Nikon D100

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by lacoste-rocker, Apr 27, 2010.

  1. lacoste-rocker macrumors regular

    lacoste-rocker

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2010
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    #1
    I am about to receive a Nikon D100 sometime buy next friday.
    Does anyone have this camera? What can I expect from it ?
    This will be my first D/SLR is this a good one to start off with?
    Thank you for your time.
     
  2. GoCubsGo macrumors Nehalem

    GoCubsGo

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2005
    #2
    You can expect it to take pictures but the advancement in technology since the D100 (which was a well-regarded camera when it was introduced) has advanced so much you may find yourself happier with another camera. Or is this free?

    Low light will be your biggest issue no doubt.
     
  3. lacoste-rocker thread starter macrumors regular

    lacoste-rocker

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2010
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
  4. GoCubsGo macrumors Nehalem

    GoCubsGo

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2005
    #4
  5. lacoste-rocker thread starter macrumors regular

    lacoste-rocker

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2010
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    #5
  6. peskaa macrumors 68020

    peskaa

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2008
    Location:
    London, UK
    #6
    I've shot probably 10-15,000 frames on a D100 at work. We hate the damn things, particularly in relation to what else is on the market now. Our major gripes?

    1) No sensor cleaning, and no matter how much we swab, the sensors are always mucky.
    2) Inconsistent white balance on preset. We have these in a studio environment, and they just seem to have a mind of their own and go "yellow" gradually.
    3) Build. Now, bear in mind our D100s are a good age now, but they're falling apart. We've had several in the last six months fail, one way or the other and get binned.
    4) Quality. You can't take them past ISO 400, the screens on the back are awful and bear no relation to what you've shot, and 6mp is bordering on insufficient.

    We much prefer our D200/300s cameras, along with the D700 and D3 series.
     
  7. standingquiet macrumors 6502

    standingquiet

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2010
    Location:
    Birmingham, AL
    #7
    I feel for your first DLSR it may be abit much for you, a D40 would have been perfect for your first DLSR
     
  8. leighonigar macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 5, 2007
    #8
    When I got my first DSLR the D100 was still pretty expensive. I got the D70 at the time, which took broadly similar photos but was a bit more refined in many areas, despite being cheaper. With a reasonable lens (are you getting a lens with this!?) and a bit of technical skill I don't see why a D100 couldn't still take great photographs if the camera itself is in good condition.

    Would I buy one? Almost certainly not, unless it was very cheap. As the others have said, technology has moved on, certainly screens are a lot bigger and the batteries with this one might need replacing. I'd probably be least concerned about the improvements in image quality, which might sound a bit odd, but I could work around the noise at higher ISOs, and I don't need more than 6mp.

    An XBOX isn't worth that much, right? It's probably a fine deal, but check the lens.
     
  9. lacoste-rocker thread starter macrumors regular

    lacoste-rocker

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2010
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    #9
    Thank you for all your responses.
    It does come with a lens.
    I think I am getting a pretty good deal here just for my xbox. If I end up hating this camera I will sell it and put the money towards a newer one.
     
  10. leighonigar macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 5, 2007
    #10
    You can easily compare the ebay price of your xbox with the price of a D100 in whatever condition. Let us know which lens you get when you get it. There is massive variation.
     
  11. lacoste-rocker thread starter macrumors regular

    lacoste-rocker

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2010
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    #11
    Here it is. this is the exact camera I am getting.
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]

    He says its in perfect condition.
     
  12. HBOC macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2008
    Location:
    SLC
    #12
    free grass blades in the lens, i see. Sweeten the deal?

    As others' have stated, the D100 was a great camera when it was released in 2003(?). It will be horribly slow and perform subpar in low light (high ISO situations) compared to todays' cameras. Will still take great pictures, no doubt. Have fun! What lens did you get>?
     
  13. lacoste-rocker thread starter macrumors regular

    lacoste-rocker

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2010
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    #13
    Lol
    I'll ask him what type of lens it is I honestly have no idea I wont get it until thursday or friday of next week.
     
  14. pdxflint macrumors 68020

    pdxflint

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2006
    Location:
    Oregon coast
    #14
    I think sometimes people get spoiled with how fast technology moves, but I'll just say that when this camera was introduced it was a fine camera, and it still is. It's just that the newest stuff has gotten progressively better in several ways. But, since it's your first dSLR, you will find it to be pretty darn decent. I still have my D50 from several years ago (6 megapixel) and it still takes as good a picture as it did when it was new, and they were good then. Don't be over influenced that it's a bad camera, it's all relative. A new generation of that camera costs $1500+ (body only,) and Peskaa should prefer the D300s ($1599 -body only,) D700 ($2399 -body only) and D3 ($4000+ -body only) cameras over the D100, it's like comparing apples and oranges, so take that into consideration. Heck, I prefer them too, but can't afford most of them. The lens looks decent, better than the D3000 kit lens. The only folks who would really be unhappy with an excellent condition D100 and that lens are those who have already been using the newer stuff. That won't matter to you for a while, seriously. Use it, learn how to shoot, then you can upgrade down the line. I still have my D50, and use it along with my D300. Unless you're intent is to print huge prints, you won't really need anything bigger than a 6mp camera. Believe me on this one. You came out ahead on your deal trading for a used Xbox.
     
  15. leighonigar macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    May 5, 2007
    #15
  16. OreoCookie macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2001
    Location:
    Sendai, Japan
    #16
    The Nikon D100 was a very good camera. However, it's old and dated technology. If you just want to peek into the world of dslrs, it may be a way to dabble into the world photography. Also, depending on the condition of the camera (number of clicks, etc.), it may not last forever. Think of getting a 15 year-old car. ;)

    You can take good pictures with it, but you will have much stricter limits than with the cameras today. I'd just try it. One advantage you do have is that the body is based around the F80 which means you have no childish picture modes (which you don't need anyway) and it has a very efficient layout for the `analog part' of the functionality (I used to own a F80).

    People get spoiled with the technology they have nowadays: AF systems with 9+ AF sensors in `small' dslrs, 4+ fps, ISO 6,400, etc. The specs of the D100 remind me more of a film camera ;)
     

Share This Page