Reading mode: Light Dark

opinions on DSLR

Go to last post
pdqgp

pdqgp

Veteran Member
Messages
10,900
Solutions
2
Reaction score
880
Location
US
okay, I'm seriously looking at a DSLR as a buddy for my everyday use 717.

I've done some minor research, but would like everyone's thoughts on what the best DSLR for the money would be. The Canon 1D would be great, but the D60 is more in my price Range. Nikon's D100 is what I've seen thus far and loved, but I'm not sure.

I'm posting this here as the opinions of a 717 user are most important as folks here will understand what I'm used to expecting out of a camera. My biggest reason for the DSLR would be a noise free image in lower light without being restricted to a tripod. The 717 does great but it does have limitations when not using a flash.

Thanks in advance for the thoughts.

--
-tim
Sony 717, Nikon 995 & Konica KD400Z
Accessories....tons of course
pbase supporter
http://www.pbase.com/pdqgp
 
Tim Lauro said:
okay, I'm seriously looking at a DSLR as a buddy for my everyday
use 717.

I've done some minor research, but would like everyone's thoughts
on what the best DSLR for the money would be. The Canon 1D would
be great, but the D60 is more in my price Range. Nikon's D100 is
what I've seen thus far and loved, but I'm not sure.

I'm posting this here as the opinions of a 717 user are most
important as folks here will understand what I'm used to expecting
out of a camera. My biggest reason for the DSLR would be a noise
free image in lower light without being restricted to a tripod.
The 717 does great but it does have limitations when not using a
flash.

Thanks in advance for the thoughts.

--
-tim
Sony 717, Nikon 995 & Konica KD400Z
Accessories....tons of course
pbase supporter
http://www.pbase.com/pdqgp
Click to expand...
--
[email protected]

 
Tim Lauro said:
okay, I'm seriously looking at a DSLR as a buddy for my everyday
use 717.

I've done some minor research, but would like everyone's thoughts
on what the best DSLR for the money would be. The Canon 1D would
be great, but the D60 is more in my price Range. Nikon's D100 is
what I've seen thus far and loved, but I'm not sure.

I'm posting this here as the opinions of a 717 user are most
important as folks here will understand what I'm used to expecting
out of a camera. My biggest reason for the DSLR would be a noise
free image in lower light without being restricted to a tripod.
The 717 does great but it does have limitations when not using a
flash.

Thanks in advance for the thoughts.
Click to expand...
I am investigating the same thing right now. I want to do portraits and gymnastics and I am finding that right now the D60 will probably not fit both of those catagories. I am waiting to see what new cameras come out in the D60 price range. IMO cameras in this price range still can use some improvements to fit both of my needs. The Canon DSLR group has been helpful on insights about what is available right now. I would narrow down your decision on what you want to use your camera for and you will be able to better justify your purchase.

Bill
 
Hi Tim,

I'm going through the same thing. I was set on the D60 until I saw that it only has ISO up to 800. Yikes, that's one of the primary reasons for my move! If that's not important to you, then it is very competitive with the D100. Based on you comments, however, the low-light high ISO's are important to you.

I just don't think I'd go up to the 1D. If I were to make that jump, I'd mortgage the farm and get the 1Ds, the Mother Ship.

I'm hoping to have one by April, finances permitting. It will a great addition to my 707. Shooting with a dslr will be much more intentional and deliberate than with my 707, so I'll never be able to get rid of my trusty sidekick.

Jim
Tim Lauro said:
okay, I'm seriously looking at a DSLR as a buddy for my everyday
use 717.

I've done some minor research, but would like everyone's thoughts
on what the best DSLR for the money would be. The Canon 1D would
be great, but the D60 is more in my price Range. Nikon's D100 is
what I've seen thus far and loved, but I'm not sure.

I'm posting this here as the opinions of a 717 user are most
important as folks here will understand what I'm used to expecting
out of a camera. My biggest reason for the DSLR would be a noise
free image in lower light without being restricted to a tripod.
The 717 does great but it does have limitations when not using a
flash.

Thanks in advance for the thoughts.

--
-tim
Sony 717, Nikon 995 & Konica KD400Z
Accessories....tons of course
pbase supporter
http://www.pbase.com/pdqgp
Click to expand...
--
Jim Fuglestad

Skill in photography is acquired by practice and not by purchase. -Percy W. Harris
Our existence is determined by the truths we tell.
Why simply live and let live? Live and help live.
http://www.pbase.com/jfuglestad/galleries
 
id wait another year.....just look at all the developments in 2002.
2003 will be bigger.
Tim Lauro said:
okay, I'm seriously looking at a DSLR as a buddy for my everyday
use 717.

I've done some minor research, but would like everyone's thoughts
on what the best DSLR for the money would be. The Canon 1D would
be great, but the D60 is more in my price Range. Nikon's D100 is
what I've seen thus far and loved, but I'm not sure.

I'm posting this here as the opinions of a 717 user are most
important as folks here will understand what I'm used to expecting
out of a camera. My biggest reason for the DSLR would be a noise
free image in lower light without being restricted to a tripod.
The 717 does great but it does have limitations when not using a
flash.

Thanks in advance for the thoughts.

--
-tim
Sony 717, Nikon 995 & Konica KD400Z
Accessories....tons of course
pbase supporter
http://www.pbase.com/pdqgp
Click to expand...
--
Posting these days requires either dedication or medication...
cheers
Zip:P
 
Tim,

In fact, the D60 is probably better if you are concerned about noise. The CCD of the 1D seems to produce more noise than the CMOS of the D60. Just my recollection of the issue--could be wrong.

However, my reading of the Canon SLR forum over the last few months indicates that D60 does have some low-light focusing problems, although there seems to be some disagreement over this as to how bad it really is. Seems that some people find that it hunts in low-light to lock on, whereas the 1D locks on comparatively much, much, much faster. People indicate that the autofocus on the D60 works much better with L glass lenses in the f2.8 area, and that area of lenses spells mucho buckaroos.

Remember, with the dSLR line, you are buying into a lens system as much (and in fact even more) than you are buying into a body. The lenses will be around after the body and you go separate ways. Just another thing to think about. Canon L glass is tip-top stuff, but it either will leave your wallet thin or your credit card stuffed.

Can you take them for a test drive at a local camera shop? That might be your best option. People seemed very swayed one way or ther other about a particular system.

Good luck to you--hope you get one that works for you. Keep us posted.

--Mike
Tim Lauro said:
okay, I'm seriously looking at a DSLR as a buddy for my everyday
use 717.

I've done some minor research, but would like everyone's thoughts
on what the best DSLR for the money would be. The Canon 1D would
be great, but the D60 is more in my price Range. Nikon's D100 is
what I've seen thus far and loved, but I'm not sure.

I'm posting this here as the opinions of a 717 user are most
important as folks here will understand what I'm used to expecting
out of a camera. My biggest reason for the DSLR would be a noise
free image in lower light without being restricted to a tripod.
The 717 does great but it does have limitations when not using a
flash.

Thanks in advance for the thoughts.

--
-tim
Sony 717, Nikon 995 & Konica KD400Z
Accessories....tons of course
pbase supporter
http://www.pbase.com/pdqgp
Click to expand...
--
--Mike Ezell
 
Hey Zip, but 2004 might be bigger still..... ;-) One a year. I'm totally convinced I'll be buying one camera a year until the end of time. lol
ZipperZ said:
Tim Lauro said:
okay, I'm seriously looking at a DSLR as a buddy for my everyday
use 717.

I've done some minor research, but would like everyone's thoughts
on what the best DSLR for the money would be. The Canon 1D would
be great, but the D60 is more in my price Range. Nikon's D100 is
what I've seen thus far and loved, but I'm not sure.

I'm posting this here as the opinions of a 717 user are most
important as folks here will understand what I'm used to expecting
out of a camera. My biggest reason for the DSLR would be a noise
free image in lower light without being restricted to a tripod.
The 717 does great but it does have limitations when not using a
flash.

Thanks in advance for the thoughts.

--
-tim
Sony 717, Nikon 995 & Konica KD400Z
Accessories....tons of course
pbase supporter
http://www.pbase.com/pdqgp
Click to expand...
--
Posting these days requires either dedication or medication...
cheers
Zip:P
Click to expand...
--
Jim Fuglestad

Skill in photography is acquired by practice and not by purchase. -Percy W. Harris
Our existence is determined by the truths we tell.
Why simply live and let live? Live and help live.
http://www.pbase.com/jfuglestad/galleries
 
Hi Tim. I am a former 707 user who moved into Canon DSLRs. While I have noticed many DSLR benefits, low noise, low light handheld shooting has not been at the top of the list. Yes, some Canon lenses are faster than the Sony, but the fast lenses are pricey, and even the best Canon zooms (L series) are f/2.8 - about the same as the Sony lens. To gain speed, you can use ISO 800 on the D60, but then you add noise. Also, I'd point out that low light focusing is not a D60 strength. Hope this helps. Joe Jones
Tim Lauro said:
okay, I'm seriously looking at a DSLR as a buddy for my everyday
use 717.

I've done some minor research, but would like everyone's thoughts
on what the best DSLR for the money would be. The Canon 1D would
be great, but the D60 is more in my price Range. Nikon's D100 is
what I've seen thus far and loved, but I'm not sure.

I'm posting this here as the opinions of a 717 user are most
important as folks here will understand what I'm used to expecting
out of a camera. My biggest reason for the DSLR would be a noise
free image in lower light without being restricted to a tripod.
The 717 does great but it does have limitations when not using a
flash.

Thanks in advance for the thoughts.

--
-tim
Sony 717, Nikon 995 & Konica KD400Z
Accessories....tons of course
pbase supporter
http://www.pbase.com/pdqgp
Click to expand...
 
Joe Jones wrote:
To gain speed, you can use ISO 800 on the D60,
Joe Jones said:
but then you add noise. Also, I'd point out that low light
focusing is not a D60 strength. Hope this helps. Joe Jones
Click to expand...
This is very true, but at an ISO 800 of a dslr you will experience noise probably around the 7x7 200-400 levels...

You should get much better low light results if using the full potential of the camera and processing.
Joe Jones said:
Tim Lauro said:
okay, I'm seriously looking at a DSLR as a buddy for my everyday
use 717.

I've done some minor research, but would like everyone's thoughts
on what the best DSLR for the money would be. The Canon 1D would
be great, but the D60 is more in my price Range. Nikon's D100 is
what I've seen thus far and loved, but I'm not sure.

I'm posting this here as the opinions of a 717 user are most
important as folks here will understand what I'm used to expecting
out of a camera. My biggest reason for the DSLR would be a noise
free image in lower light without being restricted to a tripod.
The 717 does great but it does have limitations when not using a
flash.

Thanks in advance for the thoughts.

--
-tim
Sony 717, Nikon 995 & Konica KD400Z
Accessories....tons of course
pbase supporter
http://www.pbase.com/pdqgp
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
--
Jim Fuglestad

Skill in photography is acquired by practice and not by purchase. -Percy W. Harris
Our existence is determined by the truths we tell.
Why simply live and let live? Live and help live.
http://www.pbase.com/jfuglestad/galleries
 
Lots of good stuff quickly today. Thanks to all.

My first day of hunting the matter down has lead to a low light question several times on the Canon. Similiar to what I've seen on the 5700....but not so bad obviously. Nonetheless, a red flag in my book.

I will be sure to consider the costs involved both body and lens wise. Really, my gut says to wait as things are sure to improve in leaps and drop in costs by bounds I'm sure.

Better to start now though as the big day is coming fast.
Joe Jones said:
Tim Lauro said:
okay, I'm seriously looking at a DSLR as a buddy for my everyday
use 717.

I've done some minor research, but would like everyone's thoughts
on what the best DSLR for the money would be. The Canon 1D would
be great, but the D60 is more in my price Range. Nikon's D100 is
what I've seen thus far and loved, but I'm not sure.

I'm posting this here as the opinions of a 717 user are most
important as folks here will understand what I'm used to expecting
out of a camera. My biggest reason for the DSLR would be a noise
free image in lower light without being restricted to a tripod.
The 717 does great but it does have limitations when not using a
flash.

Thanks in advance for the thoughts.

--
-tim
Sony 717, Nikon 995 & Konica KD400Z
Accessories....tons of course
pbase supporter
http://www.pbase.com/pdqgp
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
--
-tim
Sony 717, Nikon 995 & Konica KD400Z
Accessories....tons of course
pbase supporter
http://www.pbase.com/pdqgp
 
That's kind of what I'm thinking, only that when/if the price drops, they're going to go FAST, so you'll need to be ready.

At the same time, I'm not the most patient person...
Tim Lauro said:
My first day of hunting the matter down has lead to a low light
question several times on the Canon. Similiar to what I've seen on
the 5700....but not so bad obviously. Nonetheless, a red flag in my
book.

I will be sure to consider the costs involved both body and lens
wise. Really, my gut says to wait as things are sure to improve in
leaps and drop in costs by bounds I'm sure.

Better to start now though as the big day is coming fast.
Joe Jones said:
Tim Lauro said:
okay, I'm seriously looking at a DSLR as a buddy for my everyday
use 717.

I've done some minor research, but would like everyone's thoughts
on what the best DSLR for the money would be. The Canon 1D would
be great, but the D60 is more in my price Range. Nikon's D100 is
what I've seen thus far and loved, but I'm not sure.

I'm posting this here as the opinions of a 717 user are most
important as folks here will understand what I'm used to expecting
out of a camera. My biggest reason for the DSLR would be a noise
free image in lower light without being restricted to a tripod.
The 717 does great but it does have limitations when not using a
flash.

Thanks in advance for the thoughts.

--
-tim
Sony 717, Nikon 995 & Konica KD400Z
Accessories....tons of course
pbase supporter
http://www.pbase.com/pdqgp
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
--
-tim
Sony 717, Nikon 995 & Konica KD400Z
Accessories....tons of course
pbase supporter
http://www.pbase.com/pdqgp
Click to expand...
--
Jim Fuglestad

Skill in photography is acquired by practice and not by purchase. -Percy W. Harris
Our existence is determined by the truths we tell.
Why simply live and let live? Live and help live.
http://www.pbase.com/jfuglestad/galleries
 
I'm on and off again with respect to a DSLR. After viewing images from the different models it's apparent that not all of them are keepers either. Some are oustanding as are some images taken with single lens cameras. This tells me that only in certain circumstances are images taken with a DSLR superior. I can only see marginal improvements when comparing DSLR sports images to those from my UZI or 717.
I think for 2 grand difference it's simply not worth it.

I really want a one lens camera with the faster focussing ,no shutter lag, and high ISO with no noise. I hope this year someone does it.
John
Shutter said:
Tim Lauro said:
My first day of hunting the matter down has lead to a low light
question several times on the Canon. Similiar to what I've seen on
the 5700....but not so bad obviously. Nonetheless, a red flag in my
book.

I will be sure to consider the costs involved both body and lens
wise. Really, my gut says to wait as things are sure to improve in
leaps and drop in costs by bounds I'm sure.

Better to start now though as the big day is coming fast.
Joe Jones said:
Tim Lauro said:
okay, I'm seriously looking at a DSLR as a buddy for my everyday
use 717.

I've done some minor research, but would like everyone's thoughts
on what the best DSLR for the money would be. The Canon 1D would
be great, but the D60 is more in my price Range. Nikon's D100 is
what I've seen thus far and loved, but I'm not sure.

I'm posting this here as the opinions of a 717 user are most
important as folks here will understand what I'm used to expecting
out of a camera. My biggest reason for the DSLR would be a noise
free image in lower light without being restricted to a tripod.
The 717 does great but it does have limitations when not using a
flash.

Thanks in advance for the thoughts.

--
-tim
Sony 717, Nikon 995 & Konica KD400Z
Accessories....tons of course
pbase supporter
http://www.pbase.com/pdqgp
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
--
-tim
Sony 717, Nikon 995 & Konica KD400Z
Accessories....tons of course
pbase supporter
http://www.pbase.com/pdqgp
Click to expand...
--
Jim Fuglestad
Skill in photography is acquired by practice and not by purchase.
-Percy W. Harris
Our existence is determined by the truths we tell.
Why simply live and let live? Live and help live.
http://www.pbase.com/jfuglestad/galleries
Click to expand...
 
IMO....

For now at least. Both are new to the market, both have HIGH ISO's and both are incredible.

When checking the cost of lens and accessories at my shop, Canon was more than Nikon. So D60 was ruled out.

I bought the D100. Low light compared to my 707 and 717 is not even a competition. ISO 1000 is less noisey than 200 on my 7x7's. For those that have made the switch, you cannot compare the 7x7 to S2/D100.

It really comes down to what your wants and needs are.

S2 has great JPEG's straight out of the camera. High ISO noise in shadows is smeared looking, RAW mode kicks butt. More flashes are compatable with the S2. max ISO 1600. It is more of a 9 megapixel camera. CCD is easier to clean than on the D100.

D100 allows you to control your JPEG output with Custom Curves (nice-IMO), straight out of the cam JPEG's are a little dark and slightly on the soft side (you can increase sharpening), excellent RAW software (you have to buy NC3 though) and again RAW mode kicks butt. Max ISO is 6400 (if you HAVE to grab the image, it is not that bad). High ISO noise in shadows is more grainy, printed it looks like film.

I chose the D100 over the S2 for these reasons. I want to shoot mainly in NEF (raw) mode, I love post processing, I am looking at getting the MB-D100 (S2 doesn't have this), single battery(D100) over dual battery camera(S2), plus with the money I would have spent on the S2, I bought the SB-80DX. D100 was immediately available while I would of waited 3 weeks for the S2. D100 historgram is laid over the photo and bigger than the S2's.

Although, if the S2 was available....I would have had to run more tests..

This review also helped me make my decision.
http://www.bythom.com/s2d100.htm

Good luck!
--
David

My galleries:
http://www.imagestation.com/member/?name=r00t&c=201
 
johnd1 said:
I'm on and off again with respect to a DSLR. After viewing images
from the different models it's apparent that not all of them are
keepers either. Some are oustanding as are some images taken with
single lens cameras. This tells me that only in certain
circumstances are images taken with a DSLR superior.
Click to expand...
Most I've seen from good photographers are considerably better. The noise drop off is incredible. The camera isn't going to make the photo.
johnd1 said:
I think for 2 grand difference it's simply not worth it.
Click to expand...
For some it is, for some it isn't. I'm still not sure.
johnd1 said:
I really want a one lens camera with the faster focussing ,no
shutter lag, and high ISO with no noise. I hope this year someone
does it.
Click to expand...
Well, the one lens requirement pretty much eliminates the dslrs then. But I think your other requirements are already addressed with most dslr's (I'm assuming you mean little discernable noise, rather than "no" noise). We need to remember that the best film photographer's need to decide when to make "grain" compromises by going to higher film speeds, too. There are no grainless ASA 1600 films, either.

Jim
johnd1 said:
John
Shutter said:
Tim Lauro said:
My first day of hunting the matter down has lead to a low light
question several times on the Canon. Similiar to what I've seen on
the 5700....but not so bad obviously. Nonetheless, a red flag in my
book.

I will be sure to consider the costs involved both body and lens
wise. Really, my gut says to wait as things are sure to improve in
leaps and drop in costs by bounds I'm sure.

Better to start now though as the big day is coming fast.
Joe Jones said:
Tim Lauro said:
okay, I'm seriously looking at a DSLR as a buddy for my everyday
use 717.

I've done some minor research, but would like everyone's thoughts
on what the best DSLR for the money would be. The Canon 1D would
be great, but the D60 is more in my price Range. Nikon's D100 is
what I've seen thus far and loved, but I'm not sure.

I'm posting this here as the opinions of a 717 user are most
important as folks here will understand what I'm used to expecting
out of a camera. My biggest reason for the DSLR would be a noise
free image in lower light without being restricted to a tripod.
The 717 does great but it does have limitations when not using a
flash.

Thanks in advance for the thoughts.

--
-tim
Sony 717, Nikon 995 & Konica KD400Z
Accessories....tons of course
pbase supporter
http://www.pbase.com/pdqgp
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
--
-tim
Sony 717, Nikon 995 & Konica KD400Z
Accessories....tons of course
pbase supporter
http://www.pbase.com/pdqgp
Click to expand...
--
Jim Fuglestad
Skill in photography is acquired by practice and not by purchase.
-Percy W. Harris
Our existence is determined by the truths we tell.
Why simply live and let live? Live and help live.
http://www.pbase.com/jfuglestad/galleries
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
--
Jim Fuglestad

Skill in photography is acquired by practice and not by purchase. -Percy W. Harris
Our existence is determined by the truths we tell.
Why simply live and let live? Live and help live.
http://www.pbase.com/jfuglestad/galleries
 
Thanks r00t.

I am going to look at the S2 as well. The D100 is what I've seen and played with at a friends house. Unbelievable clarity at ISO 800 inside and the image wasn't too soft. I actually like it as I can then sharpen in Photoshop.

My biggest concerns are the initial costs.....is it of value to me now vs waiting just a bit. I waited one year on my latest toy...Plasma TV and it dropped almost $12k. Prolly will again come this summer...who knows.

I just am not sure I want to put more in the bucket just yet with my 717 being so new. Took me one year to buy the Sony after swearing my 995 would be replaced with a DSLR.

All I know is I'm not prepared to pull the trigger just yet. Have the fundage, but am learning patience.
r00t said:
IMO....

For now at least. Both are new to the market, both have HIGH ISO's
and both are incredible.

When checking the cost of lens and accessories at my shop, Canon
was more than Nikon. So D60 was ruled out.

I bought the D100. Low light compared to my 707 and 717 is not
even a competition. ISO 1000 is less noisey than 200 on my 7x7's.
For those that have made the switch, you cannot compare the 7x7 to
S2/D100.

It really comes down to what your wants and needs are.

S2 has great JPEG's straight out of the camera. High ISO noise in
shadows is smeared looking, RAW mode kicks butt. More flashes are
compatable with the S2. max ISO 1600. It is more of a 9 megapixel
camera. CCD is easier to clean than on the D100.

D100 allows you to control your JPEG output with Custom Curves
(nice-IMO), straight out of the cam JPEG's are a little dark and
slightly on the soft side (you can increase sharpening), excellent
RAW software (you have to buy NC3 though) and again RAW mode kicks
butt. Max ISO is 6400 (if you HAVE to grab the image, it is not
that bad). High ISO noise in shadows is more grainy, printed it
looks like film.

I chose the D100 over the S2 for these reasons. I want to shoot
mainly in NEF (raw) mode, I love post processing, I am looking at
getting the MB-D100 (S2 doesn't have this), single battery(D100)
over dual battery camera(S2), plus with the money I would have
spent on the S2, I bought the SB-80DX. D100 was immediately
available while I would of waited 3 weeks for the S2. D100
historgram is laid over the photo and bigger than the S2's.

Although, if the S2 was available....I would have had to run more
tests..

This review also helped me make my decision.
http://www.bythom.com/s2d100.htm

Good luck!
--
David

My galleries:
http://www.imagestation.com/member/?name=r00t&c=201
Click to expand...
--
-tim
Sony 717, Nikon 995 & Konica KD400Z
Accessories....tons of course
pbase supporter
http://www.pbase.com/pdqgp
 
Okay Tim. Give me the money for one and I'll tell you everything you want to know about it. ;-)
Tim Lauro said:
I am going to look at the S2 as well. The D100 is what I've seen
and played with at a friends house. Unbelievable clarity at ISO
800 inside and the image wasn't too soft. I actually like it as I
can then sharpen in Photoshop.

My biggest concerns are the initial costs.....is it of value to me
now vs waiting just a bit. I waited one year on my latest
toy...Plasma TV and it dropped almost $12k. Prolly will again come
this summer...who knows.

I just am not sure I want to put more in the bucket just yet with
my 717 being so new. Took me one year to buy the Sony after
swearing my 995 would be replaced with a DSLR.

All I know is I'm not prepared to pull the trigger just yet. Have
the fundage, but am learning patience.
r00t said:
IMO....

For now at least. Both are new to the market, both have HIGH ISO's
and both are incredible.

When checking the cost of lens and accessories at my shop, Canon
was more than Nikon. So D60 was ruled out.

I bought the D100. Low light compared to my 707 and 717 is not
even a competition. ISO 1000 is less noisey than 200 on my 7x7's.
For those that have made the switch, you cannot compare the 7x7 to
S2/D100.

It really comes down to what your wants and needs are.

S2 has great JPEG's straight out of the camera. High ISO noise in
shadows is smeared looking, RAW mode kicks butt. More flashes are
compatable with the S2. max ISO 1600. It is more of a 9 megapixel
camera. CCD is easier to clean than on the D100.

D100 allows you to control your JPEG output with Custom Curves
(nice-IMO), straight out of the cam JPEG's are a little dark and
slightly on the soft side (you can increase sharpening), excellent
RAW software (you have to buy NC3 though) and again RAW mode kicks
butt. Max ISO is 6400 (if you HAVE to grab the image, it is not
that bad). High ISO noise in shadows is more grainy, printed it
looks like film.

I chose the D100 over the S2 for these reasons. I want to shoot
mainly in NEF (raw) mode, I love post processing, I am looking at
getting the MB-D100 (S2 doesn't have this), single battery(D100)
over dual battery camera(S2), plus with the money I would have
spent on the S2, I bought the SB-80DX. D100 was immediately
available while I would of waited 3 weeks for the S2. D100
historgram is laid over the photo and bigger than the S2's.

Although, if the S2 was available....I would have had to run more
tests..

This review also helped me make my decision.
http://www.bythom.com/s2d100.htm

Good luck!
--
David

My galleries:
http://www.imagestation.com/member/?name=r00t&c=201
Click to expand...
--
-tim
Sony 717, Nikon 995 & Konica KD400Z
Accessories....tons of course
pbase supporter
http://www.pbase.com/pdqgp
Click to expand...
--
Jim Fuglestad

Skill in photography is acquired by practice and not by purchase. -Percy W. Harris
Our existence is determined by the truths we tell.
Why simply live and let live? Live and help live.
http://www.pbase.com/jfuglestad/galleries
 
Tim Lauro said:
Thanks r00t.

My biggest concerns are the initial costs.....is it of value to me
now vs waiting just a bit. I waited one year on my latest
toy...Plasma TV and it dropped almost $12k. Prolly will again come
this summer...who knows.
Click to expand...
What I noticed was that when Canon released the D60, the D30 did not drop enough in price for me to want to wait for a D200 to see the D100 drop a couple of hundred bucks.

Then again, Sony wanted me to send in my 717 for the third time. I decided against it and returned the camera instead. I got a full refund and plunked it down on the D100. I couldn't be happier. If my 717 would have behaved more nicely, I would not of gotten rid of it. You get to a point sometimes where enough is enough.

What ever decision you make, it will be the best for you. Once you go DSLR though, you will not go back. Choose your accessories wisely.

--
David

My galleries:
http://www.imagestation.com/member/?name=r00t&c=201
 
Tim Lauro said:
okay, I'm seriously looking at a DSLR as a buddy for my everyday
use 717.

I've done some minor research, but would like everyone's thoughts
on what the best DSLR for the money would be. The Canon 1D would
be great, but the D60 is more in my price Range. Nikon's D100 is
what I've seen thus far and loved, but I'm not sure.

I'm posting this here as the opinions of a 717 user are most
important as folks here will understand what I'm used to expecting
out of a camera. My biggest reason for the DSLR would be a noise
free image in lower light without being restricted to a tripod.
The 717 does great but it does have limitations when not using a
flash.

Thanks in advance for the thoughts.

--
-tim
Sony 717, Nikon 995 & Konica KD400Z
Accessories....tons of course
pbase supporter
http://www.pbase.com/pdqgp
Click to expand...
Tim I was in your shoes a few months back. Either way you look at it
the D60 or D100 would fit the bill. In the end I did the Nikon
D100. If you read over all the hub-bub you will learn the good
and the bad of both. One thing that I liked that I usually don't see
is the usb interface cable for the D100 VS D60 the D100 uses the
same cable as the F707/F717 - the D60 needs a Canon adapter.
Now I am not saying this is the reason to get one over the other
just something I thought I would point out. I use a Mac for all
my photo work (I have both BTW PC and Mac). I also like the way
the Nikon will just mount the D100s Flash on the desktop, and
now all the Nikon apps have been Jaguar'd meaning they all run
full speed on the new Mac OS 10.2.3. The low light noise between
the two is very visible. Look at the following examples of low light:
(but with tripod)
Sony:
http://www.pbase.com/image/7589896

Nikon that is 5 seconds longer:
http://www.pbase.com/image/7559849

BTW you will have to budget some coin for the lens. D100 loves
the big expensive glass. (28-70AFS 2.8D, etc. etc)
--
Regards, -David
http://www.pbase.com/dcappello/
http://www.telequest.net/~cappello
 
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