ron c sunshine coast,qld,a Posted March 9, 2005 Share Posted March 9, 2005 For those that are 'stuck' with one of the older digital bodies ,such as a DCS 3, DCS 1 ,D2000,etc -<BR>Do you use it much at all? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaïbee Posted March 9, 2005 Share Posted March 9, 2005 i have an old one laying around at work that does 640x480 and takes 6 AA batteries and no usb. want to buy it? it's by epson =P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jim_larson1 Posted March 9, 2005 Share Posted March 9, 2005 heheehhe. What do you consider ancient? 10D? D60? D30? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
catfishsalesco Posted March 9, 2005 Share Posted March 9, 2005 I have two d2000's that i still use- good for newspaper work, where huge having many Mpix's aint esentially- i love the 1n body that is built on- good A/F metering ect. It is a monster however, and quite heavy. I will soon be selling them to get a 10/20d as im looking to do more nature / landscape stock stuff, but i feel that while the image quality at big enlargements will + high ISO's will be Wonderfull (the d2000 is very noisy at high iso), i think il miss the Af and metering on the d2000. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ben_rubinstein___mancheste Posted March 9, 2005 Share Posted March 9, 2005 I'm still using an ancient and outdated, and gaga canon 10D, almost up to its first birthday. Still works great for me, am in the process of having big banners printed from a commercial job for a travelling roadshow... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bens Posted March 9, 2005 Share Posted March 9, 2005 my kids use the old casio point and shoot i started with so many, many, uh, months ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grant g Posted March 9, 2005 Share Posted March 9, 2005 I recently got a D30...does that count? 3.1 is useful, just not sexy. I also use a 1 MEGAPIXEL Kodak DCS215. Not an SLR, but it'll take a bazillion picures on any of the CF cards I have now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maureen_m Posted March 9, 2005 Share Posted March 9, 2005 "Ancient" DSLR? No, but I use a "Medieval" 10D and "Antique" Digital Rebel! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bruce_kapla Posted March 9, 2005 Share Posted March 9, 2005 I could better answer Ron's original question if he could kindly clarify what he means by "stuck" with. Could he mean not being able to get rid of it, or maybe because it may be antiquated by today's standards, that it is not a new model self-propelled, gas powered, do-it-all-for-you model with boodoo megapixels, or maybe Ron is just being a snob and wanting to know how many poor bastards like me are out there who are "stuck" with a crummy 6months-to-year-old camera? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neal_thatcher Posted March 9, 2005 Share Posted March 9, 2005 My D60 seems ancient but I have only had it for 1 year. It now backs up my 20D and is becoming my wife's camera of choice, though now we fight over the same lens (100mm). My old Nikon Coolpix has been handed down the foodchain though it wasn't a DSLR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ron c sunshine coast,qld,a Posted March 9, 2005 Author Share Posted March 9, 2005 The "stuck with" comment was a joke (allthough it may well be true with some very old bodies) <P>Yeah mostly i was curious about the pre 98? models of any brand.<BR>I remember desperately wanting a digital SLR not too long ago and was seriously considering one of these as it was i could afford(allmost,not quite).I kind of liked the nikon/kodak 315 model because it was based on one of the sexiest camera bodies ever made.Unfortunately it also had an incredibly large growth hanging off the bottom of it :-)! <P>I also considered one of the early EOS 1 based kodak bodies.One of my ebay customers had one so i managed to find out a little about them. <BR>He bought it secondhand off ebay usa for a good price of au$900 and told me he's sell it for about $1500++ six months later. <BR>Last i saw he was having his second attempt at selling it and the price was refusing to go much over au$350. I never did ask him how much he got for it as he's a nice guy and i didn't want to rub it in :-) <P><P>Oh-and to finnish my own saga-just at the time the 300D came out my finances improved enough to make the plunge :) :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whitworth photography Posted March 10, 2005 Share Posted March 10, 2005 I bought my D60 as a pre-order from Ritz before they came out and still use it today. Sadly I'm going to be retiring it because my wife dropped it and although it still works, it's not quite right any more. I think she damaged something in the AF because the entire time I've own the camera I've never had any AF problems, but shortly after she dropped it I started having problems every once in awhile. Even though the D60 cost me $2200, the part I love is that I've paid for the camera at least 2 or 3 times just in developing/printing costs - and being free to experiment at will without worrying about the cost is priceless :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bob_williams6 Posted March 16, 2005 Share Posted March 16, 2005 Not a DSLR but I do still use a Leif DCB1 back. It is old but it is still a great back. It cost about 30K 8 years ago but can be purchased for a few grand used. It still works great -only 6MP. Not very large image size but for studio photography it still easily beats my new Canon 1ds mk2. I love the Canon but for studio work you can't beat a 3 shot back. 14 bits capture makes a huge difference as does the filter wheel. bob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chico54t Posted April 13, 2005 Share Posted April 13, 2005 I have a D60 and it is my primary camera for almost all occasions. Check the gallery. The D60 pics are just as sharp and colorfull as any of the newer models. What it all boils down to quite simply is the photographer. Any disagreements please push F5. Thank You ! :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsbc Posted April 13, 2005 Share Posted April 13, 2005 I use a decrepit D30, one of the early adopters. I got the G1 for 1 week and by that time I realized the future is digital. It is quite funny to see this question because a 20D user recently accosted me and said that I must have been a very dedicated photographer if I were one of the original D30 users, when the machine still cost a bundle. That being the case, why shouldn't I upgrade to a newer machine? Well, I can easily get a newer dSLR, but the one that I want to get, a 1DS,really cost a bundle, and it is heavy. If I get a 20D, it would be more of the same thing - better performance at high ISO, better AF, better ergonomics. What's the point. These things do no matter because I primarily use my dSLR to take photos of my daughter, monitoring her growth. The D30 performs completely up to specs.(I also own a D70 and another set of Nikon lenses and I don't really prefer one over the other). I don't know about the older Kodak SLRs, but I think even a D30 is a lot of camera for any person. Better spend the money on lenses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pc1 Posted May 13, 2005 Share Posted May 13, 2005 I totally agree with you Mr Cheung , paul c. (another D30 user)... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now