1. Welcome to NikonCafe.com—a friendly Nikon camera & photography discussion forum!

    If you are thinking of buying a camera or need help with your photos, you will find our forum members full of advice! Click here to join for free!

Get the D2X or wait for the D100 replacement?

Discussion in 'Nikon DX DSLR Forum' started by dond, May 29, 2005.

  1. This question may have been posted before, if so, I apologize.

    I've recently sold some of my coin collection, with the hopes that I might have enough to buy a D2X. Well, it looks like I'll have the money for a D2X, SB800, TC-14II and some money leftover. My question? I currently have a D100 and don't know if the D100 replacement will actually be a camera I would like to own? I've handled the D2X recently at a local camera shop and it seems like an exceptional camera.

    For anyone who is/was in this predicament, if you have/had the money, would you buy a D2X? It's the $5000 price tag that bothers me a bit.

  2. jfrancis


    May 8, 2005
    Orlando, FL
    If you have the money, get the D2X. It will be a better camera than the "D200".
  3. Thanks John, that's what I'll do, get the D2X.
  4. I agree, the D2X is great and, in perspective, worth it.

    D100:D 1X::D 200:D 2X

    All speculation of course considering the rather limited availability of the D200 thus far!

    Most photographs taken with a D100 are as fine as the same shot would have been with a D1X but the experience and feel etc. are simple in a different league.

    A Hundai will get you somewhere as well as would a Mercedes...you get the idea.

    Considering WB issues and focus concerns etc. don't forget we are still on a rather steep downward technology curve. If you have the money the D2X is wonderful but it still bugs me that I had to spend $3300 more than an F5 would cost me but that's the way it is.

    I have a lot of friends who spend more on golf or NBA tickets than my camera costs me and they would think I'm crazy for buying such a camera. Set your priorities and enjoy.
  5. True, but a Hyundai will get you there just as well as the Mercedes does. There's no practical difference in how well they move you.

    A better camera, however, might give you better images.
  7. Don,

    I couldn't wait for an "upgrade" from the D100 so I jumped on the D2X.

    There is no mistake that the D2X is light years advanced from the D100 but it comes at a price beyond the cost of the camera.

    File sizes are huge and although that's because they are crammed full of the most beautiful pixels, handling those files creates problems. Suddenly your computer is the slowest slug on the planet and storage becomes an issue.

    So, unless you actually "need" the D2X I'd say wait until the D200 (?) comes out and decide based on a factual comparison of the two. The D100 is not a good camera, it's a GREAT camera so avoid the tendency to think you're walking around with an "inferior" DSLR whose day is over.

    You own THE most under-rated DSLR on the market and speaking as someone who's owned both I wish Nikon had spent the time they squandered on developing the D2Hs on developing the 8-10 MP D200.

    I'd wait, if I were you. If the D200 meets my needs I may just sell my D2X and get that camera instead. The D2X is a lot of camera, perhaps too much camera for any but the working pro.

    IMO... of course :wink:

  8. Cory Cooper

    Cory Cooper

    May 24, 2005
    Salem, NH
    Sorry, but I disagree...

    Moose Peterson, in 2 hours with a $5 disposable Kodak, would still run circles around me with a D2X and two weeks of free time.


  9. JeffKohn


    Apr 21, 2005
    Houston, TX
    I think this argument about "the camera doesn't matter" is a bit cliche. After all if you really believe that why spend $5K on a camera when you could just be using that disposable Kodak.

    While I would agree that buying an expensive camera won't magically turn a rank amatuer into Ansel Adams, the truth is all other things being held equal a better camera will yield better results in many situations. There are some things that are just impossible to do with that point-n-shoot, even for Moose Peterson.
  10. Jeff, you are right. Disposikodaks are capable of making award winning photos put they aren't in the same league. It's silly for people to compare a bicycle to a BMW. Comparisons just break down.

    The real point is budgetary constraints and the elusive concept of "need".

    If someone is absolutely limited to a $6000 kit they would perhaps not be best served with a D2X, 24-120 and SB800.

    That same $6K would buy, new, a D70, 18-70, 12-24, 70-200VR, 85.1.8, 50.1.8, SB800, 300f4 and 60mm micro !

    For me and most amateurs the D2X is a spectacular luxury. I have partners who, every year, spend far more than the cost of a D2X on Spurs NBA tickets. To me, that's a wasted. To them a Coolpix 4100 or $5 Kodak serves them perfectly adequately.

    Set priorities and enjoy live.
  11. Gentlemen, all your replies are excellent. You're all right, it comes down to what you "need". I have a D100 and it's been an excellent camera, however, it's almost 3 years old and has a functionality issue....it sometimes freezes the command functions....can take pictures, but all command functions are "frozen" on the last setting. I'd like to send it to Nikon, but don't want to be without a camera for however long it takes to get it back.

    I'm sure I'd have a bit of learning of curve on the D2X, coming from a D100, but I have a lot of the Nikon glass I'll need, with the exception of either a 300 f2.8 VR or 200-400 f4 VR (bird photography). I believe the D2X, although quite expensive will "force" me to become a better photographer. At least I hope so. The HSC mode would make wildlife/bird photography more interesting, more bang for the buck on the telephoto side.

    Now if the D200 has a lot of the same features as the D2X, except for a lower MP, than I'll sell my D100 and buy a D200 as my second body.
  12. Cory Cooper

    Cory Cooper

    May 24, 2005
    Salem, NH
    Folks, I intentionally exaggerated the scenario as a joke...that's what the smiley was for. ;) 

    I agree with you the a camera can enhance the final product, but the shooter's ability, the subject matter, the conditions, and the processing far outweigh the difference in megapixels, sensor-type, camera format, and focal length/quality of glass.

    Great comments...good discussion.


  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.