«

23 years ago I was given an FE for my 15th birthday. That camera has
been through hell and high water and keeps on ticking.

I've heard...around town...that the Nikon Digital SLR's are not quite
as 'rough and tough' as once they had been known for. Granted the
electronics and such are much more sensitive, but what's the truth
about the body and that good 'ol "Tank" feeling you get when slip an
old Nikon into your hands?

My F100 seems pretty sturdy, but I haven't dropped it yet. Granted
there's no real seal in the back but it seems ok.

Anyone have a view on this? I'm thinking about the D100 and want to
be sure she'll stay together.

thx

Hi Shipwreck

The D1* and D2* bodies are the tank-type bodies.

The D100 is not. Solid, but no tank.

Regards,

Stan

My D100 goes mountain biking and hill walking with
me. So far, I've landed on it twice with no ill effects
(to the camera). The D100 body will probably
take much more punishment than most Nikon lenses.
One word of warning though: If you live in a wet
climate as I do, the weatherproofing of the D100
and lenses is very poor and the camera soaks up
water.

Graham


"shipwreck" <> wrote in message
news:...
> 23 years ago I was given an FE for my 15th birthday. That camera has
> been through hell and high water and keeps on ticking.
>
> I've heard...around town...that the Nikon Digital SLR's are not quite
> as 'rough and tough' as once they had been known for. Granted the
> electronics and such are much more sensitive, but what's the truth
> about the body and that good 'ol "Tank" feeling you get when slip an
> old Nikon into your hands?
>
> My F100 seems pretty sturdy, but I haven't dropped it yet. Granted
> there's no real seal in the back but it seems ok.
>
> Anyone have a view on this? I'm thinking about the D100 and want to
> be sure she'll stay together.
>
> thx

shipwreck wrote:

> 23 years ago I was given an FE for my 15th birthday. That camera has
> been through hell and high water and keeps on ticking.
>
> I've heard...around town...that the Nikon Digital SLR's are not quite
> as 'rough and tough' as once they had been known for. Granted the
> electronics and such are much more sensitive, but what's the truth
> about the body and that good 'ol "Tank" feeling you get when slip an
> old Nikon into your hands?
>
> My F100 seems pretty sturdy, but I haven't dropped it yet. Granted
> there's no real seal in the back but it seems ok.
>
> Anyone have a view on this? I'm thinking about the D100 and want to
> be sure she'll stay together.

I own both an F100 and a D100 (love'em both ), so
I speak by direct experience (apparently not always the
case on this NG... )

Although most of the internals of the D100 are allegedly
borrowed from the F100, the body is more like that of an
N80 (which, BTW, is my second film body, so the comparison
is, once again, with the real thing), but it's somehow sturdier
because the chassis is stronger than that of the N80. So, as
far as sturdiness goes, you can consider the D100 build as
something between an N80 and an F100.

My D100 has been "out in the real world" for a while
now and never had any problem. It goes without saying
that I'm not a "war photographer" and therefore I never
tested it in ultra-harsh conditions.

Hope it helps.

You get the tool for the job. The D100 is not a Pro body so it's not going
to be built like your F100. Think of it as a N80 with digital internals.

The D1/D1h/D1x/D2h are an F5/F100 hybrid - i.e. built like bricks.

Having said that, the D100 is pretty rugged - for what it is.

Gav



"shipwreck" <> wrote in message
news:...
> 23 years ago I was given an FE for my 15th birthday. That camera has
> been through hell and high water and keeps on ticking.
>
> I've heard...around town...that the Nikon Digital SLR's are not quite
> as 'rough and tough' as once they had been known for. Granted the
> electronics and such are much more sensitive, but what's the truth
> about the body and that good 'ol "Tank" feeling you get when slip an
> old Nikon into your hands?
>
> My F100 seems pretty sturdy, but I haven't dropped it yet. Granted
> there's no real seal in the back but it seems ok.
>
> Anyone have a view on this? I'm thinking about the D100 and want to
> be sure she'll stay together.
>
> thx

Jay Maisel on Nikon Reliability stated that when he had Fs, he kept 16
bodies. Four in use, four backups, four in the shop, and four waiting to go
to the shop. He had at the time the interview was conducted only two Nikon
Digitals - one to use one for backup. Modern cameras are a lot more reliable
than cameras based on metal linkages and springs that fail.

--
http://www.chapelhillnoir.com
home of The Camera-ist's Manifesto
The Improved Links Pages are at
http://www.chapelhillnoir.com/links/mlinks00.html
A sample chapter from my novel "Haight-Ashbury" is at
http://www.chapelhillnoir.com/writ/hait/hatitl.html
"shipwreck" <> wrote in message
news:...
> 23 years ago I was given an FE for my 15th birthday. That camera has
> been through hell and high water and keeps on ticking.
>
> I've heard...around town...that the Nikon Digital SLR's are not quite
> as 'rough and tough' as once they had been known for. Granted the
> electronics and such are much more sensitive, but what's the truth
> about the body and that good 'ol "Tank" feeling you get when slip an
> old Nikon into your hands?
>
> My F100 seems pretty sturdy, but I haven't dropped it yet. Granted
> there's no real seal in the back but it seems ok.
>
> Anyone have a view on this? I'm thinking about the D100 and want to
> be sure she'll stay together.
>
> thx

[ajmburke]

@Tony

This is true, but one should remember that people didn't replace bodies nearly as frequently they do today. His cameras could have all been 10 years old, and I bet a bunch of Nikon D1 cameras that had been in constant use since 2000 would require frequent repair.