D100 OR F100

[auke bonne van der weide]

Okay I have to spent some money, what would you do. Add a F100 to my

current F80 and super coolscan 4000ED, or jump to digital completely

and buy a D100.

 

Peace to the world.

[User_276104]

My only "digital" item is a Coolscan IV that I bought last winter. I don't like to gripe about Nikon, but honestly, for what they have to offer at this point I'm not going in on a DSLR yet.

 

And, if you've got an F100 on your mind now's the time with the double rebate!

[NetR]

Why make it one or the other? If you get a D100, which is based on the N80, you can have the best of both worlds. For anything wideangle, the N80 and scanner are unbeatable. There isn't anything digital to compete with a well exposed 35mm slide taken on a tripod mounted camera with a good lens, and then scanned. But you don't always have the time to do that, and you don't always need that level of quality. For experimenting, telephoto and action, the D100 has a lot to offer.

 

Regards, Ross

[at]

F100. I also agree that Nikon isnt impressing me with it DSLR's

at this point. Not trying to turn this into a film vs. digital

debate but speaking for my F100 experience here's why I say F100.

1) can shoot all week on a set of batteries

2) much better build quality, expect longer shutter life, f100 is

more robust

3) Nikon claims d100 isnt based on N80 but my F100 will crush a N80 in

focusing speed and accuracy, much less hunting for focus

4) double rebate!!!!!

 

Ultimately only you can make this decision, what do YOU want???

[raymond_petty1]

That depends completely on what your needs are. I will say one thing, with the F80 you have no idea what Nikon is capable of in regards to auto-focus speed (with small and large glass) and durability. But then I have an N80 that is a wonderful small, light package when that is what I need.

If you are really getting into digital and can get by with the auto-focus cabability and durability of the F80 then the D100 might be just what you need.

It really comes down to personal needs.

[steve_muntz]

I'm going to agree with most of what Raymond said, it comes down to what you need. If the F80/N80 isn't any problem, the D100 might be a good choice. That will get you working with digital capture which is a whole new world. On the other hand, you'll have to stock up on compact flash cards which will add to it's price, and do you have a DX flash?

 

If you need a faster camera then go for the F100 but if not the D100 might be a good choice.

[robert_ardinger]

Very happy with the D100. Scanning slides is for me a bit tiresome. Digital has a lot of "hidden" expenses though. My other Nikon is an N90s so the autofocus of the D100 is fine . The F100 is a very nice camera (good current price) but my N90s and other film camera (rangefinder) are just not being used. If you have not scanned much, I would get the scanner first, you will likely need it for previously shot film even if you get the D100 or some other dSLR. Learn scanning and learn to work with your imageing software. If that all works out for you and you do not mind scanning and especially if you shoot things that need wide angles, fast motordrive, fast focusing then the F100 would be great. It really looks like the current best overall film Nikon (balancing , size and features). If you find scanning perhaps tolerable but not totally fun and your N80 did well for your subject matter then the D100 should be a good fit.

 

Robert

[richard_milner2]

Someone else asked this same question last week.

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=006Vus

[dick_van_nostrand]

During the last few years I worked for a newspaper that had gone digital. Used 2 D-1s and enjoyed them. My personal cameras are 2 F-100s. After retiring I bought a 4000ED scanner to handle the 75,000+ negatives I have stored in my basement. I will add a Dslr sometime in the future. My answer to your dilemma is," what did you do in the past?" If you have tons of negatives, I'd go with a scanner and make digital files. You could still handle film as you contemplate coverting to a digital camera.

[martin_hupfer]

ok the F100, I own one, is a wonderfull camera, very fast autofocus and good metering.

But to go on in fotographing I think the old F4 brings more, you can change the viewer you have more mechanic quality and less lost in money over the next years.

If you buy a F100 or D100, a year later you lost half of the price and the D100 even more.

Or, wait, wait another half year and the buy a D1.

Some time ago I could test a D100 and I never would buy one, only plastic and very bad "screen"

[auke bonne van der weide]

Already own a slide-scanner, the Nikon Super Coolscan 4000ED, works like a beast, great for full-size wide angle, probably superb in image-quality over any current Nikon DSLR. Only the Canon 1Ds is for big enlargements better in image-quality compared to good Velvia or Sensia scan. The dillema is:

 

D100 pro's (or digital in general)

- flexibility

- speed of processing, experimenting

- great telephoto

- flexibility in ISO-range

contra

- 1.5x multiplier

- dust

 

F100 pro's

- durability/built-quality (it works like a beast, probably better than F5)

- AF-speed

- full size wide-angle

contra

- big & heavy with vertical grip

- old-fashion analog photography

 

 

Next year I will be shooting a wedding, and already work a lot on the pc. Still a mind-breaker.

[raymond_wong7]

I recently sold my D100 and went back completely to film. Scanning is a big pain and I miss the ease of going from shot to print on the D100. However I shoot a lotsa portraits and color correction or color matching with the D100 was very difficult. It was great in the studio under control lighting but it was far from perfect outdoors. I still like the lattitude of film that I don't get with digital.

[hemen_oza]

I think people have said this before, but Nikon is long due for upgrading it'd D100. The double rebates on F100 suggest that they are making room for something (digital) in between F100 and D100.

 

F100 is ofcourse a legendary camera, and I am thinking about getting one for my self. But then again, I only shoot a couple of rolls of films a month, and for that volume, Digital does not break even (hell even the F100 does not break even, but ever since I played with it in the local camera shop, that's my next toy!).

- Hemen

[ShunCheung]

A year ago, I thought the D1x was due for a replacement but so far none has been announced yet. The D100 is still a fine camera for its class and I don't see why Nikon must produce a replacement any time soon; the main issue is that prices will continue to come down. Now the D2h is out, IMO there are higher priorities for them in both the top and bottom ends. If you want a new model every year, Nikon is not the brand for you.

 

Yes, there was another thread on this same topic a week ago. It comes down to your individual decision. If you are ready for digital and don't need your DSLR to shoot action and sports, the D100 is a fine camera.

[wayne_crider4]

A.B....I always wonder when people ask these questions what their subjects

are. I mean are they shooting portraits, landscapes, nature with big lenses,

doing street photography, creating prints for sale or display, post cards, web

site pictures, stock photography etc. Secondly, do they need to work cheaper

cause they shoot 1000 rolls a year or are they just amatuers shooting a roll or

two a month? Third do they scan all their photographs and manipulate or

normally get prints done. I think that in some part to answer these questions

defines camera selection down somewhat. Example, if was primairly shooting

alot of family portraits and printing on an Epson, then yea a digital camera is

the way to go, but if I was an amatuer into nature photography and shooting 2-

3 rolls a month then I'd probably lean to a film camera, since the camera

would also probably retain it's value better. In the end, if I could justify writing

off the cost of a digital camera thru sales over a 2 year period and my

applications and usuage justified it I'd buy one. If not, a film camera will retain

it's value longer and allow you choose and use or experiment with different

films for flavor.

[auke bonne van der weide]

I want to shoot everything, anytime, anywhere. SLR is a nice alternative in many ways...... allround use :.) But I certainly like slide, aspecially when projected, but also because of its lack of grain, when scanned, and I like true wide-angle. Have to wait until Nikon comes with a full-frame, with no grain at 1600ISO, and beneath 2000 euro/dollar........

 

how do I spend my money until then, I am leaning to F100, because it is a beast......

[arnabdas]

You want it -- so buy it. You won't regret.

[steve_ql]

The F100.

 

The F100 is at the peak of the evolution of film SLRs.

You can have perfection in your hands now.

 

The D100 is only the beginning of the digital revolution.

Sensors, media, batteries, and other technologies are still

constantly improving/changing several times a year.

 

Besides, you already have the scanner.

[rayliguori]

I've owned the F100 and a Nikon Coolscan 4000 for the last few years and have nothing but superlatives to say about the equipment. My problem is the number of shots that I end up throwing in the trash. I recently came back from a whale watching trip where I took 8 rolls of film and got 5 decent shots. Exposure and focus were fine, but spoting the damn whales and getting them at the right time was a crapshoot. After spending a few hundred dollars for developing to get five good (not great, just good) photos, I decided it was time to bite the bullet.

 

Like many of the comments, I agree that Nikon has been a real laggard on the digital front. If I could start all over again, I would have gone with a Canon system. But once you shell out a few thousand dollars for those great Nikon lenses, switching systems is just not an option (at least not if you are an amatuer like me with a wife who doesn't quite understand why I spend all this money on hobby). Anyway, I finally caved and bought the D100. It also helped that B&H had a special price of $1,400 for attendees of this year's PhotoExpo at the Jacob Javits center.

 

Here is what I like and don't like about the D100.

 

Don't Like: 1)The plastic body. I've owned an F3, an F5 (which I sold to buy the D100) and an F100 and I just like the substantial feel of these cameras. The D100 is awfully light and feels a little off-balance when I put on a longer lense like the AF-S 300 f/4. 2) I also don't like the fact that I know the price will continue to drop over time (although the F100 is also considerably cheaper today than when I bought it). 3) Short product life cycle. I assume that Nikon will eventually come out with a full size chip at a higher megapixel count. The truth is, however, that I can print an excellent quality 13" x 19" print with the D100 and I have never needed to print anything larger. I guess it's more the feeling that my camera will be obsolete relatively quickly. 4) The Pop-up flash. The flash is only good for outdoor fill-flash. Indoors, it is not very powerful and you are guaranteed to get red-eye. The B&H saleman told me to wait until the SB-800 comes out as it is far superior to the SB-80 DX and the weaker SB-50DX.

 

Do Like: 1) Instant feedback. I instantly see if I messed up and can fix the problem. 2) Low operating cost. Once you've bought the camera, a decent CF card (get a big one) and a few extra batteries, you can shoot all day long without worrying about the expense. That gives you freedom to experiment. Also, the saving on film and developing cost somewhat alleviates my concern about the fact that the camera will come down in price. 3) Intuitive Controls - If you are a Nikon user, you will feel right at home with this camera. The camera gives you two ways to adjust ISO, bracketing, white balance, etc. 4) ISO Flexibility - You can change the film speed with each shot. That means I don't have to change film when I go from bright light to darkness. Also, you can change the white balance with each shot so you don't have to worry about filters or film changes when moving from direct sunlight to shade to fluorescent to strobe to whatever else you might encounter.

 

All in all it is a very good camera. If you are used to the N80, then you won't care about the light body (in fact you might prefer it). I hope this helps.

[arnabdas]

>The F100 is at the peak of the evolution of film SLRs

 

My thinking is, that would be Minolta Dynax/Maxxum 7, and not F100.

 

In any case I'm reluctant to give F100 10/10 because of its lack of mirror prefire/lockup.