Nikon D70S

<p>I'm curious. I have a Nikon D70S with three lenses. a 50 mm 1.8; 18-70 zoom; and 70-210 zoom. Every time I browse the websites I am tempted to upgrade to a newer body, or perhaps a totally new system. Trouble is when I look at my images from the D70 they still look pretty good and I wonder what satisfaction am I going to get by forking out the extra cash for something more current. I'm not looking for advice on whether to buy or what to buy. Rather I am curious to know if there are many people out there with D70's or older cameras of any brand who are quite happy with the images they are getting, and do not feel the pressure to upgrade.</p>

<p>I'm still happily shooting my D70. The worst thing about it is the low-light / high ISO noise issue. Other than that....I still love it. I use a 18-200 VR, and for closeups of spiders and stuff, a 50mm F1.8 with Kenko extension rings. I'll probably shoot it until it breaks, but that could be a while....</p>

<p>You probably won't see the advantages of more megapickles in most online images. JPEGs at 800x600 or so pickle dimensions tend to be the great equalizer. Most of the differences you'll see in web sized JPEGs are due to post processing work rather than factors inherent to the camera.</p>

<p>More recent crop sensor cameras from Nikon or others offer better autofocus, high ISO performance and in-camera processing options (important for folks who may not enjoy post processing of raw files).</p>

<p>I use digital mostly for snapshots and don't really enjoy post processing. I'm still using a Nikon D2H and would be more likely to "upgrade" to something like a smaller, lighter weight Micro 4/3 camera that can produce in-camera JPEGs ready to print.</p>

<p>The downside to sticking with what I (or you) have:</p>

<ul>

<li>Noticeable noise even at ISO 400, compared with current dSLRs and P&S digicams.</li>

<li>Unflattering and bizarre skin colors under some artificial light due to near infrared sensitivity (also a problem with the original Nikon D70, which makes it suitable for IR conversions).</li>

<li>Bulky and heavy for 4-6 mp. There are pocket sized P&S digicams with better performance at 12 mp.</li>

<li>Good for prints ranging from wallet sized to 8x10, but easily surpassed now by some compact digicams.</li>

</ul>

<p>There are also some brand-specific drawbacks:</p>

<ul>

<li>Nikon's F-mount is the least compatible around. The Micro 4/3 design offers at least some compatibility with most commonly available manual focus lenses. This includes focus to infinity without optical adapters.</li>

<li>Nikon doesn't offer any in-camera image stabilization/vibration reduction. Special VR (Nikkor) or third party lenses are needed for image stabilization. This may matter only if you feel the need for the extra assistance.</li>

</ul>

<p>On the plus side for Nikon:</p>

<ul>

<li>Backward compatibility with an extensive lineup of AI and AI-S Nikkors and compatible third party lenses;</li>

<li>Excellent TTL flash.</li>

</ul>

<p>Personally, my next digital camera probably won't be a Nikon, unless Nikon comes out with a dSLR that includes a movable sensor to accommodate:</p>

<ul>

<li>Autofocus with any lens, including all manual focus lenses;</li>

<li>In-camera vibration reduction/image stabilization;</li>

<li>Perspective correction with any lens.</li>

</ul>

<p>I still have a D70, earlire than the D70s. I shoot off a tripod so the new cameras don't appeal to me. Fast AF and high ISO which I don't use.</p>

<p>However, I just love slides. No post processing and I enjoy the process. So I am now doing some 35mm film, probably getting a medium format within 6 months and then onto 4x5 large format.</p>

<p>Due to the fact that 120 format film is chepaer than 35mm per the roll, processing the same it makes sense to me. When I shoot 35mm the roll takes a long time to replace. Even if I go overseas a 35mm roll of film takes me 2 or 3 days to complete. Digital I shoot perhaps 25 per day on average. Also that when you are away from the masses it's more peaceful, it's not always about upgrading equip or measuring one's equip. With slides, it's either you got it or you didn't. </p>

<p>What do you feel that you are missing by not having a new body? </p>

<p>Is it the full frame of the D700? The dynamic range of the D300, D700, D7000? </p>

<p>Is it the dual cards of the D7000? </p>

<p>Is it the low light performance? </p>

<p>Every upgrade I do is for a specific reason - not just because it's new. I skipped the D70s because it didn't give me anything significant over my D70. I went to a D200 for the ISO performance. D300 for dynamic range, D700 for FF and low light, D7000 for video and dual cards. </p>

<p>Dave</p>

 

<p>I have never lusted over a camera as much as I did the D70 when it came out, and even long after. I was shooting an N65 at the time and pondering my first DSLR. Being a film diehard, when a Bronica ETRs fell into my lap I had to jump on it. Otherwise, I'd have gotten that D70.</p>

<p>Images from a D70 are just as good today as they were when the camera first took the world by storm. It simply is a fantastic camera. Have camera bodies progressed? Sure, or else new cameras wouldn't sell. Can you really tell the difference in a print? Maybe. Depends on what you shoot. That D70 still makes drool-worthy photos.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>If you want to make poster-sized prints, you could certainly benefit from the extra megapixels that new DSLRs offer. But if you're happy with the results you're currently getting from your D70s and if there's nothing wrong with the camera, there's probably no compelling reason to upgrade.</p>

I have a D70 as well as a D300.

 

After 2 years with the D300 I can tell you that anyone who thinks there are no significant differences between the two cameras

are plain wrong or just have no idea how to use a D300.

 

If I were you I would get the D7000.

 

The differences in print may not be that great, but that's like comparing a Toyota driven at 30mph with a Ferarri also at

the same speed. There are many more 'enjoyable' things that you can do with a Ferrari as well as a host of things that

a Toyota just can't do.

<p>I enjoyed my D70, and made wonderful 8x10 inch enlargements from it. I liked the image quality very much, I never had a problem with it at ISO 200. Higher ISO photos weren't great, but I found ISO 200 performance to be excellent. I upgraded from the D70 to the D80 before a trip to Japan. With the D80 I could enjoy a much nicer viewfinder, and slightly higher resolution. The D80 was also smaller and lighter, and had better high ISO performance. Otherwise, the D80 had worse metering (420 pixels vs. 1004 RGB pixels of the D70). I had some trouble with the D80 in tricky lighting situations that resulted in overexposure, I didn't have that experience with the D70.</p>

<p>Unlike Lex I don't find the Nikon F mount "the least compatible around". The Nikon F mount has more lenses available for it than any other brand. I don't consider using adapters as being very practical in the field, unless you have one body with an adapter attached and another one for normal non-adapter lenses. I know it's all the rage lately to buy adapters, but I think it's a kludge and frankly, silly. The Nikon F mount has been around in various revisions since 1959, and no other brand can match that. </p>

<p>I don't need stabilization (it is nice sometimes but overall it's very expensive and hardly needed in my experience). I'm young enough to be able to hand hold my camera reliably down to 1/8 second. I also don't think stabilization is the solution for low light shots as much as either a steady hand, or a tripod or monopod. Often times a tabletop or railing works as well. My little Nikon P7000 has VR built in if I'm not able to get the shot with my DSLR.</p>

<p>I also don't need in-camera perspective correction. This can be done better in post if necessary. Same with D-Lighting, it's better done in post than in-camera.</p>

<p>Ultimately I'd keep shooting with the D70 until it fails, if I were you. </p>

<p> </p>

<p>We all lust after new equipment - a tribute to the marketing folks at the camera makers. I'm perfectly happy with my D200 - it did not suddenly start taking bad photos because the D7000 came out. I don't think new equipment will make you take a better photograph. I do think that newer equipment will probably make it EASIER to take the photos I do now, but that's not important to me. I get really into right brain when I'm shooting and don't really care to have things too easy. Heck, I use a Sigma DP1S occasionally, and that's about as far from being an easy camera as modern equipment gets.</p>

<p>So yes, if a wheelbarrow full of money fell on me, I'd probably buy new equipment. But since I don't generally walk under wheelbarrows, I'm happy to keep shooting with my D200 (and my DP1S and my Olympus PEN).</p>

<p>I use D70s and completely satisfacted with it except noise level in some cases. In fact, even the twice more megapixels doesn't mean twice more details or sharpness. Even problem of noise is not so frightening as I understand reasons of noise and know, how to reduce it to as low values as possible. D70s is good enough for lot of applications and I like it more than my wife's D60: there are only 3 AF points (I'd like to have 9), no AF-screwdriver (while I like to use 50/1.8D), and no data display, which is only comfortable on direct sunlight.</p>

<p>There're only few resons for me to upgrade camera body:</p>

<ol>

<li>Larger viwfinder. I don't know what do I need LiveView for, but I'd like to have really large viwfinder, like on D300 or newer.</li>

<li>Lower noise for dim light conditions, as sometimes NoiseNinja plugin fails.</li>

<li>More than 5 AF points. Actually existing 5 is enough, but sometimes I'd like to have some more points for portraits.</li>

<li>Unrepairable camera fail.</li>

<li>Full Frame. It is strong reason to think that<em> technical</em> quality of my shots is increased. But it isn't so strong reason to spend money right now, as I haven't way of return of such investments at the moment.</li>

</ol>

<p>That's all.</p>

<p>Try the 18-55 vr, mostly at low light. Lower the megapixel size, image size, and crank that ISO and take advantage of the VR technology.</p>

<p>That little 18-55 plastic Nikon lens is gold, worth every penny.</p>

<p>Brand new Nikon D7000 16.2MP DSLR Camera pay with paypal<br />Brand new Nikon 70-300/4.5-5.6 G ED-IF AF-S VR Vibration Reduction Telephoto Nikkor Zoom Lens USA. 2 16 Gigabyte SD Secure Digital Memory Card. 1 MMC MultimediaCard & SD Secure Digital Reader USB. 1 HDMI To Mini-HDMI 6 Foot Cable. 1 DL-TR550A 3 Section 57INCH Tripod With 3 Way Pan Head. 1 Well Padded Multi Compartment SLR Camera Gadget Bag With Pockets & Strap. 1 Masterworks Jumpstart Instructional DVD Guide for Digital SLR Camera. 1 Memory Card 3 Pocket Storage Case. 1 Digital Camera Lens-Guard Screen Protectors. 1 Enhanced Lens Cleaning Kit<br /><br />usaphones@hotmail.com</p><div></div>