Are you still using old technology to take digital pictures?

<p>I have my D70 that's IR converted. That should qualify.<br>

And I'm still using my D300 a lot.<br>

Lil</p>

<p>Uhmm... I am still using a Nikon FM.</p>

<p>So under ten years old is ancient now?!</p>

<p>I find the term "old technology" a misnomer. I mean, there's nothing fundementally different in the older dslr's.</p>

<p>Miha, I assume you meant <em>mamal focus lens</em>? It seems to work well, the mamal is in perfect focus ;-)<br>

___<br>

While I can certainly appreciate the look that older gear can create (my most used lenses are all Ai/AiS of decent vintage), I do not find this is equally valid for digital cameras. Looking back at RAW files of my D50, it just really is lacking quite a bit in dynamic range. I am not into photo with huge dynamic range, but the D50 is the other end. Otherwise, a really nice camera, back when I bought it. But technology does march on, and not always for the worse.<br>

That's not knocking the D50, as said, a fine camera but after peeking down the viewfinder of my D80, I never really missed the D50.I liked the D80 (as one of the few, I managed OK with its matrix meter, I believe), but happily sold it off too. I really loved my D300, and I believe it is one of the finest DX cameras Nikon made. But the D700 feels just as right in my hand, and I like its output even better. Fact is, I liked them all because they did what I want, and did that well.<br>

They're all tools. And yes, regularly better tools come out on the market. But where a (useless!!) digital-versus-film discussion feels a bit like "CD-versus-Vinyl" (both having their own distinct pros and cons), I find old-digital versus new-digital a bit like "MP3-versus-CD". I have to think long and hard in which way the MP3 would yield me better quality and more pleasure, to come up blank.<br>

All this within the reasonable limitations of budget, handling and desired features, of course. But with that in mind, get the newest model you can afford. There is nothing sentimentally nice about the viewfinder of a D50 or the slow operation of a D100.</p>

<p>Still enjoy the D2H that I bought AFTER my D700. Not because I didn't like the D700 (I do, very much), but out of curiosity. And I do like the 'look' of that sensor and definitely like the feel of the body and the mechanics. Fun to shoot and therefore much used. Small filesize makes PP a breeze too. I'm not a pro though and for the few paid gigs I do once in a while I take the D700.<br /><br />Funny, I feel my girlfriends V1 reminds me a lot of the D2H. Both critisized for their 'too small' sensor / 'too low MP', too 'bad hi-ISO'.... and both praised for their speed and responsiveness.<br />Reason why I bought one for myself at the B&H close out superdeal :-)</p><div></div>

>>>Just wondering how many of you are using older Nikon dSLR's?<<<

 

Do we have a figure yet?

<p>I sold the 6yr old bought D2h after 3yr ownership, didn't use it much, my main dSLR is a D70 since 2004 (new). I don't shoot high ISO and mostly I only print so big so I don't see much benefit in upgrading (even lenses just something that is decent esp the older primes), I'll do that when it doesn't work anymore. More recently I have shot more with my F100, my most enjoyable camera is a FM2N. The F100 is just a bit easier to use re: the meter and knowing ahead of myself (with its ruler) of the adjustment when I spot meter. I may use more of the FM2N once I get a handheld meter b/c my next camera is likely to be a Hasselblad 500 CM. </p>

<p>I'm drawn to film and the mechanics b/c I'm more involved in the process from operating a more "mechanical" camera to the slower process of film, not just shooting slower but you are more involved with the store you bought the film and the lab you regularly use to have them developed. You anticipate for the results. It's like baking, you cannot taste and adjust the recipe. It may be more work than picking a loaf at the bakery or the supermarket but ... It's about the challenge and things fall into place. For color I prefer slide film b/c with digital or color neg film you still have to post process it and depending what software/hardware you have it may be different. While slides are the same and can be seen without any additional tools. The Hasselblad V is more of a vintage approach than the SLRs. There is also less online noise as you see with SLRs, brand X Y Z release product and user A B C voice theirs ... LOL. </p>

<p>Re: dSLR, not sure what I get when the D70 breaks. Probably DX, have a few DX lenses lying around. My biggest regret was getting a 18-200 which over here mint ones are half price. </p>

<p>From my count the last/current regular image post, there were 7 users who posted with maybe "older" cameras. That is assuming the D700, D90 and F6 are current as of now. So things older than that. Maybe least half of those were digital, ie D80, D70 etc.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Re: dSLR, not sure what I get when the D70 breaks. Probably DX, have a few DX lenses lying around.</p>

</blockquote>

<p><br />I had the same dilemma. My Nikon D100 which I bought ten years ago is broken. I was trying to decide between a Pentax K20D or a Nikon D3100 when I found a used but in great condition D3200 for a good price. So now my ratio of film to digital cameras is 60:2 in favour of film.</p>

<p>I will use the D3200 with the 18-70 AF-S lens I already have and some of my manual focus Nikkors.</p>

<p>Going back to the original question by Mark (nice nostalgic troll there! well done), I suppose it is inevitable that not everyone frequenting photo.net sells or shelves the older gear as soon as the new generation gets introduced!<br>

I've been using old lenses (pre-AI/AI/AIS) for over 20 years now, and still use them on my newest camera. Also the 400/3.5 Miha! But the oldest lenses only get the 'special ops' assignments now (macro-combinations, stitching, 'dangerous' cities). And the film camera's are shelved/retired now, probably for good. D200 is mostly for stitching and 'dangerous' cities now. D300 is still more than fine (as DX goes). And D800 is wonderfully new.</p>

 

<p>I am on my third D700, but the D2x remains my favourite. I just love to hold it, especially with a heavy lens. The balance just seems right to me. Whatever it may give up in IQ performance to the newer models it more than makes up for in ergonomic excellence to my hands and style. If I need more dynamic range, I just bracket a bit on my tripod and then combine the images. If I need speed, I can choose crop mode and shoot at 8 fps. If I need to shoot in the dark I use a flash. <br>

I would, no doubt, feel completely different if I owned a D3x or D4, but I don't. I see good used D2x bodies going for $700 +- and I can't imagine better value for the buck. I"ve shot many weddings, paid events, charity events, parties and Christmas celebrations with the D2x and will again. </p><div></div>

<blockquote>

<p>"...V1 reminds me a lot of the D2H."</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Ditto. Really enjoying the V1 I received as a Christmas gift. It's perfect for the same stuff I got the D2H for in 2005 - mostly candids and personal documentary photography. All in a package a fraction of the size and weight of the D2H.</p>

<p>The AF and shutter response are just as fast as the D2H. Shot-to-shot speed lags a bit in the V1 but I seldom used the D2H for more than two or three shot bursts anyway. The vaguely descriptive "Image Quality" is very similar between the two - although the V1 doesn't suffer from the D2H's wonky colors due to near IR sensitivity, or jaggies from aliasing. The V1 also has that solid, brick-like build quality. I just wish Nikon had retained the standard CLS flash capability in the 1 series, more like the Coolpix P7700.</p>

<p>My oldest "old tech" digicam that still sees occasional use would be my umpteen year old Olympus D-360L. Slug-slow and only 1.2 meagerpickles, but a good beater. Ditto the Olympus C3040Z, still a very good camera mainly hindered by the SmartMedia cards.</p>

<p>Douglas: I was thinking of the Fuji and Nikon DX forums on dpreview.com and this one might get you started:<br>

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/post/50677203</p>

I still use my D200s for all kinds of shooting, along with a pair of D5100s. I am aware of how each fits into my game and

everything has it's place. In a while I want to add a D5200 but the D200s will stay, especially when using studio lights.

<blockquote>

<h1 >Are you still using old technology to take digital pictures?</h1>

</blockquote>

<p>Lol, i still use OLD technology to take Analog pics... medium format (6x6) Rollei SL66 .... Best device for Macro i own...</p>

I considered several upgrades to my

D90 including a D800 and finally

bought a D700. I had 6 non-ai lenses

adapted and find myself using the

24mm 2.8, 55mm 2.8 manual lenses

the most. I use the 70-300 VR for

wildlife and the 85mm 1.8 for people

but mostly i shoot landscapes.

<p>I use a D70 as a backup for my D300 when I do Santa Photos in a mall each year. Both take the same Nikon AC adapter. The 300 adapts exposures better since I shoot under a big skylight in the roof. I just gave my old D70s to my son for family pictures with an old Sigma 28-80. He is very happy with it. D7000 is my main working camera.</p>

<p>I think some sensors in older cameras, if they are still working well, are worth shooting with. I've always liked the Sony 6mp sensor *everybody* released a body using. I keep my Pentax K100D around for that very reason. I also really like the look from Canon's 8mp sensor in the 20D and 30D so both those cameras are still in my inventory. I look back fondly on images I made with a Nikon D50 that I sold, but think, isn't that the 6mp Sony senor? My eldest Nikon came to me just a year or two ago - a refurbished D3000. That one is going nowhere as I love using it with pre-AI lenses.</p>

<p>My D3s is 3 years old -- but since it was discontinued by Nikon, I guess it is now considered 'old technology'. :-) I still use all of my old lens and accessories that I bought in the 90s for a Nikon SLR -- and I wouldn't part with them. They are incredible with the 'new' digital camera. Sure, I've bought a few new lenses also, but for the most part I tend to grab the old lenses quite a bit. </p>

<p>I really should get a digital Nikon some day. My Nikons are all film, including an SP and S3 (2000). My most modern Nikon is the F4.</p>

<blockquote>

<p ><a href="/photodb/user?user_id=505561">Alex S.</a> <a href="/member-status-icons"><img title="Subscriber" src="/v3graphics/member-status-icons/sub10plus.gif" alt="" /><img title="Frequent poster" src="/v3graphics/member-status-icons/1roll.gif" alt="" /></a>, Feb 04, 2013; 06:13 a.m.</p>

 

<p>I really should get a digital Nikon some day. My Nikons are all film, including an SP and S3 (2000). My most modern Nikon is the F4.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>If you're happy with your images, film or digital, it makes no difference. I think a lot of people spend way too much time debating the merits of the latest and greatest Nikon and too little time shooting.</p>

<p>But hey, they look hip. :)</p>

<p>Yes I use old technology to take digital pictures. I still love my D200, although I use only the lo ISOs. And some software would not even support it. It feels more solid and have more features than my D7000. But the oldest technology is still film cameras. I use film then scan them with a Nikon Coolscan to go digital midstream in the workflow. In this way, it is full frame, large pixel count and gives digital pictures. <br>

The latest Plutak OpticFilm 120 can even do 120 film scan at $2000 (Still have to see the reviews). That is cheaper than many advanced modern DSLR.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>a refurbished D3000. That one is going nowhere as I love using it with pre-AI lenses.</p>

</blockquote>

<p><br /><br /><br />Any problems doing that? I keep reading mixed reports. Some say you can't mount pre AI lenses on a D3000?D3100/D3200 and others say you can because they do. As these cameras don't have AI tabs, I can't see a problem.</p>

<blockquote>

<p ><a href="/photodb/user?user_id=1787762">Steve Smith</a> <a href="/member-status-icons"><img title="Frequent poster" src="/v3graphics/member-status-icons/3rolls.gif" alt="" /></a>, Feb 05, 2013; 03:25 p.m.</p>

 

 

<blockquote>

<p>a refurbished D3000. That one is going nowhere as I love using it with pre-AI lenses.</p>

</blockquote>

<p><br /><br /><br />Any problems doing that? I keep reading mixed reports. Some say you can't mount pre AI lenses on a D3000?D3100/D3200 and others say you can because they do. As these cameras don't have AI tabs, I can't see a problem.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Well, there's no metering at all, and obviously no AF, but I haven't had an issue. All the pre-AI lenses I have used on it worked fine.</p><div></div>