D100 - It's always good...

When the drapes match the carpet.

Old Nikon D100 with the new-ish 18-55mm VR II

Still appreciate the color fidelity (and 3D Pop) of Nikon's trusty old D100 CCD to this day.

fPrime

I agree with you !

Murray Bowles wrote:

And, as I recall, the battery life was excellent.

Indeed it was thanks to its new Li-Ion battery instead of the Ni-MH batteries in the D1 series. It's somewhat amazing that I can use that same battery in my D100, D200, and D700 despite their vast generational difference.

fPrime

I hate to disagree, but the color and contrast of your photo do no look all that good to me.  I also have an old D100 that I use occasionally My results in terms of color and contrast usually look better.

fPrime wrote:

Still appreciate the color fidelity (and 3D Pop) of Nikon's trusty old D100 CCD to this day.

It looks oversaturated and unnatural to me.  Also, I didn't realise that sensors could display 3D pop.  I guess you're going to try to explain, but I won't be listening...

Ten years ago I was on vacation in the mountains, and shooting film only with a Fm2n. I used up ten rolls of film, and with no place to buy film, I pulled out my little used D100. I shot with a 135mm 2.8 Ais and a 15mm 5.6 Ai, and was totally surprised when I got home and viewed the pictures. That 6.1MP sensor really did a fine job, The color saturation was better than most film. Much of this also has to do with the lenses used.

That experience mad me a believer in digital photography.

I still rely on the D100 , along with a D200, for my photography. Compared to the D100, the D200 has a better viewscreen for examining images, a higher frames per sec shooting speed for burst shooting, and a larger image buffer when continuous shooting. It also offers Nikon's i-TTL through the lens flash exposure system, which the D100 does not. But the D100 was also my first DSLR, and I would not have acquired the D200 if I hadn't first become comfortable shooting with the D100.

Michigan Sandman wrote:

Ten years ago I was on vacation in the mountains, and shooting film only with a Fm2n. I used up ten rolls of film, and with no place to buy film, I pulled out my little used D100. I shot with a 135mm 2.8 Ais and a 15mm 5.6 Ai, and was totally surprised when I got home and viewed the pictures. That 6.1MP sensor really did a fine job, The color saturation was better than most film. Much of this also has to do with the lenses used.

That experience mad me a believer in digital photography.

Agree. Thanks to their strict CFA's the color saturation on these early CCD cameras is quite punchy. It allows the natural vibrancy of a scene to be recorded in its full richness.

Nikon D100 w/18-55G VR II

I can completely understand why those who have slowly become accustomed to the thinner digital colors from later CMOS cameras now find the D100 colors to be a bit over the top. Personally, I find them to look refreshingly analog.

fPrime

briantilley wrote:

fPrime wrote:

Still appreciate the color fidelity (and 3D Pop) of Nikon's trusty old D100 CCD to this day.

It looks oversaturated and unnatural to me. Also, I didn't realise that sensors could display 3D pop. I guess you're going to try to explain, but I won't be listening...

Well, the colors are certainly different from modern Nikon's that's for sure!

The short answer as to why sensors matter in rendering 3D Pop is that they record color microcontrast which is a visual cue for rendering depth. The stronger the CFA, the better the microcontrast as demonstrated here.

fPrime