Making the Case For the Nikon D3x

I’m surprised at the reaction the Nikon D3x has received thus far. The introduction of the new Nikon has been met with far more jeers than cheers thus far. I’m not sure whether it’s the perceived lack of advancement (It is the D3 “x” after all), or the price, perhaps a combination of the two. Regardless, I think both are misguided.

On the price, well the Canon 1Ds Mark III lists at $8000. Now I know that it’s now available for less, but the D3x will be too. Besides, lets think of the market for the D3x. We’re talking pro photographers, of the studio or landscape variety, who spend 10’s of thousands on medium format digital backs, Compared to that, $8000 looks pretty cheap. The disappointment stems from the hobbyists I think, who hoped beyond all hope that for some reason Nikon would come in with 24 megapixel flagship at the same cost or less as the $5000 D3. That just wasn’t ever going to happen.

On the camera itself, I thought I had a convincing case to make, but then I noticed David Kilpatrick had made it better.

Anybody else have a take on this? If so leave it in the comments. (maybe we can get a fist fight going…)

Similar Posts:

• Best Digital Cameras of 2009
• Instant Rebates on Nikon DSLR/Lens Combinations Now I…