MarkoKovacevic
Well-known
Hey everyone,
I want a DSLR for journalism and taking photos of friends, things that I don't want to use film on.
I'm stuck between the Kodak DCS 14mp nikon mount camera.
It has a higher resolution and a full frame sensor.
Or the Nikon D2h, which I assume is faster and better built.
I want a DSLR for journalism and taking photos of friends, things that I don't want to use film on.
I'm stuck between the Kodak DCS 14mp nikon mount camera.
It has a higher resolution and a full frame sensor.
Or the Nikon D2h, which I assume is faster and better built.
cmedin
Well-known
The Kodak is a clunky unwieldy thing with the potential for great output but I would not use it for "everyday" shooting. Go with the D2h.
user237428934
User deletion pending
Hm. You compare a 14MP fullframe camera with a 4MP camera with crop factor 1.5.
When you consider a Nikon with crop factor I would go for a D200 or a Fuji S5 Pro right now.
When you consider a Nikon with crop factor I would go for a D200 or a Fuji S5 Pro right now.
BillBingham2
Registered User
If you really need the full frame thing, look at the D700. Smaller package than the D2 and I bet almost as good.
Take a look here:
http://www.dxomark.com/
You might see some interesting info.
B2 (;->
Take a look here:
http://www.dxomark.com/
You might see some interesting info.
B2 (;->
MarkoKovacevic
Well-known
My budget is around 800$ though..
cmedin
Well-known
Try a D2X then -- you should be able to find one close to that price. Much higher res and a great camera. The Kodak is really not a fun beast to work with and has a lot of limitations...
BillBingham2
Registered User
Why is full frame such an issue? What lenses you have/use?
B2
B2
MarkoKovacevic
Well-known
Well I like using wides/normal lenses, and I also like to have a nice sized viewfinder.
I have the 28mm f2.8D and 50mm f1.8D lens. I want my wide to be wide, because mountain biking and journalism look better with wides.
I have the 28mm f2.8D and 50mm f1.8D lens. I want my wide to be wide, because mountain biking and journalism look better with wides.
peter_n
Veteran
I'm with Tom above. If you have $800 get a DX body like a D200 or a Fuji S5. Nikon is clearly going to be supporting DX for many years. For a lens if you like primes you can do no better than the brand new 35/1.8. If you want a zoom get a used kit lens and save up & then trade the kit lens for a Nikkor 17-55/2.8 which is very high quality and will cover everthing you need. 
Below are links for a new Fuji S5 for £475.00 from Calumet and for £424.00 from Ffordes. Both shops are in the UK and both are very reputable. If you buy from the UK insist on shipping by Royal Mail to avoid brokerage fees on import to your country.
http://www.calumetphoto.co.uk/item/331-501A/
https://secure.ffordes.com/Shop/Store/Itemdet.asp?Type=new&sub=1&Code=DC&SubCode=F2&id=72008&promo=0
Below are links for a new Fuji S5 for £475.00 from Calumet and for £424.00 from Ffordes. Both shops are in the UK and both are very reputable. If you buy from the UK insist on shipping by Royal Mail to avoid brokerage fees on import to your country.http://www.calumetphoto.co.uk/item/331-501A/
https://secure.ffordes.com/Shop/Store/Itemdet.asp?Type=new&sub=1&Code=DC&SubCode=F2&id=72008&promo=0
emraphoto
Veteran
whilst a great camera the fuji s5 pro is not a great all around photojournalism tool. it can be slow in operation it fast paced environments.
photojournalism doesn't require resolution to trump all other requirements. you need a tough, fast and capable tool. both the d200 and d2h would fit the bill quite well.
there are many working pro's still packin' d2h's out and about. don't overlook a great, great buy for megapixels.
photojournalism doesn't require resolution to trump all other requirements. you need a tough, fast and capable tool. both the d200 and d2h would fit the bill quite well.
there are many working pro's still packin' d2h's out and about. don't overlook a great, great buy for megapixels.
BillBingham2
Registered User
I agree, but here is what I'm doing, might work for you, might not. I'm going with a D60 and a 20/3.5 and 58/1.4 CV. Keep your 50 and sell your 28 and pick up a 20. I'm a manual focus and exposure geek so CV is a great choice for me. I seem to be going back to where I started. One body a wide (30 effective), a short tele (85 effective) and a long telephoto (270 effective). Kind of strange but I think I will be happy.
Nikkor made/makes some fine 20mm lenses that are really close to as wide on a DX as your 28.
B2 (;->
Nikkor made/makes some fine 20mm lenses that are really close to as wide on a DX as your 28.
B2 (;->
gavinlg
Veteran
d200 or fuji s5 pro.
user237428934
User deletion pending
Agree. S5 Pro is a little slower than the D200. It is said to be more a great portrait or studio camera.
Xusha
Working Mom
peter_n
Veteran
I agree with this. I'm biased because I use one.
However mine is set up for maximum DR and highest quality JPEG output. JPEG files are 6MB and the most amazing quality, said to be the best OOC JPEGs available and I can believe it. Minimal PP work and you have a quality picture, plus you are not using RAW so it writes to the card pretty fast.I agree that the D200 is ultimately faster but the lack of PP with the Fuji makes the workflow much quicker. Fuji are giving up on dSLRs and that's why the prices are so low. Calumet just got a shipment of the last 40 from Fuji UK. They'll all be gone soon.
ampguy
Veteran
D200s are bargains now, $399 or so if you look hard, but probably no better IQ than a D40, 50, 60, 90, just a better built camera with mag. alloy frame and some good sealing over the lower end models. If not discontinued, it probably will be very soon.
Frank Petronio
Well-known
I've had nearly all the Nikons D60-70-80-100-200-300-D2x.
The best bang for the buck is the D200 right now, $450 or the D70 for $250-$300. The D100-200-300 viewfinders are better than the D60-70-80-90 finders. The best value zoom is the $150 18-70/3.5-4.5 AFS. The $100 50/1.8 is a great lens, as are the 35/2 and 24/2.8 AF lenses, you don't need the "D" versions.
Me? I've always liked the more robust semi-pro bodies but realistically the plastic bodies and lenses are very robust. And the D200-300 are quite heavy for a walk around camera... So I'm getting a D60 ($400 usd) w the new $200 35/1.8 next month. For what it is, it is great as a compact, easy to carry camera that is a step up from the Canons and Panasonics, maybe not in feature count but in usability. The Nikon files are better too I think, more range than everyone else other than Fuji and some Canons. If I find that I need a wide angle lens for a project, the cheap 18-70 or 18-55 AFS lenses are great bargains.
I had the $$$ 28/1.4 once and compared it to the cheap 35/2 and was amazed that a $200 lens was as good at f/2.... so don't belittle the cheap little Nikon primes.
As for full-frame, it is a nice idea but I wouldn't bother unless I could drop $2200 on a D700. The old Kodak 14n was only good at ISO 80 and it was based on the N80 plastic body -- so the build quality isn't any better than a D40-D60. It's no longer supported and it has a really checkered reputation.
The D2h is a great camera but it will break your back, it is a pig....
If you really want FF, look for a beat up Canon 5D, which might be almost down to $800 if the seller is desperate. But the build quality of the 5D is shoddy compared to the cheap Nikons, so any bargains should be carefully inspected.
The best bang for the buck is the D200 right now, $450 or the D70 for $250-$300. The D100-200-300 viewfinders are better than the D60-70-80-90 finders. The best value zoom is the $150 18-70/3.5-4.5 AFS. The $100 50/1.8 is a great lens, as are the 35/2 and 24/2.8 AF lenses, you don't need the "D" versions.
Me? I've always liked the more robust semi-pro bodies but realistically the plastic bodies and lenses are very robust. And the D200-300 are quite heavy for a walk around camera... So I'm getting a D60 ($400 usd) w the new $200 35/1.8 next month. For what it is, it is great as a compact, easy to carry camera that is a step up from the Canons and Panasonics, maybe not in feature count but in usability. The Nikon files are better too I think, more range than everyone else other than Fuji and some Canons. If I find that I need a wide angle lens for a project, the cheap 18-70 or 18-55 AFS lenses are great bargains.
I had the $$$ 28/1.4 once and compared it to the cheap 35/2 and was amazed that a $200 lens was as good at f/2.... so don't belittle the cheap little Nikon primes.
As for full-frame, it is a nice idea but I wouldn't bother unless I could drop $2200 on a D700. The old Kodak 14n was only good at ISO 80 and it was based on the N80 plastic body -- so the build quality isn't any better than a D40-D60. It's no longer supported and it has a really checkered reputation.
The D2h is a great camera but it will break your back, it is a pig....
If you really want FF, look for a beat up Canon 5D, which might be almost down to $800 if the seller is desperate. But the build quality of the 5D is shoddy compared to the cheap Nikons, so any bargains should be carefully inspected.
Last edited:
Photon42
burn the box
Well, the wides are the problem with the DX format. Especially, if you need fast wides ...
In this respect, DX is kind of locked-in from both sides - no high-speed wide angles, and a more noisy sensor than the full frame Nikons. The D200's domain isn't really high ISO.
With DX, you'd need a WA DX zoom, such as the Tokina 12-24. This plus your 50 mm is not a bad start, given that you don't do too much of low light shooting with wide angles.
Regards
Ivo