D1x by todays standards

[lars69]

Hi,

 

I have been offered a Nikon D1x with a very low shutter count and I would like

to know if any of you have one and how it really compares to the newer D200 or

even D2x.

 

I currently have a Sigma SD9, am not really happy with it and think about

migrating into Nikon cameras.(Actually used Minolta for ages but first they

didn?t have any digital SLRs and now they are gone and Sony is not an option)

So I would start from scratch and have to buy some high quality lenses as well.

The main things that annoy me about the SD9 are:

 

-ISO range and performance in darkness, anything above ISO 200 is impossible

and long exposures above ?s are bad as well. So I really miss some good shots

because of this.

-Speed, it does something like 6 frames burst but then needs 30 seconds or

more to save them, even to the fastest CF cards. Again I loose shots because I

have to wait for the camera.

-Layout. No build in portray grip (I prefer heavy, big cameras) and reasonably

bad layout of buttons. I cannot change shutter speed while looking through the

viewfinder.

 

 

Resolution is more or less the only thing I don?t really mind, the 3 Mpixel of

the Sigma are enough for me and the 5.5 of the D1x certainly would be.

 

So keeping that in mind, how would a D1x perfrom? Technology has advanced a

lot so does a D200 actually outperform a D1x in all aspects even though it

is 'only' a semi-pro model? I know a D200 has faster framerates etc, but it

would also cost me more than twice as much (including grip) as the offered

D1x. So does the D1x now feel dated or is it a fast, responsive camera even by

todays standards?

 

Thanks,

 

Lars

[seandepuydt]

Lars, the D1x was a good camera back in the day. The D1x battery life was terrible. I had to have three batteries for half a day of shooting, and then I was conserving juice by using manual focus. The noise, anything over 5 seconds and it seemed image quality went south real quick. I do believe the D1x has a sweet spot, but I don't know, just based on your post if it would be a good choice, given the ISO performance I've experience with the D1x. My thought is that the D200 would have much better results in that area. The D1x user interface is also something that I thought needed improvments. You cannot zoom in on an image, max was 1x, which doesn't really tell you anything. Hope this helps. - Sean

[ott_luuk]

I really don`t know about the d1x but for older generation digitals, my prime concern would be high ISO performance. If you are starting from scratch, why not look at the other systems, too.

 

Pentax has really attractive pricing and feature set on their new k10d. If you want a big brick of a camera, lots of people in the Canon camp are selling their 1d mkII-s to upgrade to mkIII. Might be good deals there. 20D-s are not expensive either. I think you could get more bang for the buck with 1-2-3 year-old technology in a less fancy casing than 6-year-old tech in a near-perfect body.

[elliot1]

I would suggest looking at a d80 or if that is out of your price range a d40x or d40.

[hashim a]

the D70/s is a lot of camera for the dollar at this point...<P>

 

<a href="http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/compare_post.asp?method=sidebyside&cameras=nikon_d70%2Cnikon_d1x%2Cnikon_d200&show=all">a side by side</a>

[lars69]

Thanks for the answers so far. I was really only wondering if I can get a bargain with the D1x but the not existing zoom in the preview pretty much does it for me(Thanks Sean). I think it's really essential and to be honest and I didn't expect it to be missing.

 

The D40 to D80 Nikons are nice but I am not a friend of plastic bodies. So it will be probably be a D200 or the Fuji S5 which looks interesting.

Pentax are ok but I was a big shocked when Minolta stopped building cameras and somehow I want to go with Nikon to avoid something like this happening again. Not saying it would with Pentax, but you never know.

I borrowed a Canon 5D from a friend and I just dislike the position of the shutter wheel and I know all Canon friends say you get used to it but I wouldn't buy Canon just for that.

So it will be a Nikon and I guess a D200, or maybe a second hand D2h.....

 

Thanks again,

 

Lars

[Peter_in_PA]

Lars,

 

The new Sony Alpha is the successor to the Minoltas. Minolta sold its whole camera business

to Sony, so they didn't go away, just switch brand.

 

If you can afford it, go for the D200. AVoid D1 series at all costs. Battery is atrocious by

today's standards.

[m_.]

lars,

 

if manual focus is important, and accurate AF focus is important, and a large viewfinder for eye relief is important, then D1x is a lot more camera then D200 or D80, even with current standard. i understand D2x is a lot better, or on theory, than D1x but the D1x i have is all i need in the digital arena.

[ellis_vener_photography]

Lars,

 

Having shot a lot with the D200, the D1X and the D2X and given the options you present, I'd definitely get a Nikon D200 over a D1X or D2H.

[Ed_Ingold]

I have a D1x (my first DSLR) and currently use a D2x.

 

The D1x is ruggedly built and takes fine pictures with good color and low noise at ISO 800 and lower. Battery life is an issue if you do a lot of shooting - you get about 175-200 RAW images per charge. It is comparable to an F5 in speed of focusing with standard AF lenses, and is completely compatible with AI/AIS manual lenses (spot and center-weighted metering only). The D1x gets noisy (hot pixels) for exposures of 1 second and longer, and is nearly unusuable at 15 seconds. The D1x tends to overexpose with flash, especially fill flash. You have to be careful and turn the flash down (or use the diffusion cap). If you need a camera with a vertical grip, don't waste time with an add-on. Get a D1x or D2h (for about the same price).

 

A D2h is another viable option. Although it has 4.1MP compared to 5.5MP for the D1x, the sharpness is comparable and the color generally better. The quality of D2h images is comparable or superior to that of 35mm film. Battery life is phenomenal - 400 to 600 shots per charge. I carry one spare, which I have never needed in a day's shooting. I find the camera is overly sensitive to infrared, causing color shifts under low artificial light. I fixed that with a B+W #486 hot mirror filter (B+W calls it something else, but that's what it is). That filter also improves color with the D2x. The D2h and D2x behave very accurately with flash, much better than the D1x (both with an SB-800).

 

The D2x is another creature altogether. You can use it for long exposures, up to 30 minutes or so, without seeing hot pixels. The color and sharpness easily surpass that of 35mm film, and approach medium format quality (Hasselblad, anyway). Battery life is comparable to that of the D2h.

 

The deciding issue is build-quality. If you use a camera for work, build-quality trumps pixels, hands-down. Only the D200 has similar compatibility with older lenses. If you want pixels without the price tag, you have other options. If budget is the main concern, put your money in glass and scrimp on the body.

[walterh]

Lars about 2 years ago I went with a professional to shoot some scientific instrument just to make certain that the technical aspect of the instrument came through with the images. The pro had a carload full of equip and he looked at the room and came back with lots of stuff. He then set up the lights and ladder and tripod etc. and made his shots with his D1x. Did I mention that the 3rd battery was in working order? (2 others were drained in a few test shots to start with.)

 

When he was done I grabbed my D70 and took a few shots myself.

 

When I saw the results he send me I thought he did a really good job. (My own images came out about equal^^). I also asked him if he would give me his original files to play with. Once I saw those I was deeply impressed. He was REALLY good. These files just looked awful against what I was used to with my D70. I never would have been able to get images of best quality from these files. I did ok with the images from my D70.

 

This tells me 2 things. 1) A true pro can get results even with a D1x :-P 2) A D70 is more advanced than the D1x in terms of image quality and color output.

 

Ok there is a third point - the person makes more of a difference than the tool.

[sublimeimages]

If image noise is a big concern stay away from the D2h. They are great cameras just a little noisy. I've got an eye on a Fuji S5, seems like a nice tool.

[rick_helmke]

The D1x is a good camera by most standards. Battery technology has given the D200 a leg up but I still need the battery grip and a spare battery to make it through the day. The D1x gives me good images but I can do more with the D200 and the D2h is a distant third. If it's a good price and low mileage you will enjoy the D1x but if you don't mind dropping the extra cash you'll be happier with the D200.

 

Rick H.