Nikon D2/D2H/D2Hs questions:::

[Paul G]

In looking around for a second body I almost bought a D2Hs from eBay today (being sold by photog Bill Zunic)

I read some reviews in days prior and all sounded good but at the last minute I realised that these had only a 4mp resolution. The D2X was obviously when Nikon changed to the newer style of sensor giving 10 -12 mp.

I probably would have been happy enough with this camera (as they're great camera) but I think it would have been a backward step in this day an age to buy a 4mp pro camera, especially if large prints are going to be ordered by any future customers.

Does anyone on the forum still shoot with the older style D2 series and what do you think?

Kiwi I think you had one of these didn't you? (great frame rate and buffer for sports!)

[kiwi]

I have had a D2H and a D2Hs

Pro grade cameras. Just look at what Sar Nop achieves with his

The 4mp is limiting if you need to crop very much and do large prints. 4mp itself is plenty for print sizes to 20 x 30 inches Id say

The "issue" ith the D2 series are ISO performance. 800 is what I found to be a practical limit, and the terrible (by modern day standards) LCD screen

I think a D2X is a bargain camera these days

[JM Tran]

yup agree D2X probably best bargain/bang for buck camera for 2nd hand buyers IMO

for around a grand u get a pro grade body thats weather sealed with 12MP and excellent features , just dont shoot above 800ISO, not that I ever go much above that anyway. If you can, get that, just make sure the mileage isnt tooooo high on it.

[Paul G]

Thanks for the replies guys. And Kiwi thanks for the heads-up about Sar Nop. I have never seen any of his topics on here before but now I know ;)

[Gregg Bell]

I know this is just figures and stuff, but here is a technical comparison of the D2h, D2X, and D200.

clicky (http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/eng/Image-Quality-Database/Compare-cameras/(appareil1)/206%7C0/(appareil2)/207%7C0/(appareil3)/203%7C0/(onglet)/0/(brand)/Nikon/(brand2)/Nikon/(brand3)/Nikon)

The nikon D200 is very good, in comparison, with the D2X trailing behind. I think The D2x is a good camera if you can forgive its slight shortcomings, for the positive of having something that's a weather-sealed professional body.

The D2xs just has .1 more color depth, then the D2x. All in all they're not bad, but If I was you and had the $$ to spend, I'd personally look at a Fujifilm S3/S5 pro.

The S5's dynamic range aces over any of the D2, and D200 models available. and it has a very good tonal range too. The S3 Pro is a pro body camera, and only has ISO1600 max, but its as noisy as the D2x. The tonal range, and color sensitivy is on par to the D2h, or slightly better. However the Dynamic range is leaps and bounds beyond any semi-pro camera of today, offering you nearly 13 stops of dynamic range at ISO800! That's something that sony A900 can not do.

The S5 is slightly better then any of the camera's mentioned but it comes in a D200-esque body. An S3 Pro will cost you US$500 at the very most.

S3 Pro comparison (http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/eng/Image-Quality-Database/Compare-cameras/(appareil1)/206%7C0/(appareil2)/207%7C0/(appareil3)/236%7C0/(onglet)/0/(brand)/Nikon/(brand2)/Nikon/(brand3)/Fujifilm#589)

S5 Pro comparison (http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/eng/Image-Quality-Database/Compare-cameras/(appareil1)/206%7C0/(appareil2)/207%7C0/(appareil3)/258%7C0/(onglet)/0/(brand)/Nikon/(brand2)/Nikon/(brand3)/Fujifilm)

[Sar NOP]

In looking around for a second body I almost bought a D2Hs from eBay today (being sold by photog Bill Zunic)

I read some reviews in days prior and all sounded good but at the last minute I realised that these had only a 4mp resolution. The D2X was obviously when Nikon changed to the newer style of sensor giving 10 -12 mp.

I probably would have been happy enough with this camera (as they're great camera) but I think it would have been a backward step in this day an age to buy a 4mp pro camera, especially if large prints are going to be ordered by any future customers.

Does anyone on the forum still shoot with the older style D2 series and what do you think?

Kiwi I think you had one of these didn't you? (great frame rate and buffer for sports!)

Hi Paul,
I've been using two D2Hs since 2005 for bird photography and portrait (kids and wedding). I have used sevral times a D2Xs, D300, D300s, D90 and D700 but still love my "Hs" for its AF performances and buffer capacity.
For what I do (I've never printed bigger than 23"x34"), 4 mpx is more than enough, even with severe crop (interpolation or upsizing works really well with the D2Hs files).

When I feel the need, I never hesitate to shoot at 3200 or 6400 ISO with this camera. Here's a full size image shot @6400 ISO : http://hotfile.com/dl/29029244/5df077b/CB0_0333-PP-NX2-HR.jpg.html

Another with stacked converters : 600 VR + TC-17EII + Kenko 2x
http://i47.tinypic.com/2lnvhh5.jpg

If one day I need high resolution camera for landscape work I probably will buy the D2Xs...

[dsaini]

yup agree D2X probably best bargain/bang for buck camera for 2nd hand buyers IMO

for around a grand u get a pro grade body thats weather sealed with 12MP and excellent features , just dont shoot above 800ISO, not that I ever go much above that anyway. If you can, get that, just make sure the mileage isnt tooooo high on it.

+1 D2x is a bargain.

[Gregg Bell]

reviving this thread, I have been considering a D2hs because of the features, despite being old, and behind the ball. How much difference is the large viewfinder to a D200? hows the noise at 400 RAW?

US400-500 on ebay. worth it? or just get a D300s + grip?

[I @ M]

Gregg, you answered your own questions in this thread about 2 months ago ------

[Gregg Bell]

Gregg, you answered your own questions in this thread about 2 months ago ------

acutally I didn't I gave an objective view stating it is behind in terms of technology. I never said the D2hs felt good in my hands, or the diference in the viewfinder was amazing. I never said that 4 megapixels was enough. I just mentioned the D2x being as good as a D200, and the fujifilms have better dynamic range.

[Sar NOP]

acutally I didn't I gave an objective view stating it is behind in terms of technology. I never said the D2hs felt good in my hands, or the diference in the viewfinder was amazing. I never said that 4 megapixels was enough. I just mentioned the D2x being as good as a D200, and the fujifilms have better dynamic range.
Gregg, not long ago when I put my eye behind a D200 and a D300s' viewfinder it was a shock !
The real viewfinder is a HP one...:cool: