D70 or D100

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Roger, Mar 7, 2005.

  1. Roger

    Roger Guest

    I really need your help.

    First off, I have researched this on this and other news groups and a
    side by side comparison in the store. Many of the archived discussion
    posts were initial impressions, but now both cameras have been on the
    market for ample time for some hard opinions to surface. My local
    store is selling the D100 with a $200 Nikon rebate for $1300 after the
    rebate. I likely can do better, but they've been kind enough to let me
    bring my lenses and shoot a bunch of in-store photos on the two
    cameras. I prefer the viewfinder of the D100, however.....

    I'm interested in the users who have experience with these cameras and
    there side by side usage or praises / discontents with the two
    cameras. I'm finally about to buy one of these but they are complex
    pieces of gear and while the D70 has some really nice additions, I'm
    also interested in some hard usage info.

    In what categories does the D100 have an edge? It's still commanding a
    higher price and I think the technology and ergonomic edges belong to
    the D70 (excluding the viewfinder). So what am I missing...

    Best Regards,
    Roger
     
    Roger, Mar 7, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Roger

    Rainy Guest

    Try going here for some help. http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d70.htm


    Rainy Iannucci


    "Roger" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > I really need your help.
    >
    > First off, I have researched this on this and other news groups and a
    > side by side comparison in the store. Many of the archived discussion
    > posts were initial impressions, but now both cameras have been on the
    > market for ample time for some hard opinions to surface. My local
    > store is selling the D100 with a $200 Nikon rebate for $1300 after the
    > rebate. I likely can do better, but they've been kind enough to let me
    > bring my lenses and shoot a bunch of in-store photos on the two
    > cameras. I prefer the viewfinder of the D100, however.....
    >
    > I'm interested in the users who have experience with these cameras and
    > there side by side usage or praises / discontents with the two
    > cameras. I'm finally about to buy one of these but they are complex
    > pieces of gear and while the D70 has some really nice additions, I'm
    > also interested in some hard usage info.
    >
    > In what categories does the D100 have an edge? It's still commanding a
    > higher price and I think the technology and ergonomic edges belong to
    > the D70 (excluding the viewfinder). So what am I missing...
    >
    > Best Regards,
    > Roger
     
    Rainy, Mar 7, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Roger

    Owamanga Guest

    On Mon, 07 Mar 2005 07:40:29 -0600, Roger <> wrote:

    >In what categories does the D100 have an edge? It's still commanding a
    >higher price and I think the technology and ergonomic edges belong to
    >the D70 (excluding the viewfinder). So what am I missing...


    You are missing nothing, the vast majority choose the D70 because it's
    a technically superior camera at a lower price.

    I'm surprised you give ergonomic advantage to the D70, the D100 feels
    better to me.

    In addition to a better viewfinder, the D100 has MLU, some audio
    recording gadget, and a more pro-body finish - bigger grips and extra
    trigger button, cable release etc. It also takes less strikes to kill
    a man with a D100 than a D70 would.

    (Disclaimer: I haven't used the D100 for any significant period, so
    this isn't a side-by-side opinion)

    --
    Owamanga!
     
    Owamanga, Mar 7, 2005
    #3
  4. In article <>, Roger
    <> wrote:

    > In what categories does the D100 have an edge? It's still commanding a
    > higher price and I think the technology and ergonomic edges belong to
    > the D70 (excluding the viewfinder). So what am I missing...


    I don't think you're missing anything. For me, the D70 killer is the
    viewfinder, which I simply find inadequate. I want a real pentaprism,
    not a collection of mirrors. The D100 has significantly more robust
    overall construction, as well.

    The first really acceptable Nikon DSLR would be a D100 body with the
    D70's more advanced electronics - for little if any more than the D70
    price. I can't believe Nikon won't be offering something like this, and
    soon.
     
    Scott Schuckert, Mar 7, 2005
    #4
  5. Roger

    bmoag Guest

    Bascially both these cameras have serious issues.
    Unless you absolutely gotta have one right now I would wait to see Nikon's
    next generation of cameras.
    Short of that I would look into the Canon D20. Those 2 extra mps make a
    world of difference and anyone who doesn't realize that should run for
    Cleopatra's job: Queen of Denial.
     
    bmoag, Mar 7, 2005
    #5
  6. Roger

    Clyde Torres Guest

    "bmoag" <> wrote in message
    news:ZF_Wd.4838$...
    > Bascially both these cameras have serious issues.
    > Unless you absolutely gotta have one right now I would wait to see Nikon's
    > next generation of cameras.
    > Short of that I would look into the Canon D20. Those 2 extra mps make a
    > world of difference and anyone who doesn't realize that should run for
    > Cleopatra's job: Queen of Denial.


    I like this!

    Clyde Torres
     
    Clyde Torres, Mar 7, 2005
    #6
  7. Roger

    C J Campbell Guest

    "bmoag" <> wrote in message
    news:ZF_Wd.4838$...
    > Bascially both these cameras have serious issues.
    > Unless you absolutely gotta have one right now I would wait to see Nikon's
    > next generation of cameras.
    > Short of that I would look into the Canon D20. Those 2 extra mps make a
    > world of difference and anyone who doesn't realize that should run for
    > Cleopatra's job: Queen of Denial.


    Well, 2 more MPs on a smaller chip -- should be noisier, to say the least.
     
    C J Campbell, Mar 7, 2005
    #7
  8. Roger

    Tom Scales Guest

    "Scott Schuckert" <> wrote in message
    news:070320051013461287%...
    > In article <>, Roger
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >> In what categories does the D100 have an edge? It's still commanding a
    >> higher price and I think the technology and ergonomic edges belong to
    >> the D70 (excluding the viewfinder). So what am I missing...

    >
    > I don't think you're missing anything. For me, the D70 killer is the
    > viewfinder, which I simply find inadequate. I want a real pentaprism,
    > not a collection of mirrors. The D100 has significantly more robust
    > overall construction, as well.
    >
    > The first really acceptable Nikon DSLR would be a D100 body with the
    > D70's more advanced electronics - for little if any more than the D70
    > price. I can't believe Nikon won't be offering something like this, and
    > soon.


    Have you used them both regularly? I own both and don't find the viewfinder
    differences even noticeable, let alone a problem.

    If I was buying now, and was going Nikon, I'd buy the D70. If I was
    starting over without lenses, I'd buy the Canon D20.

    I love my D100 and D70, but am ready for a D105 and D75.

    Tom
     
    Tom Scales, Mar 7, 2005
    #8
  9. Roger

    Rainy Guest

    The Nikon d70 and D100 are both great cameras. Do a search for both cameras
    on the net and read as many reviews as possible. all cameras have some
    issues including the Canon D20. Please go here for a direct comparison of
    the Nikon D70 and The Canon 20D. If money is an issue for you stick with the
    Nikon D70 because the Nikon D100 will run you about $200.00 more and the
    Canon D20 should run you about $600 more. Good Luck!!


    "C J Campbell" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >
    > "bmoag" <> wrote in message
    > news:ZF_Wd.4838$...
    > > Bascially both these cameras have serious issues.
    > > Unless you absolutely gotta have one right now I would wait to see

    Nikon's
    > > next generation of cameras.
    > > Short of that I would look into the Canon D20. Those 2 extra mps make a
    > > world of difference and anyone who doesn't realize that should run for
    > > Cleopatra's job: Queen of Denial.

    >
    > Well, 2 more MPs on a smaller chip -- should be noisier, to say the least.
    >
    >
     
    Rainy, Mar 8, 2005
    #9
  10. Roger

    Rainy Guest

    Please go here for the direct comparison between the Nikon D70 and the Canon
    20D. http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/20dd70.htm


    "Rainy" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > The Nikon d70 and D100 are both great cameras. Do a search for both

    cameras
    > on the net and read as many reviews as possible. all cameras have some
    > issues including the Canon D20. Please go here for a direct comparison of
    > the Nikon D70 and The Canon 20D. If money is an issue for you stick with

    the
    > Nikon D70 because the Nikon D100 will run you about $200.00 more and the
    > Canon D20 should run you about $600 more. Good Luck!!
    >
    >
    > "C J Campbell" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > >
    > > "bmoag" <> wrote in message
    > > news:ZF_Wd.4838$...
    > > > Bascially both these cameras have serious issues.
    > > > Unless you absolutely gotta have one right now I would wait to see

    > Nikon's
    > > > next generation of cameras.
    > > > Short of that I would look into the Canon D20. Those 2 extra mps make

    a
    > > > world of difference and anyone who doesn't realize that should run for
    > > > Cleopatra's job: Queen of Denial.

    > >
    > > Well, 2 more MPs on a smaller chip -- should be noisier, to say the

    least.
    > >
    > >

    >
    >
     
    Rainy, Mar 8, 2005
    #10
  11. Roger

    Roger Guest

    On Mon, 07 Mar 2005 15:00:58 GMT, Owamanga <> wrote:

    >I'm surprised you give ergonomic advantage to the D70, the D100 feels
    >better to me.


    I agree the D100 feels better, my comments on ergonomics really are
    pointed towards the three new buttons on the back of the camera to
    manipulate ISO/WB/etc. (can't remember what etc. is right now and I
    don't have any pictures available, sorry).

    Roger
     
    Roger, Mar 8, 2005
    #11
  12. Roger

    Roger Guest

    On Mon, 07 Mar 2005 23:35:36 GMT, "Tom Scales" <>
    wrote:

    > I own both and don't find the viewfinder
    >differences even noticeable, let alone a problem.


    Tom,

    Do you wear glasses? My glasses sit off my face quit a bit (just can't
    change the eyeball to nose bridge distance without major
    intervention.) That situation poses problems for me with almost any
    but the Nikon high eye-point finders.

    Just curious...

    Roger
     
    Roger, Mar 8, 2005
    #12
  13. Roger

    GTO Guest

    Re: D70 or D100 -> D2H

    For now, I assume that you're already on the Nikon track.

    You cannot possibly just ask other users and think you get the right
    recommendation for your personal needs. You should go to a local camera
    store and borrow a D100 for a couple of days. Then, borrow a D70 and compare
    for yourself. Asking people in a newsgroup is just not good enough to
    justify such an investment.

    Remember, depending on your style of photography, a D2H (currently around
    US$1999) may be the better choice. Only you know what you need. But if you
    don't, buy the cheapest DSLR you can get and experiment. DSLR cameras
    require much practice, many hours of learning and a large pocket book to
    invest in computer HW and SW, printers, and other not exactly cheap
    accessories. - Finally, after you have purchased all you need for serious
    amateur, digital photography, the investment into the camera body appears
    smaller.

    Gregor

    "Roger" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >I really need your help.
    >
    > First off, I have researched this on this and other news groups and a
    > side by side comparison in the store. Many of the archived discussion
    > posts were initial impressions, but now both cameras have been on the
    > market for ample time for some hard opinions to surface. My local
    > store is selling the D100 with a $200 Nikon rebate for $1300 after the
    > rebate. I likely can do better, but they've been kind enough to let me
    > bring my lenses and shoot a bunch of in-store photos on the two
    > cameras. I prefer the viewfinder of the D100, however.....
    >
    > I'm interested in the users who have experience with these cameras and
    > there side by side usage or praises / discontents with the two
    > cameras. I'm finally about to buy one of these but they are complex
    > pieces of gear and while the D70 has some really nice additions, I'm
    > also interested in some hard usage info.
    >
    > In what categories does the D100 have an edge? It's still commanding a
    > higher price and I think the technology and ergonomic edges belong to
    > the D70 (excluding the viewfinder). So what am I missing...
    >
    > Best Regards,
    > Roger
     
    GTO, Mar 8, 2005
    #13
  14. Roger

    Tom Scales Guest

    "Roger" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Mon, 07 Mar 2005 23:35:36 GMT, "Tom Scales" <>
    > wrote:
    >
    >> I own both and don't find the viewfinder
    >>differences even noticeable, let alone a problem.

    >
    > Tom,
    >
    > Do you wear glasses? My glasses sit off my face quit a bit (just can't
    > change the eyeball to nose bridge distance without major
    > intervention.) That situation poses problems for me with almost any
    > but the Nikon high eye-point finders.
    >
    > Just curious...
    >
    > Roger



    Yes, sure do. -12 diopter!
     
    Tom Scales, Mar 8, 2005
    #14
  15. Roger

    Roger Guest

    Re: D70 or D100 -> D2H

    Please see my comments, in line below:

    Regards,
    Roger

    On Tue, 08 Mar 2005 04:44:58 GMT, "GTO" <>
    wrote:

    >For now, I assume that you're already on the Nikon track.


    Yes, I am on the Nikon track. However, I also know that for my lens
    usage, buying a late model DSLR means pretty much a whole new system
    or at least major additions. If I look at the D100 I can keep my
    SB80dx flash. My 24, 35 and 50mm lenses will be useful. In the range
    where I photograph most often it will require a wide angle lens
    replacement and that will likely be a zoom. For my low light needs,
    the 17-55mm f2.8 covers about 90% what I want. My 80-200 AFS gets the
    rest. So I'm likely looking at a body, strobe, normal coverage fixed
    aperture zoom and my tele zoom.
    >
    >You cannot possibly just ask other users and think you get the right
    >recommendation for your personal needs.


    I didn't, I asked people to give me some information on what aspects
    of two cameras appealed to them. Nits to major flaws and ergonomic
    preferences and glitches often come to light when people talk about
    how the use equipment, rather than what's on paper.

    >You should go to a local camera
    >store and borrow a D100 for a couple of days. Then, borrow a D70 and compare
    >for yourself.


    I'm acquainted with a lot of dealers in the Chicago metro area and I
    don't know any who let their cameras go for a few days. I did handle
    both cameras for a couple of hours and the proprietor let me take
    photos in the store. He was very generous in letting me work around
    and with other customers were also looking at these bodies. I answered
    questions only when asked directly, did not sell and did not counter
    any of the sales staff answers even though several were incorrect. I
    did bring my own lenses so the store inventory was enhanced quite a
    bit since they didn't have any fast primes and his other customers
    also got to use the lenses.

    >Asking people in a newsgroup is just not good enough to
    >justify such an investment.


    Perhaps, but the people in this news group collectively have a wealth
    of experience all of which I value, and much of which far surpasses
    what I have collected over the years, and that includes your
    suggestion that a D2H might be useful in my case.

    Can you tell me more about your D2H and what about it meets your
    needs.

    >
    >Remember, depending on your style of photography, a D2H (currently around
    >US$1999) may be the better choice. Only you know what you need.


    Actually, I do know what I want and it hasn't been offered by Nikon
    yet. That's a 6+ MP equivalent of the F100+ or Nikon F6. I NEED a
    viewfinder that I can see through with my glasses, and that's a Nikon
    High Eyepoint finder (like on my F100, F3 or F5). However, I'm willing
    to compromise and search the VF for the exposure information, that's
    less of a problem with the D100 than the D70. The camera I buy now
    will likely be a backup for something else down the road. The F5
    exposure system has spoiled me and the D100 doesn't have that, the D70
    does. The D70 also has the much used ISO/WB/QUAL buttons on the back
    and not on the D100 dial. The D70 is a candidate because of size and
    the mode dials which would make it easier for other members of my
    family to use to include me in some photos. The D100 just feels
    better, and I'm hoping in the responses to this query that someone
    will discuss the ease/difficulty of using the ISO/WB/QUAL on the mode
    ring.

    >But if you
    >don't, buy the cheapest DSLR you can get and experiment.


    I'll most likely do that with any camera... I'm an experimentalist, by
    training, a photographer by avocation.

    >DSLR cameras
    >require much practice, many hours of learning and a large pocket book to
    >invest in computer HW and SW, printers, and other not exactly cheap
    >accessories.


    Actually, the reason I'm looking at these two cameras (and not the
    D2H) is because of the relatively low price point given the
    functionality. I'm thinking that a D70/D100 right now with my existing
    24mm f2.8, 35mm f2.8 and 50mm f1.4 lenses will give me quite a bit of
    utility. I travel a great deal internationally for business (about
    one/two weeks a month) and my photo opportunities are early or late
    after meetings - late usually means night street shooting. So a camera
    with low noise capability is a plus, compact also counts for a lot.
    The D2H doesn't really fit that profile, although I came very close to
    buying one at $3200. I'm still not sure whether the D2Hs will be the
    right answer for dealing with the low-light photography that I do.

    I have a very nice/quality mini-lab a few minutes from my home. They
    take Internet-submitted photos and print them in one-hour. It's a
    great product and service. So a printer is not on my list. Last month
    I submitted some of my digital photos from my hotel room in Budapest
    and they were waiting for me when I got home.

    > - Finally, after you have purchased all you need for serious
    >amateur, digital photography, the investment into the camera body appears
    >smaller.


    That's the marketing genius of digital photography. $2000 throw away
    technology/bodies. Integrate the film into the computer - now you have
    two marketing points to build new interest in something that is now
    ephemeral but with film, was "geological" in its MTR, Mean time to
    Replacement - very rarely failure.

    >
    >Gregor
     
    Roger, Mar 8, 2005
    #15
  16. Roger

    Roger Guest

    On Tue, 08 Mar 2005 10:34:41 GMT, "Tom Scales" <>
    wrote:

    >Yes, sure do. -12 diopter!


    I'm sorry, you win in the diopter count. In your original post you
    recommended the D70. As I mull this over more and more, I'm also
    leaning in that direction. I think the smaller body with a couple of
    my fixed focal length lenses (24mm f2.8 and 35mm f2.0) will allow me
    flexibility for travel. The built in flash means I can put off getting
    a larger unit (I do have a SB80dx) for a while. The kit lens seems
    like such a bargain and it would cover the WA range that I need (but
    not the best choice for my available light needs). The 17-55mm can
    come later.

    OTOH, the D100 integrates well (and it's ~$1000 w/ rebate from B&H)
    with the SB80dx. My existing lenses still work. But, I'll loose the
    price break on the 18-70. I still like the feel of the D100 and the VF
    is still marginal for me on the D70. Oh, Well.... Maybe by the time I
    figure this out, Nikon will have at least announced the ones we're
    waiting for.

    Thanks for the input,
    Roger
     
    Roger, Mar 8, 2005
    #16
  17. Roger

    Tom Scales Guest

    "Roger" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Tue, 08 Mar 2005 10:34:41 GMT, "Tom Scales" <>
    > wrote:
    >
    >>Yes, sure do. -12 diopter!

    >
    > I'm sorry, you win in the diopter count. In your original post you
    > recommended the D70. As I mull this over more and more, I'm also
    > leaning in that direction. I think the smaller body with a couple of
    > my fixed focal length lenses (24mm f2.8 and 35mm f2.0) will allow me
    > flexibility for travel. The built in flash means I can put off getting
    > a larger unit (I do have a SB80dx) for a while. The kit lens seems
    > like such a bargain and it would cover the WA range that I need (but
    > not the best choice for my available light needs). The 17-55mm can
    > come later.
    >
    > OTOH, the D100 integrates well (and it's ~$1000 w/ rebate from B&H)
    > with the SB80dx. My existing lenses still work. But, I'll loose the
    > price break on the 18-70. I still like the feel of the D100 and the VF
    > is still marginal for me on the D70. Oh, Well.... Maybe by the time I
    > figure this out, Nikon will have at least announced the ones we're
    > waiting for.
    >
    > Thanks for the input,
    > Roger
    >


    Roger,

    One more data point. The 18-70 is wonderful.

    Tom
     
    Tom Scales, Mar 8, 2005
    #17
  18. Roger

    Mick Brown Guest

    "Tom Scales" <> wrote in news:xfnXd.132337$qB6.57850
    @tornado.tampabay.rr.com:

    >
    > "Roger" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >> On Tue, 08 Mar 2005 10:34:41 GMT, "Tom Scales" <>
    >> wrote:
    >>
    >>>Yes, sure do. -12 diopter!

    >>
    >> I'm sorry, you win in the diopter count. In your original post you
    >> recommended the D70. As I mull this over more and more, I'm also
    >> leaning in that direction. I think the smaller body with a couple of
    >> my fixed focal length lenses (24mm f2.8 and 35mm f2.0) will allow me
    >> flexibility for travel. The built in flash means I can put off

    getting
    >> a larger unit (I do have a SB80dx) for a while. The kit lens seems
    >> like such a bargain and it would cover the WA range that I need (but
    >> not the best choice for my available light needs). The 17-55mm can
    >> come later.
    >>
    >> OTOH, the D100 integrates well (and it's ~$1000 w/ rebate from B&H)
    >> with the SB80dx. My existing lenses still work. But, I'll loose the
    >> price break on the 18-70. I still like the feel of the D100 and the

    VF
    >> is still marginal for me on the D70. Oh, Well.... Maybe by the time I
    >> figure this out, Nikon will have at least announced the ones we're
    >> waiting for.
    >>
    >> Thanks for the input,
    >> Roger
    >>

    >
    > Roger,
    >
    > One more data point. The 18-70 is wonderful.
    >
    > Tom
    >
    >
    >


    I second that, it's an awesome lens, and sharp!!

    Mick Brown
    www.photo.net/photos/mlbrown
     
    Mick Brown, Mar 8, 2005
    #18
  19. Roger

    Mick Brown Guest

    Re: D70 or D100 -> D2H

    Roger <> wrote in
    news::

    > Please see my comments, in line below:
    >
    > Regards,
    > Roger
    >
    > On Tue, 08 Mar 2005 04:44:58 GMT, "GTO" <>
    > wrote:
    >
    >>For now, I assume that you're already on the Nikon track.

    >
    > Yes, I am on the Nikon track. However, I also know that for my lens
    > usage, buying a late model DSLR means pretty much a whole new system
    > or at least major additions. If I look at the D100 I can keep my
    > SB80dx flash. My 24, 35 and 50mm lenses will be useful. In the range
    > where I photograph most often it will require a wide angle lens
    > replacement and that will likely be a zoom. For my low light needs,
    > the 17-55mm f2.8 covers about 90% what I want. My 80-200 AFS gets the
    > rest. So I'm likely looking at a body, strobe, normal coverage fixed
    > aperture zoom and my tele zoom.
    >>
    >>You cannot possibly just ask other users and think you get the right
    >>recommendation for your personal needs.

    >
    > I didn't, I asked people to give me some information on what aspects
    > of two cameras appealed to them. Nits to major flaws and ergonomic
    > preferences and glitches often come to light when people talk about
    > how the use equipment, rather than what's on paper.
    >
    >>You should go to a local camera
    >>store and borrow a D100 for a couple of days. Then, borrow a D70 and
    >>compare for yourself.

    >
    > I'm acquainted with a lot of dealers in the Chicago metro area and I
    > don't know any who let their cameras go for a few days. I did handle
    > both cameras for a couple of hours and the proprietor let me take
    > photos in the store. He was very generous in letting me work around
    > and with other customers were also looking at these bodies. I answered
    > questions only when asked directly, did not sell and did not counter
    > any of the sales staff answers even though several were incorrect. I
    > did bring my own lenses so the store inventory was enhanced quite a
    > bit since they didn't have any fast primes and his other customers
    > also got to use the lenses.
    >
    >>Asking people in a newsgroup is just not good enough to
    >>justify such an investment.

    >
    > Perhaps, but the people in this news group collectively have a wealth
    > of experience all of which I value, and much of which far surpasses
    > what I have collected over the years, and that includes your
    > suggestion that a D2H might be useful in my case.
    >
    > Can you tell me more about your D2H and what about it meets your
    > needs.
    >
    >>
    >>Remember, depending on your style of photography, a D2H (currently
    >>around US$1999) may be the better choice. Only you know what you need.

    >
    > Actually, I do know what I want and it hasn't been offered by Nikon
    > yet. That's a 6+ MP equivalent of the F100+ or Nikon F6. I NEED a
    > viewfinder that I can see through with my glasses, and that's a Nikon
    > High Eyepoint finder (like on my F100, F3 or F5). However, I'm willing
    > to compromise and search the VF for the exposure information, that's
    > less of a problem with the D100 than the D70. The camera I buy now
    > will likely be a backup for something else down the road. The F5
    > exposure system has spoiled me and the D100 doesn't have that, the D70
    > does. The D70 also has the much used ISO/WB/QUAL buttons on the back
    > and not on the D100 dial. The D70 is a candidate because of size and
    > the mode dials which would make it easier for other members of my
    > family to use to include me in some photos. The D100 just feels
    > better, and I'm hoping in the responses to this query that someone
    > will discuss the ease/difficulty of using the ISO/WB/QUAL on the mode
    > ring.
    >
    >>But if you
    >>don't, buy the cheapest DSLR you can get and experiment.

    >
    > I'll most likely do that with any camera... I'm an experimentalist, by
    > training, a photographer by avocation.
    >
    >>DSLR cameras
    >>require much practice, many hours of learning and a large pocket book
    >>to invest in computer HW and SW, printers, and other not exactly cheap
    >>accessories.

    >
    > Actually, the reason I'm looking at these two cameras (and not the
    > D2H) is because of the relatively low price point given the
    > functionality. I'm thinking that a D70/D100 right now with my existing
    > 24mm f2.8, 35mm f2.8 and 50mm f1.4 lenses will give me quite a bit of
    > utility. I travel a great deal internationally for business (about
    > one/two weeks a month) and my photo opportunities are early or late
    > after meetings - late usually means night street shooting. So a camera
    > with low noise capability is a plus, compact also counts for a lot.
    > The D2H doesn't really fit that profile, although I came very close to
    > buying one at $3200. I'm still not sure whether the D2Hs will be the
    > right answer for dealing with the low-light photography that I do.
    >
    > I have a very nice/quality mini-lab a few minutes from my home. They
    > take Internet-submitted photos and print them in one-hour. It's a
    > great product and service. So a printer is not on my list. Last month
    > I submitted some of my digital photos from my hotel room in Budapest
    > and they were waiting for me when I got home.
    >
    >> - Finally, after you have purchased all you need for serious
    >>amateur, digital photography, the investment into the camera body
    >>appears smaller.

    >
    > That's the marketing genius of digital photography. $2000 throw away
    > technology/bodies. Integrate the film into the computer - now you have
    > two marketing points to build new interest in something that is now
    > ephemeral but with film, was "geological" in its MTR, Mean time to
    > Replacement - very rarely failure.
    >
    >>
    >>Gregor

    >


    Roger,

    What I did was I hired a D70 to try it, when I decided that I liked it,
    I made the guy an offer, if he didn't charge me the rental I would buy
    it on the spot, he agreed.

    Mick Brown
    www.photo.net/photos/mlbrown
     
    Mick Brown, Mar 8, 2005
    #19
  20. Roger

    Roger Guest

    Re: D70 or D100 -> D2H

    On Tue, 08 Mar 2005 22:00:22 GMT, Mick Brown
    <> wrote:

    >Roger,
    >
    >What I did was I hired a D70 to try it, when I decided that I liked it,
    >I made the guy an offer, if he didn't charge me the rental I would buy
    >it on the spot, he agreed.
    >
    >Mick Brown
    >www.photo.net/photos/mlbrown


    Mike,

    Great idea, thanks. Is the D70 you "tested" in this way, the same one
    you purchased?

    Roger
     
    Roger, Mar 8, 2005
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Jim Waggener

    Nikon D70 vs D100 ,300D, 10D

    Jim Waggener, Jan 29, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    14
    Views:
    746
    Proto
    Feb 5, 2004
  2. Mark

    Should I send my D100 back and wait for a D70?

    Mark, Jan 31, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    30
    Views:
    908
    Mark M
    Feb 4, 2004
  3. GTO

    Nikon D70 vs D100 (mirror lock feature)

    GTO, Jan 31, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    37
    Views:
    4,894
    Roger Halstead
    Feb 4, 2004
  4. Karl Bedford
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    505
    Joe Jobbs
    Jan 31, 2004
  5. john chapman

    Rechargeable AA Batteries in MB-D100 for Nikon D100

    john chapman, Aug 19, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    745
    Ed Ruf
    Aug 19, 2004
Loading...

Share This Page