| Author |
Message |
Larry R Harrison Jr
Guest
|
 Posted:
Sat Nov 27, 2004 6:09 am Post subject:
Nikon D100--Why So High? |
|
|
It sounds like a "whiner" post and isn't meant to be. That said, I will
admit--I actually switched to Canon largely because you can get a used 10D
for like $750-800 easily or D60 for $650-750--and the Rebel for $600-650.
Good luck getting anything that close with the Nikon D100, even with the D70
now out & it being an overall superior camera. I looked foreover hoping to
find a D100 at a similar price, and gave up trying in vain.
I got my DR now and am happy with it, especially with the Wasia hack, but I
do poke around the Fred Miranda & Rob Galibrath sites too. Someone is
selling a Nikon D100 for about $850 body-only, and everyone is acting like
it's such an outstanding deal. Meanwhile, someone else is selling a D70
body-only for $750, it was practically not even used as it was a backup
body, and that ad is barely getting a response. What gives?
I guess I'm asking--what is up to where everyone is so stir crazy over the
D100 even though it is, by my reckoning, a "lame-duck" camera ever since the
far-superior D70 has arrived?
I don't think I'm still bitter that I was unable to get a huge price break
on a D100 when I was shopping; I've actually been quite happy with my
EOS300D (DR), especially with the Wasia hack addressing so many features.
Great though the D100 is, it takes a long time to save RAW files and doesn't
have a RAW+JPEG mode and I've really come to love the DR's RAW+JPEG mode.
But it still amazes me, I guess, that people are going hog-wild over the
D100 even with the superior D70 now out.
Whatever for?
LRH
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Howard McCollister
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sat Nov 27, 2004 6:10 am Post subject:
Re: Nikon D100--Why So High? |
|
|
"Larry R Harrison Jr" <noone@noone.com> wrote in message
news:30qh13F33q2btU1@uni-berlin.de...
| Quote: | It sounds like a "whiner" post and isn't meant to be. That said, I will
admit--I actually switched to Canon largely because you can get a used 10D
for like $750-800 easily or D60 for $650-750--and the Rebel for $600-650.
Good luck getting anything that close with the Nikon D100, even with the
D70 now out & it being an overall superior camera. I looked foreover
hoping to find a D100 at a similar price, and gave up trying in vain.
I got my DR now and am happy with it, especially with the Wasia hack, but
I do poke around the Fred Miranda & Rob Galibrath sites too. Someone is
selling a Nikon D100 for about $850 body-only, and everyone is acting like
it's such an outstanding deal. Meanwhile, someone else is selling a D70
body-only for $750, it was practically not even used as it was a backup
body, and that ad is barely getting a response. What gives?
I guess I'm asking--what is up to where everyone is so stir crazy over the
D100 even though it is, by my reckoning, a "lame-duck" camera ever since
the far-superior D70 has arrived?
I don't think I'm still bitter that I was unable to get a huge price break
on a D100 when I was shopping; I've actually been quite happy with my
EOS300D (DR), especially with the Wasia hack addressing so many features.
Great though the D100 is, it takes a long time to save RAW files and
doesn't have a RAW+JPEG mode and I've really come to love the DR's
RAW+JPEG mode. But it still amazes me, I guess, that people are going
hog-wild over the D100 even with the superior D70 now out.
Whatever for?
|
The D100 will be replaced within a matter of months with the D200- 12.2
megapixels, so I'm sure that D100 prices will be falling rapidly soon. 3
months after that, the D90 to replace the D70.
Hmc |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Larry R Harrison Jr
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sat Nov 27, 2004 11:07 am Post subject:
Re: Nikon D100--Why So High? |
|
|
12 megapixels huh? Just when it used to be the case that 11 MP via the Canon
EOS-1Ds cost like $7-8 grand or something. Now we can get that in a (let's
say) 2 grand camera? Wow. Got to love progress.
The D100 is a fine camera, I don't mean to sound critical. I just don't see
it being a camera I'd pay MORE for than a D70 at this point.
LRH
"Howard McCollister" <nospam@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:41a812a6$0$310$45beb828@newscene.com...
| Quote: |
"Larry R Harrison Jr" <noone@noone.com> wrote in message
news:30qh13F33q2btU1@uni-berlin.de...
It sounds like a "whiner" post and isn't meant to be. That said, I will
admit--I actually switched to Canon largely because you can get a used
10D for like $750-800 easily or D60 for $650-750--and the Rebel for
$600-650. Good luck getting anything that close with the Nikon D100, even
with the D70 now out & it being an overall superior camera. I looked
foreover hoping to find a D100 at a similar price, and gave up trying in
vain.
I got my DR now and am happy with it, especially with the Wasia hack, but
I do poke around the Fred Miranda & Rob Galibrath sites too. Someone is
selling a Nikon D100 for about $850 body-only, and everyone is acting
like it's such an outstanding deal. Meanwhile, someone else is selling a
D70 body-only for $750, it was practically not even used as it was a
backup body, and that ad is barely getting a response. What gives?
I guess I'm asking--what is up to where everyone is so stir crazy over
the D100 even though it is, by my reckoning, a "lame-duck" camera ever
since the far-superior D70 has arrived?
I don't think I'm still bitter that I was unable to get a huge price
break on a D100 when I was shopping; I've actually been quite happy with
my EOS300D (DR), especially with the Wasia hack addressing so many
features. Great though the D100 is, it takes a long time to save RAW
files and doesn't have a RAW+JPEG mode and I've really come to love the
DR's RAW+JPEG mode. But it still amazes me, I guess, that people are
going hog-wild over the D100 even with the superior D70 now out.
Whatever for?
The D100 will be replaced within a matter of months with the D200- 12.2
megapixels, so I'm sure that D100 prices will be falling rapidly soon. 3
months after that, the D90 to replace the D70.
Hmc
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Siddhartha Jain
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sat Nov 27, 2004 12:11 pm Post subject:
Re: Nikon D100--Why So High? |
|
|
Larry R Harrison Jr wrote:
| Quote: | It sounds like a "whiner" post and isn't meant to be. That said, I
will
admit--I actually switched to Canon largely because you can get a
used 10D
for like $750-800 easily or D60 for $650-750--and the Rebel for
$600-650.
Good luck getting anything that close with the Nikon D100, even with
the D70
now out & it being an overall superior camera. I looked foreover
hoping to
find a D100 at a similar price, and gave up trying in vain.
I got my DR now and am happy with it, especially with the Wasia hack,
but I
do poke around the Fred Miranda & Rob Galibrath sites too. Someone is
selling a Nikon D100 for about $850 body-only, and everyone is acting
like
it's such an outstanding deal. Meanwhile, someone else is selling a
D70
body-only for $750, it was practically not even used as it was a
backup
body, and that ad is barely getting a response. What gives?
|
Same here. Got my 300D yesterday and within hours I upgraded it with
the wasia hack. The D70 looks like a really neat package but the price
difference was too much, so I opted for the 300D. If I had the extra
money, I'd probably stretch and get the 20D.
- Siddhartha |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Seymore
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sat Nov 27, 2004 12:12 pm Post subject:
Re: Nikon D100--Why So High? |
|
|
Just courious... Have we heard anything of a time line in the D90 release?
Any guesses? I'd like to get a D70 about the time the D90 is
announced/released.
Seymore...
www.SonyCams.com
Sony F717 / TRV70
Nikon N90s, FM2, SB22 Speed-Light Flash
Nikon MF 50mm 1.4/f16 -- AF 24-50mm 3.3-4.5/f22
Nikon AF 60mm 2.8/f32 -- AF 35-135mm 3.5-4.5/f22
Tokina SZ-X 80-200mm 4.5-5.6/f32 -- AT-X 100-300mm 4/f32
remove "REMOVE" to reply directly
"Howard McCollister" <nospam@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:41a812a6$0$310$45beb828@newscene.com...
| Quote: |
The D100 will be replaced within a matter of months with the D200- 12.2
megapixels, so I'm sure that D100 prices will be falling rapidly soon. 3
months after that, the D90 to replace the D70.
Hmc
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sid derra
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sat Nov 27, 2004 5:59 pm Post subject:
Re: Nikon D100--Why So High? |
|
|
"Howard McCollister" <nospam@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:41a812a6$0$310$45beb828@newscene.com...
| Quote: |
"Larry R Harrison Jr" <noone@noone.com> wrote in message
news:30qh13F33q2btU1@uni-berlin.de...
It sounds like a "whiner" post and isn't meant to be. That said, I will
admit--I actually switched to Canon largely because you can get a used
10D
for like $750-800 easily or D60 for $650-750--and the Rebel for
$600-650.
Good luck getting anything that close with the Nikon D100, even with the
D70 now out & it being an overall superior camera. I looked foreover
hoping to find a D100 at a similar price, and gave up trying in vain.
I got my DR now and am happy with it, especially with the Wasia hack,
but
I do poke around the Fred Miranda & Rob Galibrath sites too. Someone is
selling a Nikon D100 for about $850 body-only, and everyone is acting
like
it's such an outstanding deal. Meanwhile, someone else is selling a D70
body-only for $750, it was practically not even used as it was a backup
body, and that ad is barely getting a response. What gives?
I guess I'm asking--what is up to where everyone is so stir crazy over
the
D100 even though it is, by my reckoning, a "lame-duck" camera ever since
the far-superior D70 has arrived?
I don't think I'm still bitter that I was unable to get a huge price
break
on a D100 when I was shopping; I've actually been quite happy with my
EOS300D (DR), especially with the Wasia hack addressing so many
features.
Great though the D100 is, it takes a long time to save RAW files and
doesn't have a RAW+JPEG mode and I've really come to love the DR's
RAW+JPEG mode. But it still amazes me, I guess, that people are going
hog-wild over the D100 even with the superior D70 now out.
Whatever for?
The D100 will be replaced within a matter of months with the D200- 12.2
megapixels, so I'm sure that D100 prices will be falling rapidly soon. 3
months after that, the D90 to replace the D70.
|
and those infos are based on exactly what source?
sid |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sid derra
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sat Nov 27, 2004 6:00 pm Post subject:
Re: Nikon D100--Why So High? |
|
|
"Larry R Harrison Jr" <noone@noone.com> wrote in message
news:30qh13F33q2btU1@uni-berlin.de...
| Quote: | It sounds like a "whiner" post and isn't meant to be. That said, I will
admit--I actually switched to Canon largely because you can get a used 10D
for like $750-800 easily or D60 for $650-750--and the Rebel for $600-650.
Good luck getting anything that close with the Nikon D100, even with the
D70
now out & it being an overall superior camera. I looked foreover hoping to
find a D100 at a similar price, and gave up trying in vain.
I got my DR now and am happy with it, especially with the Wasia hack, but
I
do poke around the Fred Miranda & Rob Galibrath sites too. Someone is
selling a Nikon D100 for about $850 body-only, and everyone is acting like
it's such an outstanding deal. Meanwhile, someone else is selling a D70
body-only for $750, it was practically not even used as it was a backup
body, and that ad is barely getting a response. What gives?
I guess I'm asking--what is up to where everyone is so stir crazy over the
D100 even though it is, by my reckoning, a "lame-duck" camera ever since
the
far-superior D70 has arrived?
I don't think I'm still bitter that I was unable to get a huge price break
on a D100 when I was shopping; I've actually been quite happy with my
EOS300D (DR), especially with the Wasia hack addressing so many features.
Great though the D100 is, it takes a long time to save RAW files and
doesn't
have a RAW+JPEG mode and I've really come to love the DR's RAW+JPEG mode.
But it still amazes me, I guess, that people are going hog-wild over the
D100 even with the superior D70 now out.
|
the d70 still is seen as the "little bro" of the d100 - i have worked with
both for a while, and since the d70 contains newer technology i really would
see them somewhat equal too. the d100 body you could've gotten on
overstock.com - brandnew - for 1049 bucks a few weeks ago. rock on.
sid |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
leo
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sat Nov 27, 2004 6:02 pm Post subject:
Re: Nikon D100--Why So High? |
|
|
"Siddhartha Jain" <losttoy2000@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1101546336.312853.207500@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
| Quote: | Larry R Harrison Jr wrote:
It sounds like a "whiner" post and isn't meant to be. That said, I
will
admit--I actually switched to Canon largely because you can get a
used 10D
for like $750-800 easily or D60 for $650-750--and the Rebel for
$600-650.
Good luck getting anything that close with the Nikon D100, even with
the D70
now out & it being an overall superior camera. I looked foreover
hoping to
find a D100 at a similar price, and gave up trying in vain.
I got my DR now and am happy with it, especially with the Wasia hack,
but I
do poke around the Fred Miranda & Rob Galibrath sites too. Someone is
selling a Nikon D100 for about $850 body-only, and everyone is acting
like
it's such an outstanding deal. Meanwhile, someone else is selling a
D70
body-only for $750, it was practically not even used as it was a
backup
body, and that ad is barely getting a response. What gives?
Same here. Got my 300D yesterday and within hours I upgraded it with
the wasia hack. The D70 looks like a really neat package but the price
difference was too much, so I opted for the 300D. If I had the extra
money, I'd probably stretch and get the 20D.
- Siddhartha
|
I had the 300D for 11 months. It did a great job for me. I have pictures
that worthwhile to enlarge to 12x18. I just sold it on ebay and am
anticipating to upgrade to 20D. If I had got the 10D in the first hand, I
wouldn't have been able to upgrade to a new 8MP DSLR. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Howard McCollister
Guest
|
| Posted:
Sat Nov 27, 2004 6:02 pm Post subject:
Re: Nikon D100--Why So High? |
|
|
"sid derra" <ng_NO_@_SPAM_emolife.net> wrote in message
news:30rc13F341684U1@uni-berlin.de...
| Quote: |
The D100 will be replaced within a matter of months with the D200- 12.2
megapixels, so I'm sure that D100 prices will be falling rapidly soon. 3
months after that, the D90 to replace the D70.
and those infos are based on exactly what source?
|
The usual source - a friend of a friend who knows the sister-in-law of a
janitor at the Nikon factory... ;)
HMc |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bryce
Guest
|
| Posted:
Mon Nov 29, 2004 11:16 am Post subject:
Re: Nikon D100--Why So High? |
|
|
"leo" <someone@somewhere.net> wrote in message
news:Df0qd.1574$u81.1205@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
| Quote: | "Siddhartha Jain" <losttoy2000@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1101546336.312853.207500@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
Larry R Harrison Jr wrote:
It sounds like a "whiner" post and isn't meant to be. That said, I
will
admit--I actually switched to Canon largely because you can get a
used 10D
for like $750-800 easily or D60 for $650-750--and the Rebel for
$600-650.
Good luck getting anything that close with the Nikon D100, even with
the D70
now out & it being an overall superior camera. I looked foreover
hoping to
find a D100 at a similar price, and gave up trying in vain.
I got my DR now and am happy with it, especially with the Wasia hack,
but I
do poke around the Fred Miranda & Rob Galibrath sites too. Someone is
selling a Nikon D100 for about $850 body-only, and everyone is acting
like
it's such an outstanding deal. Meanwhile, someone else is selling a
D70
body-only for $750, it was practically not even used as it was a
backup
body, and that ad is barely getting a response. What gives?
Same here. Got my 300D yesterday and within hours I upgraded it with
the wasia hack. The D70 looks like a really neat package but the price
difference was too much, so I opted for the 300D. If I had the extra
money, I'd probably stretch and get the 20D.
- Siddhartha
I had the 300D for 11 months. It did a great job for me. I have pictures
that worthwhile to enlarge to 12x18. I just sold it on ebay and am
anticipating to upgrade to 20D. If I had got the 10D in the first hand, I
wouldn't have been able to upgrade to a new 8MP DSLR.
|
I bet your pictures will be better with 8MP. Right? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
Memberlist
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in