What's new
DPR Forum

Welcome to the Friendly Aisles!
DPRF is a spin-off of dpreview. We are a photography forum with people from all over the world freely sharing their knowledge and love of photography. Everybody is welcome, from beginners to the experienced professional. From smartphone to Medium Format.

DPRF is a community for everybody, every brand and every sensor format. Digital and film.
Enjoy this modern, easy to use software. Look also at our Reviews & Gallery!

D70 vs D100

You can keep the 28-105 and get equal quality. But now you will have like a 42-150mm zoom, so you will probably buy a 20/2,8 later on, cuz you will miss the wide-angle.
If you trade the 28-105 and get the new 18-70, you will instead get like a 29-105mm lens, and maybe buy a tele zoom later on.

Personally, I think the new 18-70 is a more flexible alternative to start with, cuz it will cover most photographic needs. Later on you could get a lens like the 70-300 and cover like 105-450mm. Then when you can afford it, get the 50/1,8 which is a great low light lens as well as a nice portrait lens, like 75/1,8.

I have a D70, and I am very pleased with the 18-70. My second most used lens is 50/1,8.

Good luck!

Hans
 
Alan, I was where you are at about 10 months ago. I was going to buy a D100. I sold all of my Nikon equipment about 12 years ago and decided to get back into it. I wanted the highest quality at the most rock bottom price. (imagine that) I said, ok I need wide to tele. I looked at all of the lenses available and it came down to the 24-120VR and 80-400VR. I bought the 24 new and it cost about $550 US and the 400 used for $1,100 US. If I had any of my other 8 Nikon lenses, I would have kept them and still bought these other two, Why? The "D and G and now DX" lenses are made to work with the D series cameras. The D lens is a hybrid that works with film and digital, but let's not nit-pick. The others I would have probably used here and there, but I bet the two new lenses would still be the main stay on my camera. I have yet to get into a situation where I have said, oh gee I wish I had my so-and-so lens.

A foot note: I'm going to be adding one more lens in the next couple of months, probably the 17-55, because 24 in just not wide enough at times. So Hans and I are basicly telling you the same thing, just different numbers.

Good Luck,
Bo
 
Hi Alan,

Another suggestion is to keep your 28-105 and get a 18-35 as well. This will cover you from mederately wide (about 28mm on your D70) to mild telephoto (about 170mm). One reason I would keep the 18-105 instead of switching to the 18-70 is the former's moderate macro ability, which comes in even handier with the D70's 1.5 factor.
I have both lenses which I use on an F80, F65 and FE, and I'm very pleased with them, especially the 18-35's quality, and I have yet to run into a situation where between the two of them they don't cover me. (I used to have a 70-300G, but I gave that to my sister along with the F65 and an SB-50, so now I'm without a telephoto. I'm mulling either the 80-200 2.8 non-AFS or the 80-400 which is twice as expensive!)

Shady
 
Hi all,

I went to Berger Brothers on Long Island (NY) to see the demo of the Nikon D70. I have to tell you I wasn't impressed with the physical characteristics of this camers. They even had the D100 there too which seemed to have more physical quality )parts) compared to the "Plastic" that encompasses the D70.

I also spoke with the Nikon representative and he asked me about my present F100 and how I print out from film. I told him that I do use the Nikon ED4000 scanner for my color negatives (135 mb file - 14 bit depth 5900x3500 approx in pixels) using Photoshop and my Epson 2200 printer. He told me bluntly that that was the way to go if one really wants to have printing as a priority. I thanked him for his honesty. I do print out at 13x19.

I am glad that I went to the demonstration before shelling out my 13 one hundred dollar bills and I have to say that I am passing on this. The quality of parts coming out of Japan is truly a horror for the inflated dollars the consumer is shelling out.

Once again the main thing that turned me off from this D70 camera were the physical qualities and how light the lens (18-70mm) was in my hands. One drop of this camera and its a goner IMHO. BTW, notice how drastically the Nikon 8700 has dropped over the last 3 weeks...I see it at $589 now..now-USA Warranty.

JMHO, others may differ

Alan Russell
 
Alan,

The 18-70 is a very light "consumer-grade" lens. If you put a "real" glass lens on this camera, there will be no comparison to scanned 35mm negs....I'm a professional photographer who used to scan Hasselblad negs so that I could do my own retouching....my D70 images are better. I shoot about 110-120 weddings per year and for the last year I've been using a Fuji S2 - the body is still like new and I expect the D70, which is based on a similar platform, to give me the same service. I'm not trying to sell you a D70, but it's one heck of a camera for the bucks AND you won't spend your life waiting on negatives to finish scanning!

Greg
 
Alan,

Your post has given me something to think about re buying a D70 body. I have a feeling that the D70 will be reduced in price to below $500 when the D100 is replaced. As for a lens, I never intended to buy the 18-70, but would use my favorite 35-70 f3.5 AF Nikkor and 50mm 1.8 AF Nikkor.

Meanwhile I'm getting very good digital images with an Olympus 5050 prosumer that sports a 1.8 moderate zoom.

I agree that a film camera produces both excellent images if scanned negs -- and even prints -- are used. After the shock of digital wears off we may see a return to film by a wiser public. Based on your report, I'm keeping my money in the bank. A good negative scanner makes sense in any case, which brings up the subject of negative scanners.
I hope our colleagues would have some advice on this subject.

Best,
Bob R
 
Alan and Greg,
I guess I'll chime in on this one as well. I've been using a D100 for the last 6 months and coming from a Nikon F3. I was a bit leary about all that plastic. I must say though, that under heavy pro use, *not* being a "don't get a scratch on it" kind of guy, the D100 has performed just as good as the magnesium body F3. Granted, I have not put the D100 through the sort of abuse that my F3 went through, but I think for consumer grade every day use, it would hold up very well. (Until Nikon puts out the next "great" camera anyway, oh wait, that's the D70) So I'm comparing the D70 to the 100....which is more or less the same. My lenses, I seem to use the 24-120 VR and the 80-400VR the most. The 120 is semi close to the 18-35 and I have not had any problems with it either, but then again, I don't drive nails with my lenses.........

Cheers
Bo
 
Bob,

I come form a family of teachers. I am a technology teacher for the Dept of Ed (NYC) and do lecture consumer education as part of my agenda. The reduction to $500 or a tad more will happen as soon as the hype settles down via the I-Net and Nikon takes hold of the profit margins at its max for the D70. I am just an individual like you seeking out objectively the reasons to purchase the D70. Patience is virtue.
Stay in touch..

Alan Russell
 
Greg,

you must have read my mind. I did take my F100 with my 28-105mm "D" AF lens to the Nikon D70 Demo. I did ask the Nikon Rep. to put it onto the D70. After he made the switch, I noticed that the lens went into the 1.5 multplier stage. I also had the Nikon Rep put the 28-105mm lens onto the D100. The D100 had the servo motor (manual, continous, etc) for focusing identical to my F100. Guess what, the D100 had a better response as I focussed away on each camera. I have a habit that before I buy something, it has to feel good in my hands knowing that it will offer excellent quality.
The pictures out of the D70 are exscellent..I have seen them. My concern is still the physical abuse that this camera can take especially in the wrong hands.
As far as Scanning negative with my Nikon ED4000, it takes a lot of time but the results are worth waiting for. I appreciate your response and let's all click the shutter here.

Alan Russell
 
To Allan

Allan it looks like you can't make a decision on your own, always looking for reassurance from someone else. I'm mean one minute your ready the next your not. As for the nikon rep he works for nikon, probable not even a photographer, he's the last person you should be taking advice from? I'm mean does he own a scanner? does he print from a scanner? Does he even own a camera film or other wise? I aslo used to shoot film and scan on a dedicated film scanner and know the results are great. As for the D70 not being sturdy enough it's a entry level DSLR for Godsake! If you want integrity buy the D2H. After shooting with film for years I just purchased the D70 and can tell you the results are great.The prints I get on my canon 9000 are just as good as scanned if not even cleaner! The freedom I get from digital is great,I can experiment al I want without having to worry about the cost of film! No more going to get the film processed, and then going to pic it!
No more scanning! RAW files, whitebalance I love it.These are just a few of the advantages. Allan I believe IMHO that you want to go digital, buy the D70 , D2H , D100 whatever you'll LOVE IT! Believe me you'll love the results. If you decide to stay with film thats fine but rest assured that you will eventually have to switch to digital, cause none of the big players are investing their money on film based cameras.So Allan don't think to much, just do.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top