Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > Nikon D1x vs D200

Reply
Thread Tools

Nikon D1x vs D200

 
 
LouisB
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-21-2006
I've been agonising over a better digital SLR for some time and generally
been disappointed at the look and feel of a number of Canon, Nikon and Lumix
cameras I've tried.

Yesterday, I was passing a well known s/h camera shop and noticed that their
window was filled with Nikon D1x DSLRs. I've never tried one but the owner
took me through one pointing out all the features. What really impressed me
was the rock solid feel of the camera. It is the first one I've picked up
which feels well built.

I can put together a s/h kit from this shop that includes the D1x, a 18-35
AF and 70-210 AF which would give me a good basic kit. Cost of the whole kit
would be about GBP 200 ($400) than say a Nikon D200 with kit lens. Would I
be nuts to buy the D1x or should I accept that the D200 is more up to date
and probably the better way to go?

LouisB
------
"I'm a half-wit. I sold the other half on e-Bay"


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Philip Homburg
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-21-2006
In article <O%j_g.4870$(E-Mail Removed)>,
LouisB <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>I can put together a s/h kit from this shop that includes the D1x, a 18-35
>AF and 70-210 AF which would give me a good basic kit. Cost of the whole kit
>would be about GBP 200 ($400) than say a Nikon D200 with kit lens. Would I
>be nuts to buy the D1x or should I accept that the D200 is more up to date
>and probably the better way to go?


I have a D1 and I plan to buy a D1x in the near future. At the moment I
think that a D1x is worth around 750 euro, so that's about half of a D200.

The thing is, the image quality will be less than that of the D200. You
get 5 Mpixels (in a rather odd arrangement) on the D1x and 10 Mpixels on the
D200. Low light performance is likely to be worse than on the D200 as well.

For about the same amount as a D1x you should be able to get a D80, which
has the same image quality as the D200 but in an even less professional
body.

If you really want a professional body, then a D1x is probably the way to go.

Otherwise, the D200 makes sense, but it is also a good idea to think about
the D80 and using the difference to buy higher quality glass.

It looks like the 70-210 AF doesn't have a good reputation.


--
That was it. Done. The faulty Monk was turned out into the desert where it
could believe what it liked, including the idea that it had been hard done
by. It was allowed to keep its horse, since horses were so cheap to make.
-- Douglas Adams in Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
frederick
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-21-2006
Philip Homburg wrote:
> In article <O%j_g.4870$(E-Mail Removed)>,
> LouisB <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>> I can put together a s/h kit from this shop that includes the D1x, a 18-35
>> AF and 70-210 AF which would give me a good basic kit. Cost of the whole kit
>> would be about GBP 200 ($400) than say a Nikon D200 with kit lens. Would I
>> be nuts to buy the D1x or should I accept that the D200 is more up to date
>> and probably the better way to go?

>
> I have a D1 and I plan to buy a D1x in the near future. At the moment I
> think that a D1x is worth around 750 euro, so that's about half of a D200.
>
> The thing is, the image quality will be less than that of the D200. You
> get 5 Mpixels (in a rather odd arrangement) on the D1x and 10 Mpixels on the
> D200. Low light performance is likely to be worse than on the D200 as well.
>
> For about the same amount as a D1x you should be able to get a D80, which
> has the same image quality as the D200 but in an even less professional
> body.
>
> If you really want a professional body, then a D1x is probably the way to go.
>
> Otherwise, the D200 makes sense, but it is also a good idea to think about
> the D80 and using the difference to buy higher quality glass.
>
> It looks like the 70-210 AF doesn't have a good reputation.
>
>

One of the reasons to buy a pro level camera is for heavy use, and
buying a second hand pro level camera may mean that you are buying
something that already has had pro level use. Even if it looks like
new, that doesn't mean that 100,000 shutter actuations have taken place,
even if in comparison some obvious ex photojournalist gear looks thrashed.
All models of 70-210 AF Nikkors are not bad - for what they are. They
are a consumer grade lens with not bad optical performance fully wide on
DX sensor cameras - especially compared with later consumer nikkors of
similar focal length range. They are quite solidly made compared to
modern consumer lenses. The 70-210 AF-"D" sells for quite high prices
(>US300) because it focuses fast and Ken Rockwell mades big noises about
it, but the early f4, and later f4-5.6 AF - non D are easy to find and
usually only around $100 or so.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Philip Homburg
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-21-2006
In article <1161424113.380818@ftpsrv1>, frederick <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>Philip Homburg wrote:
>One of the reasons to buy a pro level camera is for heavy use, and
>buying a second hand pro level camera may mean that you are buying
>something that already has had pro level use. Even if it looks like
>new, that doesn't mean that 100,000 shutter actuations have taken place,
>even if in comparison some obvious ex photojournalist gear looks thrashed.


I don't know. In general I have had no problems with 2nd hand professional
Nikon cameras. They continue to work just fine.

>All models of 70-210 AF Nikkors are not bad - for what they are. They
>are a consumer grade lens with not bad optical performance fully wide on
>DX sensor cameras - especially compared with later consumer nikkors of
>similar focal length range.


Are you saying that a 70-210 is as good or better than the 18-200?

Personally, I use just 'professional' lenses. Usually the quality difference
is well worth the price.


--
That was it. Done. The faulty Monk was turned out into the desert where it
could believe what it liked, including the idea that it had been hard done
by. It was allowed to keep its horse, since horses were so cheap to make.
-- Douglas Adams in Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency
 
Reply With Quote
 
frederick
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-21-2006
Philip Homburg wrote:
> In article <1161424113.380818@ftpsrv1>, frederick <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>> Philip Homburg wrote:
>> One of the reasons to buy a pro level camera is for heavy use, and
>> buying a second hand pro level camera may mean that you are buying
>> something that already has had pro level use. Even if it looks like
>> new, that doesn't mean that 100,000 shutter actuations have taken place,
>> even if in comparison some obvious ex photojournalist gear looks thrashed.

>
> I don't know. In general I have had no problems with 2nd hand professional
> Nikon cameras. They continue to work just fine.
>

But I'd still recommend checking shutter actuation and / or getting them
independently checked. They will be very expensive to fix, and they
won't last forever.
>
>> All models of 70-210 AF Nikkors are not bad - for what they are. They
>> are a consumer grade lens with not bad optical performance fully wide on
>> DX sensor cameras - especially compared with later consumer nikkors of
>> similar focal length range.

>
> Are you saying that a 70-210 is as good or better than the 18-200?


I was thinking more of 70-xxx lenses. You can buy perhaps 5 or more
70-210s for the price of one 18-200. On a budget, I wouldn't even
consider the 18-200.
>
> Personally, I use just 'professional' lenses. Usually the quality difference
> is well worth the price.
>

Nice if you can afford it.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Paul Rubin
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-21-2006
frederick <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
> But I'd still recommend checking shutter actuation and / or getting
> them independently checked. They will be very expensive to fix, and
> they won't last forever.


This is something I don't understand. It's basically the same shutter
found in a film camera, so why should repairing it cost more than the
same repair on the corresponding film camera?
 
Reply With Quote
 
tomm42
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-21-2006

Philip Homburg wrote:
> In article <1161424113.380818@ftpsrv1>, frederick <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> >Philip Homburg wrote:
> >One of the reasons to buy a pro level camera is for heavy use, and
> >buying a second hand pro level camera may mean that you are buying
> >something that already has had pro level use. Even if it looks like
> >new, that doesn't mean that 100,000 shutter actuations have taken place,
> >even if in comparison some obvious ex photojournalist gear looks thrashed.

>
> I don't know. In general I have had no problems with 2nd hand professional
> Nikon cameras. They continue to work just fine.
>
> >All models of 70-210 AF Nikkors are not bad - for what they are. They
> >are a consumer grade lens with not bad optical performance fully wide on
> >DX sensor cameras - especially compared with later consumer nikkors of
> >similar focal length range.

>
> Are you saying that a 70-210 is as good or better than the 18-200?
>
> Personally, I use just 'professional' lenses. Usually the quality difference
> is well worth the price.
>
>


I wouldn't call the 18-200 a pro lens either. The best copy of the
70-210s is the f4. Solid metal build not bad sharpness wise. On par
with if not a little better than the 18-200. The pro lenses for Nikon
in this range are the 80-200 f2.8 or the 70-200 f2.8 VR, both wonderful
lenses, big and heavy. I got my copy of the 70-210 f4 on Ebay for $185.

Camera wise, if money is a problem go for the D1X, but remeber, lousy
batteries, and a sensor noted as a dust magnet. Nice images and an
interpolated 10mp with Nikon Capture NX. The D200 makes more sense even
if it is just that you have a year warranty. It is not much lighter
than the D1X either. It is a good solid camera capable of making
excellent images.
Enjoy what ever you buy.

Tom

 
Reply With Quote
 
Floyd L. Davidson
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-21-2006
Paul Rubin <http://(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>frederick <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
>> But I'd still recommend checking shutter actuation and / or getting
>> them independently checked. They will be very expensive to fix, and
>> they won't last forever.

>
>This is something I don't understand. It's basically the same shutter
>found in a film camera, so why should repairing it cost more than the
>same repair on the corresponding film camera?


A lot of it has to do with how complex the camera is to
disassemble and how long it takes to run through all of the
verification checks and adjustments as it is re-assembled.

Older cameras (e.g., all film cameras) are less complex.

I think I've seen two quotes on what Nikon charges just to
inspect cameras. I know that a D2x is $375, and I believe
someone said either the D50 or the D70 was in the $250 range.

Regardless, purchasing used pro-models has the advantage of
getting a lower price on a more versatile camera. But I would
*not* advise picking one up, if it is your primary camera,
without knowing *positively* that it had not been subjected to
typical professional level "use and abuse".

For example, I've bought such cameras twice, one from an
acquaintance who is an "advanced amateur", who had put less wear
and on it in 4 years than I did in the first 6 months I owned
it. The other was from a well known photo journalist working
for the Washington Post, who won the camera as a prize but never
used it (the exposure counter was at 0006). (I wouldn't touch a
Canon from that person, because it would be highly suspect in
terms of rough usage and thousands upon thousand of exposures!)

--
Floyd L. Davidson <http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson>
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed)
 
Reply With Quote
 
Paul Rubin
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-21-2006
"LouisB" <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
> I can put together a s/h kit from this shop that includes the D1x, a 18-35
> AF and 70-210 AF which would give me a good basic kit. Cost of the whole kit
> would be about GBP 200 ($400) than say a Nikon D200 with kit lens. Would I
> be nuts to buy the D1x or should I accept that the D200 is more up to date
> and probably the better way to go?


Maybe you want to look for a used D2 or D2H. It would be another pro
camera, but in the same price range as a new D200.

Philip Homburg knows what he's getting into well enough that I won't
advise him against the D1x but for someone not familiar with these
cameras, you might want to consider something more modern, in terms of
the batteries and the flash system, among other things. The D1x's
D-TTL system was a temporary stopgap kludge between the old film stuff
and the current and wonderful i-TTL system.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Philip Homburg
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      10-21-2006
In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
Paul Rubin <http://(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>"LouisB" <(E-Mail Removed)> writes:
>> I can put together a s/h kit from this shop that includes the D1x, a 18-35
>> AF and 70-210 AF which would give me a good basic kit. Cost of the whole kit
>> would be about GBP 200 ($400) than say a Nikon D200 with kit lens. Would I
>> be nuts to buy the D1x or should I accept that the D200 is more up to date
>> and probably the better way to go?

>
>Maybe you want to look for a used D2 or D2H. It would be another pro
>camera, but in the same price range as a new D200.


I've no idea what a D2 is supposed to be, but I don't think it is a good
idea to buy a 2nd hand D2H for the same amount of money as a new D200
unless you really need one.

>The D1x's
>D-TTL system was a temporary stopgap kludge between the old film stuff
>and the current and wonderful i-TTL system.


I played some time with a 28DX on a D1 and it does seem to work. I don't
know why that system got such a bad reputation. i-TTL may work better, but
then you proably want an SB-800, which is going to be a lot more expensive
than a 28DX.


--
That was it. Done. The faulty Monk was turned out into the desert where it
could believe what it liked, including the idea that it had been hard done
by. It was allowed to keep its horse, since horses were so cheap to make.
-- Douglas Adams in Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Nikon's D200 posted, and removed... D200, $1699 how about that... ThomasH Digital Photography 33 11-02-2005 12:04 PM
Nikon D1H, D2H, D1X "SET" what's that ??? Nr612 Digital Photography 0 11-07-2003 07:48 PM
Re: nikon D100 vs. nikon D1x: enlarging photos to 16 x 20 Simon Digital Photography 0 09-02-2003 09:24 AM
Nikon D100 or D1X and accessories Charles Digital Photography 1 08-12-2003 09:43 PM
Re: Nikon D1x & SB-80DX Functionality Dave Digital Photography 1 07-22-2003 10:15 PM



Advertisments