Reading mode: Light Dark

Which is better for low light, D2x(s) or D2hs? N/T

Go to last post
Never owned either but from what I've heard from those who do, D2x(s) is great for high MP at ISO 100-400 and D2h(s) is the undisputed king for (relatively) high ISO and fast fps.

Thus the D2h(s) would probably be the better fit for low light shooting.
 
I had both cams.

The D2hs is much better in low light. I had good results with the D2hs with ISO 1600. Depending upon the situation, I could take also good pics with ISO 3200.
But, I say.. with ISO 1600 the D2hs is still good.

You should take the D2hs version! Best regards, Sebastian
--

Nikon D3, D2x, AFS 24-70/2.8, AFD 85mm/1.4, AFS 105mm/2.8VR, AFS 70-200/2.8VR, TC-1.4E II, SB-800

Gitzo GT2540 tripod, Markins M20, Markins TB-20, Manfrotto Neotech 685B monopod with RRS clamp

my gallery: http://www.fotocommunity.de/pc/pc/mypics/19199
 
I've used it recently in a reasonably well-lit concert at 1250 and images are clean...can't speak about the D2xs though but understand it is noisier
tony
 
D2hs is better but both are surpassed by the D200 and probably by the D60 as well. With either the D2hs or the D2x you are looking at ISO 800 and using Dfine 2.0 noise reduction software on many if not most images.

If low light photography is important to you then neither of these cameras are going to make you happy.
 
Hi Doug.

Don't listen to GeminiJoseph.

I have both cameras and the D2hs is much better for low noise high ISO shooting.

The difference is about 1 stop - some say maybe slightly more.

I think ISO 1600 on the D2hs equals about ISO 800 on the D2x.

One clue about what Nikon thinks about their noise performance is that Auto ISO on the D2hs goes up to ISO 1600 but on the D2X the camera only allows you to set Auto ISO up to 800.

I can tell you that I like my D2hs MUCH better than my D2X, and one of the only things I like about my D2X is the HSC High Speed Crop mode because of the faster frame rate and the "added reach" that crop mode gives your lenses.

I like the D2hs so much better that I've only used my D2X when my D2hs has been in for repair (as it is right now.) I've taken over 1,000,000 photos with my D2hs.

--
Bill,

http://www.pbase.com/billmcintyre

 
Have you actually used the D200 and have you actually compared the D200 at high ISO to the D2Hs???

I sold my D200 and bought the D2Hs ... there is NO comparison!!!

I just love these threads where people post like (further up in this thread: I don't use it/own it, but ... oh, boy ...

nevermind, couldn't resist ...
calson said:
D2hs is better but both are surpassed by the D200 and probably by the
D60 as well. With either the D2hs or the D2x you are looking at ISO
800 and using Dfine 2.0 noise reduction software on many if not most
images.

If low light photography is important to you then neither of these
cameras are going to make you happy.
Click to expand...
--
Deed, Auckland, New Zealand
D2H machine gun ...
 
I have both the D2Hs and D2X as well as the D3. As for the D2's the D2Hs does much better in low light high ISO (up to 1600) compared to the D2X which is only good up to ISO 400 beyond this the noise is an issue.

The posters who are stating that because the D2Hs is only a 4MP camera the image quality is inferior are totally wrong. These comments are usually made by people who have NEVER used the camera or made a print from an image from this camera. I have had both for several years and have a hard time telling the difference from images printed up to 13X19" without significant cropping between the two cameras. It is the fact that the D2Hs has 4MP covering the same sized sensor that the D2X has for 12 MP that makes it so good from a noise standpoint at high ISO

Having said all that neither camera can come close to the D3 in low light high ISO and low noise arena
--
Karel
 
have shot about 5000 frames on borrowed or rented D2Hs 's and I can certainly tell you the H is better in high ISO situations than the X. the X is pretty poor at high ISO in poor light. In good light, and no one I know shoots high ISO in good light all the time, the D2Xs is known to be a problem above ISO 800. If you pay a lot of attention to the histogram, you can get better results but not great or even good in some cases :-)

BUT, you will have to get over the Pixel Deficit on the D2Hs over the D2Xs.
--
Manny
http://www.pbase.com/gonzalu/
http://www.mannyphoto.com/
FCAS Member - http://fcasmembers.com/
 
never shot a d2hs but had 3 d2h and a d200. much less noise with d2h and the 16x20 prints look super if you don't crop much. if you put the d200 on high noise reduction; you might as well throw the images away.
--
pete self
 
As Karel, I also have all three- and I have the same experience.

I still use the H for poor lighting and telephoto for church shots from the back, and have never had problems with enlargements up to 20 x 16. My X has slightly more saturated colour and better white balance.

THe Mp argument is still a spill-over from the old marketing hype for consumer cameras, and in practical money making conditions it has virtually no effect.

The D3, however, is in a different league, and the D2's will be replaced over the next 12 months with the current D3 equivalent. The high ISO performance and the overall image quality puts it out on its own and has given me images at weddings I would never get with the others.

Brian
 
D2Hs is a very nice low light cam, compared to the D2H which was a disappointment.

--
chry -Sweden
 
chry said:
D2Hs is a very nice low light cam, compared to the D2H which was a
disappointment.

--
chry -Sweden
Click to expand...
Since they share the same censor, one would think that the difference is only in JPG, or am I missing something?

When processed in RAW will the D2Hs picture still have less noise than the D2H?
 
Well, I have the D2Hs. I took a lot of ISO 1600 shots on holiday last week in the Middle East. They look pretty fine to me - I'd say they're equivalent to ISO 640 shots on my D70s, which is 1.33 stops. I have heard the D200 isn't a great performer at high ISO [as relayed to me by a gig/concert shooter]. I'd even take my D1H to a concert over the D70s.

As for the sensor on the D2Hs being the same as the D2H, I'm not sure. I thought I'd read that Nikon had put the technology of the D2X into the D2Hs, or did I dream it?

~ morozhenoye ~
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top