| Joined: | Fri Apr 6th, 2012 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 224 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
I hsten to add, that this is geared entirely to my way of working. Which means, for small insects (bugs, beetles, grasshoppers etc., none of your gaudy popinjay butterflies!). Consequence: the target does not always fill the frame and so cropping is usually the name of the game. This means the higher the pixel count the better. Yes of course the D3X is better if everything else is ideal (see later!).
Also working in the wild which means a lot of the time I am working handheld without tripod or monopod. Consequence: Shutter speed needs to be as high as possible to freeze motion and operator incompetence.
To get a decent depth of field I am often working at f16 or worse! Consequence: less light and a completely against what the high shutter speed dictates.
Chitin is quite shiny and ring-flashes are a p.i.t.a. Consequence: flashes give (i) highlights and (ii) frighten the hell out of the beasties so that you only have one chance.
Therefore, a high resolution camera with a noise-free, high ISO capability is needed. The D3X is IMHO the winner up to ISO 600, but I don't really like going much above ISO 800.
This is the basis for the D4 as the best compromise candidate. When I am ankle deep in photons, the D3X is the tool of choice. The rest of the time (particularly with the Nikkor 200 f4) the D4 is an excellent solution.
The rider is that I do not want or need video.
Hope this clarifies
Ed