I haven't ever used it for fishing pics (just too much to haul around, plus I'd rather be fishing!! ;-). But in other areas... The responsiveness--blistering AF, low black-out time, low shutter lag, etc. It's just damn fun to use.
Since this is a photography sub-forum, might be you would like to share more your experience with us...
I think we are not just express "opinions" here... instead, please take those feedback as positive comments or a welcome gate for discussion. I think your photos are great! :thumb:
Maybe I should elaborate more about what I think about your title "D3 capabilities". I truey think the D3 is a great camera and surely has a lot of capabilities... as well as any other DSLR or even Point and Shot type of cameras. Your photos are nice steady shots with less of an action type of photos that you particular emphasis on the legging time. I guess I was expecting to see some bullet freezing, balloon busting kind of photos (don't get me wrong, your photos are awesome).... contrast to your title, it make me feel "any kind of DSLR can do things like that just fine". Not negative comment at all, just a thought in the first second...
Talk about the term "capability"... For the fuzz of new DSLRs, I think people are over emphasis the advanced system can improve the photo shooting ... honestly... I feel many people prone to "under utilize" their equipment, and more keen in pursueing capability whatever the media feed them... agree?
I don't bring heavy duty camera with me when i was fishing, I carry P&S. But still it capable to take some good photos. Not a bragging here... just backup my previous statement that a lot of consumer level camera are capable to shoot...
The first photo is trout feeding spinner on air (Nikon coolpix 995)
The second photo is butterfly flying over stream side (Nikon coolpix 995 plus sb26)
Well, what I mean and really enjoy with the D3, is (one of many examples) the capability to deliver almost noise free images at iso 2000+ so that you don't have to go up to let's say f/2,8 when I want the dept of f/4,5 and still maintaining usable shutter speed. That's something I really enjoy for low light situations, and is something that has helped me selling more magazine photos than I normally would have in low light fishing conditions. I am enthusiastic when it comes to this camera in low light conditions especially.
That said I've also used an sb-900 on a couple of these photos for fill flash.
For example photo number 3:
D3/ Nikon 28-70 f/2.8 @f/4 with B+W Kaesemann pola, which steals some light aswell
iso 1600, overexposed +0,3, sb900 with a warming filter in front.
Dark conditions on the shadow side of the river.
When it comes to USM, I feel that the RAW files from the D3 and a good lens most often both needs and can tolerate a larger amount of sharpening than for example from my D200 (which needs, but can not tolerate the amount).
yes, the shooting info and description will help... I think maybe you chose to overexpose the photo 3... That is the reason I did not feel it is in a very dark situation... but for the condition you just described, it was in a very low light condition. and the noise under 1600 is very impressive. So I am curious why you chose to use polarized filter in the photo#3?