Anyone still want a D2X?

[steve_larese1]

In light of the unveiling of the D200 specs, is anyone still saving for the D2X? I

finally have the quid but am thinking 2 D200s would fit the bill for my

magazine work (need 11x14 at 300 dpi at most). Any angles I'm not

considering (beyond the fact I can hold a D2X today)? I've defenestrated

several D100s due to the buffer on RAW (not a bad build, actually). So nice

for us loyal Nikon users to finally have this question ... .

 

Thanks for your thoughts and apologies if this has been covered ad nauseam.

 

Steve

[ilkka_nissila]

Before we get reviews of the D200 I don't think anyone should really make the decision ... after all, we don't know how well the AF works, and we don't know what the image quality is like. Too many unknowns to make a decision. I am mostly shooting film these days so I'm not in a hurry to replace my D70. I'm actually waiting for Katz Eye to bring out their D70 focusing screen, and that would allow me to use the camera for the foreseeable future. I may buy a new digital camera next summer when I'm taking more pictures but it could be either the D200 or the D2X. The D2X is likely to go down a bit in price by that time, pressured by the 5D and D200.

[ShunCheung]

One issue I would like to investigate further is that the D200 has only 1 cross-type AF point, so does the Canon 5D. If you shoot action/sports, it could make a pretty significant difference. When the D200 is available, a side-by-side comparion will be useful.

[RaymondC]

I would like the CAM2000, bigger heavier cam and the round VF and without any flash, I know some say the VF is larger than the D2x, even if so I just don't like the flash unit there and that AF assist lamp thing.

[vivek iyer]

"I've defenestrated several D100s due to the buffer on RAW (not a bad build, actually)."

 

Defenestrated?! Unusual! You sure must be carrying a lot of cash around!

 

I could care less about the AF points or the little green dot focus light from the electronic range finder when a good optical view finder is available. I will be using mostly manual focus lenses anyways.

[dan_brown14]

Another interesting question: What yields a higher profit to Nikon, a single D2x or two

D200's?

 

As far as which I'd prefer? D200's for sure.

[john_kothanek1]

I think if you are able to get two D200 bodies and are a pro that is a serious thing to consider logistically. Having said that I am not patient enough to wait months for a camera that I want.

 

Of course Nikon came out with the news of the D200 a month after I dropped the cash bomb on the D2X. I have that kind of luck the kind that if I won the lottery I'd get hit by a bus.

 

Having said that I love my D2X and I cannot imagine that I would love the D200 more. I have owned and used a very wide range of cameras and the d2X for ME is THE fave camera. We all I am sure have/had that 1 camera that just feels perfect to you, the capabilities and limitations are well known to you and you adapt, that 1 camera that you will remember fondly the rest of your life even if something measureably better comes along.

 

Speaking of which am I the only one that finds all this chasing a marginally better camera exhausting? I cannot believe how many threads I have read elsewhere that have people wanting to get rid of their new D2X for the D200. Do digital photographers really chase gear this much? I guess my thought process was get the vewry best Nikon that I can afford after careful research and then plan on sticking with that camera until it fails to a degree fixing it is not an option.

 

Am I weird for not praying like others that there is D3X in a few months or whatever the next iteration will be? Am I crazy for thinking I get great pictures from the D2X so why bother changing? Should I be on the bandwagon and consider my D2X obsolete like a well known reviewer claims on his site?

 

I don't think so as a new "convertee" so to speak I am very much in love with my D2X.

[paul_sokal___dallas__tx]

I love my D2X too. It's capabilities from wedding work with built in vertical grip and controls, to fast paced sports with HSC mode, are unmatched in my mind. That said, as soon as I can figure out how to get the boss (my wife) to agree, I'll probably start thinking about replacing my D-70 with the D-200 as my second/back-up body. I think the imporvements compared to the D-70 will be noticeable and worth it. If I had it to do over again would I forego the D2X? Doubt it. The D2X simply feels like another body part to me. I can carry it all day in one hand at a wedding and I never seems to tire. Nor does it feel like it could come loose, the ergoniomics are that good.

[ky2]

Sure. I want a D2X. for a D200 price.

[tomweis]

There have been those who have said that certain stock agencies (Getty) who will not

accept image submissions less than 12MP... that may not matter to you. I have a D2x and

can't wait to see the D200 as a second body, but I am not selling the D2x.

[mark_sirota1]

Seems to be not unlike the decision between an F5 or two F100s, back in the day.

[ShunCheung]

I have an F5 and an F100, one each. That was a very easy decision. Both of them use the same AF module (Multi-CAM 1300) and the same type of batteries (AA). I got the F5 first and needed a backup, and the lighter and smaller F100 was the easy answer.

 

If AF capability doesn't matter to you, this would be a moot point, but I think it is pretty clear that Nikon designed the Multi-CAM 1000 to be an inferior version of the 2000. Moreover, the D200 uses the EN-EL3e that is incompatible with the D2's EN-EL4.

 

The D200 sure looks like a nice DSLR on its own at its price range, but I have some reservation about using it to back up the D2X. I'll see whether Nikon has any more new DSLR announcements in 2006, e.g. an 8MP version of the D2Hs. At for me, that could be a better fit.

[david_h._hartman]

<strong>YES!</strong>

[greg s]

Not really... don't want to carry something that big, heavy and expensive around. Not necessary, for me. ;)

[david_h._hartman]

<em>Speaking of which am I the only one that finds all

this chasing a marginally better camera exhausting? I cannot

believe how many threads I have read elsewhere that have people

wanting to get rid of their new D2X for the D200. -- John

Kothanek<br>

</em><br>

<strong>GREAT! How soon will these </strong><strong><u>Enablers</u></strong><strong>

be dumping their D2X bodies?<br>

</strong><br>

<em>Do digital photographers really chase gear this much?

--John Kothanek<br>

</em><br>

I dont give a damn. I shoot APC-H through 4x5 in film

so I know about what to expect from a difference of 4.1MP to 12.4.

I want a D2X.<br>

<br>

<em>Am I weird for not praying like others that there is D3X

in a few months or whatever the next iteration will be? --John

Kothanek<br>

</em><br>

The D2X has clearly hit a plateau such that you can be happy with

it for years. If you are a professional then it is likely just

equipment and at a point the competitive edge of a new body may

compel you to buy a newer camera. If you are a true amateur (one

who loves photography) I would not worry about your D2X purchase.<br>

<br>

My guess is the D200 will weight about 250g less than a D2X when

both camera have a battery installed. Nikon specifies the D200 at

830g without a battery or strap (as if anyone will use the D200

without a battery ;-). The size, the height, and the reduced

presence that goes with it can be an advantage for

the D200. I don't see either as a major factor. Like Shun I

wonder about the D200's AF.<br>

<br>

Ill bet a lot of D2X owners will buy the D200 as a backup

mostly for the price advantage and perhaps to save 250g in the

bag.<br>

<br>

Regards,<br>

<br>

Dave Hartman.

[john_kothanek1]

Shun you state you have reservations about the D200 as a back up for the D2X. Can you explain a bit about that? I was considering doing exactly that and would appreciate a bit of "knowledge" from you to help me in my process.

[john_kothanek1]

David thanks for your comments I feel better. I am glad at least 1 other person feels about the same. It just baffles me that so many seem to chase these marginal changes. Especially when I see such stunning work from D50s and D70s out there. Before switching I got incredible shots with my Canon 10D. It seems like most of these cameras will produce really nice results and isn't that all that is really important?

 

I wrote my original response after reading Ken Rockwell's review on the D200 where he says the D2X is now "obsolete" because of the D200. How someone can claim a camera that is not even out yet renders a camera like a D2X obsolete is beyond me. Obsolete is a VERY strong VERY specific term and it seems inappropriate. I think comments like that from apparently well respected reviewers makes people crazy and helps push the notion that if your camera is some grams heavier or lacks a few more megapixels that you have to buy the newest. Anyhow, really makes a fella feel good when his less than 2 month old 4K+ camera is called obsolete.

 

To me "upgrading" will be considered when my D2X is as far behind whatever the latest and greatest camera is as the F3 was behind the F5. D2X gives me great joy and pictures do I REALLY need a few more megapixels, a little less weight or some other marginal improvement or are my photos still pleasing to me even though it has been declared obsolete.

 

Finally I am an amatuer and like you I have shot all formats from APC to large format view cameras. I love photography always have the ability to "capture" my world is priceless to me.

[ShunCheung]

John, I thought I already explained. For the D200, (1) AF performance has yet to be evaluated. Personally, having only 1 cross-type AF sensor could be a problem, as I could be restricted to only 1 useful AF point again. (2) Incompatible batteries with the D2X. In other words, when you travel, you'll need to carry a separate charger and batteries, which negates some of the weight advantage for the D200.

 

Most likely, your needs will be different. But I'll see what else Nikon will announce during the PMA or otherwise 1st half in 2006 before I decide what to get. The D200 is a possibility if no better choices are available.

[paul.thomsen]

Ken Rockwell also says on his site things like;

 

"Don't use a tripod if you can help it. Having to carry one is a pain and thus cripples creativity.

 

Only use a tripod for still subjects either at night or when you need long shutter speeds of about 1/60 or slower.

 

It's a common misconception among photo teachers and amateurs that tripods are good, although no one really knows why. I guess some people just associate tripods with serious photography."

 

I wouldn't be too concerned about him saying the D2X is obsolete.

[ShunCheung]

There are people who make outrageous comments on their web sites to generate publicity, web traffic, and therefore income. IMO, the best thing we can do is not to discuss such comments and web sites so that we don't feed those publicity stuns.

 

A few years ago, there were claims on some web sites that the then 3MP Canon D30 (or was it the D60?) rivals 4x5 quality and there were the endless faked D200 information and images ....

[tony_cabrera]

Ken Rockwell fails to even mention the AF system on his D200 vs D2X page. It's almost as if he's getting paid to push the D200.

 

I do feel a small touch of resentment that they packed so much into a $1700 body, having already purchased 2 D2X's. But don't get me wrong, I love the D2X and wouldn't trade it in...

 

Now let's see what Canon announces next week =)

[ilkka_nissila]

Nikon really had no choice. Canon's had a lead in the middle segment for a while and Nikon has to produce a very competitive D200 to show that they can take on the 5D (at a lower price point) and 20D (with more features). Canon's 5D is going to cut the sales of their 1D Mk II, just like the D200 is going to cut the sales of the D2X. Prices are going down, and it is us users that benefit. A DSLR is not a long-term investment, you buy it when you need it and use it until it is no longer sufficient for your needs.

 

If I had two D2Xs I'd be one happy animal, no need to worry about the D200.

[tony_cabrera]

Ilkka - My wife shoots with me. We each cary 1 D2X and 1 D70. I'm looking to replace the D70's. Mainly for post-processing reasons so that all the photos have a universal color tone. As I understand it, the D200 share the same image engine as the D2X. For the price, the D200 really packs a lot.

 

Nikon is really looking smart right now. Just like the D2X kind of fell between the 1DSMk2 and the Mk2 at the right price, the D200 is falling between the 20D and 5D at the right price.

[tony_cabrera]

By the way Paul...

 

If you get your wife to shoot with you, you'd have an easier time approving certain NAS purchases. =)

[ilkka_nissila]

Yeah, there is no other way to get two D2Xs... :-)

 

I recall Nikon saying that the D2X was designed to imitate the D70 colours ... I guess it fell half-way between D70 and D1X? Maybe the D200 falls between D2X and D70 then.