Any use for a D2x in good shape?

B

Buanadha

Senior Member
Saw one of these with very low clicks and in good shape and wondered if it still had some value as a long distance wildlife camera in good light and as a studio camera?

Pros appear to be:
12mp and pro body
supposedly great color out of the camera
1.5x and 2x crop modes (albeit with 6.9mp only when in 2x crop), but with nice distance and good frame rate

Negatives:
big and bulky (par for the course on a Pro body)
bad ISO performance above 400 and I think terrible above 800 or 1600
Missing a lot of the niceties/automation added for newer bodies


I guess another positive - I think it can work natively with the TC-16A teleconverter (not the modified version) and do AF on some MF lenses - the combination in good light could help turn it into a relatively cheap wildlife/bird camera

Any thoughts?
 
Last edited:
hark

hark

Administrator
Staff member
Super Mod
I don't have any experience with this body or TC but just wanted to mention that when using a TC, it will reduce light by at least one stop. And that will impact your ISO. The Nikon 1.4x TC reduces light by 1 stop. Not exactly sure if this 1.6 TC would reduce light by 1.5 stops or a little more.
 
BF Hammer

BF Hammer

Senior Member
Let's be realistic, a D610 would mostly run a ring around a body of this age. The sensors have improved so much.

It is a starter camera today. Could be a candidate for an infrared conversion but a D7100 would be an even better choice that can use D autofocus lenses.
 
Fred Kingston

Fred Kingston

Senior Member
Buanadha said:
Saw one of these with very low clicks and in good shape and wondered if it still had some value as a long distance wildlife camera in good light and as a studio camera?

Pros appear to be:
12mp and pro body
supposedly great color out of the camera
1.5x and 2x crop modes (albeit with 6.9mp only when in 2x crop), but with nice distance and good frame rate

Negatives:
big and bulky (par for the course on a Pro body)
bad ISO performance above 400 and I think terrible above 800 or 1600
Missing a lot of the niceties/automation added for newer bodies


I guess another positive - I think it can work natively with the TC-16A teleconverter (not the modified version) and do AF on some MF lenses - the combination in good light could help turn it into a relatively cheap wildlife/bird camera

Any thoughts?
Click to expand...

Your question is relative to the price of the D2... There are newer better bodies for what you want, for usually, less money than D2s go for... A few mentioned by other folks here...

A camera body is a tool... I have a friend that uses one almost exclusively... He's been a professional for well over 40 years... He knows and understands that body's features and limitations... it's just a tool... what the tool produces is relative to the skill of the person using the tool...
 
B

Buanadha

Senior Member
BF Hammer said:
Let's be realistic, a D610 would mostly run a ring around a body of this age. The sensors have improved so much.

It is a starter camera today. Could be a candidate for an infrared conversion but a D7100 would be an even better choice that can use D autofocus lenses.
Click to expand...

No doubt, I'd like the D610, but for wildlife/birds, I'd lose the lens length advantage by going to FF (and I think in crop mode the D610 is 10 MP as well).

The D7100 is a really good alternative and decent models can be had at a bit less than 2x the cost of the old D2x I saw.

The camera I'd like to have for birds/wildlife is the D500.. but dollars matter still ;)

I'm kind of leaning against it in general. I have a D300 that I use for wildlife/birds now and this is a step backwards (except for maybe the 2x crop mode in HSC and the ability to use the unmodified TC-16a teleconverter -- it is kind of tempting to use a 300mm f/2.8 AI-S, for instance)
 
Top