SportsShooter.com - Canon 10D or D2000

	New York \| NY \| USA \| Posted: 11:07 PM on 01.29.04
	->> get the 10D...do not buy ancient history....or once the Mark II comes out, you can get a 1D for cheap....the 1D is an excellent camera

Robert G. Stevens, Photographer

	Halifax \| NS \| Canada \| Posted: 11:09 PM on 01.29.04
	->> John: I just noticed you wanted to do some nature photography with your digital. I would skip the D2000 and get a 10D with the bigger and better image size. Your other option it to stick with what you have now until you can afford the 1D Mk II, which would fit the nature photography role as well as the PJ work. Robert

Matt Barton, Photographer

Lexington | KY | USA | Posted: 11:13 PM on 01.29.04

->> A D2000 would be a waste of money. It might be cheap now, but it will be REALLY worthless in another year. A 10d will hold its value much better over the next few years because of the larger chip. The D2000 is big, heavy and most importantly-six year old technology. Think about how much has changed technology-wise since 19998. Would you even use a cell phone from six years ago?

The 10d is a better choice in every sense. And when you make a little money, pick up a used 1d. I bought one of mine for $1600. With the new Mark II out soon, I imagine they may become even cheaper.

Paul W Gillespie, Photographer

Annapolis | MD | USA | Posted: 11:41 PM on 01.29.04

->> I have both cameras, 10D and dcs 520, and it all depends on what you want to do with them. I have made many great images with the dcs520, you just can't blow them up real big. Some examples are on my website http://pwgphoto.com Now if you can which was made with which camera I will be impressed.

The dcs 520 is big and heavy and a real work horse. It seemed to AF better than my 10D and shoots faster also. The 10D is not a great sports camera unless you have manual focusing down to a science. However the 10d does shoot some great images on non moving objects. Although it took some getting used to the softer CMOS images but they sharpen up nicely in PS.

I have seen a DCS 520 go for 250 bucks the other day on galbraith's site so they can be had for cheap. If you are expecting these things to hold their value for any period of time you are crazy. I paid 7,100 for my DCS 520 a little over 4 years ago and would be lucky to get 710 dollars for it today. Heck I could not get half of 710 dollars. But the camera made me lots of money and made my life a lot easier. 1,500 seems like a bargain to me these days. I am actually waiting for the used 1D market to be flooded with cameras because of people upgrading to the new body.

If I were you I would either 1) spend up to 400-500 bucks and try and get a clean DCS 520 with a few batteries perferably to hold me over until the used 1D's start showing up. or 2) Save your money and get a 1D used as soon as you can afford it. Being a PJ myself and if I were in your shoes I would not get the 10D for 1,500 plus 150 for the grip. I would either wait until a used $1,500-$2,000 1D turned up or buy the DCS520 depending on the price and still wait for the used 1D.

Just one man's opinion

Paul W Gillespie, Photographer

	Annapolis \| MD \| USA \| Posted: 11:44 PM on 01.29.04
	->> PS try and get the DCS520 as opposed to the D2000 because Kodak and Canon had a falling out and KOdak stopped making software that was compatible with the D2000. If I remember correctly you can still use Kodak's excellent Photo Desk software to view and work on your images with the DCS 520.

Michael Hickey, Photographer

	Muncie \| IN \| USA \| Posted: 11:45 PM on 01.29.04
	->> I'm suprised nobody has mentioned this but the ONLY way to process D2000 photos is with the acquire module only within OS 9! If that's not enough reason to stay away I don't know what else is!

John A. Pavoncello, Photographer

York | PA | USA | Posted: 12:15 AM on 01.30.04

->> Thanks for the input. I'm not really, per say, switching over to Canon, the newspaper I work for supplies me with Nikon gear. The only piece of equipment I have left is a Nikon 300 2.8. The main reason for getting into Canon is I've the desire to have my own camera for freelancing and personal work, plus, I just can't rely on the Nikon stuff anymore, too many problems. My company D1 is going back to NPS for the fourth time in seven months and I don't know if and when we'll get D2h's.
One other question, I understand the D2000 captures in TIFF, can the files be opened in off brand browser software such as PhotoMechanic or ACDSee or do I have to use Canon/Kodak software?

Michael Hickey, Photographer

	Muncie \| IN \| USA \| Posted: 12:30 AM on 01.30.04
	->> No it's a proprietary tiff. The only way is the acquire module plug-in, it is still available from Kodak I believe.

Paul W Gillespie, Photographer

Annapolis | MD | USA | Posted: 12:32 AM on 01.30.04

->> If I remember correctly the canon D2000 has to use the aquire software in PS. The Kodak DCS 520 can use the newer Kodak PhotoDesk software at least up til version 3 I think. The PhotoDesk software is very similar to photo mechanic. The PD software can do ITPC captioning, change WB and exposure, and other things I can't think of. That's why I think the DCS 520 is better. The Kodak software kicks butt and its free. They may work with the other programs I don't know.

Michael Coons, Photographer

	Agoura Hills \| CA \| USA \| Posted: 2:10 AM on 01.30.04
	->> I'm looking for a used DCS 520 or D2000 right now too because I can find one for around $500-600. The $1000 I will save will go towards a 1D when used prices come down. I'm not concerned about resale value either because I don't intend on getting rid of it, just using it till it doesn't work no more. The camera still produces great images and looks just fine in a newspaper.

Jeff Stanton, Photographer

Tucson | AZ | USA | Posted: 2:35 AM on 01.30.04

->> I just sold my DCS 520 and I'm using a 10D now. The obvious difference to me before even firing a frame was the weight of the cameras. As Keith Jackson would say, "that boys' a hoss!" And in this case, the boy is the 520.

I made a lot of great images with it and it was a great introduction into digital. The EOS 1N body is rugged and proved reliable for me.

So far I like what I have seen in this camera and it sure is easier to carry around all day.

I can see arguments on both sides of this issue. You certainly will have additional money left if you go with the DCS520. Plus, when you are able to afford a 1D, you will still have your lenses you were able to purchase with the savings.

Doug Holleman, Photographer

	Temple \| TX \| USA \| Posted: 3:06 AM on 01.30.04
	->> Keep your Nikon stuff and hold out for the new D70. You'll save a bunch of money, and it's probably about as good as a 10D.

Brian Blanco, Photographer

Tampa / Key West | FL | USA | Posted: 9:08 AM on 01.30.04

->> If you're just planning on shooting for newspaper work, then the answer is easy. Go with the DCS 520. Don't worry about the file size; you'll find it to be fine for newsprint resolution. And, in fact, it's usually fine for (news)magazine repro too, as long as you shoot tight and don't have to crop into the image alot, and they don't attempt to run it enormous.

I've shot some of my best stuff with a DCS 520 and had one up until just a few days ago. I also know a few shooters that I really respect who shoot whith DCS 520s daily and still love them. In fact Louis Alverez, of AP in Miami still uses a few of them and he swears by them. And that guy knows how to put a camera through it's paces-- a 10D wouldn't last a week with that guy.

The bigger question is this; if you go for the 10D, will you be able to afford a back-up body? I'm constantly amazed at the number of shooters I meet, in person and on this site, who are working with only one camera. It's not a good idea to take on an assignment with only one camera--things happen, and ediotrs don't wanna hear, "well, I'm sorry but my camera broke".

You may wanna consider getting a DCS 520 for your daily work and for faster moving subjects like sports. AND get a D-30 for assignments that need a larger, prettier file, and are not sports action.

This combination will still cost you about $500 less than a 10D and will give you the best of all worlds: equipment redundancy, the ability to shoot sports and an acceptable file size when you need it. PLUS a left over $500.00 bucks to buy a 550ex or some glass!

This combination served me well for years, and I think you'll find that having a back-up body will relieve alot of strees while on assignments.

Clark Brooks, Photographer, Photo Editor

Urbana | IL | USA | Posted: 10:59 AM on 01.30.04

->> John:

If dollars are an issue I agree with Brian B.. For sports and newsprint work the 520 or D2000 would be great until you could afford a 1DM???. Instead of the d30, get a d60 as it focuses a bit better than the d30 and produces a little bit sharper file I think.

I had two d2000 and sold them last year and replaced them with a 1D after I made some change to pay for it. The d2000 are rugged workhorses even if they don't look pretty or shoot 8fps. The make damn good pics for daily print work sports or news.

My .02 are up . . . .

John A. Pavoncello, Photographer

	York \| PA \| USA \| Posted: 7:29 PM on 01.30.04
	->> Thanks to everyone for the information!

Robert G. Stevens, Photographer

Halifax | NS | Canada | Posted: 11:28 PM on 01.30.04

->> John:

The D2000 files are not a problem if you are running Windows and Photoshop. I just upgraded to a laptop with XP and Kodak even updated their Photoshop Plugin to support XP.

Recently I have been generating jpegs in the camera using the enable in camera processing option of the D2000/DCS520. It seems to do a good job with the jpegs and even corrects minor exposure problems.

I generate the jpegs in the camera so the D2000 files will fit in with my 1D work flow. I shoot RAW+jpeg and use ACDsee to quickly flip through the jpegs until I find the one I want to acquire.

Robert

Sam Morris, Photographer

Henderson (Las Vegas) | NV | USA | Posted: 12:57 AM on 01.31.04

->> If you get a D2000, just remember that any repair you might need for it, if you go through Canon, will cost you at least $3000. We have two paperwieghts because of that. I don't remember what one of the problems was, but on mine, I began getting a blue line through every image. When it was sent to Canon, it came back with the same answer "Uh, it's the motherboard and it will cost $3000."

Our guess was that they did not want to work on them anymore and were trying to nudge people into buying the 1D.

It is kind of like getting a good deal on an older BMW or Mercedes - it is a good deal until it needs any work done to it.

Michael Hickey, Photographer

Muncie | IN | USA | Posted: 1:27 AM on 01.31.04

->> Sam,
We replaced more than one board on our D2000 where I used to work when it was before the 1D was out and it was $3000 then also. As much as I like the D2000/520 cameras when the main board goes out like you said it's a paperweight and I would be VERY leary about buying a used one. Keep in mind originally these cameras were over $10,000 when they came out so a $3000 board doesn't sound that bad in comparison to the original price.
John, unless you can get the camera for next to nothing I would save for a new one (with a warranty)

Rick Rowell, Photographer

Canoga Park | CA | Usa | Posted: 2:33 AM on 01.31.04

->> John, look for a good used DCS 520. I owned for three years a Nikon DCS 620 which is the same camera on an F5 Nikon body. I can show you 20x30 prints made with this camera shot at 400asa that are as sharp as a tack. if you shoot tight and you have good glass you won't have any problems. Also I believe you can still download the viewing software from the Kodak web site. I think the latest verson was 5.9.3 After I convert my 6 meg TIFFS to high end JPEGS, I go into photoshop and change the image size to 6x9 at 300dpi this will give you roughly a 1600x2400 image. That's big enough to print a 20x30. But you have to start with a sharp image to begin with. Yes it's slower and bigger than the new cameras, but it's a great stop gap camera to use until it dies, and these work horses don't die easy. My DCS 620 is up for sale and you can use all the papers lenses with it. Check out the classified section.

Thad Parsons, Photographer

Durham | NC | USA | Posted: 3:06 AM on 01.31.04

->> Just another note ...

You can use the Kodak 520 / Canon D2000 with PS CS. The acquire module does work with the files. I used it just this last week because the 520 is my backup camera. It is a beast of a camera (both good and bad sides to that). I got it as my first digital camera (instead of going to a higher resolution, lower quality body) and it still works to this day.

Don't knock old technology ... it will still get the job done!

John Froschauer, Photographer

Tacoma | WA | USA | Posted: 7:14 PM on 01.31.04

->> Just a note on the use of OS X and a Mac. Yes you can use OS X with the DCS 520, I use 10.3 (panther) and have used it with the DCS, You use DCS Photo Desk from Kodak instead of the aquire. Does all the same stuff as the aquire via Photoshop. I have both bodies, but the 520 has mainly been sitting on a shelf for the last 8 months. Yes the 520's a little faster, but the files on the 10D are really nice. I primarliy use a 1D with the 10D as a second body and yes I shoot sports with the 10D -- slower, but it works, in fact 4,5,9 and 10 on my member page are with the 10D

Paul W Gillespie, Photographer

	Annapolis \| MD \| USA \| Posted: 11:16 PM on 01.31.04
	->> After this thread started I downloaded the newer version of Kodaks Photo Desk for OS 10.3 and I wonder why other camera makers don't make software this good. You can even use it to work with other cameras jpgs, although you can not make all the adjustments you can with Kodak files.

Return to --> Message Board Main Index