Found a Killer Deal on a Nikon D100

chrisburke · Feb 11, 2009

200 bucks... in great condition... is it worth it??

ann · Feb 11, 2009

i don't know about the price, you might check on KEH to see what they are getting .

i have a d100, and it does everything i want to do, and i will be sad when it has to be replaced. I have some co-professional folks who like to kid me about getting a "real" modern camera.

There are a few times i wish to do something that it can't do, i.e. multi exposure on the same file, but then i just use slides instead.

which lens is coming along for the ride for that price?

Dao · Feb 11, 2009

Chris, not sure if you know. You can use google.com to search the entire craigslist.org site and locate Nikon D100 by search with the following ..

nikon d100 site:*.craigslist.org

I did that and found most of them cost more than $200 (from different cities)

chrisburke · Feb 11, 2009

thanks dao.. i didnt know that.. i'll have a look

ann said:
which lens is coming along for the ride for that price?

no lens.. just the body

i checked KEH and looked through that craigslist search and most of them are going for 300+ which is actually what the guy who i found is asking.. except he doesnt have a battery for it.. so i sent him a message saying "i'm going to have to buy a new battery, and possibly charger if you dont have that.. which will cost me at least 100 bucks" so i offered him 200.. still waiting to hear back from him... his original ad is asking for trades as he is looking for a computer.. but all i have are macs, and they are worth more than the 300 bucks that the d100 is valued at

Flash Harry · Feb 11, 2009

without a battery and lens how do you know it even works. H

ANDS! · Feb 11, 2009

Flash Harry said:
without a battery and lens how do you know it even works. H

Right here. I have an old D50 that is in immaculate condition, but it does not work. Dunno if it had a battery short or what, but it decided it didn't want to go. I never buy anything that I can't actually test.

Now, that the finger wagging is out of the way - just take your D50 battery. Its the exact same. So all you actually need to buy is the charger. But don't tell him that.

chrisburke · Feb 11, 2009

i had a feeling it was the same battery as the D50... was actually just researching that! so I dont actually need to get a new charger, just a second battery... because the charger i have for my D50 can charge them both.. as for the lens.. i have a few lens' so that wont be an issue

chrisburke · Feb 13, 2009

Picking it up on Tuesday..I'm excited!!

AlexColeman · Feb 13, 2009

Yeah, but don't you think it would be a better quality choice like a D40, or D90? It is more expensive, but isn't the D100 a lateral move?

Sw1tchFX · Feb 13, 2009

I got a feeling in my gut that you're not going to like it compared to your D50.
Actually, I know for a fact that you're going to hate it.

I used a D100 once along side my D70 during a wedding and never again will I shoot with it unless it's the apocalypse.

Forget shooting RAW or TIFF. Not only is it slow, but the buffer fills too fast and when it is full, it feels like you can't do ANYTHING till it clears.

You think your D50's viewfinder is small? Yeah right!

The LCD is a fast-track to bifocals. I've seen some pretty Sh*tty looking LCD's from people who want to do repairs on 10-6 year old cameras, but I can easily say the D100's is one of the worst on the eyes. It shakes and flickers...WTF?!

Want to try out flash photography? FORGET ABOUT IT. REALLY, DON'T EVEN THINK ABOUT IT. D-TTL is the WORST flash system implemented ever by anyone. You shoot the same thing 3 times, one will be absolutely NUKED, the next will be underexposed, the next could be right on, but I doubt it. During the wedding, I couldn't use flash, it blew everyone out or was mad underexposed EVERY SINGLE TIME. Every pro i've spoke to who shot on D1's and D100's said that when they used flash, they threw everything in manual and guessed the power because it was more accurate and consistent. WOAH...

Worse yet, the flash sync at full power is 1/180th of a second...and the base ISO is 200....

...your D50 can do 1/500th of a second at full power, something that few SLR's can even consider doing. Guess it's next to impossible to control your ambient lighting and fill flash would be useless. You'd have to shoot at f/22 with an ND filter to try and get your shutter speed down to 1/180th at ISO 200 at noon... and in that type of situation, would the pop up flash have that kind of power? I think not....

There are three things the D100 has over the D50/70:

Nikon makes a vertical grip for the D100.
You can hook up a normal cable release to it.
You can shoot at ISO 3200 and 6400

hmm....

IMO, that $200 is better spent on another D50 if you really need a 2nd body, otherwise, go get yourself a 35mm f/1.8..

I'm not saying the D100 can't shoot a picture, the picture quality is fine and there's alot you can do with the images, but the D100 is a peice of garbage compared to what you can find today.

chrisburke · Feb 14, 2009

i've been reading reviews, and viewing D100 photos on Flickr... they seem great.. the reviews seem pretty good too... talk about the screen size, but i hardly ever look at the screen as it is... so that doesnt really worry me.

I've sent a message off to chase jarvis (via twitter), who tests almost all of the Nikon products, so we'll see what he tells me about it.

thank you very much for that sw1tchFX... i will go have a look at it, and try it out.. but you have made me reconsider it altogether... it sounds like all the areas that i thought it would be better than the D50, its actually worse than it.... i'll do a little more research on it here... just to make sure you didnt have a dud... and i'll see what i can find...

Sw1tchFX · Feb 14, 2009

chrisburke said:
i've been reading reviews, and viewing D100 photos on Flickr... they seem great.. the reviews seem pretty good too... talk about the screen size, but i hardly ever look at the screen as it is... so that doesnt really worry me.

I've sent a message off to chase jarvis (via twitter), who tests almost all of the Nikon products, so we'll see what he tells me about it.

thank you very much for that sw1tchFX... i will go have a look at it, and try it out.. but you have made me reconsider it altogether... it sounds like all the areas that i thought it would be better than the D50, its actually worse than it.... i'll do a little more research on it here... just to make sure you didnt have a dud... and i'll see what i can find...

You need to understand the the reviews you're reading are 7 years old, 7 years ago, the D100 was bomb, so of course they'll sound positive.

AlexColeman · Feb 14, 2009

Just look at an image sample like AlexColeman : photos : Portfolio : Blue Crystal- powered by SmugMug, shot with the D90 with a 16-85. It is more expensive, but you have to ask yourself, 100 dollars will get you 20% closer.

inTempus · Feb 14, 2009

chrisburke said:
i've been reading reviews, and viewing D100 photos on Flickr... they seem great.. the reviews seem pretty good too... talk about the screen size, but i hardly ever look at the screen as it is... so that doesnt really worry me.

I've sent a message off to chase jarvis (via twitter), who tests almost all of the Nikon products, so we'll see what he tells me about it.

thank you very much for that sw1tchFX... i will go have a look at it, and try it out.. but you have made me reconsider it altogether... it sounds like all the areas that i thought it would be better than the D50, its actually worse than it.... i'll do a little more research on it here... just to make sure you didnt have a dud... and i'll see what i can find...

Ken Rockwell tells us that the D100 is an old design (2002) and the D70 is a vastly superior camera and cheaper as it's several years newer.

I'm so glad we have Ken to clear these things up.

Nikon D100 review test