I’ve been thinking about this off and on, particularly when I look at the demise of my D2x as it sits, seemingly discarded, in one corner of the room. It rarely sees any use; however, it is still quite a capable camera.
I know that quite a few of you will be able to chime in on this. It’s a curiosity of mine. When you buy new photographic equipment, specifically a new camera body, what do you do with the old stuff?
I now have three Nikon camera bodies. From newest to oldest: D300, D40, D2x. The D2x was my first Nikon digital camera. What can I say? I wanted the best!
I use the D300 constantly, much the same way as I used the D2x. The D40 is my carry around camera that I use when I don’t want to use a tripod or am going for a photo walk, so to speak. Of the 3 cameras, two are nearly identical. The D2x and the D300. The D40 does not compare in any way to the other two, other than it produces photographs too. However, it is not meant to be a competitor.
Former glory
The D2x, used to be my go-to guy. It is still capable in every way. As a matter of fact, all of the pictures that I am using for my 2009 calendar were taken with the D2x! This was a surprise. I looked at the meta data after the fact. I kept the D2x mounted on the tripod and kept the D300 for close up, near-ground macro and walking around. There was a practical reason. I didn’t have a Really Right Stuff bracket for the D300 and didn’t want to spend an additional $200 to get one at the time.
So, what’s the difference?
As far as I’m concerned, the only differences that matter to me (sometimes) are:
- The sensor cleaner. A big plus!
- The D300′s better performance at higher ISO levels.
- The D300′s auto focus is a bit better and more up-to-date, but for the way that I use the camera, I get the same out of each one, so the other differences don’t matter.
- For shooting sports, they are equal. Both shoot at about 6 frames per second. Both of capable of shooting 8 frames per second, except the D2x has to do it cropped mode. The D300 needs a grip and either 8 AA batteries, or an En-El4a battery. But you can get a burst of 8 frames without the grip.
As you can see, the differences, from my point of view and usage, are small. I do feel that the D2x is more of a rugged, professional type camera than the D300. It just seems a bit more durable. I don’t hesitate to take it out in dust, light rain, fog, any type of weather. I’m a bit more hesitant with the D300. So, I was thinking that it would be my backup/tough(er) weather guy. I don’t want to sell, really, because I think that it does make an excellent starter or 6th man, to use basketball terms. I think that I’ll have to pick it up and use it some this weekend. 
Naturally, both of these photos were taken with the D2x. According to the meta data, the last shot that I took with the D2x was May 29th of this year. I think that it’s time for it to come out of retirement!
OK, so let’s hear it. I know that a number of you bought new cameras this year: Earl? Mark? Laurie? Kate? Gordon? Anita? JH? Amy? So, I know that I’m not alone! Speak on it!
No related posts.
12 Responses to “By the wayside: Old equipment”
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
Hi Paul:
Earlier this year my kit consisted of a Nikon D200 & D300, very similar cameras except the D300 is better at higher ISO numbers, has sensor cleaner and a few other features. In that situation, I used the D300 almost exclusively and the D200 was basically a spare gathering dust much like your D2X.
Then I purchased a Nikon D700 and I’ve since been using both the D300 and D700 almost equally for shooting. With the differences in DX/FX formats and the lens I own they each have a purpose or duty in my photography efforts.
I gifted the D200 to my daughter and it is being put to good use.
In my situation, having multiple camera bodies I routinely used was a matter of which camera bodies I had. Of course keeping a second “main” camera body as a backup in case of failure isn’t a bad practice either.
I’d keep the D2x until your next upgrade if I was you.
Interestingly, my digital kit is VERY similar to yours. D40 as a general carry camera and the D300 as my main body. I’ve only got the two though, and since I still shoot film I also have an FE2 as a general carry camera and an FM2n with MD12 drive as my main film body (I also have an F2a, but it sees less use due to the higher weights and lower max shutter)
I’m seriously looking at moving to the D700 next year, if only so that my 35/1.4 is a fast/wide on digital like it is on film. A Nikon 24/1.4 would solve that problem for me though.
Here I go again, failing to stop reading. Anyway – old equipment – my original Canon G2 I sold, for a bit more than 50% of what I paid for it – pretty happy about that and it went to someone who shot with it a lot.
My Canon D60 was used for quite a while, to the point that I looked to selling it and it was worth about 10% of what I’d originally paid. At that point I wasn’t selling it on!
I did toy for a while with the idea of converting it to be an infrared only body. Get the hot filter taken out and be able to shoot IR at reasonable shutter speeds. Never quite got excited enough to spend the money on that usage. My wife used that camera on a workshop we did in Italy, and her sister picked it up a few times before we bought her a Canon Rebel for Christmas.
Right now it is pegged for hanging off the end of an adjustable arm, suspended a few inches off the road on a bike mount – just as soon as I get back to riding again. Can’t decide if it or the 1DII will be put at risk that way.
I’m closing in on buying a Canon 5DII at some point next year, all things going well. It’ll be cheaper than my 1DII but similar to what you describe, not as rugged a camera (that’s part of the motivation, I want a lighter body).
The tripod mount on my 1dII is broken, so I can’t use my RRS bracket at the moment – Canon wanted about $200 to fix the mounting screw, so I just haven’t really used a tripod in a while
I forced a small QR plate in and glued it on for now (I treat my cameras quite roughly it seems 
)
Mostly, the old cameras just fade away. I have a succession of small point and shoot cameras that never quite satisfy that I keep trying to find something suitable – DMC-LX1 is the current carry around camera. I’ve seriously thought about the LX4 or a Canon G10, or a Ricoh or something. Nothing quite there yet.
I have a plan on how to get rid of my old cameras: give them to my daughters for learning photography. But I’m not yet sure whether I can really let go.
My venerable Minolta 7D went as a long term lending to a friend for a second life when the A700 came – he sports enough Minolta glass to make good use of this camera body. As his kids are grown up and he’s more interested in landscape and static subjects, the main handicap of the 7D, the bad low-light autofocus performance, is not an issue for him.
I did not want to sell it – prices were low anyhow, but when I would have kept it it would have been on the shelf probably all the time, therefore I decided to let someone else make best use of it.
I guess for me old equipment falls into one of three categories:
1. Camera has active use scenarios
2. No active use scenarios, but camera has sentimental value
3. No active use scenarios, and camera has no sentimental value
My D200 is category 1. Its role is to serve as my backup camera during events. For important events, I want to have two cameras available. When they use the same lenses, batteries, and CF cards (as my D200 and D300 do), that’s a big plus. For everyday use, the D200 does not see any action, as it falls short of the D300 in critical areas (high ISO capability, autofocus capability, af sensor manual selection, and image quality).
My Minolta 7D is category 2. I can’t let go of my Minolta gear. As a matter of fact, I have *all* of my old Minolta cameras and lenses. I’m pretty sure my 7D will soon go to my daughter, though, as she uses it for her graphic design work. She’s comfortable with it, and the camera is a good fit for her needs.
I’ve owned three Canon PowerShots — all category 3. When one superseded the other, the old camera I found a good home for.
I would *really* love to have a D700 with a Nikkor 24-70 zoom. (I am very envious of Earl!) That’s not going to happen on my current budget, but if Santa got a little crazy and dropped off the kit at my house, I’d keep the D700 and D300 and sell the D200, demoted to category 3. I need only one backup camera, and I have no personal attachment to the D200.
I started with a Canon Powershot A70, but it wasn’t really mine. My husband bought it to take on endurance rides, and I unofficially appropriated it. It’s life ended when he dropped it and the lens mechansism was damaged. (I was relieved that I wasn’t the one who dropped it.)
I then moved to the Canon Rebel (the first generation), and it is rarely used. But, the husband occasionally takes it out for a spin, and it still does a good job. Next, came the Canon 20D and it’s not only become my backup camera, but lately that camera and the 200mm f4 lens, combined with a 1.4 teleconverter, have been almost inseperable. My workhorse, at the moment, is my 40D (purchased around five or six months ago). My favorite walk-around lens, the 24-105mm f4 pretty much lives on that camera.
The primary motivations for the upgrade included ISO visible in the viewfinder, Sensor Cleaner, and the larger view screen. There are several other features I am very much enjoying, and all the improvements have made me glad I upgraded.
Somewhere between the purchase of the 20D and 40D, I got a G7. I wish I had waited for the G10, since I’d rather not shoot jpg. I can’t say that I have ever given the G7 a full try. It’s very handy for certain situations, but I almost always opt for the 40D—even when the G7 would be far more pracical in terms of space and weight.
Of course, I long for a 5D and would dearly love to own one of the 1D cameras, but now that we are living on a fixed income and facing the current economic landscape, neither of those is likely to be in my future. I suppose it’s just as well, since I do seem to have trouble letting go of old cameras that still have life left in them.
I haven’t used my D200 since getting the D700, but I will definitely bring it along on assignments as a back-up body and or to use with my fisheye DX and wide angle DX (unless I get an FX wide angle…hello Mark are you listening? hehe
) It is good to have a back-up when you are getting paid to do a photo assignment and I was going without before and always worried about what I would do if the unthinkable happened while away on an assignment.
I skipped the D300 because I was holding out for a D3, saving my $$, but lo and behold they introduced the D700 which was a no brainer for me instead of the D3 at more than $2000 less. The only real advantage to the D3 would have been for sports, but I don’t do sports and if I did the D700 outfitted with the EneL4 battery or alkaline will keep up with the FPS rate.
I have actually used my Olympus E300 a couple of times this past summer because it is really light and portable for times when I don’t want to lug the big guns around. But I will be passing that camera, lenses, strobe and accessories on to my middle son Russell.
My D200 and D700 are both outfitted with their respective vertical battery grips so they are essentially the same size and weight. I like the stability of the vertical battery grip so they are left on all the time.
I have several old film cameras but they haven’t seen the light of day in a couple of years. I think I am done with film. My clients, at least so far, have all required digital files so why go to the extra expense and time that film would require? I need quick turn around for most my clients too so I don’t have time for film.
I still have my Nikon F5, which used to be king in its day – amazing how quickly the kings fall, especially now in the day of digital. As enchanted as we can get with all the new features of the new camera, I think we need to remind ourselves that old equipment still is capable of the same images it was back when we bought it. And there we need to ask ourselves – are our expectations of acceptable quality growing and changing? If so – what are the reasons why? The market, advertising hype, peer pressure, competition?
My first DSLR, a D2H – I ended up selling when I got the D2X. Yes, it was for a price much lower than I paid, but it was more money than serving as a paperweight. With having the full frame in the D700, and the multiplier in the D2X, I suppose they are complimentary depending on use. But it is rare I want to carry two heavy camera bodies around. So the D2X may be left in the car just in case, and the D700 goes with me in the field. As much as the D2X gives me extra reach, the D700 gives me extra speed for wildlife – both important – and it is quite hard to choose between them.
I really try to resist the latest and greatest to avoid all the old cameras sitting around. After all, the D700 is really now 3 generations of cameras (D300, D3 -) ahead of the D2X. There has to be some really wiz bang features that are going to make it a worthwhile purchase.
I’d say if you aren’t using it – sell it and use the cash for something of use to you today. A lot of people would love to own a D2X, and now they are quite affordable on the used market.
These days I’m mostly shooting with the D3. The full frame and higher ISOs are very addictive. Just wish it had the sensor cleaner built in.
However the D200 still gets a workout every month – I find with the 18-200 lens on it – it covers all my outdoor & walkabout needs. It also serves as backup camera when I’m on a trip. All of my trips this year had the D200 and my little
pocket waterproof camera along, as well as the D3.
My Fuji S2 comes out when I want to take portraits of people – not sure why – but they just look better taken from the S2 than the D200. With the D3 it is less obvious – but the way the S2 sensor renders skin – comes out good from the camera, rather than requiring post processing fiddling – to my eyes.
Now my film cameras haven’t seen much usage since I got the D200 – however the lens from them, are now proving very useful again with the D3.
I’m waiting for a niece/nephew to show enough interest and then I’ll probably be giving them some of the old gear. That or donating it to the local community college to give to some student who can’t afford an intro SLR – but wants to get into photography.
… yes, I am a packrat.
Wow! What a response. Thanks to everyone for replying. I see that we all have, or have had, a few cameras to spare!
I think that this weekend, I will take the D2x out for a spin, due to nostalgia. 
As I said, it is quite a capable camera. It would suit me well, too, to shoot basketball games, having one camera with a 35 or 50mm lens, the other with the 80 – 200mm. I had thought of selling, but still haven’t done so. I posted it on eBay one time, but it didn’t sell. I was asking too much for it, obviously. Prices for the D2x vary widely. I’ve seen them go for between $600 and $1,100. Naturally, I’d like to get the upper end and my camera is in excellent shape. Of course, the longer that I keep it, the more it depreciates, but that doesn’t make it any less useful.
Ah, same here. I keep piling up old camera gear. And take it out for a nostalgic ride now and then. But usally I have my current favorite body with me and end shooting most of the time with that one.
BTW, I love your second photo from above. Such a great, cozy autumn-feeling!