Nikon D1X a Ridiculous camera! better use a Leica.

[steve_bellayr]

I had a Nikon D1.  I was disappointed with it.  I wore our quickly.  Certainly was not worth repairing,

[John Seaman]

I had a spell of collecting and using (and later selling) D1 cameras, the D1 was not great, the pictures has a magenta cast. The D1H was better, even with only 2.7MP it still made nice pictures. I used the 5.4MP D1X for infrared, with an infrared filter. These early DSLR's were much more sensitive to infrared than later incarnations. Here are two examples, from the D1H and D1X.

[JDMvW]

On 8/23/2002 at 7:35 PM, derek_stanton2 said:

You disparage a camera because it, on the surface, is too

complex for you to come to grips with?

There seems to be a lot of that going around. A mask and social spacing may help.

[glen_h]

On 12/18/2022 at 9:56 AM, John Seaman said:

(snip)

These early DSLR's were much more sensitive to infrared than later incarnations.

(snip)

 

I knew that once, and then forgot.

 

I have done IR with the D200 and D700, which does work.

With the ISO on the highest setting, you can even handhold them.

 

Now, to try the D1X ...

[john_cooper9]

Nikon always seemed out of my reach along with Leica and Hasselblad. Bought into Minolta and later Sony. Then, because being a photographic collector/user I bought a Nikon D1X with lens (28-200 AF Nikkor) several batteries and a charger and other bits for $54. It was fun to use and felt very strong. Now I have another two D1X's and several Nikkor DX lenses. Then on the advice of another forum's user have ordered a Nikon D300s at 12 Meg. 5 and/or 12 meg should be enough for most of my image needs. For "high pixel" needs I have a Sony A99II at 42 Meg and of course film in sizes from 120 to 4x5, 5x7 and 4x10. As in most situations, of any pursuit, you can't have too many tools. But must have the ability to choose the right tool for he situation at hand.

[Dave Murray]

On 3/5/2002 at 9:24 PM, jay_. said:

I agree the operation of not only digital cameras but AF SLRs in

general involve a huge commitment to memory if you want to operate

them fluidly. I take issue with the statement regarding the

reliability of Leica bodies, though. The top-end digital SLRs seem

to be relatively trouble-free at least from everyone I know who owns

them, whereas in my own experience Leica R bodies' reliability has

been spotty. I also have found (and spoken to others more adept at

digital that I am) that I get sharper images from my 3+ megapixel D30

with a Leica R lens than I get from the same lens on a film body,

using a 4000dpi scanner. Perhaps with an old-fashioned enlarger with

a Leica lens, or a Tango scan, it's a different story.

I’ve used the pre-R Leicaflex and Leicaflex SL cameras pretty extensively and, apart from dud meters, found them to be exceptionally reliable. Of course, if the meters had worked, they’ll be inaccurate as the correct Mercury Oxide cell hasn’t been available for 30? Years. The later, Leica R8 and it’s updated R9 are Leica designed and built. I now use three of these bodies and find them a delight to use. 
Now the Nikon D1X, I bought one a few years ago. A long way from Leica M3 and Leicaflex. A chap in a photographic shop in town where I went for a memory card, said he had used the D1X extensively in the past as a wedding photographer. He set up my camera to use as a point and shoot. Switch on and it’s set toMatrix metering and Program.  Very easy. I can review and delete if necessary, I can find mono if I want. I’ve now got a lens with an aperture ring and can set this and change the camera to aperture priority. I have acquired a manual. Found flash a bit confusing but it seems dedicated units are required. 
 

So, on the whole, I don’t find that the D1X is more complicated to use than the R8 as I use Program and Matrix metering for both. 

[robert_bouknight1]

Yes, a few settings, I'm used to them now.  Had a couple of good years using a $350+/- D1x when I was short on $, it served me very well other than the awful batteries.  IMO, using raw files and manual white balance, it was about as good as the next generations of cameras at around 1600 ISO.  Then the D3 came along.

In fairness, I would have had to carry at least 4 film bodies to replicate the high/low ISO and color/B&W settings available in DSLRs.  So having setting options are not always bad.  The majority are set once and forget.

Although I (still) have Leica M & R equipment, I'm using Nikon digital mirrorless bodies mostly.  With most menu items set and forget, I go out in manual mode and pick the stop and shutter speed I want, then concentrate on my subject.  Auto ISO and WB take care of most of the rest.  I do go out with small, light adapted M/LTM lenses on a regular basis, so I still have a toe in the Leica camp.