Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital Cameras (Point and Shoot) > Nikon

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Sep 28, 2003, 4:32 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 137
Default Nikon D1h (used) vs. Nikon D100 (new) vs Fuji S2 (new)

For anyone here who's actually seen/held/used the above three cameras, how would you go about selecting one over the others?

I can't afford (or don't want to spend) $4000 for a D2. The D1h would cost me around $2500 or so used, and the other two maybe a thousand less, new. I've read all the reports I can find, and still think it's too close to call... in which case, if it really is too close to call, I'd just go for the Fuji I guess.

I do mostly "sports" type stuff, so that points towards the D1h. I do make large images every so often, which might make the Fuji a better choice. I've got lots of AA cells, so the Fuji again. I want something that's reliable, which probably means any of the three. I didn't like the weight of my Nikon F4, which means the D1h might be too heavy, again pointing towards the Fuji. I guess what I'm really wondering, is if I spend less money and get the Fuji, what might I be upset about later on, wishing I had spent more for the D1h?
mikemyers is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Sep 28, 2003, 5:59 PM   #2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,803
Default

That is a really tough question.

The d1h is only 2.7 MP, but it shoots at a blazing 5 frames per second. If you need the speed, there is nothing else like it (the best film cameras match it.) It does sound like you would take advantage of it.

The D100 is good and much cheaper. It's much higher resolution, but it had some quirks. Only 200ISO, for example. It's fairly small and light (a good thing.)

I have a friend who gave away his D100 (girlfriend) and got an S2 Pro. He likes it a lot. He doesn't miss the D100 (loves the resolution, but dislikes the software which came with it.) But 2 frames per second isn't much.

If you really, really have to have the speed then you really have no choice. What will you use the pictures for? If you'll make big prints it could be a problem.

Eric
eric s is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 28, 2003, 6:42 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 137
Default

Most of my images go on the 'net, and in magazines. I rarely make huge prints. I used to, but haven't for years.

If the D100 really *only* goes up to 200ISO, and the S2 goes to 1600ISO, that pretty much eliminates the D100.



I don't think the 2 frames per second would hurt me too much, but the buffer size certainly would. I hate it when the buffer fills up, and I can't take anything until space in the buffer is freed up. In that sense, the D1h might be better.


How does the "user friendliness" of the S2 compare to that of the D1h ? Maybe that's going to be the deciding factor.... Or, I can wait a few weeks/months, save up a bit more money, and get a D2h....
mikemyers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 28, 2003, 11:07 PM   #4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,803
Default

I said that wrong. The lowest ISO is 200, the highest is (quick review check) is 1600.

If you do action/sports, 2 frames a second = missed shots. If this is for fun, you can get away with it. If its for money, it will cost you money.

I saw a perfect example of this on dpreview one time. A pro photojournalist had a shot of a hockey player horziontal in the air while flipping over. The next shot the guy was on his butt on the ice. He missed 3/4th of the spin in the air. The camera wasn't fast enough to get any other pictures in the scene. 2 or even 3 isn't that fast.

If you really aren't sure, rent the D1h for a weekend and try it out. Many places will let you apply part of the rental to the cost of the purchase (if you rent the S2... the D1h was used, right?)

I do agree, a full buffer is death. Doesn't matter how fast or slow the camera is, it's a brick when it can't take any more pictures.

I'll ask my friend about the user friendliness of the S2. He's used it and the D100.

I'm holding out judgement on the D2h. They did a lot of new things in it... it could be great, or it could have troubles. Did you read this preview?

http://www.robgalbraith.com/bins/mul...id=7-6269-6285

Eric
eric s is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 29, 2003, 12:19 AM   #5
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 137
Default

Thanks - the more I read about the D2h, the more I think I want one. Yes, I've read pretty much everything I can find on it. The bottom line might be the price... if it sells for near $3000 maybe I can somehow do it, but if it's $4000 or more, it's out of the question.



Without unlimited money, everything is a compromise, and the S2 seems to be quite reasonable. The smartest thing I could do regarding the D2 is wait a year, until any bugs are worked out...

I'm real curious what your friend will have to say about the S2 vs. D100. After reading all the reports, the S2 "seems" to be the camera people liked, even though it's "older technology" (the battery arrangement, etc.).



I guess I need to track down a camera store in Miami that has some of these things that I can look over and "feel".
mikemyers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 29, 2003, 11:35 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,803
Default

He is out today, but I'll ask my friend tomorrow.

Eric
eric s is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 29, 2003, 12:13 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
Klaus DK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,216
Default

Eric!

Quote:
He doesn't miss the D100 (loves the resolution, but dislikes the software which came with it.)
Whether you like the one or the other is a matter of taste, but please is this a joke ? If he tried using the Nikon Capture software, he would have experienced the best RAW converting software on the market! The RAW plugin for PS is NOTHING compared to Nikon Capture.

As you can see I like it! :lol:
Klaus DK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 29, 2003, 1:05 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 137
Default

Well, for better or worse, I made my choice.

I called B&H to ask about a few things, including when the new D2h would be available, and as of this past weekend, it's now available.

Instead of getting something and wishing later that I spent a bit more money, I just went for the D2h. It's $3200, and I should get it a week or so after the cameras come in.


I can't see getting a D1h when the D2h seems so much better, and while the Fuji S2 will do "most" of what I think I want it to do, I just know I'm going to be frustrated because of what it can't do.

I guess I should also say thanks to everyone here for posting all the information they have... reading all of it gave me a pretty good idea of the choices and limitations.
mikemyers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 29, 2003, 1:42 PM   #9
Senior Member
 
Klaus DK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,216
Default

...and I'm sure you did right. If you're not already familiar with the Nikon Capture, you should be so and shoot in RAW. This is so great and you will almost never get a real bad shot. In capture you can correct lots and lots of the D2 -settings.

Good luck and congratulation on your new baby!
Klaus DK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Sep 29, 2003, 2:29 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 5,803
Default

Congrats! Tell us all about it after you've used it a bit. I don't know anyone who had the D2h, so it will be good to hear your impressions.

Eric
eric s is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:31 AM.