It's January 2013, if you were on a budget, would you buy a D70?

[zack_zoll]

<p>For what it's worth, I just sold my old D70 on 'that site.' Body, strap, charger, cap, replacement battery (not Nikon), Hoodman LCD cover, 4GB, 2GB, and 512MB SanDisk Extreme cards. Good condition, not mint. I expected about $100, but someone took the $125 buy it now option.</p>

<p>If that's a proper indication of value, then I would say that a EX+/NM one with an 18-70 probably would be worth about $300. That doesn't mean that it's the best choice, but that could very well be its actual value. It does produce a better tonal range at base ISO than the smaller, cheaper Nikon bodies like the D60/D3000... but once you hit around 640 ISO, it stops being a better camera, and is just an older one.</p>

<p>And Rafa, I think you can push D70 files much larger than 8x10. I used to print them at 12x18 without any problems (granted I used slightly textured paper, which helps), and poster prints were fine at typical viewing distances. Close up they were pretty terrible, but if you put them over a couch or someplace people couldn't get close to them they looked pretty good.</p>

<p>I also made most of those images with a 50mm or 85mm prime though, which really helps sharpen up the images when printing larger. The camera may be capable of some good sized prints, but I'm not sure the 18-70 is the best tool for the job.</p>

[ShunCheung]

<p>The D70 is certainly "capable of taking good pictures." A $10 disposible camera (can you still get those?) is "capable of taking good pictures" also, under certain conditions. However, that is not the point here; neither is whether the D70 worths $100 or $300 with the 18-70 DX.</p>

<p>The issue on hand is that if one has $300 and needs a camera for the purpose of posting to Face Book, etc. and e-mailing JPEGs to friends, is that D70 a good choice for that purpose today, in 2013, with risks such as BGLOD, need new batteries, memory card is the no-longer pupular (except on the high end) CF .... Or you can get a much-more-appropriate camera for that purpose (and capturing video for YouTube ...) for even less money.</p>

<p>I think Peter Hamm already got his answer. Frankly, that is a no brainer.</p>

[alastair_anderson]

<p>If it's new in the box it may just be worth more than $300 as a collectible.</p>

[ky1]

<p>The sensor of the D70 is especially good for UV and IR photography. You can shoot UV without modification. You can shoot IR with a modified sensor.<br>

It is a good camera by itself. A better tool than any PSs.</p>

[pablito_pistola]

<p>The lens is quite good, and has a metal mount, unlike the later even more plasticky kit lenses with their fragile plastic mounts. The real question is whether the battery will hold a charge. $300 is not outrageous given the new condition.<br>

Most folks here might be right in asserting that it may not be the best camera for his needs, but I much prefer my photo students to have a D70 than a p/s. It is possible to work with somewhat shallow depth of field, which is impossible with a tiny sensor p/s. <br>

I have made very large prints from D70 files, increasing the resolution through Alien Skin interpolation. Worked beautifully.</p>