# Nikon D2H price drop



## ·clyde· (Dec 26, 2001)

Yesterday $3200
Today $2000


----------



## Mathew (Feb 8, 2002)

Good. Just in time for the holidays.


----------



## j2 (Jun 13, 2003)

Picked mine up last night! :thumbup:


----------



## Dr. Phil (Dec 19, 2001)

·clyde· said:


> Yesterday $3200
> Today $2000


When are you getting yours :dunno: How much for the D100 :dunno:

:angel: :bigpimp:


----------



## Alex Baumann (Dec 19, 2001)

justinu said:


> Picked mine up last night! :thumbup:


geek !!


----------



## vexed (Dec 22, 2001)

justinu said:


> Picked mine up last night! :thumbup:


Just don't send it in to Nikon for repair


----------



## j2 (Jun 13, 2003)

Alex Baumann said:


> geek !!


Do you think it's time for alee to pass on the crown?


----------



## Dr. Phil (Dec 19, 2001)

justinu said:


> Do you think it's time for alee to pass on the crown?


:slap:

:nono:


----------



## BahnBaum (Feb 25, 2004)

Should this make me second guess my pending decision to pull the trigger on a Canon 20d?

Alex


----------



## Alex Baumann (Dec 19, 2001)

justinu said:


> Do you think it's time for alee to pass on the crown?


Crown ?


----------



## j2 (Jun 13, 2003)

BahnBaum said:


> Should this make me second guess my pending decision to pull the trigger on a Canon 20d?
> 
> Alex


The Canon 20D is a nice camera, but the build quality is nowhere near as nice as the D2H.

D2H is a real professional tool, with stuff like a magnesium frame, advanced autofocus, weather sealing, built in vertical grip, interlocked controls, 8 frames per second, etc, etc.

That being said, the 20D has a more modern imaging sensor with double the megapixels and probably better high ISO noise performance.

Does this mean that the 20D will take better pictures than the D2H, or vice versa? I think that's up to the photographer!


----------



## xspeedy (Apr 10, 2003)

justinu said:


> The Canon 20D is a nice camera, but the build quality is nowhere near as nice as the D2H.
> 
> D2H is a real professional tool, with stuff like a magnesium frame


The Canon 20D is magnesium. The Rebel is plastic. Another plus for the 20D is that it has a built in flash (though it won't match the performance of an external).


----------



## Mr. The Edge (Dec 19, 2001)

BahnBaum said:


> Should this make me second guess my pending decision to pull the trigger on a Canon 20d?
> 
> Alex


you should be basing your choice of bodies on lenses, so no


----------



## j2 (Jun 13, 2003)

atyclb said:


> you should be basing your choice of bodies on lenses, so no


:bustingup

As if Canon lenses are better than Nikon!


----------



## Mr. The Edge (Dec 19, 2001)

justinu said:


> :bustingup
> 
> As if Canon lenses are better than Nikon!


well that's certainly debatable, but it has nothing to do with my post


----------



## ·clyde· (Dec 26, 2001)

For Alex's needs, it's a good question that he asked. The lenses available for both cameras are more than good enough for his purposes. The featureset of the D2H is sufficently more robust than that of the 20D that it's more than worth considering.

For film SLRs there are a limited number of differences between bodies/brands/lines...few of which affect image quality. DSLRs have a much larger number of differences between bodies/brands/lines...many of which affect image quality.

I don't know which would be best for Alex. I don't think that this is the final shot in this battle, though... Nikon's D2x which is going to be for sale soon still isn't officially priced and there are rumors that it's going to be priced a lot lower than anyone expected before yesterday...low enough that Canon could be forced to drop the price of the 20D and their higher line models significantly. It's also been widely expected that Nikon would announce around the end of the year a new camera to replace the D100. Maybe Nikon wants to slot the D2H as the D100 replacement instead. :dunno: OTOH, it could just be what it is...a massive price cut to clear out remaining inventory of a slow seller that never compared favorably to Canon's competing models. :dunno: 

Unless I needed a new body for a paying gig in the next little bit of time (two months?), I'd try to hold off on buying anything until the dust settles. This price drop could be the start of a war...


----------



## BahnBaum (Feb 25, 2004)

·clyde· said:


> Unless I needed a new body for a paying gig in the next little bit of time (two months?), I'd try to hold off on buying anything until the dust settles. This price drop could be the start of a war...


Well, my plan was to have a new camera by the middle of January; I was going to wait until after Xmas to see if there was any sort of price drop on the 20d, but what you're saying may make waiting a little longer worthwhile. The one thing I'm sure of is that the 20d won't get more expensive.

Alex


----------



## ·clyde· (Dec 26, 2001)

rumratt said:


> One of the few things that depreciates faster than a BMW. :bustingup


 Oh, man...you should see the b:tching on some of the camera forums. "Nikon just stole $1,000 from me! I was going to sell mine on ebay to buy a D2x, but now it's not worth anything. I might as well throw it in the river."

Some looney tunes out there.. :loco:


----------



## ·clyde· (Dec 26, 2001)

BahnBaum said:


> Well, my plan was to have a new camera by the middle of January; I was going to wait until after Xmas to see if there was any sort of price drop on the 20d, but what you're saying may make waiting a little longer worthwhile. The one thing I'm sure of is that the 20d won't get more expensive.
> 
> Alex


It's all rumor and speculation, but it really looks like something that will have a big effect ont he rest of the DSLR market...


----------



## JetBlack330i (Feb 8, 2002)

atyclb said:


> you should be basing your choice of bodies on lenses, so no


That's a truism from the old film world. Ever since shutter speed became electronically controlled (by quartz), camera body's contribution to picture quality saturated. Just like how a $20 Casio watch could all of a sudden perform the same, if not better, than a $2K Rolex.
But in the digital world, that's not true (at least not yet). While the lenses are important, the camera body is still the limiting factor in quality. We have not yet found the quartz equivalent for digital imaging technology.


----------

