Another darn D2H/Hs thread

Joined
Jun 16, 2008
Messages
30
Location
Canada
Yep, another one of them is right! I've gone through the entire 16 pages of the D2H vs D2Hs thread started by Nute and I want more! haha

I hoping to pick either one of those bad boys up within the next week *hopefully*

But I am curious as to what shooting at iso1600 and above is really like with either camera. about 80% of the stuff I shoot is indoors basketball and volleyball and swimming at the university level. Most of the stuff will be for newsprint so super hi-res is not too much of a concern.

So there are shooters out there with plenty of indoor sport snaps, post away!

(*currently my main body is the D200)

EDIT: oh and how much of a difference is the 8-bit vs 12-bit deal
 
Joined
Aug 11, 2007
Messages
757
Location
Milton, Ontario, Canada
I am sure you have seen my comments in the various threads so I won't repeat myself here, suffice it to say that they are both excellent cameras however the D2h is better suited for things like sports photography or photo journalism, something it was actually designed for. The 4MP is more then enough for magazine or paper layout, or even 8x12 or 16x20, so I've been told. It handles noise well, but perhaps not quite as well as the D200, I have never shot more then ISO 800 with mine and I have been more then pleased with the results. Also, the pro build of the body cannot be ignored, it truly is a 'tank'.
 
Joined
Mar 4, 2005
Messages
15,557
Location
Los Angeles, USA
The D2H above 400 ISO is like rubbing your face through broken glass. It's just rough and ugly. Get a D2Hs, much better noise reduction performance at higher ISOs. I wanted to chuck my D2H out a window, I hated that camera.
 
Joined
Jun 16, 2008
Messages
30
Location
Canada
The D2H above 400 ISO is like rubbing your face through broken glass. It's just rough and ugly. Get a D2Hs, much better noise reduction performance at higher ISOs. I wanted to chuck my D2H out a window, I hated that camera.

It can't be that bad...but then again I did survive then D1H.

Anyone have shots from indoor venues?
 
Joined
Mar 4, 2005
Messages
15,557
Location
Los Angeles, USA
Basically the D2H is a mistake. The D2Hs is the real camera they were supposed to release. Unfortunately it was late and suppose to compete with the 1Dm1, but Canon released the 1Dm2. I'll admit though, under good lighting settings, the D2H yielded some nice colors.
 
Joined
Aug 11, 2007
Messages
757
Location
Milton, Ontario, Canada
I think your being a bit harsh on the D2h, with current noise reduction software, there is plenty you can do in PP to reduce the noise. Frankly I personally think the difference between the two is negligible and certainly not worth the extra $3-400 the D2hs commands over the D2h.

AM
 
Joined
Apr 5, 2007
Messages
320
Location
Southern Californnia
I've owned both the D2H and D2Hs, although not concurrently. The visible noise levels on jpegs from the D2Hs were obviously better than the jpegs from the D2H. However, I was less than impressed by the RAW output (in terms of noise) from either body. I believe there are many who say their RAW output are the same.

I waited a long time before finally acquiring a D2Hs. Unfortunately, as much as I wanted to love that camera, it just ddn't do it for me. It's high ISO capabilities were touted as being the best of any Nikon body prior to the D3 and D300. It also was supposed to have improved Auto white balancing. And people would go on and on about the colors coming from the LBCAST sensor. While I certainly enjoyed using the D2Hs, it didn't quite live up to my lofty expectations.
 
Joined
Mar 11, 2008
Messages
918
Location
Skewen -S. Wales -UK
The D2H above 400 ISO is like rubbing your face through broken glass. It's just rough and ugly. Get a D2Hs, much better noise reduction performance at higher ISOs. I wanted to chuck my D2H out a window, I hated that camera.

I get good 10x8 prints at iso 400, ok at 800 and grainy at 1600 with my d2h.
noise nija helps loads though
 
Joined
Jun 16, 2008
Messages
30
Location
Canada
If the iso1600 on the d2h is anything like the d200, I think I would survive with noise reduction software. However, if the iso3200 on the d2h is ever so slighty better then is non-existant DR of the d200, I would be semi-impressed :biggrin:
 
Joined
Jun 16, 2008
Messages
30
Location
Canada
ok, I actually got to check out some actual samples for myself, and wow, the OOC shots...the noise is brutal on the H compared to the Hs, but with noise reduction, it's on par...for the most parts :frown:
 
S

say cheeze

Guest
Shoot in raw and you'll get very good results with the H.
 
Joined
Jun 5, 2008
Messages
6,091
Location
Alberta
Iv got a D2H with a hard drive full of its capture's. First off, it was my first Nikon Digital so I never had any to compare it to except film.. I still think it's a great camera, even though I now have a D3. I noticed the D2H is going for as low as $800. in good condition. How can you go wrong at that price? As far as the D2hs I have no idea if the "s" is worth the extra price for the better AF because , Im Nikkor AIS all the way. However, if it was me I would put the extra $400 into faster glass. As having one stop of light through the lens is superior than better higher ISO IQ in my opinion.

Gregory
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Latest threads

Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Nikon Cafe is a fan site and not associated with Nikon Corporation.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Forum GIFs powered by GIPHY: https://giphy.com/
Copyright © Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom