charlie_johnson1

<p>When I was taking my pictures at the hockey games, the local news photographers were shooting in the same general area I was, but they had field artillery compared to me, i.e. 400 to 600 mm f2.8 glass on either Nikon or Canon digital bodies. You had to have a monopod to hold that kind of weight up. Yes, using a tripod is insane, I 100% agree with that. I used the monopod to steady my camera because I had a slow lens. I also compensated for the lack of lens speed with high ISO film (Fuji 800). </p>

<p>Brian, you're missing the point of this discussion. The camera body is meaningless if the glass can't do the job. These high ISO's that are available now with digital photography did not exist in film. I use to shoot Kodak Ektar 1000 when I could get it, I loved it. Again, I had low speed glass on a lowly consumer film body. However, using proper technique, I could capture images equivalent to those using pro-level bodies and high speed glass. The image captured is only as good as the skill of the photographer. Having the latest camera with all the bells and and whistles doesn't mean a thing if the kid next to you with his point and shoot camera using proper technique captures a better image than you. I learned photography using film. I didn't learn everything there is to know about it, but I'm still learning. Digital and all the Auto everything has made us lazy in taking the time to setup a camera and lens to capture a quality image. Film might be old school, but the rules still apply, just with some minor adjustments in the White Balance.</p>

<p>I can't throw down on a D3X or a D700 at the moment, but I wouldn't mind getting my hands on more f2.8 glass to go in my bag. My D1 and newly acquired D1X shoot pretty good pictures, even in low light. An 80-200 f2.8 is on my list for my next lens purchase. The 2 ring standard AF-D is fine in my book, the AFS is too pricey for me. Next would be a 300 f2.8 but I would even settle for 300 f4, but the older versions not the latest incarnations.</p>

<p>Eli, save your coin and hope Obama doesn't pinch your income tax refunds. Your best combination is the D700 (Full Frame) and the 80-200 f 2.8 AF-D, 2 ring with the mounting bracket foot. I still recommend a quality monopod and ball head, they will be very useful. Do a search for choosing and using a monopod and ball-head on here (Photo.net) and you will learn what I have.</p>

<p>If you go the D300 route, remember the crop factor of the DX sensor, the 80-200 f2.8 is a 120-300 f2.8. The key is the high speed glass. Forget the VR, it's a waste of money. The price difference alone in the VR and Non VR would cover the price of a good Manfrotto/Bogen Monopod. Also, the newer bodies have blazing fast focus motors in them these days. The F4s was AF, but was so slow its was a joke (F4s was the greatest Manual Focus AF camera ever made). The F5 had a superior focusing motor and made AF-D lenses fly. The digital bodies have the faster motors in them as well. I know this, I can compare my N4004s (same motor as the F4s) to my D1 (same motor as the F5) and tell the difference in the focus speed. I wouldn't throwdown on the AFS unless someone was going to be paying for my pictures. </p>

<p>Forget the VR Crap, go get a decent Bogen Monopod and ball head for your camera, you will be amazed at the quality of the pictures. I shot some minor league hockey a few years ago with a Nikon N4004s with a Nikon ED AF Nikkor 70-300 1:4-5.6D using a Bogen 681B Monopod and S55 Ball Head with Hex Plate Release. It was indoor, and I was using 800 ISO Fugi Film. At the distance I was shooting at, I turned off the AF and set the zoom just past 200mm. I had a great field of view and depth of field, the entire rink stayed in focus. If I would have had the 80-200 2.8, I would have been in heaven, even with my lowly 4004s. <br>

Glass is the name of the game and stability is achieved with good platform such as a mono pod. Look at the photographers on the sidelines at sporting events, emulate what they are doing. I used the above listed equipment because that was all I could afford then, but my shots looked like they came from higher end optics. I got what I got because I looked up older post here on Photo.Net, especially about shooting indoor and outdoor sports and using and choosing a good monopod/tripod. I have one lens with VR and the VR is a total joke. I noticed in one of the responses, all the glass was 2.8; for sports, you need speed.<br>

Get the 80-200 2.8 and D700, that's what I would do. Used lenses from a reputable dealer or from someone on eBay with 100% rating would be a cheaper way to go to help save some coin. My 4004s was a gift, and I bought my 681B Mono from B&H, the rest of my gear, all from eBay. Death to DX, go with Full Frame Glass just like you would shooting 35mm Film.</p>

I have the Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-120mm 1:3.5-5.6 G ED IF VR SWM lens. I have not found the issues with this lens that others have. The AF-S focus is super quiet and fast. I got it with my D1 I found on EBay. This lens can be easily found there but prices vary greatly. It is a great walk around lens.

 

It works great in bright sunlight and well lit rooms. When getting into low light, the VR helps some. Otherwise get out a tripod or mono-pod and turn off the VR. Of course, a tripod is the cheapest speed enhancer you can get. Anything Nikon / Nikkor that has AF-S and/or f2.8 is going to cost bucks and won't be in the zoom range you're looking for.

 

What are you taking pictures off that are in low light and in dusty conditions? I live in West Texas in the Panhandle-South Plains regions and our DUST is rather infamous. I have used my 24-120 to take pictures inside of dimly lit well houses. I just kick the ISO to 800 and lean against the door frame. I have sometimes have had to drag out the SB-80DX Flash to get a shot when the light gets really dim, but that is just part of it. Lucky for me, what I was taking pictures of was not moving. If it was moving, the 35-70mm f2.8 or the 50mm f1.4 would have been attached.

It must be the NAS, I have Nikon L37C UV filters on all my glass. I recently added 81A in 52, 62 and 72 to my collection. I also have Circular Polarizers for each size as well. I haven't had any adverse affects from the UV on the end of the lens, whether on my 4004s or my D1. I have found the filter easier to clean and keep clean than the front element of the lens. Since my front element is rarely exposed to things that may smudge or scratch it, they are all still pristine. I also use my lens cap when not taking shots.

 

Since the Nikon L37C is no longer produced and even harder to find, unless you eBay really well, the best filters I would purchase would be Hoya. Go with the Super HMC, little higher, but better quality. A friend of mine has all Hoya on his Nikon and Canon glass as well as his Tokina and Sigma. Sure, its a redundancy, but it is my personal preference to have the filter out there.

I have the Kenko Auto Extension Tube Set as well as the Nikon BR2A and BR3. The Kenko Tube set is very versatile and can be used with many of your AF Nikkor lenses. I even used them with my 70-300mm ED-IF AF-D 1:4-5.6 zoom lens. This set is worth the investment and will give you multiple magnification ranges as another poster suggested. I got my Kenko tubes from B&H Photo and have not regretted it.

 

The BR2A lens reversal does work, but you are limited to one range of magnification. I just now have taken possession of the BR2A and BR3 after an exhaustive eBay search, watching, and bid battling to get mine. Some can be found cheap; others go for higher than new. If you can afford it, get the Kenko tubes and the BR2A and BR3.

When I first heard of the DX lenses and read up on them, I thought, "OMG, Nikon is smoking some good stuff on this one." I was right. Call me Old School.

 

I jumped from a Nikon N4004s AF film body to a Nikon D1. I looked at the 1.5 Crop Factor as a built in 1.5 TeleConverter. I still look at lenses from a 35mm Full Frame Film Body perspective. Someday, I still want to get a F4s or an F5 maybe. I, however, may not be able to find film for either one, if I ever do get one.

 

What I did see when the DX lenses were brought out, was the problems associated with Super Wide Full Frame lenses on Film bodies, vignetting. Full Frame glass on the APS sensor virtually guaranteed no vignetting from what I could gather. Why would anyone wish to ever have that problem. Then the complaint about Vignetting on DX lenses came in on this very forum. The COMMON SENSE factor flew out the window. Clearly nobody experiencing vignetting with a DX lens on an APS Sensor ever used a Full Frame lens on a Film Body and had the same problem. Nobody ever bother to look up the issue ever happening before, to anyone else.

 

Maybe the DX lenses aren't Born Losers, but the people who sold off the full frame glass and rushed out to get DX were Born Suckers for Nikon Marketing. I just found it really funny when some poor soul put his prized DX lens on a Film Body and was surprised because it vignetted no matter what. Yes, that very issue what posted on this very forum.

 

Someone said they never had a DUD Nikon lens. Well, I did have one. It was a 28-80mm AF Zoom made for the Pronea Series Nikon AF bodies. It didn't work at all on my 4004s. That was a dud lens.

 

Surely, there are those of us here remember the firestorm over at Canon when they made an entire family of cameras and line of lenses obsolete when the EOS system was brought out? I guess the Canon guys that were sacked over that one finally made it up the ranks at Nikon and are now trying the same silly stuff again.

 

Just my $0.02, the IRS got the rest.

Ian,

 

Do a search for Nikon N4004 and N4004s. The F401 in the UK was the 4004 in the US. The F401X was the 4004s in the US. I have the 4004s myself. Don't use it much anymore these days, have a D1 now. But, I was able to do some things with that camera that most people couldn't believe. Most Nikon AF lenses will work with it. However, you cannot use anything that is AF-S, not enough contacts in the body. Also, you are limited to AF only lenses, manual lenses will not meter. But there were many lenses in the AF family that work well with that body. Your best flash option is the trusty SB-22 and SB-22s if you can find one.

 

19 Pounds, eh? That should be about $38.00 US. I have seen these on EBay recently selling around that point to $45.00 US.

 

You got yourself a great starter camera that can shoot film. As you get more proficient with it, you will find yourself venturing away from the Full AF computer stuff in the camera and using more manual settings to do more with the camera. When you get to this point, you'll start wanting to get an F4s or F5 or venturing into the digital realm. Enjoy your find and good luck on your searches on the forum. Take you new camera, several rolls of film and enjoy.

I am an owner of a D1. I got mine second hand from EBay. It was clean and packaged in a deal I could not refuse at the time, 3 years ago. Viewfinder is 95%. I have never had much problem with the viewfinder. My 4004S had a viewfinder of 92%. A little extra view through the lens was nice, but not much different from what I already was use to. I might be wrong, but I believe the F3HP, F4s and F5 offered greater viewing through the viewfinder, at least 98% if 100% was not there.

 

Battery life of the D1. Well, having nothing to really compare against, my 2 battery packs serve me well. Most I have ever shot in a single day was 54 snaps. Generally, not much over 24 to 30. Gee, I wonder if shooting 24 and 36 exposure film for years had anything to do with that. On average, about 300 snaps to a charge on the D1. The D1X and D1H faired better, around 900 snaps, according to what I have read from books and other posters on this forum.

 

The D1 is a PRO Grade DSLR. It can only be compared against bodies that offer the same features and benefits. The D2 family and the D200 are really the only ones to compare the D1 against. Mainly because of the AIS lens compatibility. My school of thought is on Pro Grade 35mm glass for Film Bodies is the best and only way to go. The DX lenses shrink the barrel size of the lens and reintroduce vignetting problems faced with the 35mm glass on film bodies. The larger barrel of the older lenses virtually eliminated the vignetting issue but gave us the 1.5X Mag or Crop factor to deal with. Again, with older manual lenses, you don't have AF but you can meter with a D1. The D2 series and D200 give you this, the 70, 40, 50, and 80 do not. Also, there is something I heard about some of the newer bodies being strictly AF-S lens compatible only or not at all, unless you go again to the D2 series or D200. The D1 works with both AF and AF-S lenses.

 

Yes, the D1 is a beast and a brick compared to my old 4004s but its not the monster the F4s was, it was a lead weight by comparison to the D1. Mine has held up pretty well. The original owner took great care of it and I have cared for it well too. I have seen others that have literally been through the mill; some still working, others in need of repair and TLC.

 

A D1 for $300.00 is still pretty good. Pristine units have still gone for more from my observations. The D1H and D1X still command higher prices and what few still show up as NEW IN BOX are still listed near their original selling price, $1500 and up.

 

The D2 Series is PRO Grade and the D200 is PROSUMER. The consumer grades 40's, 50's, 70's and 80's, with their limited features and DX AF/S only compatibility makes them a nightmare. But then too, just look on this forum at the problems everyone is having with the newer Nikon gear. Battery recalls, lens issues, unexplained failures, etc. etc.

 

Nikon has obviously followed the PC industry too close. Get a product out the door full of bugs and issues. While correcting some, introduce a newer model to fix some bugs and introduce more. Repeat, several times per family series then drop the first end of the original series and introduce another whole series in the process. Then along the way, introduce a new series of lenses that work only with the newer generations of digital tech and fore go the film bodies that got you where you are. Of course, use the same bug problems and upgrades and reintroductions to get people to buy the newer stuff and have to sell the old stuff because it ain't compatible anymore. Then you wonder to yourself, "My God, I should have bought Canon instead of Nikon."

 

I like my D1 and I will keep my D1. I will also collect glass that was made for film bodies because someday, I might just get and F4s or F5. But that's me.

I currently have the Nikon AF Nikkor 70-300mm ED 1:4-5.6 D. Don't get the G version of this lens, it is total junk. The D version is the superior version of the lens. Its biggest let down is the fact that it doesn't macro like the Sigma or Tamron lens of the same class. With Kenko AF extension tubes, it will macro just fine. The newer version of this lens that just came out offers up the VR and AFS which is much faster and quieter on focussing. But it now has an oddball filter size, instead of the standard 62mm filter front that can be easily found. I would like to have the newer lens but the front filter size has changed my mind on that.

 

You have selected a good walk around midrange zoom size. For a quality robust lens, get the Nikon D 70-300. For the same quality lens with macro, get the Sigma or Tamron. The Kenko AF extension tubes are a good investment too.

I had the Nikon 50 f1.8 non D lens, and it wasn't built poorly at all. I did not like the focus ring grip that was on it at the time, plastic fine ridges. I liked the next version that came out with the rubber grip on the focus ring. I made the mistake of selling my 50 1.8 on Ebay with a used camera body and not getting the lens value out of it. I purchased a Nikon 50 f1.4 and like it ok, but I miss my 1.8 dearly. I am looking to get another one but the used ones are selling higher than the new ones on Ebay and I don't have time to sit in a bid war trying to get another. The 18-70, unless its 2.8 all the way through, doesn't compare to primes at all. Also, the high speed that a prime offers cannot be matched by any zoom, high spped or otherwise. A 50 1.8 is worth having, if you can afford the 50 1.4 too, get both.

I had a 50mm f1.8 AF Nikkor and sold it on Ebay to help pay for a 50mm f1.4AFD. I wish I still had my 1.8. I like the low light that the 1.4 gives me over the 1.8, but I saw that my 1.8 was sharper that the 1.4 I have now. I want my 1.8 back, but they are outragiously high on Ebay, used going for more than new alot of times. Too bad when I sold mine it didn't do that. If you can aford both, get them.

I have a Bogen/Manfrotto 681B 3 section mono that is down right sweet. Bogen has a 4 section that collapses shorter that has about the same weight rating and extended length, but I don't know the model number. Mine is currently topped with a Bogen 3055s Ball Head with the hex plate. If I was replacing it now, I would go with the Acra Tech Ball and Really Right Stuff Plates. I would use the same setup on my 3021 tripod and replace my heavy 3039 head I have now.

 

The purpose of a good monopod is to steady the camera, especially during action like indoor sports or action sports in general but still be mobile to a point. A good mono is good for hiking and touring when you need steady support in something small and light. The Gitzo CF is the way to go if you do allot of nature hiking and photography. But for the local hockey or indoor football, Gitzo is overkill unless the photos are your bread and butter. The Bogen/Manfrotto is the next best choice. Get down to your local camera shop that stocks monopods and tripods and play with a few to find what you like. Be sure to get one that will hold up the gear you plan to use.

Thomas,

 

I have the AF-S Nikkor 24-120mm 1:3.5-5.6 G ED lens. At first, I thought, "Oh Crud, a G Lens." But its has worked out OK. It is a great walk around lens. I read the reviews the people hated this lens but I have actually liked mine. On my D1, its too long on the short end, 5ft. minimum focus, and too short on the long end, 120mm sometimes doesn't reach out far enough. The AFS is silent and fast on my D1, it should be lightning fast on the newer bodies. For more precise work, I switch lenses for what I'm doing. For walk around its great. My walk around lens on my Nikon N4004s was the much malinged 35-70 AF 1:3.3-5.6 but I got great shots with it that others couldn't figure out how I did it. The 24-120 is the same way. Its not my favorite lens, but it is the one I use the most. I have heard that the 28-200 was a great little lens that is often misunderstood. But the reviews I read, it was on a film body, go figure. The 24-120 is solid, the AFS is fast and quiet, the VR is OK, but to me just pulls the batery down quicker.

 

Something I learned with my N4004s, I have found, using the same techniques that the pros says one should use with film bodies in the PRE AF days actually makes the AUTO Evervthing turn out alot better. I play with my ISO and apeture to keep things in the range that tends just make everything pop. I compose myself and my shot to get what I am after. I also find, if you experiement with what you have, you can alway prove the reviewers wrong. I say play with your current lens and venture off the auto everything path. If you want to, like the other responder said, check around and see if you can rent one to try out.

According to B. Moose Peterson's Magic Lantern Guides Nikon Lenses 2nd. Edition, 2000, this lens first introduced at the 1984 Olypics in LA was a beast in many ways. At the time it was discontinued, it was special order only and listed at $22,000.00 US. It weighs in at 16.6 pounds or 7.5 kg for our metric friends. Two things are required for this lens, the muscle to move it and the money to afford it, that is if you can find one, very rare this lens is. The TC-14C was the standard TC sold with this lens. The TC-16A could be used with it as well, but is not compatible with any Nikon D series SLRs. But with the D series 1.5X mag or crop factor, this lens alone is a 450mm f2.

 

See this link for lens info:

http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/companies/nikon/nikkoresources/telephotos/300mmedif20/index.htm

Don't waste your time or money on the Nikon Extension tubes. Instead, go to B&H Photo and buy the Kenko Auto Extension tubes. You will have full lens function including metering and AF with the Kenkos. I have these and they work like a dream. They are also more froogle for what they cost compared to the Nikons. The three piece set is the best value. Later on, you could add the other two lengths that Kenko makes. The Nikons are all sold idividually.

 

Kenko Auto Extension Tube Set DG (12, 20 & 36mm Tubes) for Nikon Digital and Film Cameras B&H Price: $169.95

 

The Nikon BR-2A is the proper reversing ring and for its price, its worth getting. Don't try getting one off Ebay, you'll wind up paying more than new price and shipping for it. This is an item best picked up from Adorama or B&H. I don't have one, but its on my list of stuff to get one day.

 

Go with the Kenko Extension tubes, I know these work very well.

My $0.02

 

Charlie Johnson

The solution to this problem of image shake while using a short lense is resolve pretty easy without buying a lens with VR. Its called:

 

1.) Buy a tripod or

 

2.) Buy a monopod or

 

3.) Use proper handhold and steadying techniques to get your shot.

 

The solution is Bogen, NOT VR or IS. Technology is not always the cure for technique. I might be shooting digital these days, but I still take the time to get the shot like I was shooting film. Anything under 1/60th needs rock steady support for the shot to come out. I shake enough by myself to know that I need proper support or steadying when shooting slow speeds. Support rules, no matter the angle of the lens.

My D1 has done the same thing from time to time and as Mark Dunker says, its the shutter acting up. However, I have found I have this problem also happens when one of the following conditions occur:

 

1.)When my batteries get low on charge;

2.) Static buildup on battery when chaging;

3.) The Dew Point is in single digits and the Relative Humidity is super Low. By the way I live in the Texas Panhandle and it does get really dry from time to time.

 

I can put the camera down for a while, a hour or two to several days, and it will start working again until the above conditions show up again and the shutter goes nuts. I have changed the battery to one fresh off the charger after a Refresh Cycle and things work like they should. Also, the dreaded static buildup while swapping batteries, can be easily be fixed by wiping the battery down with a semi damp cloth to remove the static build up. I have to wipe a damp cloth down the face of an Amp Meter to remove the static build up after pulling it from its case, especially on days of extremely dry conditions. Last I had heard, shutter replacement was an $800.00 ordeal that had to be done through Nikon East or West Service centers in the US. That and be without your camera for up to 2 months.

 

Before you shell out the bucks and ship your D1H off, try a few of the things I have done to see it they work for you. If the camera is your bread and butter, then you should get it fixed or get another body.

 

My $0.02, but there is a $1.98 consulting fee and claims on your first born fuel ser charge attached.

D,

 

What you are looking for is not made by Nikon. Sony has a camera that fits what you are wanting. The Sony Cybershot DSC-R1, 10.0 Megapixel, 5x Optical/2x Digital Zoom, Digital Camera. This is the current production model and is available at B&H Photo. Actually, it is currently out of stock, but I imagine they will be restocked soon or Adorama may have one.

 

This one has a viewfinder and a 2" LCD that can be used to review, or the compose your shots like you are wanting to do. My dad has an earlier variant of this camera, the 717 or 707, I don't remember which. He got it off Ebay. Anyway, it does take a very nice pictures. Works like an SLR but handles like a Point and Shoot. It is not an SLR however, the Carl Ziess lens is built onto the unit. I feel that this is the camera you are looking for. Granted Nikon has some Sony Chips in the bodies, but Nikon doesn't build the same style of cameras that Sony does.

 

I prefer the DSLR because I like being able to look through the lens to compose my shots. I have tried using cameras with the LCD viewfinder and didn't get the same results. Mostly because I was trying to use the camera in bright sunshine and outdoors. LCD views don't work well like that. The Sony will do something the Nikon can't do, take pictures in total darkness automatically. They have IR emitters and sensors around the end of the lens that make this possible. Look at the specs on the Sony and see if this is what you are wanting. Hope this helps.

Willam,

 

Good news. Yeah, there is a way to get to the D1 Clock Battery. Allot of it depends on how far you want to tear down your D1. The following link will get you a PDF file of a D1 Reapir/Parts Guide.

 

http://www.huroncamera.com/diagrams/nikon_digital/d1_Parts.pdf

 

This guide basically shows the assembly process of a D1 starting with the frame and putting together all the of pieces. Some of the pages are updated. The manual does go into sub-assembly details as well. HOWEVER, IT MUST BE NOTED: This guide contains DIAGRAMS ONLY, no text to guide you on your way. I have figured out, it is possible to get to the Clock Battery without totally dismantling the entire camera. You will need a controllable soldering iron. From what I can tell, the Battery is a Sanyo, MnO2-Lithium 2032 Battery.

 

http://www.batterystore.com/

 

Tab on to Sanyo, choose lithium, then choose promary coin cells with pins. the CR2032-T14-1 looks to be the closest variant to what is in the camera. Hope this helps.

Francesco,

Welcome to the Nikon Digital World. You have a fine camera and your list of lenses is a good choice too. I have the AF 50 1.4D, great lens, but with the 1.5 Crop factor of the digital sensor of the D1X, it shoots like a 75mm lens, which would work great for portraits. A lower cost alternative to the 1.4D is the 1.8D. Its one stop slower, just as sharp image wise and 1/3 the cost of the 1.4.

 

I myself would love to have the 17-35 2.8, great zoom from everything I have read. I can't tell you about the 85 or the 105, don't have them. I do have some other lenses you may wish to add to your list, some I have and others I still want to get.

 

1.) Nikon AF 35 f/2, the normal lens for DSLRs that the 50 f/1.4 or 1.8 is for SLRs. Don't have one, but its on the list.

2.) Nikon AF-S 24-120 f/3.5-5.6 G VR. I have this one, great walk around lens for general use.

3.) Nikon 35-70 f/3.3-4.5. I used to have this lens. Tack sharp although not fast like its 2.8 cousin. Macro thru the entire zoom range. Wish I still had it. The 35-70 f/2.8 is a good high speed zoom. I have this one, but have not gotten the same results with it as i did with the slower speed version mentioned above.

4.) Nikon AF 70-300 f/4-5.6 D. Great Supertelephoto Zoom. I have this one also. Works like a champ and hand holdable. Don't get the "G" version of this lens, it isn't near as good as the "D".

5.) Nikon 80-200 f/2.8. Fast telephoto zoom. Don't have this one yet, but someday hope too.

 

I have the D1 myself, the first version of your D1X. Yeah, its heavy, I used to carry a Nikon F-401s (4004s in the US) and it is light compared to the D1. I use a Tamrac N-45 strap myself. I like the quick release ends and the leather padding.

 

As a reference guide, I have the "Magic Lantern Guides, Nikon Lenses" 2nd Edition by B. Moose Peterson. The book is dated some and should be updated one of these days. This book is a great reference for many of the better Nikon AF and MF lenses.

 

All of the lenses we have talked about here were designed for 35mm SLRs. The newer DX lenses that Nikon has made are strictly for DSLRs, because the have a tighter lens barrel and will vignet on a film SLR.

 

In my own opinion, I think its better to stay with the film SLR compatible lenses becuase they have a tried and true build history. Plus, you may just get yourslef a good Nikon Film SLR one day to go with your D1X and you would be able to share lenses between them without any problems. Who knows, maybe Nikon will build a full frame Digital Sensor someday and these DX lenses will be obsoleted.

 

Good luck on you lens quest.

From the description, they are a new type of Nickle Hydroxide battery that looks to replace alkalines. But it doesn't say anything about them being rechargable. The Japanese consumer market looks to be the first users. Won't know much about them until they are imported to the US.

 

I have never had good luck with Everready products and Energizers ruined a MagLite Flashlite for me. I have had great luck with Duracells. Yes, I have had some Duracells begin to leak, but not so much as to ruin a device. I bought a Nikon SB-80DX off of Ebay and it was shipped with Energizer Lithiums. They worked great for a while, but the recyle on the flash was slow. They finally gave out and I put in some Duracells I had in my camera bag meant as backups for my flash and 4004s camera body. Then I remembered I had purchased some Duracell NiMHs and charge at Walmart. I tried them in the flash and they worked great. Really fast recycle on the flash. I make sure I keep them charged up for when I will be needing them in the flash. However, I still keep some regular Duracells around just in case.

William,

 

I have asked about this before. I made a post about this in December of 2004. Here it is.

 

Charlie Johnson , dec 12, 2004; 02:57 p.m.

Here is something that I have not seen anyone address yet. It is that internal clock battery inside of the Nikon Camera bodies. I have a Nikon D1, probably built in 2000 judging by the serial number, s/n 5015624. I am the second owner of this unit. According to the owner?s manual, a separate internal clock battery that has a useable life of about 10 years powers the clock.

I would think that would really be shelf life, not useable life. So, for a body built in 2000, in 2010 this body would have to be sent to a Nikon Service Center to have the battery changed for a fee. OK, what is the fee for this change? How long can I expect to have my beloved Nikon out of my hands, i.e. how long will it take to change this battery?

 

Now here is why I ask this. I have had Timex watches with 5 or 6- year batteries only last 3 to 4 years. It does say in the owner?s guide, battery life is dependent on how the watch is used and cared for. Do you use the display light often and for how long? OK, lets apply this rule to the Nikon SLR or DSLR in your hands. If you shoot a few hundred frames a year, you should get a full ten years out of the battery if not longer. But lets say you shoot 10,000+ frames a year, your battery life could be shortened somewhat, all those time stamps saved to the Flashcard or Film file. Lets say that this cuts the life to 7 to 8 years.

 

Someone should have had to send their SLR or DSLR body in to have that battery changed by now, assuming this battery was put into bodies such as the F5, which came out prior to the release of the D1 in late 1999. Or lets look at it this way, your Nikon Body has been sent in for service, shutter or something else to be repaired or updated and you see a Battery Replacement Fee on the Invoice. What was the fee? And why make a battery that has to be changed at a service center?

 

I know that there are DIYs or Do-It-Yourself types on this forum. Who has tinkered with their Nikon and found a hidden compartment for the internal clock battery? Or, how far of a tear down was involved to get to the clock battery? I am very curious. For all we know, starting in the near future, there will be a thread about how long it takes to get your camera back from Nikon for a stupid clock battery change and the astronomical price they want for it. Lets say it was first referenced here. I thank all who respond in advance.

 

 

Shourya Ray , dec 12, 2004; 04:03 p.m.

Your camera will be due for a schedule repair/update well before 10 years. If nothing else, your shutter will probably die before then. Nikon will then replace your battery when you send it in for some other repair or a scheduled tuneup.

I know that when I send my DSLRs in to Nikon for repair (broken shutter, etc.) they will also fix anything else that may require a CLA (such as cleaning the sensor, etc.).

 

I believe the new DSLRS (D2 series) have the clock battery in a user accessible compartment.

 

Ilkka Nissila , dec 12, 2004; 03:15 p.m.

An F5 does not have an internal clock, so no battery either. A digital SLR body will never be used for 10 years so it's an academic point anyway. A D70 gives far superior image quality to the D1 and the difference will be much bigger in 2010 so that it is pretty much guaranteed that no D1 will need a replacement battery for the clock.

 

Darren Cokin , dec 14, 2004; 09:02 p.m.

> A digital SLR body will never be used for 10 years...

I think that's a fairly naive statement. Yes, something better will have come along by then, but that doesn't mean the current equipment will be working any worse than it is now. 6 megapixels is enough for quite a lot of uses. Even if a 60 megapixel camera is availble for two dollars, certain people will still be using and maintaining their trusty old 6 megapixel models for years to come.

The 12-24 Tokina you are refering to shows to be for "Digital Only" in the B&H Photo catalog I have sitting on my desk. This will not work on a F100. Just like a DX Nikon lens is for Nikon DSLR's, with the smaller cylinder in the lens made for the smaller sensor, it will vignet on a film body.

 

In terms of the 17-35 by Tamron, it is noted to be "Optimized for Digital." I'm not exactly sure what they are getting at there. I may work on a film body and a digital.

 

If you are planning on still using lenses on your film SLR body and sharing them with your digital SLR body, you're best bet is to stay with 100% film body compatiple lenses and adjusting your shooting style with the digital because of the crop factor. Another option is to have glass specific for each body. Full frame glass for film SLR and digital glass the the DSLR. The 3rd option is selling the film SLR and going straight digital.

 

Myself, I am staying with film slr compatible glass; 1.) I still have a film body I may wish to use, and 2.) I might buy an F4, F100 or F5 sometime in the future and want to be able to share lenses between that film slr and my D1 or any future digital body I might get. But that's me.

Dave,

 

Where are you getting your information? Do you have first hand experience using any of the D1 Family? I have it in two published books saying what the battery life is for the D1H and D1X. "The D1H and D1X did have better power management, 900+ frames on a single charge." I don't have first hand knowledge; I don't own either of those bodies. I have to trust what the pros have written in their books. Are Thom Hogan and B. Moose Peterson wrong in their own experiences? Are they the spreaders of false battery life statements?

 

Now as to the D1 Batteries: "The D1 had the bad power management, 300 frames on a single charge, if you are lucky." I know this for a fact. I have gotten 300 frames on a single charge and could take no more. I have 3 batteries with my D1 really have never needed more than two for a weekend of shooting. I always make sure my batteries are hot when I go out and swap accordingly. I also recharge the discharged batteries overnight before going out the next day. I follow the recommended battery guidelines in the Nikon user guide combined with what I have read from Thom Hogan and B. Moose Peterson. I know how to manage my battery power. I am used to using cordless power tools with NiCd batteries, older cell phones using NiCd or NiMH batteries, and ham radio gear using NiCd and NiMH batteries. The only power problem I ever had with my camera; dead lithiums in the flash. Lucky me, I had spare alkalines in my bag. Lessons learned from shooting with my old N4004s and SB-22.

 

Dave, Trevor asked for advice and all that have answered gave their reasons for getting the D1X or waiting for the D200 and explained why. However, Dave, your statement is just that, a statement. Please explain why all D1 users need 5 batteries. If you can't explain, Dave, then your advice wasn't needed.

Warren, glad I could be of some help. I have a few Nikon books laying around so I can find gear and accessories for my stuff when I start looking for new items to get. Got have have reference materials for shopping on Ebay. Good luck on your CP and hood purchases.

 

Charlie