Nikon D2H v Canon 1D MkII - any experience?

dod

dod

TPer Emeritus
Messages
16,678
Name
Ebenezer McScrooge III
Edit My Images
Yes
Anyone had any experience with both the above? How do they compare, which did you prefer, that sort of thing.

I know there's a difference in MP and the like but the D2H looks like a bargain at second hand prices.
 
Hi Dod ,
I have both,and use both,sliightly unusual,but it's just worked out that way.
The D2H is a fantastic camera and an absolute steal at present prices which is why I am keeping mine for present .
It's main plus points are pro build,great ergonomics,fast frames per sec,smaller files,weatherproofing,loads of features,takes great pictures if set up right,feels great in the hand,takes any nikon lens.great battery life.
It's minus points,struggles with lower light and high iso compared to 1D ,gets noisy above 800,white balance needs careful understanding,needs to shoot raw,pics need to be shot right size ,minimal cropping.works best with proper glass.

ID mk 2,
plus points,
Built like a tank,takes great pictures even at 1600 iso,real pro workhorse,weatherproofed,and once you get used to it a great camera taking great pictures.Fast shooting and buffering.Good colours ,except reds can be a problem needing careful control of white balance. More keepers than D2H.

minus points,
I think it is very complicated and controls can be very hard to use needing lots of fingers.
Very heavy !Screen is small and hard to see if pictures are sharp.
Bigger files but less noise.

The D2H for the money is a bargain in the hands of very competant photographer,it is easy to use if you are a Nikon man ,and offers a pro camera for the price of bridge camera.
In good to average light the results are fantastic with good glass,and the 4mp is not an issue.The smaller files can be very handy and much quicker to send as jpegs on the pc and to mags.
The Mk2 is a great camera ,no question but not perfect ,takes great pics,but again is no point and shoot for best results.
I might think of more in a bit,
Pons
 
Ta Pons, I know about the MkII ;)

I'd been humming and hawing about Whitey's D2H in the classifieds (now sold) mainly because I've been fancying trying out Nikon for a while but not wanting to commit to getting rid of all my Canon gear. The D2H seems to tick a lot of the right boxes for me for not much cash, although you've still got to factor in glass.
 
Firstly, Whitey's has now gone!

I toyed with the idea of buying it as well, mainly just to see what they are like and also to experience a pro body.

From what I understand the AF is very good, but I think the D300 AF (same as D3 et al) is better.

Noise is not great, this was improved in the D2Hs.

The 4mp is limited resolution (well obviously!) but I understand it creates lovely colours and can be interpolated well.

Overall, I think Flash is right in what he says about the D2Hs.
 
CT said:
Don't do anything rash Doddy. ;)
Click to expand...

There's an itch I can't scratch ;) But, I'm not going to go spending a fortune on changing systems until I've tested the water, so to speak. I'm reckoning the handling etc on any of the "pro" bodies is going to be similar so, if I could get on with one of them, any of the newer models would simply be better.
 
LOL Oh I know about them itches. :D
 
D2Hs is a fantastic camera with good glass - you'll get great prints up to 15" x 10" or even bigger if you're careful. I have two of them - you should get a lightly used one for around £700 but good ones are getting scarcer.

AW4_2546.jpg
 
D2H has a completely different sensor (designed by Nikon over several years and has a throttled output IIRC) Probably has some traits that are better than a CMOS or CCD and apparently even at 4Mp produces pics on a par with higher Mp cameras. (s'what I've picked up from reading stuff... so take no notice lol)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top