Home · Register · Search · View Winners · Software · Hosting · Software · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username   Password

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Nikon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       end
  

Archive 2013 · D2x, still worth it?
  
 
Dee50
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · D2x, still worth it?


Hi all

Been with Nikon since going digital several years ago. Started with D50 (loved that thing). Now have a chance to pick up a used D2x for around 400 pounds. Is it worth it? Mainly shoot landscapes, architecture and my very active family. Would appreciate any feedback from those with experience of the D2x.

Many thanks in advance and happy 2013 to all.



Jan 07, 2013 at 07:01 PM
NathanHamler
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · D2x, still worth it?


I had one, it's a great body, very responsive...coming from a d50 you'll be impressed no doubt, i had a couple issues with the d2x, i didnt like where the AF points were located, they never seemed to be in the right spot, there was no AF fine tuning, and the lcd screen was about as good for checking sharpness as a magna doodle...lol other than that it was the cat's ass...at low iso's it was awesome...higher than 800 it fell apart though..


Jan 07, 2013 at 07:21 PM
Mescalamba
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · D2x, still worth it?


Its a bit old body, but its still "pro" gear. Feels in hand as any Dx class. Which is very very good.

Performance isnt best, but considering age its still good and particulary at base ISO its very nice. Colors are considered as best from Nikon.

If its good or bad buy depends on what you are using now.



Jan 07, 2013 at 07:43 PM
edl415
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · D2x, still worth it?


Welcome to FM. I see you started with a D50 but you don't say what you're shooting with now. If it's still the D50 you will love the D2x. If it's a more modern body then I'd say "it depends."

I bought a D2x in 2010 and used it alongside my D700 for a few months. I appreciated the fast handling, snappy shutter, and bigger AF spread but was dissatisfied with IQ. Even at base ISO D2x files do not have any advantage over D700 files at higher ISO's. 400 pounds in the US would buy you a used D7000, which would be my preference for Nikon DX at the moment.



Jan 07, 2013 at 08:10 PM
John Skinner
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · D2x, still worth it?


I use a D2x daily.

It does everything I need it to in studio and more.

I'm not a 59 points of focus kinda guy.. If you can't nail a focus with 12 points, you maybe a red-neck.

Looking at the present LCD sizes of 3 and 3.2, it's certainly a bone of contention. But again, if you need 102,*** iso, 59 focus points, 720+ movie capability in your STILLS BODY... You'll need to save up a bit then



Jan 07, 2013 at 09:11 PM
Littleguy
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · D2x, still worth it?


Used to have one, loved the AF coverage - no other Nikon like it. All 9 main AF points are cross types spread out wide in the frame.

Will be great for landscapes when on a tripod or anything when used at base ISO - anything above iso 400 - forget it or you are looking at a B&W conversion image.

DR is narrow so watch the highlights. No LV focusing but the PDAF is great. Still a very responsive camera but small LCD compared to the newer cameras.




Jan 07, 2013 at 09:45 PM
gugs
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · D2x, still worth it?


I still use a D2x from time to time but just for the fun and the "pro" feel because almost any recent body will outperform the D2x in most aspects. IQ is not on par anymore even with the cheapest consumer bodies (resolution, dynamic range). The only positive things about the D2x are:integrated grip and pro user interface, speed (fps), IQ for daylight shooting and that's about it. The rear screen to control IQ, colors is even better on the 3000 range, AF is way better in more recent bodies, recent pro bodies have a much better IQ, are faster and have a much better high ISO performance. Another issue, even if you only pay 400 pounds, any repair will be charged the full "pro"price. In other words, I wouldn't do it anymore. If you want to shoot DX and FPS are not too critical, go for a D7000.

Guy



Jan 07, 2013 at 09:49 PM
trenchmonkey
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · D2x, still worth it?


Welcome to FM The D2X(s) is still a favorite body for portraits. Skins tones are gorgeous SOOC.
Little confusion on the frame rate...it's 5fps unless shooting in HSC (high speed crop mode) then it's 8fps.
So a D7K is a little quicker at 6. As mentioned low ISO is excellent and it's a real joy to shoot with. Still find
the time to shoot with mine, still make money with it even tho I have 4 'better' DSLR's. Your call as to worth.



Jan 07, 2013 at 10:12 PM
harvey steeves
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · D2x, still worth it?


you will like the AF for your family photos, landscape shots at base ISO will be quite alright, unfortunately Nikon TS lenses on a DX camera leave much to be desired in terms of coverage so the architecture thing may need some work. You will get ruggedness and durability that bodies like the D7000 cannot give you. Now, having said all that, newer cameras do have better image quality, much better high ISO capabilities. Ergonomics have improved over the years as well.


Jan 07, 2013 at 10:13 PM
Avi B
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · D2x, still worth it?


I dropped my D2Xs and 17-55 some time back. I've decided to get it fixed instead ($450) of getting a D700.

1. It is fast. Fast AF (CAM 2000 is actually very good at acquisition, and has pretty good tracking) 37ms VF blackout lag and therefore feels faster than the D700 and newer bodies. I also like integrated grip bodies...
2. The sensor is contrasty, so be careful about blowing out highlights! Also, compared to recent offerings has a much lower DR (even compared to wife's D3100).
3. I love the skin tones with it. Especially great for portraits where you control the light, and even for times when you dont
4. I have a katz-eye on mine so manual focussing is good.

For your needs, IF you learn the AF system, you will be perfectly fine with the D2Xs. Here is a good link about the AF system. Sure it's not "latest and greatest" but in the right hands, it can hold its own.



Jan 08, 2013 at 01:12 AM
 

Search in Used Dept. 



Rodolfo Paiz
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #11 · p.1 #11 · D2x, still worth it?


For landscapes, architecture, and a very active family -- which to me implies some recurrent need for low-light work -- I would definitely not choose a D2x in 2013. Maybe it's because I never had one, so I don't feel the visceral pull of memory for those who loved it. But to me, the main benefits of a D2x are rugged build and fast focus, and only the latter is beneficial to you.

Landscapes and architecture especially would benefit from more pixels, and the active family would benefit from higher ISO. Depending on your budget and your need for pixels versus high ISO versus ruggedness, I could potentially recommend a D7000, D300, a D5100 or the new D5200 even... each of which is superior to the D2x in some way. D7000 has 16MP and great high ISO; D300 has 12MP and is a fantastic action camera that's also very rugged; and the D5100/D5200 are both cheap while still having lots of pixels and good high ISO.

Of course each has its weaknesses too, just like the D2x has its own. So, in order to help you better, could you please rank the following in order of importance to you?

- Pixel count for larger prints
- High ISO for low light performance
- Low cost
- Rugged build
- Lots of manual controls
- Fast AF performance

Knowing that will enable us to advise you far more usefully than just basing our comments on our own prior experiences.



Jan 08, 2013 at 02:34 AM
Dee50
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #12 · p.1 #12 · D2x, still worth it?


Thanks for the welcome and all the responses. Much appreciated.

I would love to get the D2x but after further thought and the comments here, perhaps I ought to be thinking of picking up something like a used D300 instead. It seems to me that in good light the D2x will perform well, and I would hope to be able to bring out the best of the files in Lightroom, but as previously mentioned, I would also be using the camera in doors capturing family moments almost on a daily basis. Seems like the D2x may struggle here without flash, and the D300, with its better ISO performance and on board flash might work out a bit better on that front. I hear that the D300 AF is very capable, so would be adept at catching the action as it happens.

As regards landscape work, both would seem be rugged enough to cope and take a beating. IQ and DR on the D300 perhaps a little better?

In the end, 12 MP will be a great improvement over the D50 (now dead), and I’ll have the ability to print bigger. Having greater low light capability is a plus for indoor and family pics. 2013 may see the introduction of the mythical D400, but who knows. In the interim, whilst saving for better glass (currently using Nikon 18-70mm) and keeping my ‘big purchase upgrade’ options open, I need something that will meet my needs over the coming months but also be a joy to use.

Thanks for the input again, and any further thoughts on the D2x D300 debate still much appreciated.




Jan 08, 2013 at 05:15 PM
Rodolfo Paiz
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #13 · p.1 #13 · D2x, still worth it?


Dee50 wrote:
I would love to get the D2x but after further thought and the comments here, perhaps I ought to be thinking of picking up something like a used D300 instead. It seems to me that in good light the D2x will perform well, and I would hope to be able to bring out the best of the files in Lightroom, but as previously mentioned, I would also be using the camera in doors capturing family moments almost on a daily basis. Seems like the D2x may struggle here without flash, and the D300, with its better ISO performance and on
...Show more

The D300 AF is not very capable... it's amazing. It's essentially the same AF module as in the D700 and D3, with about 95% to 98% of the performance (the D3 is a hair quicker, probably due to higher voltage) and even better coverage because the AF points cover a larger part of the DX frame. I put over 100,000 clicks onto a pair of D300 bodies shooting aviation (see this old thread for some examples), and the D300 absolutely rocks.

There are better high-ISO bodies than the D300 (D7000, D5100, D5200), but since you want fast AF and a rugged build then the D300 is probably the camera for you.

Dee50 wrote:
As regards landscape work, both would seem be rugged enough to cope and take a beating. IQ and DR on the D300 perhaps a little better?

In the end, 12 MP will be a great improvement over the D50 (now dead), and I’ll have the ability to print bigger. Having greater low light capability is a plus for indoor and family pics. 2013 may see the introduction of the mythical D400, but who knows. In the interim, whilst saving for better glass (currently using Nikon 18-70mm) and keeping my ‘big purchase upgrade’ options open, I need something that will meet
...Show more

Joy to use, check.

Larger prints than what you can get from the D50 and D2x bodies, also check. Rugged enough, definitely.

What I would also definitely suggest is that you pursue more glass. For your indoor family shots, something like the $100 "nifty 50" (50/1.8D or G) would give you at least a 2-stop brightness advantage over your 18-70, and sometimes more. There are all kinds of old, manual-focus prime lenses you can mount on a D300 which will give you great results for very little money (for example, I have a 28/2 and a 35/2 that each cost me around $200 or $300). And on the much-more-expensive side, my personal favorite lens for both landscapes and portraits is the 70-200… And that new 70-200/4 looks absolutely scrumptious.



Jan 08, 2013 at 06:56 PM
huddy
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #14 · p.1 #14 · D2x, still worth it?


Dee, you have been given some great advice and a D300 would serve you really well. I would second Rodolfo on the glass front. A 50/1.8 or 35/1.8 would be the cats meow with that body. I am strongly considering picking up a D300 to use as a backup body for portarait shooting since it shares the AF and controls of my D700


Jan 09, 2013 at 01:25 AM
okephoto
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #15 · p.1 #15 · D2x, still worth it?


I have owned both the D2X and the D300 and between the two I grabbed for the D300 95% of the time. It's not that the D2X was bad but more the D300 was better, especially in low light where I do so much of my work. Where the D2X really excelled was feel and colour tone, at base ISO it' still a great camera.

Now, my D300 is backup to my D800 and my D2X went to a good home for $550 US. Kind of miss the "solid" feel.



Jan 09, 2013 at 04:00 AM
trenchmonkey
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #16 · p.1 #16 · D2x, still worth it?


Old piece of crap >100% crop SOOC 2 stop ND
BushHawk w/the assist



© riversbendphotography

  NIKON D2Xs    200mm    f/2.0    1/800s    100 ISO    -0.7 EV  




Jan 09, 2013 at 09:41 PM
Rodolfo Paiz
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.1 #17 · p.1 #17 · D2x, still worth it?


Will, of course any D2-series body can make good images, just as it did when it was new. Nothing wrong with that camera (or any other out-of-production camera, either). Most people who have one or had one, love it.

But if you don't have one, and you have to pay nearly $650 for it (GBP 400), and you shoot the kind of things the OP is shooting, then I think that other Nikon bodies offer a better value proposition for him.



Jan 09, 2013 at 11:09 PM
1joel1
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #18 · p.1 #18 · D2x, still worth it?


I just bought one, $750 with extras in minty condition, and LOVE it.

JMO,

Joel



Jan 10, 2013 at 06:00 PM
smithcottage
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #19 · p.1 #19 · D2x, still worth it?


I have owned a D2x in the past and really liked it. However, later bodies like even the D 7000 made it difficult to justify and I sold it.

http://henrysmithscottage.wordpress.com/2010/07/18/the-gear-i-use-nikon-d2x/



Jan 10, 2013 at 07:54 PM
allstarimaging
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #20 · p.1 #20 · D2x, still worth it?


yea but how about those skin tones







Jan 10, 2013 at 09:04 PM
1
       2       end




FM Forums | Nikon Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1
       2       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username   Password    Reset password