DSLRUsers.com

Hi all,

Opinion time.
Is a D1x worth it still? I shoot with a D70 (what a gem) and i am looking for a 2nd body. Now, with a mortage and everything else in life to deal with, money isn't tight, but saving where i can is important. But i want a 2nd body for backup, and i have seen D1x's from reputable dealers in the states going at pretty good prices ($500-600US)
So, is it worth it?
I know they had problems with battery life, but what else is there to look out for. I don't need anything too crazy, but i also feel that a D1x might be a good "pro camera" starting point for me too.
I really want a D2x, but even cheap ones will raise the eyebrows of my wife!!!!

Opinions welcome.
Thanks in advance.

D2H(s) cameras goes for slightly bit more than that... and D2X can be grabbed for cheap these days.

Question is, what does the D70 wouldnt give you for you to consider the D1X?

A used D200 can also be option to those as well.

Yi-P wrote:Question is, what does the D70 wouldnt give you for you to consider the D1X?

I love the D70, think its one of the greatest things ever. Part of my thinking was:
1. D1x and D70 are similar in price, maybe $100-200 difference.
2. D1x is a "pro" level camera, and it would be a good starting point to get into the pro cameras and get a feel for them, so in the near future, i can make the step up to something like a D2x or D3, without having to learn everything.

D200. I like it, but it is a bit out of what i am looking at, the are still up around the $800-900US for a used one.

Like i said, its more to use as a backup, but also to either take the wide angle lens or the telephotos, so i don't have to keep changing.

akdphotos wrote:
I love the D70, think its one of the greatest things ever. Part of my thinking was:
1. D1x and D70 are similar in price, maybe $100-200 difference.
2. D1x is a "pro" level camera, and it would be a good starting point to get into the pro cameras and get a feel for them, so in the near future, i can make the step up to something like a D2x or D3, without having to learn everything.

D200. I like it, but it is a bit out of what i am looking at, the are still up around the $800-900US for a used one.

Like i said, its more to use as a backup, but also to either take the wide angle lens or the telephotos, so i don't have to keep changing.

1- something at that level, it is better to get a newer consumer D80 or similar...

2- Going "pro" is a curse... Once you do, you will soon enough to buy your next pro body...
The learning curve from a D1x to any recent camera is very steep... there is nothing much similar from a D1 to a D2 or nothing of D3... They can look similar and probably feel similar, but the menu, controls and settings on a D1 series is far from the newer generations.

I'm not saying the D1x is a bad performer. In fact, it performs very good. But with its outdated battery and menu/button ergonomics, it is more of a camera to collect than to have for to use.

Beware that in the near future, ever you want to expand your camera to the next one, it going to cost you $500USD extra of what you spend on the D1X and learn the same way as you did coming from a D70...

Yi-P wrote:

akdphotos wrote:
I love the D70, think its one of the greatest things ever. Part of my thinking was:
1. D1x and D70 are similar in price, maybe $100-200 difference.
2. D1x is a "pro" level camera, and it would be a good starting point to get into the pro cameras and get a feel for them, so in the near future, i can make the step up to something like a D2x or D3, without having to learn everything.

D200. I like it, but it is a bit out of what i am looking at, the are still up around the $800-900US for a used one.

Like i said, its more to use as a backup, but also to either take the wide angle lens or the telephotos, so i don't have to keep changing.

1- something at that level, it is better to get a newer consumer D80 or similar...

2- Going "pro" is a curse... Once you do, you will soon enough to buy your next pro body...
The learning curve from a D1x to any recent camera is very steep... there is nothing much similar from a D1 to a D2 or nothing of D3... They can look similar and probably feel similar, but the menu, controls and settings on a D1 series is far from the newer generations.

I'm not saying the D1x is a bad performer. In fact, it performs very good. But with its outdated battery and menu/button ergonomics, it is more of a camera to collect than to have for to use.

Beware that in the near future, ever you want to expand your camera to the next one, it going to cost you $500USD extra of what you spend on the D1X and learn the same way as you did coming from a D70...

Appriciate the replies. Will see if the rest of the family have plans for my christmas presents yet.................................. D2x........hmmmmm, fingers crossed!!!!

I just had a quick look at your site. Judging from the photos you shoot, I really suggest you to get a used D2H(s) body and never look back.

D2H can shoot up to about 40+ shots at 1-8fps, compared to 3fps for only 9 pics on the D1x... It can mean a lot in a race on its heats. Autofocus on the D2H is also better than D1X.

A little side note, D1 uses NiMh batteries, which are discontinued and hard to get. If any case battery fails, it will cost much more to continue the use of the camera than to buy a D2H or D2X initially (that uses same battery as D3 and will be available for many years). Just another point of consideration.

Yi-P wrote:I just had a quick look at your site. Judging from the photos you shoot, I really suggest you to get a used D2H(s) body and never look back.

D2H can shoot up to about 40+ shots at 1-8fps, compared to 3fps for only 9 pics on the D1x... It can mean a lot in a race on its heats. Autofocus on the D2H is also better than D1X.

A little side note, D1 uses NiMh batteries, which are discontinued and hard to get. If any case battery fails, it will cost much more to continue the use of the camera than to buy a D2H or D2X initially (that uses same battery as D3 and will be available for many years). Just another point of consideration.

Every point is appriciated and taken into consideration. Guess i didn't really consider a D2h enough. I like them, they have had good feedback, but i guess i was in a "megapixel" haze, thinking more is better.

Anyone give a good indication on how the D2h "blows up" photos? A3 isn't a problem for the D70, the shoots look great, even at iso 400 on dark overcast days witha slow shutter.

just to ask outside the square, what else is in your arsenal?

a quick squiz at your site, and you have karting shots for sale, show at 1/400th, f5, and most shots may be considered "too distant".

if you have kit glass, have you considered sticking with the great D70, and perhaps adding a nice f2.8 zoom, like a 80-200? my thinking is always along the lines of "good bodies come and go, but glass lasts forever"

Every point is appriciated and taken into consideration. Guess i didn't really consider a D2h enough. I like them, they have had good feedback, but i guess i was in a "megapixel" haze, thinking more is better.

D2H produces somewhat much better photos with its 'fat pixels' than a 6MP D70...

akdphotos wrote:Anyone give a good indication on how the D2h "blows up" photos? A3 isn't a problem for the D70, the shoots look great, even at iso 400 on dark overcast days witha slow shutter.

Blown it up to A2-ish size... not a problem:

Oz_Beachside wrote:just to ask outside the square, what else is in your arsenal?

a quick squiz at your site, and you have karting shots for sale, show at 1/400th, f5, and most shots may be considered "too distant".

if you have kit glass, have you considered sticking with the great D70, and perhaps adding a nice f2.8 zoom, like a 80-200? my thinking is always along the lines of "good bodies come and go, but glass lasts forever"

Yep, Kit glass. Have been looking into other lenses, but even the G-series 70-300 gives great results, yeah, AF is a little slow, but it gives great results.
Was looking into moving to primes, and sticking with the 18-70 ED. was looking at 85mm, 200 & 300. Then also the 80-200 to fill in the gaps.

I shot using shutter priority. I learnt a long time ago the pain in thinking you know everything and manual is the only way to shot, and when you get burned cause you miss something, cause you weren't quick enough and its either under or over exposed. The D70 handles shutter priority reall well. As for shoting at 1/400th. i am not a huge fan of it, i prefer making myself look different from other photographers, but, a lot those shots seem to be the ones that the guys like, so, i guess its cater for the market in a way. I like movement.

Yi-P wrote:

Every point is appriciated and taken into consideration. Guess i didn't really consider a D2h enough. I like them, they have had good feedback, but i guess i was in a "megapixel" haze, thinking more is better.

D2H produces somewhat much better photos with its 'fat pixels' than a 6MP D70...

akdphotos wrote:Anyone give a good indication on how the D2h "blows up" photos? A3 isn't a problem for the D70, the shoots look great, even at iso 400 on dark overcast days witha slow shutter.

Blown it up to A2-ish size... not a problem:

Very nice work there.
Am looking into the D2h at the moment. Thanks heaps for the input and advice

akdphotos wrote:Yep, Kit glass. Have been looking into other lenses, but even the G-series 70-300 gives great results, yeah, AF is a little slow, but it gives great results.
Was looking into moving to primes, and sticking with the 18-70 ED. was looking at 85mm, 200 & 300. Then also the 80-200 to fill in the gaps.

I could make my old 70-300G work 'ok' when stopped down to f8-f11, maybe alright on cloudy days, but CA can be a spoiler. For circuit racing my 80-200 f2.8D was too short and TC doesn't work well with it. I'm getting to grips with my new 300 prime + 1.4x TC, fantastic combo - my first outing with it a Wakefield park last weekend:
Mark

I use to use 2x d70 for motorsport stuff up until earlier this year. I decided to upgrade to either a d300 or 2x d200.
Both were about 2500$. I end up getting the d200 bodies.

I think having 2 bodies the same helps with settings, d200 isn't that old so you won't lose out with remote flash setups with the sb800.

I dunno about the d1x, the batteries are pricey, it might not work too well with the sb800(don't quote me). If its old it might need a service.
Why not pickup another d70? I picked up one for 55$ at a second hand store.

monyx wrote:I could make my old 70-300G work 'ok' when stopped down to f8-f11, maybe alright on cloudy days, but CA can be a spoiler. For circuit racing my 80-200 f2.8D was too short and TC doesn't work well with it. I'm getting to grips with my new 300 prime + 1.4x TC, fantastic combo - my first outing with it a Wakefield park last weekend:
Mark

The reason i was looking into primes more than zoom lenses was also the sharpness of the image. This is in no way saying that zooms can't produce sharp images, far from it, but with less elements in the lens, primes are good.

redline wrote:I use to use 2x d70 for motorsport stuff up until earlier this year. I decided to upgrade to either a d300 or 2x d200.
Both were about 2500$. I end up getting the d200 bodies.

I think having 2 bodies the same helps with settings, d200 isn't that old so you won't lose out with remote flash setups with the sb800.

I dunno about the d1x, the batteries are pricey, it might not work too well with the sb800(don't quote me). If its old it might need a service.
Why not pickup another d70? I picked up one for 55$ at a second hand store.

Thats a good price for a D70!!! damm, i would buy a 2nd one for that.

Guess at the end of the day i will have to save more pennies. My thinking all along was i wanted new lenses, somehting nice, but my thinking was also whats the point in having good lenses, if i have no body to shoot them with if mine was to go south. Guess i would rather just have the backup first.

Wonder what tattslotto is like this week..............

whats the point in having good lenses, if i have no body to shoot them with if mine was to go south.

Depends how essential it is to keep shooting. If you are a pro wedding tog, then what are you doing with only one body? OTH if you are a hobbyist, then "Darling my camera just broke... I need a new D4 to replace it" is a great excuse. In the meantime, you can have a new lens that works great on your D70 as well as your planned D700

Mr Darcy wrote:

whats the point in having good lenses, if i have no body to shoot them with if mine was to go south.

Depends how essential it is to keep shooting. If you are a pro wedding tog, then what are you doing with only one body? OTH if you are a hobbyist, then "Darling my camera just broke... I need a new D4 to replace it" is a great excuse. In the meantime, you can have a new lens that works great on your D70 as well as your planned D700

Once again, good point!
Too much to think about now, my wife is going to kill me for what i am thinking!!!!!!

thanks all for the input

And don't forget, I still have the D2X for sale - enthusiast use only. And the 17 - 55 and 12 - 24 lenses for sale. I did quote prices in another post, but am willing to negotiate with realistic possible purchaser's. PM Me. I'm also in Melbourne, so you could alway have a feel of the D2X!!!!!!