D2H vs D1X

[marc_lieberman1]

What are the differences between the D2H and the D1X?

 

I understand that there may be different versions of D2H. What are

they and what is the difference between them?

 

I also understand that the D1X can be purchased with an extra large

buffer. What does that mean?

 

Finally, ame I correct that these cameras should each sell for about

$1500 in the PNET classifieds?

[ilkka_nissila]

The used price should be similar. As far as I know, the D2H has way better battery life, improved white balance and image processing, improved autofocus, improved viewfinder, faster frame rate and the overall image quality is in the same ball park. I would get the D2H although the D1X has higher resolution along the horizontal axis.

[marc_lieberman1]

Illka:

 

What does it mean when you say that the D!X has a "higher resolution along the horizontal axis"?

[Ed_Ingold]

I have both, and answered a similar question at length, quite recently.

 

Still, since you ask, I can summarize my impressions.

 

The D1x has somewhat better resolution (only 15%, by the square root law), but the D2h is sharp enough. The ergonomics on the D2h are outstanding, and the response time is virtually instantaneous, even from hibernation. The D1x is fast enough, but seems slow by comparison - especially waking up from hibernation. The battery is the biggest fault of the D1x. It is only good for about 200 raw images per charge, whereas I can get 600 or more from a D2h.

 

Nikon offers a buffer/firmware upgrade for the D1x, which is installed on more recent cameras, and can be retrofitted. It doubles the buffer size, "fixes" the battery indicator (more of this) and correctly "tags" the images with the color space.

 

The color, especially "Automatic" white balance are much better in the D2h. The D2h is much noiser in the shadows than the D1x. The D2h works just a little better with flash - nothing to write home about. I don't use the CLS system, preferring to be manual and metered for multi-flash setups.

 

By "ergonomics" I mean the controls you use as a professional are at your fingertips instead of in menus - ISO, WB, QUAL and focus options. The AF and AF-L buttons are large and positioned for easy use (essential if you rock-and-roll). There's a programmable button near the lens - I use it to kill the flash. You have a thumb and front wheel for the vertical release. After half an hour, you feel like this camera is part of you.

 

The D1x has enough juice for about 40 shots when you get down to the last of three segments in the charge indicator. At that point, the viewfinder display stays on only while the shutter is half-pressed. Keep your hand on the spare battery, just in case. The firmware upgrade fixes this by eliminating those 40 extra shots. There's no chance for confusion - the camera stops working without any "buffer" shots (Nikon must hire American engineers).

 

The original D1x firmware does not put a color space tag in the image that Photoshop could read. However, NikonView, Capture and ACR reads it just fine. Starting with CS, you don't have to think about it.

 

The D2hs has better firmware, better image processing, and the sensor may be somewhat different. Supposedly, the image processing is the same as the D2x, for better color and faster recycling time. I don't think about it much. I jumped on the bargain-priced D2h just before the "s" was introduced. I don't think the new goodies are worth $1500 more.

[Ed_Ingold]

The D1x pixels are rectangular - twice as long as wide. The software automatically interpolates the image so that there are the same number of pixels in the output, but square, in a 2:3 pixel ratio. Capture and ACR has the option of normal interpolation, doubling the number of pixels on the short side, giving a 10 MP file.

 

The standard, 5.5 MP interpolation works just fine for me. I've never seen any artifacts or assymetry - the images are just d*** sharp! If there's any advantage in the 10 MP option beyond Photoshop USM, I just don't see it.

[marc_lieberman1]

Are there different versions of the D2H?

[martin_martinez]

Marc, the two versions of the D2H are the ruglar model and the newer D2Hs. The small improvements arent really worth the extra $1000 you would pay over a clean used D2H.

[david_h._hartman]

<em>Are there different versions of the D2H? --Marc

Lieberman<br>

</em><br>

Yes, there is a Nikon D2H (discontinued) and the Nikon D2Hs (current).

Edward Ingold summarize the improvements in the last paragraph of

his first post. I do not however think that the image sensors are

different, just the firmware.<br>

<br>

Besides what Edward notes the D2Hs accepts a better wireless

transmitter (WT-2/2A) with 2-way communication and faster data

transfer, 802.11b/g whereas the D2H accepts only the WT-1/1A and

has only 1-way communication and uses only the slower 802.11b

data transfer. The WT-2 wireless transmitter is a cool tech toy

but for me thats mostly what it would be. For some its

very useful as it allows very rapid uploading of images to the

editors desk. It also allows control by software as I read here

at PHOTO.NET. The Nikon D2X also accepts the WT-2/2A. The D2Hs

also has a slightly higher resolution color LCD like that of the

D2X.<br>

<br>

The D2H closed out at $1,995.00 at B&H Photo. The new D2Hs

sells for $3,499.95 at B&H Photo this morning. I think the D2Hs

is worth it for professional newspaper photographers and sports

photographers. Most others should probably cough up the extra

$1,500.00 and get the D2X.<br>

<br>

I bought the D2H on closeout. I didnt even consider the D2Hs.

If I had been close to affording a D2X I would have gone for it.

I only had $750.00 saved at the time the D2H went on close out

but then I got a lovely 0%, no points, balance transfer from a

credit card and I jumped.<br>

<br>

Although the D2H is quite complicated with all its various

features it is so logically laid out that I found it surprisingly

easy to learn. It didnt hurt that I had experience with the

Nikon F5 and a Fuji FinePix E550 P&S. After not too much time

the menu system is easy to negotiate. I also found the SB-800

Speedlight very nicely laid out.<br>

<br>

Regards,<br>

<br>

Dave Hartman.

[lukas_kisiel]

It all depends on how you're planning to use the camera. For fast action and sports you're much better off with D2H.

[ShunCheung]

If the primary objective is to photograph your twins playing soccer, I would go with the D2H between these two, although the D1X can certainly get the job done, as well. The D2H is designed to be a sports DSLR, and 4MP is sufficient unless you need to make very large prints, which is unlikely for children soccer images. The D1X is an "old" DSLR (4+ years) by DSLR standards. It still takes fine images, but if you have a choice, might as well get something newer with a better AF system.

[mark newcombe www.mcnphoto]

Big difference in the D2H and the D2H's is the printed board behind the prism. The one in the D2H is prone to letting go and loosing metering and focus. The one they replace it with seems to metre a little better but I've only had the new one for a day or so now.

 

Nikon did replace it for me FOC which was great and I really appreciate the service in Sydney. 1 day to replace the board.

 

I instantly looked at the D1X on saturday when my D2H let go but the battery life and slower focus was a factor so I waited and took mine back to nikon on monday, glad I did.

 

I had to shoot a kids soccer grand final cuesing the exposure and manually focusing but still got some great results. The histogram helped with exposure and manual focus was a trip down memory lane.

 

My advice is get the D2H, prefferably one that has the new board in it.

 

It's a great sports camera.

 

Regards

Mark<div></div>