I like my D300, but I'm not shooting much these days and its sort of an expensive weekend toy. Couple that with a press for cash (I already thinned out my kit and sold my expensive lenses) and we've got a recipe for a cheap camera, but I'm not sure I'd like the consumer models (D40, D60 or whatever it is these days).
I have my eye on the D90, but its really not a whole lot cheaper and I'd lose the MF-lens metering that I love on the D300... which leads me to the though of getting a used D2h, because they're (a) crazy cheap and (b) have nice little files. I rarely print (a side effect of rarely shooting) so I can't imagine the lack of megapixels being a problem... frankly, I see it as a very positive because I'm running out of hard drives.
Anyone want to convince me in either direction? I love the D300 (scratch the like in the first paragraph) but it seems like overkill for a snapshot machine.
Addendum - I'm going to be shooting part time in the coming year, but the gear is provided and its all Canon... I'm thinking about getting a 1d mark 2 and not buying any lenses and just using the ones available (24-70 2.8, 70-200 2.8 IS) but I've grown to prefer Nikon and frankly the 1d mark 2 seems very out of date (yes, the d2h is more out of date but its also $1000 less)
grenadier2002 wrote:
Awesome camera, I have a D2H as the second to my D300.
Lee
Owning both, which would you grab first when shooting: long exposures (I do it for fun, have a sturdy tripod, low ISO), travel pics (basically everything, snapshots), artsy-fartsy (flowers, closeups etc)? Oh, and I have a VERY energetic dog.
Yessir, the D2H is a fantastic cam Shoot RAW or stay under ISO 800 when shooting JPEG, and you will be fine
Learn the AF system, it is still a very good one! 9 cross sensors in good places. The high-torque focus motor makes focussing AF-D lenses a snap.
I personally prefer the handling of the D2 series to the D200/D300/D700 bodies. The only body that feels better is the D3
Don't forget that you also get metering with AI/AIS lenses, and that it works very well.
FWIW, I just got a 24"x24" printed out of my D2H for an engagement shoot. No one could tell it was from a 4MP cam cropped so that the actual image was around 2.3MP.
If you can really get good deal out of it say like sub $600 then get it. There's one local guy in my area (Houston) selling a D2X for $850 and that's a steal!!!.
maxx9photo wrote:
If you can really get good deal out of it say like sub $600 then get it. There's one local guy in my area (Houston) selling a D2X for $850 and that's a steal!!!.
Yes, I'd only do it if it was $500-$600. Avi, you've made some very compelling points - an embarrassing, but relevant fact is that 99% of the time I shoot single point AF and simply select where I want to focus. That's a good system for me, sometimes I use the 51 point 3d tracking whatzit but only if I know it will be effective (plane against a blue sky, for example). I don't trust it for anything else. Speed is a big factor for me, right now my main lens is the nice but slow focusing (non af-s) 35-70mm f/2.8
There is a D1h at one of the stores in town for 250.00 I almost bought it just because but I don't know. It felt lighter and better balanced than my D80 w/grip but I don't know if I would like the little lcd.
I want a faster cam for Bif that af's faster with my long af-d lenses but I don't know if the quality (iQ not build) would be to low to what i am used to.
I think i will buy a D2x next year I haven't taken the grip off my camera since I got it and like the added size and extra shutter button to much
If you were looking to go cheap for a while you might think about the D1h?
The H is a great machine. The only things to consider, when comparing it to the D300 is that if you do lots of high ISO, especially if you only shoot JPG, the 300 will be a better camera. Apart from that, it's a superb machine.
I have used a D300 but not enough to issue a credible opinion. The D2H I use daily.
In the first place, the D2H is big and heavy as other professional bodies. It is a very capable tool. As you heard already, its 4.1 megapixels are also very capable and enlargements retain their quality.
The AF of the D2H is superb. I am not into sports or wildlife shooting but I can assure you from my limited experience that if you want to do that type of photography you will not find faults with the D2H. I am sure it has one of the best AF out there.
I shoot RAW exclusively. The files are small and easy to edit. I never had a problem to enlarge those files to my usual size, 12x18 and as you have already read, much bigger enlargements are no problem. Expect pictures with excellent resolution, colors and details.
It works great with AIS lenses. I use my SB-28DX and SB-600 with it and exposures are very accurate. Some of these cams had a problem with metering and AF but be assured that Nikon knows of the problem and will fix the camera for free if you ever happen to run into it.
I also use the D1X, another excellent professional body. Although battery life is short due to the old technology, keeping a couple of batteries available in the field will allow you uninterrupted shooting. I like its 1/500sec. flash sync. which is faster than the D2H and D3. If speed while shooting is what you want, the D2H is capable of 8 FPS with a 40 files buffer.
I am not a high ISO shooter but using RAW and overexposing slightly has given me excellent files up to ISO 1600. I use it mainly for landscape and some portraits and it excels there also.
All in all it is an excellent cam and you will be very happy with it.
William Rodriguez
Miami, Florida.
Concerns are a more dated LCD and menu, image quality versus the D300 (and not just at ISO64-kabillion either... throughout the spectrum), ability to crop down shots (which may or may not be a bad thing), far inferior WB, and of course if you use them, the added features like Live View or Anti-Dust or whatever.
On the OTHER hand, it's still blazingly fast at 8FPS, those 4.1MP images are a JOY in post, the AF system is still pretty much as good as you'll find, I like the extra info in the VF, and it's a highly capable DSLR. As an added bonus, for long exposures you say you like doing, it's one of the very best, and better than the D300. Add to that it's built like a tank.
I say if you can find a steal on one, give it a try. Playing around with it for a bit will answer a lot of questions for you. In some ways it's starting to feel a little dated, but in others state-of-the-art. Bottom line though is that it's a great machine, just has been outdone in a few key areas by the newer kids on the block.
Lotsa good points here. As far as ISO goes, is it comparable to the D300 with both at ISO 200? I've already got a flash so 85% of the time I can get away with 400 or lower ISO.
Taylor Barrett wrote:
Lotsa good points here. As far as ISO goes, is it comparable to the D300 with both at ISO 200? I've already got a flash so 85% of the time I can get away with 400 or lower ISO.
Taylor, I don't have a D300, but do have the D2h. I like the quality and small file size of the D2h, but have a hard time believing it is close to the D300 for IQ even at ISO 200. The lower noise, higher resolution, and better image processor of the D300 are big improvements. That being said, either camera in the hands of a skilled photographer should produce very nice images at ISO 200.
Well I do like my D2H a lot, the only draw back being some noise at high ISOs and lack of MP for landscape shots. Having said that I don't print that often either, so I'd really be throwing my money away to get a higher MP camera. The ISO isn't a deal breaker for me as I kind of like it at the same time as wanting it gone.
Sorry to hear that you are pressed for cash. But I have a suspicion that the relatively small amount of cash you would make by selling the D300 and replacing it with a D2h can easily be made in other (legal) ways. It would be a shame to sell the D300 - you will probably end up buying another one at a later date
The D2h is an awesome camera. I have always been a D2h advocate. Wicked fast, excellent camera, great RAW files to work with. And like Avi, I have printed images in large scale that you could never tell came from a camera with only 4mp.
So if you have the means, definately get one. I still use mine on a semi-regular basis, as I have the D2x as well. I am usually shooting the D2x with 28-70f/2.8 and the D2h will have the 70-200VR attached. The only time I switch is when I want to take advantage of the HSC mode on the D2x with the 70-200.
The D2h is one of the best for bodies I've owned... I sold the first one I had and missed it until I replaced it.... I can only echo all the good things said about it... I use it to do candid shots at wedding receptions...
Images cleanup wonderfully, ISO 1250 not a problem.. white balance is.not the best as well as LCD display but CS3 OR LIGHTROOM MAKES LIGHT WORK OF IT...
I pick one up about 2 weeks ago in the B&S forum for 550.00
I have D300 and D700 and I am keeping my D2h. The 4.1 mg file is very good at 8x10 and I have sold several 16x20's from it. Great focus and tracking. Yes the LCD is very outmoded, but can be used easily to look at histograms and you will always be pleasantly surprised when you see your files in the computer. Great size to work on in photoshop or FTP to a lab for printing. This is a classic camera and VERY useful. They are a steal at the price they are selling for.
I have to say... the LCD on my D2h is far far better than the LCD on the D2x I recently picked within the last 6 months. My D2x seems to be one of the models affected by bad LCD production. There is a green/yellow tint to all of the pictures. Thus, I never use the LCD as a judge of colour reference. I don't think I will ever sell the D2h, it really is a joy to use, and even though its outdated, you couldn't ask for a better camera for photojournalistic work in good light.
Shoot RAW or stay under ISO 800 when shooting JPEG, and you will be fine 
?