[Pink Fairy]

Two days into becoming the owner of this camera, I had a bit of reasonable light to play with today.

Although 12.8mp sounds a guarantee to great images, that's only a part of what the camera is about. In truth, for most purposes you'll never see much difference between 6mp and 12mp, though it does allow you to crop substantially and still have an image capable of a good print or publication at a sensible size (which is mighty handy in the bird photography world)

The Nikon D2x, unlike the big Canons, still uses the same sensor size as previous Nikons, so it does give this 12.8mp + the 1.5x crop factor that occurs when you attach a 35mm based lens.... great for telephoto photography, but not good news for landscape guys.

I've never owned a pro body camera before (even my Nikon F100 wasn't that calibre), the obvious difference is that they weigh a ton and are built to stand up to the rigours of hard daily use... as well as being sealed well enough to withstand the elements.

AF speed is suitably faster than with most cameras, as well as almost non-existant shutter-lag and the camera ready to take a photo almost the instant you switch it on. 'Responsiveness' is the keyword here, it's desirable in the world of amateur photography... but absolutely essential in most areas of professional photography. Frame rates of 8fps may seem over the top but the duration of a spectacular scene is often short, so it's vital to cover your bases with as many shots as possible... it could be the difference between a £50 shot and something that will help secure your financial security for life.

All of this equally applies to Canon pro bodied dslr cameras, I'm just highlighting what pro dslr cameras are about.... it's not all about megapixels.

One thing that is amazing is the battery the d2x comes with, at 67% after two days of shooting and playing around (yep, you can check battery life to the % point)... god knows why i purchased a spare.

Anyway, first photos... still learning, these won't necessarily look any better on the web than something from a £150 digicam, we're all pretty equal at 800x600

[1 GND]

Lovely photos and glorious detail. Reminds me of medium format even at 800x600!!

[mr jones]

finches are all well and good, but have you captured any pictures of the blue footed boobie or the great tit

[/sexist male behavure]

[fraggle]

I was going to ask what sort of lens you used then I had a look at your website... heh!

How well does the eyepiece adapter work with a heavy pro slr camera attached to a scope?

[Radiohead]

Lovely photos - makes me realise how far I have to go!

[witters]

Wow - those are some superb images. Tac sharp.

Leaves anything I shoot trailing in your wake.....

[tomson]

wow they're sharp - superb detail.

[condyk]

I feel a rethink coming on!! Really interesting ...

I have been saving for a big zoom, but it may be I can get similar shots taking your approach. I am really interested in wildlife and, to a slightly lesser degree, birds ... and only in Africa and similarly exotic parts of the world as I pretty well burnt myself out on UK birds as a teenager (sounds a bit pervy, but you know what I mean!!)

So, what kinds of prices are we talking about for an adaptor and good quality 'scope? I have a spanking new Canon 300D, but I could sell the lot if this is a better solution in terms of quality/cash. I had a Panasonic FZ3 super zoom a while back (12x Leica optical zoom and great quality images) which was a fab point and shoot. I seem to remember there was an adaptor for that, but I never even thought about it. Any thoughts on suitability?

Thanks.

Great shots BTW.

Dave

[paulc1]

can you attach the nikon to a scope?..I havn't seen any adapters for slrs, as the vignetting effect would be massive.
they are great photo's and espescially the long tailed tit shots.

here are a some shots taken with a nikon d7 and a cheapo 300G lense,..handheld, they have been cropped and resized,...and although I am very happy with them (for me),.I dont think that they come anywhere near the quality of the shots from your 12mp Nikon, so it just goes to show that you get what you pay for...especially with fast glass.
superb site by the way!, you really know your stuff.

[witters]

Not too shabby for a handheld "cheapo" lens. I've been thinking about investing in this lens but was concerned re it's quality. For what I'd use it for though, it's not really worth spending more. Could fit the bill nicely.

[paulc1]

Originally Posted by witters

Not too shabby for a handheld "cheapo" lens. I've been thinking about investing in this lens but was concerned re it's quality. For what I'd use it for though, it's not really worth spending more. Could fit the bill nicely.

providing that you have reasonable light or can use flash, then It's ok, and the autofocus motors are noisy,.. but, I am happy with it thus far, however, when you look at some photo's like the pink fairies, or Johndms aeroplane shots, then you see just how much good quality, fast lenses matter, infact they make all of the difference.

[owain_thomas]

I recently got one of the 70-300G lenses and I've got to say I'm well pleased with the quality for the money (got mine for 60 quid out here in the US, can be had at jessops for about 80 with a price match).

[Radiohead]

Originally Posted by owain_thomas

I recently got one of the 70-300G lenses and I've got to say I'm well pleased with the quality for the money (got mine for 60 quid out here in the US, can be had at jessops for about 80 with a price match).

Likewise here.

I considered it worth a punt at £80 from Jessops and it's proving a very good buy.

[seany]

Those shots are cyrstal.