Nikon postings

Hello everyone,
Back in the days of the "other" forum of which most of us were members, I would find myself checking the posts all the time. Since the demise of that site, I certainly have more time on my hands...which is good...but I am definitely missing the give and take of information about Nikon products. So, I thought I might try to rev things up a bit and see what happens. Anyone get their hands on a D2Xs yet? I am also interested in the new 105 micro vr. Glad to hear any info on either item.
Jon

I'm interested in both of those products (more the 105mm VR than the D2Xs, because my D200 is fine for my needs), but can't afford either. It's still fun to read discussions about things one can't afford and won't be buying, though.

Jon Crispin said:

Hello everyone,
Back in the days of the "other" forum of which most of us were members, I would find myself checking the posts all the time. Since the demise of that site, I certainly have more time on my hands...which is good...but I am definitely missing the give and take of information about Nikon products. So, I thought I might try to rev things up a bit and see what happens. Anyone get their hands on a D2Xs yet? I am also interested in the new 105 micro vr. Glad to hear any info on either item.
Jon

Click to expand...

Sorry I have no reports on the D2X. I have however been trying to recruit Nikon users to OPF. So if you know of others let them know they are very welcome here!

Asher

I have the 105VR. It's as sharp as the older version but the VR is useless for macro work. It didn't take too long for us over on the Nikon DSLR forum to realize that the VR gets gradually diminished as you get closer to the subject. It does tell you this in the manual. The VR is fine for anything more than 3 feet away.
Bottom line is that if you do macro work only, then the older AF105 is just as good (many macro shooters prefer to use MF for macro anyway) and just as sharp.

I am trying, ("trying" is the operative word here), to make the jump to a DSLR. I have film Nikons from way-back including FM, FEs and a F3. My initial thinking is a D200. Does it have a sync socket so I can use speedlights? Or do I have to go through a hotshoe like I did with a 6006? (I hated that).

Thanks,

Paul

The D200 has a PC-synch socket on it's left side.

Thanks Steve. Is there anything other camera you would recommend, or should I be considering anything else?

Paul

I only have the D40 but I recently purchased the 105mm AF-S VR and absolutely love it. I use it for both macro and "regular" photography. The VR is definitely pretty useless in macro applications but it does work well on longer shots. I use this lens probably more than any others. I have the 18-55 kit lens and also the 70-300mm AF-S VR. I just acquired an R1C1 macro flash system and an extension tube set to use with the 105. I just always seem to want to get closer and closer. I have a lot to learn but am already getting some enjoyable results with this setup. Oh yes...admin...you should add the D40 to the list for this forum name.

I tried the D2X at the local camera shop and liked the handling and the response times in all the body functions I got from it, but I just love my D200, it is a little slower in fps but since I shoot all sports I do on slide film with my D200 as my back up it's not a big deal. I have a 105 but it's the older AI-S which is crazy sharp! I borrowed the 105VR from the same shop one afternoon and found not a difference in quality and the VR was nice when I didn't have the lens pointed at a wall or the ground. I do all my micro work(which is not a lot) on a tripod with a cable I don't have the pressing need to get the VR version anytime soon and my wife is happy about that.

mitchmcneil said:

I tried the D2X at the local camera shop and liked the handling and the response times in all the body functions I got from it, but I just love my D200, it is a little slower in fps but since I shoot all sports I do on slide film with my D200 as my back up it's not a big deal.

Click to expand...

OK. I have to ask... why shoot sports primarily with slide film? I'd think you'd want to be able to rattle off lots and lots of images without worrying about the cost of film, processing, etc.

The last big sporting event I shot was the World Field Lacrosse held here in London last summer. The biggest reason is the colour from the fuji chrome's films. For me it's more forgiving in the action sports but at that time I wasn't shooting anything digital and just two F4s. I get great rates in processing and if I sell one image it pays for me getting to sit and watch sports all day.