I know a thousand of these have been done before so I hope you don't mind one more.
I have a D7000 (my husbands actually- that I borrow when he isn't using) and a D70. Recently the D70 just doesn't seem to be up to scratch - I seem to have to keep it on a tripod all the time to get a sharp image and even then it seems to be lacking that pop which obviously comes with the better sensor in the D7000. I know people have said a better lens is more important than a better camera - but is there a point when this just isn't the case - can a camera be too old?
If I did want to upgrade the D70 (but as we have the D7000 don't want to spend a great deal and will probably go second hand as it will always be a "second camera") what would be the minimum you would recommend? Want to stay with a Nikon just because we are a Nikon family lol.
Is there a point when a camera can be too old?...
YES. I had my D200 to three places and they all told me the same thing. We used my lens on several new Nikon cameras and it was fine. I upgraded to a D7000 and at the same time purchased an AW100. I didnt want to spend lots on a macro lens, couldnt get a waterproof housing for the D7000 and also wanted something small that I could take everywhere and it could stand up to an accidental fall when out hiking.
I found that my D200 was very hit and miss. Some days were good, some not so much. The bad images with the D7000 are due to poor lighting and or camera shake... ie...me and not the camera. I have not put it on a tripod as yet but must get on to that and improve my images.
Digital - Yes...Film - Not really, I have a Seagull that's about 60 years old and they still make film that will work in it! My Brownie (from the early 1900s) does not work. I've had my Nikon2000 (film) since I was 16 and here I am at 42 still works like a charm.
As long as the camera works it's never too old. But, then you need to ask yourself, do I want to invest in lens for an old camera? Like in my case, I had a Minolta SLR that I received as a gift back in the early 70s. The shutter speed was starting to slow down. I took it to a camera store and the owner contacted Minolta. Minolta told him they don't work on that model any longer. They didn't have the parts to replace what was needed to correct the problem.
I am with Marlena on this ( @photochik ), really no such thing on a film camera! When digital first came out, it couldn't compete with the quality of film, but was so darned convenient it caught on. I am not sure exactly when digital broke the quality barrier, but I wouldn't go back any further than that. I honestly shoot more film now than digital anymore.
If you have to keep it on a tripod to get a sharp image, then the problem sounds like your shutter speeds are too slow. Do some test shots outdoors with fast shutter speeds (1/500 second+) to see if you get sharper images. I have an old D70 I use every once in a while, and I get great results out of it.
the 3100 I hear good things about.
But like the boys above say I use a Rollei from 1972, a Zenit from 1976 and an OM1 from 1979 so what do I know. If you're shooting on AUTO you will get all sorts of made effects that you won't understand. If you're shooting on manual with a normal standard lens and faster than /100 and you're still getting blur, maybe it needs to be traded in, sell it on ebay for parts and it will generate some cash for you, then retain the lens and buy a body only on ebay to upgrade and use your existing lens, should be pretty cheap that way.
I 'only' have a 300D (the original "Digital Rebel"), from 2003 and it still takes photos which (IMO) knock the socks off modern point-and-shoots.
I guess with old cameras, you get in issues of moving parts stopping working properly (shutter, etc), dirty sensors, solder joints giving up the ghost, etc.
The shutter and mirror mechanics in SLRs can wear down over time and performance can degrade. My impression is that older cameras - from decades past - were built better in that respect.
When I bought my D70, my pictures suddenly seemed so much better. 5 years later, I upgraded to a D90, and the D70 suddenly didn't seem to cut it any more. The D70 still worked as well as it ever had, but the D90 had some advantages. I think it meters and focuses a bit better, and the big improvement for me was the LCD display - it's twice the size and much more visible outdoors than the D70's. I could preview images and see out of focus shots and reshoot them, rather than find out much later that I'd missed focus. I also realised that the auto white balance on the D90 was very accurate, and that many of my old D70 shots were very blue (including outdoors). I learned to adjust the D70 to warm up the WB. Something I would never have noticed unless I compared side by side.
Of course if you are careful with metering, check your histogram, and careful/competent with focusing, then that difference isnt' so important.
The D7000 probably has better dynamic range, larger sensor, improved focus and metering. But I doubt your D70 is performing any worse than when you first got it, you just have to take more care to get good shots.
@k1w1 Thanks Christine - yes I think comparing it to the D7000 isn't helping it's case @skipt07@sudweeks That's exactly what is happening with mine! No mater what shutter speed I put it on it is so slow! So this can be fixed? I tried to explain it to a person at a ig commercial camera store and he said "camera's aren't cars, you can't get them serviced and replacement parts." @chewyteeth Thanks Dave - yes I only shoot on manual mode with it as it just doesn't work on auto - too dark etc. I have heard good things about the 3100 @june I have heard the D90 is one of the better models they have made! Thanks @eutony@bankmann thanks - yes I think someone is going wrong - it was a professional photographers camera when we bought it 6 years ago so it has seen some mileage @mikew Thanks Michael - yes you just listed all the frustrations I have esp the display but I was happy to persist with her until this recent turn - now it's just plain frustrating - would rather not bother taking anything with it than do battle
@saranna - I don't know what to tell you Sarah. It seems like everything that is made any more is not made to be fixed. We've become a "throw-away" society. My old SLR was more mechanical and seemed to be more fixable. With the the advent of digital cameras they are more electronic. The manufacturers of cameras, like computer manufacturers only made so many parts and service them for shorter periods of time. They want you to upgrade every so many years. Now the more expensive the camera, the more likely they will service them longer.
@saranna - No that is a weird issue that every shutter speed seems too slow. If the shutter is constantly too slow, then you should have some images that are way overexposed.
I'd try taking both the D7000 and D70 out on a sunny day, set the ISO, shutter speeds and the apertures the same, and check how different the exposures are. (I'd start with ISO 200, F5.6 1/1600 second on a sunny day) So if the laws of physics hold true, you should either have an image that's properly exposed and has no motion blur, or you should have an image that's way overexposed.
Good luck.
Write a Reply
Sign up for a free account or Sign in to post a comment.
Tweets ahoy!
Join the Group
Pin With Me
YES. I had my D200 to three places and they all told me the same thing. We used my lens on several new Nikon cameras and it was fine. I upgraded to a D7000 and at the same time purchased an AW100. I didnt want to spend lots on a macro lens, couldnt get a waterproof housing for the D7000 and also wanted something small that I could take everywhere and it could stand up to an accidental fall when out hiking.
I found that my D200 was very hit and miss. Some days were good, some not so much. The bad images with the D7000 are due to poor lighting and or camera shake... ie...me and not the camera. I have not put it on a tripod as yet but must get on to that and improve my images.
This shot was taken on a 1943 Argus C3:
And this on a 1910 Burke & James Rexoette:
But like the boys above say I use a Rollei from 1972, a Zenit from 1976 and an OM1 from 1979 so what do I know. If you're shooting on AUTO you will get all sorts of made effects that you won't understand. If you're shooting on manual with a normal standard lens and faster than /100 and you're still getting blur, maybe it needs to be traded in, sell it on ebay for parts and it will generate some cash for you, then retain the lens and buy a body only on ebay to upgrade and use your existing lens, should be pretty cheap that way.
I guess with old cameras, you get in issues of moving parts stopping working properly (shutter, etc), dirty sensors, solder joints giving up the ghost, etc.
Of course if you are careful with metering, check your histogram, and careful/competent with focusing, then that difference isnt' so important.
The D7000 probably has better dynamic range, larger sensor, improved focus and metering. But I doubt your D70 is performing any worse than when you first got it, you just have to take more care to get good shots.
@skipt07 @sudweeks That's exactly what is happening with mine! No mater what shutter speed I put it on it is so slow! So this can be fixed? I tried to explain it to a person at a ig commercial camera store and he said "camera's aren't cars, you can't get them serviced and replacement parts."
@chewyteeth Thanks Dave - yes I only shoot on manual mode with it as it just doesn't work on auto - too dark etc. I have heard good things about the 3100
@june I have heard the D90 is one of the better models they have made! Thanks
@eutony @bankmann thanks - yes I think someone is going wrong - it was a professional photographers camera when we bought it 6 years ago so it has seen some mileage
@mikew Thanks Michael - yes you just listed all the frustrations I have esp the display but I was happy to persist with her until this recent turn - now it's just plain frustrating - would rather not bother taking anything with it than do battle
I'd try taking both the D7000 and D70 out on a sunny day, set the ISO, shutter speeds and the apertures the same, and check how different the exposures are. (I'd start with ISO 200, F5.6 1/1600 second on a sunny day) So if the laws of physics hold true, you should either have an image that's properly exposed and has no motion blur, or you should have an image that's way overexposed.
Good luck.