dpolston
TPF Noob!
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2007
- Messages
- 949
- Reaction score
- 1
- Location
- Norfolk, VA.
- Can others edit my Photos
- Photos OK to edit
Okay... I am looking into the possibility of buying a second camera aside from my backup camera. And frankly, I don't know the direction I need to take. I am looking for those cross over pros that shoot both PJ and Session photos.
My story: I shoot primarily with Nikon D200 and I have a D70 as a backup. I really want the D3, but realistically, I can't justify that price for something that it more or less for a part time, occasional job. I think I need a second camera because it is becoming a hassle switching lenses back and forth during a shoot (which I do often). Keeping a lens on both the 200 and the 70 is a bit of a headache in some occasions because the 70 doesn't keep up with the way I shoot my primary. It feels like I am taking a Ford Pinto onto the racetrack that I normally drive a BMW M3!
Now, I love the 200 and my first thought is to get another one. But I thought; buy a D2h (if I can find them) because I have heard that they're a bit more versatile than the 200, but not as pricey as the D2xs (around half the cost). But how does the d2h's lower resolution 4.something compare to the 10.4 I have in the D200 where functionality is concerned? I guess I wanted to know if the trade off is worth it. I know that the lower resolution for greater speed and durability is a factor but am I taking a step backwards by not getting another 200 instead of the 2h?
I know that the D2Xs are around 4200 and the D3 is 5000 compared to the 200 which is 1500. I believe I can get the D2H for around 2000. I am asking pro's (or those with the pockets to afford them and have OWNED them) will I notice a considerable difference in these cameras or am I trying to compare apples to oranges? I'd like these opinions because I shoot somewhere in between PJ style and portrait. I am also a hands opinion guy, I don't do very well on side by side technical spec comparisons - I'm more touchy-feely.
Thanks... you all are the best! =o)
My story: I shoot primarily with Nikon D200 and I have a D70 as a backup. I really want the D3, but realistically, I can't justify that price for something that it more or less for a part time, occasional job. I think I need a second camera because it is becoming a hassle switching lenses back and forth during a shoot (which I do often). Keeping a lens on both the 200 and the 70 is a bit of a headache in some occasions because the 70 doesn't keep up with the way I shoot my primary. It feels like I am taking a Ford Pinto onto the racetrack that I normally drive a BMW M3!
Now, I love the 200 and my first thought is to get another one. But I thought; buy a D2h (if I can find them) because I have heard that they're a bit more versatile than the 200, but not as pricey as the D2xs (around half the cost). But how does the d2h's lower resolution 4.something compare to the 10.4 I have in the D200 where functionality is concerned? I guess I wanted to know if the trade off is worth it. I know that the lower resolution for greater speed and durability is a factor but am I taking a step backwards by not getting another 200 instead of the 2h?
I know that the D2Xs are around 4200 and the D3 is 5000 compared to the 200 which is 1500. I believe I can get the D2H for around 2000. I am asking pro's (or those with the pockets to afford them and have OWNED them) will I notice a considerable difference in these cameras or am I trying to compare apples to oranges? I'd like these opinions because I shoot somewhere in between PJ style and portrait. I am also a hands opinion guy, I don't do very well on side by side technical spec comparisons - I'm more touchy-feely.
Thanks... you all are the best! =o)