could turn it up higher, but there was no need to. Anyway, ISO 800 on the D3 is as clean as ISO 200 on my D2X. ISO 1600 is entirely usable for everything. And ISO 3200 and 6400 are very impressive. Noise beginning to creep in, but still totally publishable at a large size.

Here is the HIGH ISO section of the review.

Alex

Alex,

Once again your work has raised the bar!

Green water will never look the same again!

Thanks

Adam

As always; outstanding series Alex. Despite your modesty about not being a decent topside photographer I think your nabbed a few pretty decent ones.

The late afternoon shark shot is another one I think you really pulled off in stunning fashion. I was there at the same time and could not pull that off; but then I was in the other cage.

Yet another exceptional gallery from the great one! But I do think you're "sand bagging" us when you claim not to be a great topside photographer.

Cheers,

Mike

I love all the cold water images. Id love to see more of us post more like them for variety

Here is the HIGH ISO section of the review.

 

Alex

Thanks for this Alex!

Hi Alex,

Your accolades are well deserved, but I for one would like an honest, forthright, frank and eye opening opinion of the question that now remains on everyone's parched lips.

Shit, now I've forgotten what I was going to ask. . . .

...

thinking. . . .

...

thinking. . . .

...

thinking. . . .

...

Oh yeah,

Is there now any need to have the DX format now that FX has come full circle?

I realise that a person in your position, with attached responsiblities, should be hesitant to dabble in heiracy and voodoo. . . .

It was clear from the start that no-one wanted the DX format; a 60mm was no longer a 60 and a 105mm could no longer be used as a macro lens, and wide angle, geez, it will never be the same. . . .

These same folk now have their 60's back, the 105 is again a macro lens, and wide angle. . . . woohoo.

It seems obvious that Nikon was never really interested in DX because it released very few DX 'only' lenses and continued to release FX lenses during the reign of the DX. Now that they (Nikon) have got their FX act together, camera releases are scheduled for nearly every week. . . .

So, Alex, now that all things are back to normal, is there any need/future for the DX format.?.?.?

With respect. . . .

Bruce...

Hey Alex,

What lenses did you use? Especially for some of the cold water kelp photos. In particular I'm curious about the nudi photo with the kelp background.

Also, with the shark photos, did you use a filter?

Cal

Is there now any need to have the DX format now that FX has come full circle?

Currently, yes. If, like most UW photographers, you shoot mainly wide angle in bright conditions and macro then Nikon's best DX cameras at least match and arguably exceed (with regards to 10-17mm, better corners with rectilinear wides, and better AF coverage with macro lenses) their FX ones. And do this at a significantly lower price.

But FX has much more potential for the future. I see DX maxing out at 15-16MP in terms of rez. Some would argue it has at 12 and Canon's 15MP 50D is marketing driving engineering. Plus FX has much more capability at high ISO, although this is only something to value if your photography exploits it.

What lenses did you use? Especially for some of the cold water kelp photos. In particular I'm curious about the nudi photo with the kelp background.

Also, with the shark photos, did you use a filter?

I used the Sigma 15mm FE throughout in Canada - which has excellent close focus - hence the high magnification possible. 10 cm closer than the Nikon 16mm FE. I wrote about why I favoured the Sigma over the Nikon in my review. While I was just checking the minimum focus distances I bumped into this quote from Thom Hogan's site on the same issue:

Despite the difference in focal lengths, the two lenses appear to have the same angle of view. The Nikkor is slightly larger, and its built-in hood isn't as good. The 16mm doesn't focus as close and appears to still be the same optical design as the original introduced in 1979! The Nikkor is more expensive, but I don't think it delivers better results. (Admittedly, I no longer have a 16mm to directly compare against the Sigma 15mm, but my memory of the 16mm makes me believe that the results I've gotten from the Sigma are slightly better.) Frankly, I don't know of anything that would make me want the Nikkor over the Sigma, especially considering the price differential.

I did not use the Magic Filters in Guadalupe, but will if I can persuade Eric to let me run a Wetpixel trip there. Having a camera without strobes in the cage would be a big advantage for handling. I'd also take a wetsuit rather than a drysuit, water much warmer there than I was expecting!

Alex

Lovely pics Alex,

I especially liked the cross-eyed warbonnet. I really love the diving up in BC and even though I just got back from a trip to Alaska July it was still great looking at the pictures and wishing I was there diving Browning Pass rather than sitting here at work. With many of the shots I found myself wondering if I knew exactly where it was taken - and I'm guessing I would be right on some number of them. Brings back lots of great memories from previous trips.

You did well capturing the place. Good show.

Clinton

One can only dream of the abilities of both the camera and the photographer. But dreams keep the blood going...and the wallet empty. BTW, you posted a topside photo of some gravel that highlighted the high iso abilities of the D3. It seems beyond compare at the moment. The WA nudi is great. The best topside is the seal head above water....great expression on him.