Added to D2X, D70 and Fuji S3 collection. Image quality is much better than the 4.1 MP suggests. Equal to or better than D70 (better at iso 400 and above than D70), Slightly less resolution than S3 and about same noise up to 800, Fuji pulls ahead at 1600 but you have to look at a 100% crop to see it. Much less noise than D2X.

Speed in continuous shooting, saving files and focus is much faster than S3 - no contest. Focus is much faster than D70.

D2X advantage is solely a result of the 12MP sensor - higher resolution, however, it is visible only very slightly in 8X10 print.

Battery life is stellar, like D70 and D2X - all day or two shooting.

I just thought I'd point out that this is a sports camera with an amazing buffer + continuous shooting mode. Here are the specs:

* Continuous High [CH] - 8 fps
* Continuous Low [CL] -1 to 7 fps (programmable)
* Buffer size 50 JPEG frames, 40 NEF (RAW) frames *

THIS is the only reason to buy this camera over the D1X or D70. But if you're looking for a great studio camera, the D1X won't let you down, and if you're just getting into DSLR's, the D50/ D70 are great bodies to get started on.

Thanks for reading!

-Jason

This camera is designed for journalists and journalists alone. 4 MP means that the maximum size you can make prints at 300 DPI is roughly 6" x 8". That's fine if you're submitting images to a newspaper, but if you have any chance of wanting enlargements you'll be better off with something with more resolution.

Funny thing is that the Canon sports camera is roughly the same price and shoots 8.5 fps at 8.2 MP. I'm sure Nikon could do better, but perhaps there just isn't a market for Nikon sports cameras, I mean, look at the amount of white lenses on any mayor sporting event!

This is the second factory refurbished camera I have purchased from Cameta Auctions (this time through Amazon.com). Both cameras have been in perfect condition 10/10 and have performed flawlessly. As a result, I have been able to upgrade my equipment to professional level camera bodies at a cost of $[...] on the dollar. I have no hesitation recommending the purchase of factory refurbished cameras, either through Cameta or any of the other vendors with which Amazon is connected.

Most of my friends suggest that I buy a camera by Canon. It would be only 1/3 the price, maybe half the price. But they spend most of the time correcting the RAW files in Aperture or Lightroom and I have always perfect pictures. No corrections, no electronic image retouche. Just great pictures!

And yes, it's worth the price. You save countless hours and tons of GB harddisc space. Don't accept a second best solution. If you can afford a Nikon D2HS SLR go for it!

You can shoot 8 frames per second, up to 50 frames continuously (jpeg, 40 raw) with this Nikon workhorse. And don't be fooled -- that 8 fps is not just for sports. I shoot photos for a Disney travel guide (The Complete Guide to Walt Disney World), and being able to zip off shots like that lets me get just the right facial expressions for people and wildlife, and capture subjects at the moment they look straight into my lens. It's terrific for twirling dancers! When I work with this camera I always end up sweating like a pig, but always get at least one shot that is far better than I planned. Other pluses: 1. Fast focus (otherwise, what's the point?) 2. Good build quality. 3. Accurate battery gauge. 4. Auto ISO (lets you prioritize shutter speed and the camera adjusts the film speed, though I never get good results over 1200 ISO or so). 5. A large bright LCD (chimps rejoice!) makes it easy to review your shots. Really there's only one problem: image size is just 4.1 meg, and sometimes my facial features or other small details suffer. And right now my body doesn't work -- the auto-focus broke after 30,000 shots! How does this camera compare to the Canon? In my experience (limited), I noticed that the Canon focused a hair faster, but my Nikon was always a little more sharp. Kudos to Canon for starting at 100 ISO, though. I'd love to have that for fireworks shots!

You can shoot 8 frames per second, up to 50 frames continuously (jpeg, 40 raw) with this Nikon workhorse. And don't be fooled -- that 8 fps is not just for sports. I shoot photos for a Disney travel guide (The Complete Guide to Walt Disney World), and being able to zip off shots like that lets me get just the right facial expressions for people and wildlife, and capture subjects at the moment they look straight into my lens. It's terrific for twirling dancers! When I work with this camera I always end up sweating like a pig, but always get at least one shot that is far better than I planned.

Other pluses:
1. Fast focus (otherwise, what's the point?)
2. Good build quality.
3. Accurate battery gauge.
4. Auto ISO (lets you prioritize shutter speed and the camera adjusts the film speed, though I never get good results over 1200 ISO or so).
5. A large bright LCD (chimps rejoice!) makes it easy to review your shots.

Really there's only two problems: image size is just 4.1 meg (sometimes my facial features or other small details suffer) and there's too much noise at high ISOs. How does it camera compare to the new Canon models? In my experience (limited), I noticed that the Canon focused a hair faster and is more forgiving in shadow detail, but my Nikon was always a little more sharp.