Should You Get a D3x?
Well, Nikon’s not going to like my answer this time around. My answer is “no, most of you shouldn’t.” Sure, there are a few of you that can justify the extra price for the pixels, and the pixels themselves are very nice, arguably better than the Canon and Sony offerings in my initial testing. As I’ve written above, the D3x is probably the best DSLR in terms of image quality so far. But the problem is value. There simply isn’t US$5700 worth of value in a D3x over a D700.
The bottom line is that Nikon still needs to compete with a D700-type body in a high pixel count camera, which means that we’ll have a D700x sometime within a year. If that camera is equal to or less than US$3999, then I would be able to recommend it if it has D3x levels of quality. But the D3x itself seems a bit out of place. It’s a big, heavy, expensive camera that feels a bit like a big SUV does when gas is US$4 a gallon. Yes, it’s nice, but it’s probably just not worth it for most people. Wait for the less expensive crossover.
