Posted by Tim Munsey on January 5, 2008 at 1:05 PM
Hey up folks I'm suffering from severe lust and no dosh, a terrible combination, so I'm selling my crown jewels.
For sale a sigma 800mm + nikon D2H for 2K or
sigma 800mm + nikon D2X for 2.5K
The sigma is what they call scruffy but is optically sound, it comes with an aluminum carry case.
Both cameras are in good condition with below 50K shots (D2X 38K, D2H 25K) both are with boxes.
Tim
Posted by Paul Gibbs on January 5, 2008 at 1:18 PM
Not going to Canon are you? I'd love a 800, but i'd only want then lens, sadly i have about £2000 of repairs due on the house
Posted by Tim Munsey on January 5, 2008 at 1:23 PM
No not canon, I fancy the D3 a radical change but I'm after new challenges.
Posted by John Varley on January 5, 2008 at 2:42 PM
Well that puts a stop to me getting a D3 and borrowing your 800
You'd have to to prise my 800 from out of my cold dead hands before I would sell it for a d3, I did have one on loan through my NPS membership before they were officially released, they are a nice camera but I find the d300 much better for wildlife especially with the grip, the enel4 battery giving 8fps if you need them with absolutely superb jpeg's straight from camera.
Phillip.
iso1600 JPEG straight from camera justly sized to 720
Posted by Steve Makin on January 5, 2008 at 3:34 PM
I was pondering this camera today and wondering if the greatest improvement is the ability to use a higher asa which consequently gives higher shutter speed and the ability to close the lens down to its best performing aperture - OR - is the camera better at this and focusing ability, and higher frames per second etc - is it really such a huge improvement ?
sorry to drag off topic, is it worth a new thread ?, can techs be discussed on this forum ?
Posted by Tim Munsey on January 5, 2008 at 5:49 PM
Hi Steve,
My take on the D3 is that its a very different camera to the D2X, and so closes down and opens up different shooting. For wildlife I reckon the D2X is better suited.
care to elaborate tim? also, aren't you tempted to wait for the allegedly higher megapixelled inevitable D3x??
regards,
mark
Posted by Andy Astbury on January 6, 2008 at 9:36 AM
Just to chuck in my two pence worth - the D3 seems to me to be a strange thing for Nikon to produce, and though it must have its uses I can't see it being a viable body for our purposes. Using a full frame body has loads of appeal to me, but only if I'm getting a big 'hike' in file size - with the D3 all I'm getting is a smaller image.
The 'just get closer' argument falls down somewhat when we consider using 600-800mm lenses as quite often we are working with these lenses at or close to their minimum focus distance anyway - quite often I'm on a working distance of 20-21 feet with my 800mm; switching to a D3 would mean I'd have to be a lot closer than the minimum focus distance would allow in order to obtain the same image size; and due to the 12mb file size I cannot crop the image PP to any great degree.
The D300 is much more viable alternative but its only real plus point over the D2Xs is iso performance - yes I know the AF is supposedly better, but then again it'll only produce results based on the lenses AF abilities - for us Sigmonster owners in average English light levels I doubt we'd see too much of a difference, but Phillip might well have experience to the contrary.
If I had the dough I think I'd buy one tomorrow, but I wouldn't get rid of the D2Xs in exchange.
It'll be interesting to see if Nikon really do announce a D3X: to my way of thinking they have GOT to - there's no way they'll survive with a 12Mb FF in the face of Canons latest FF with nearly twice the pixel count.
For me the D2Xs' only negative is iso noise, but I don't find it a problem in the slightest if I can keep the iso at 200 or below - in every other respect it's got to be one of the finest bodies money can buy for the type of big glass work we do.
and you can get the for about a grand now....or so i hear
Posted by Tim Munsey on January 6, 2008 at 10:50 AM
Hi Mark,
What's this "waiting" thing? Never been one for that. I agree with Andy's ramblings for wildlife shooting I should stick with the D2X or get a D300. But I want to try something different, also it does have a 5MP 1.5x crop option and I know from my D2H I can get excellent A3 prints from this number of pixels so I can still get a birdie or two.
Anyways this is pie in the sky as I haven't sold it yet.
Tim
Posted by Tim Munsey on January 9, 2008 at 3:55 AM
Hi,
Having had it valued at a local dealers I've decided to take it off the market at this price, far to much of a give away.
Discussion
11 repliesFor sale a sigma 800mm + nikon D2H for 2K or
sigma 800mm + nikon D2X for 2.5K
The sigma is what they call scruffy but is optically sound, it comes with an aluminum carry case.
Both cameras are in good condition with below 50K shots (D2X 38K, D2H 25K) both are with boxes.
Tim
Somebody is going to get a super bargain
Phillip.
iso1600 JPEG straight from camera justly sized to 720
sorry to drag off topic, is it worth a new thread ?, can techs be discussed on this forum ?
My take on the D3 is that its a very different camera to the D2X, and so closes down and opens up different shooting. For wildlife I reckon the D2X is better suited.
Tim
care to elaborate tim? also, aren't you tempted to wait for the allegedly higher megapixelled inevitable D3x??
regards,
mark
The 'just get closer' argument falls down somewhat when we consider using 600-800mm lenses as quite often we are working with these lenses at or close to their minimum focus distance anyway - quite often I'm on a working distance of 20-21 feet with my 800mm; switching to a D3 would mean I'd have to be a lot closer than the minimum focus distance would allow in order to obtain the same image size; and due to the 12mb file size I cannot crop the image PP to any great degree.
The D300 is much more viable alternative but its only real plus point over the D2Xs is iso performance - yes I know the AF is supposedly better, but then again it'll only produce results based on the lenses AF abilities - for us Sigmonster owners in average English light levels I doubt we'd see too much of a difference, but Phillip might well have experience to the contrary.
If I had the dough I think I'd buy one tomorrow, but I wouldn't get rid of the D2Xs in exchange.
It'll be interesting to see if Nikon really do announce a D3X: to my way of thinking they have GOT to - there's no way they'll survive with a 12Mb FF in the face of Canons latest FF with nearly twice the pixel count.
For me the D2Xs' only negative is iso noise, but I don't find it a problem in the slightest if I can keep the iso at 200 or below - in every other respect it's got to be one of the finest bodies money can buy for the type of big glass work we do.
and you can get the for about a grand now....or so i hear
What's this "waiting" thing? Never been one for that. I agree with Andy's ramblings for wildlife shooting I should stick with the D2X or get a D300. But I want to try something different, also it does have a 5MP 1.5x crop option and I know from my D2H I can get excellent A3 prints from this number of pixels so I can still get a birdie or two.
Anyways this is pie in the sky as I haven't sold it yet.
Tim
Having had it valued at a local dealers I've decided to take it off the market at this price, far to much of a give away.
Tim