Replacing a D100 with another pro-sumer digital SLR
July 11, 2008 12:01 PM Subscribe
Looking for a new digital SLR to replace my girlfriend's Nikon D100. She loved her D100 but is ready for a new one, price range up to $2000 new/refurb/used. Any advice?
So following up on my most recent question, my girlfriend's D100 is on its last legs. She's had it since 2003 and really put it through its paces, time for a new digital SLR. She has only one Nikon lens so could stay with the brand or hop to a new one, we've been reading steves digicams reviews for weeks, but as amateurs who like taking pretty pictures, it is hard to really compare and contrast.
She has a budget of up to $2000 for new/refurb/used.
She's looking for 6 mp or more and perhaps a slightly smaller footprint/body weight than the D100 (it typically takes up 1/5 of her suitcase and she takes it everywhere). Ideally it would have an LCD or waist-level viewfinder so she could shoot from the hip, but my previous question suggested that a camera like that doesn't exist in her price range.
Thanks for your advice!
So following up on my most recent question, my girlfriend's D100 is on its last legs. She's had it since 2003 and really put it through its paces, time for a new digital SLR. She has only one Nikon lens so could stay with the brand or hop to a new one, we've been reading steves digicams reviews for weeks, but as amateurs who like taking pretty pictures, it is hard to really compare and contrast.
She has a budget of up to $2000 for new/refurb/used.
She's looking for 6 mp or more and perhaps a slightly smaller footprint/body weight than the D100 (it typically takes up 1/5 of her suitcase and she takes it everywhere). Ideally it would have an LCD or waist-level viewfinder so she could shoot from the hip, but my previous question suggested that a camera like that doesn't exist in her price range.
Thanks for your advice!
Since she already has Nikon, I'd suggest going with a Nikon. And that's coming from a Canon guy.
My sister got a D40 and loves it. I was looking for a D50 before I got mine.
D40 won't let her autofocus with the lenses she already has. I don't know how important that is to her.
posted by theichibun at 12:17 PM on July 11, 2008
My sister got a D40 and loves it. I was looking for a D50 before I got mine.
D40 won't let her autofocus with the lenses she already has. I don't know how important that is to her.
posted by theichibun at 12:17 PM on July 11, 2008
You really don't want to go from a pro-sumer D100 to a low end D40/D50/D60. Why isn't the Nikon D300 your natural choice?
posted by SirStan at 12:29 PM on July 11, 2008
posted by SirStan at 12:29 PM on July 11, 2008
Response by poster: Yeah, I don't think there's any chance she's going to downgrade to a D40 or similar - she likes having a prosumer camera and needs the functionality it provides.
posted by stewiethegreat at 1:05 PM on July 11, 2008
posted by stewiethegreat at 1:05 PM on July 11, 2008
D300 is probably the best choice in the near-$2000 budget range.
D300 and a 70-200mm VR lens = teh win.
See dpreview.com for a really good in depth article on the D300's features/upgrades over the D80 and D200.
posted by thewalrus at 1:16 PM on July 11, 2008
D300 and a 70-200mm VR lens = teh win.
See dpreview.com for a really good in depth article on the D300's features/upgrades over the D80 and D200.
posted by thewalrus at 1:16 PM on July 11, 2008
Er, the D40 is definitely "Prosumer," at least by any standard I know - the low end of it, sure, but still in that category.
Regardless, she should probably look at the Nikon line in general and see at what point she loses the functionality she prizes - maybe she can "get away" with the D80. (I say get away because I'm personally proponent of the "Spend relatively little on the camera, save your pennies for glass" school of thought.)
posted by Tomorrowful at 1:18 PM on July 11, 2008
Regardless, she should probably look at the Nikon line in general and see at what point she loses the functionality she prizes - maybe she can "get away" with the D80. (I say get away because I'm personally proponent of the "Spend relatively little on the camera, save your pennies for glass" school of thought.)
posted by Tomorrowful at 1:18 PM on July 11, 2008
Nthing D300.... the new D700 is out of her price range a bit, and at around $1600-1700 street price the D300 is the cat's meow in DX format.
posted by pjern at 1:31 PM on July 11, 2008
posted by pjern at 1:31 PM on July 11, 2008
Her D100 is so old school at this point that literally any current DSLR she buys will give her image quality, operational speed, and user friendliness which far surpasses it.
I am a professional photographer and after going all digital in 2001 with an original Nikon D1 and an Olympus E10, followed by three D1x's and a D70, followed by two D2x's, a D200 and a D40x (as a walk around camera), I have been shooting three D300 bodies since last November and they are far and away the best digital cameras I have ever owned.
I think they are the sweet spot in DSLR cameras these days regardless of the brand.
I have no problem bashing specific Nikon products nor the company's corporate philosophy on certain issues, but you really get a tremendous bang for the buck with the D300.
You mentioned that she'd like something physically smaller than a D100 - which the D300 is not. Remember however that the choice of lens will be the primary determining factor in the physical size, weight, and bulk of the camera.
posted by imjustsaying at 1:58 PM on July 11, 2008
I am a professional photographer and after going all digital in 2001 with an original Nikon D1 and an Olympus E10, followed by three D1x's and a D70, followed by two D2x's, a D200 and a D40x (as a walk around camera), I have been shooting three D300 bodies since last November and they are far and away the best digital cameras I have ever owned.
I think they are the sweet spot in DSLR cameras these days regardless of the brand.
I have no problem bashing specific Nikon products nor the company's corporate philosophy on certain issues, but you really get a tremendous bang for the buck with the D300.
You mentioned that she'd like something physically smaller than a D100 - which the D300 is not. Remember however that the choice of lens will be the primary determining factor in the physical size, weight, and bulk of the camera.
posted by imjustsaying at 1:58 PM on July 11, 2008
Obligatory Canon 5D full frame camera for $1999 after rebates should be a strong concender if your wife doesn't care for the Nikon/Camon wars.
posted by SirStan at 2:47 PM on July 11, 2008
posted by SirStan at 2:47 PM on July 11, 2008
I love my Canon, but if she already had Nikon glass, it would make some sense to stay in that camp. I'm not really familiar with the newest offerings, but most SLRs wont have the ability to use the LCD as a viewfinder. (The two exceptions I know of are the Canon 1Dr3 which is stupidly expensive, and the Leica Digilux which are also a bit pricey.)
Though, now that the technical hurdles have been beaten, I'm sure it's going to become much more common feature.
posted by quin at 2:50 PM on July 11, 2008
Though, now that the technical hurdles have been beaten, I'm sure it's going to become much more common feature.
posted by quin at 2:50 PM on July 11, 2008
The 40D and XSi both have live LCD preview (the XSi does contrast detection focusing (live focusing, like a point and shoot) while the 40D doesn't autofocus without making a clicking noise and not displaying the image for a second (ie -- not good for most situations).
The Sony A100 might do contrast focusing - but definately has live view LCD.
posted by SirStan at 3:27 PM on July 11, 2008
The Sony A100 might do contrast focusing - but definately has live view LCD.
posted by SirStan at 3:27 PM on July 11, 2008
Maybe I'm just dense, but what's the point of LCD preview? Presuming that you have a decent viewfinder (unlike me with my .74x teensy finder).
On the subject, I'd either go with a D80 and a bunch of glass or a D300. Why? She's used to the way the Nikons operate. Not that it takes long to switch, I'm sure, but why bother?
posted by wierdo at 4:28 PM on July 11, 2008
On the subject, I'd either go with a D80 and a bunch of glass or a D300. Why? She's used to the way the Nikons operate. Not that it takes long to switch, I'm sure, but why bother?
posted by wierdo at 4:28 PM on July 11, 2008
D300 or used D200 (lots of folks are unloading their D200s in favor of a D300 or D700 so you can get a good deal).
posted by matildaben at 5:05 PM on July 11, 2008
posted by matildaben at 5:05 PM on July 11, 2008
Just curious, did you guys look at the Olympus E-3 and Sony 350? They were recommended in responses your previous question. Both have pop-out lcd screens allowing waist-level type shooting. Was something wrong with those (size, weight, non-Nikon lens)? Might help us answer this question.
posted by conrad53 at 5:23 PM on July 11, 2008
posted by conrad53 at 5:23 PM on July 11, 2008
Switching to Canon or Pentax would be silly unless she has a good reason; she already has the lenses and the familiarity with the interface so another Nikon is probably the best idea. As others have mentioned the D300 would be wonderful.
posted by sjl7678 at 7:06 PM on July 11, 2008
posted by sjl7678 at 7:06 PM on July 11, 2008
Response by poster: conrad53, we did look at both of them - the main issue for her is that they are live LCDs, she was hoping for an optical viewfinder and still hasn't really come to grips that it isn't available unless she gets a wobbly bit for $50-$500 that will require being taken off and babied a lot of the time (she works in a really intense profession with a lot of arduous physical activity, not much time for fiddling) or gets a camera and uses the live LCD.
She went to a local camera store and tried out the Nikon right-angle optical viewfinder on her D100- as expected from the reviews on amazon and the like, it is kind of fiddly, a little cheap feeling and had to be taken off and stowed before moving with the camera from one place to the next.
She doesn't think she would use it if it had to be a pop-out LCD screen and has decided to look into getting an older medium format film camera for situations where she will want the waist-level viewfinder.
BTW, she said thanks for the thoughtful responses, both on this and the previous question - I guess she was just suprised that an optical option that was integrated into the camera doesn't exist.
posted by stewiethegreat at 7:19 PM on July 11, 2008
She went to a local camera store and tried out the Nikon right-angle optical viewfinder on her D100- as expected from the reviews on amazon and the like, it is kind of fiddly, a little cheap feeling and had to be taken off and stowed before moving with the camera from one place to the next.
She doesn't think she would use it if it had to be a pop-out LCD screen and has decided to look into getting an older medium format film camera for situations where she will want the waist-level viewfinder.
BTW, she said thanks for the thoughtful responses, both on this and the previous question - I guess she was just suprised that an optical option that was integrated into the camera doesn't exist.
posted by stewiethegreat at 7:19 PM on July 11, 2008
Response by poster: PS- she only has one lens, a great portable little lens that has a fantastic zoom (I forget what, maybe 24-120?) and does macro. Perfect for her line of work and she's taken some amazing pictures (I know, I'm biased, but they actually get published in somewhat decent magazines).
posted by stewiethegreat at 7:20 PM on July 11, 2008
posted by stewiethegreat at 7:20 PM on July 11, 2008
This thread is closed to new comments.
posted by lia at 12:11 PM on July 11, 2008