A quite old camera (by digital standards), which was way ahead of its time. Is it obsolete? Does it have anything to offer in the age of the D4, the D7000, and the D800? The answer might surprise you. NOTE: There is very little practical difference between D2x and D2xs, the following apply to both
+ superb value. For a few hundred dollars, you get a pro body with great features...
+ ...and absolutely TOP class image quality at base ISO, 100 (excellent at ISO 200 and still quite good at ISO 400)
+ apart from video, there's little a photographer would miss in terms of features
- Image quality deteriorates pretty rapidly after ISO 400
- modest frame rate at full resolution (5fps, perfectly fine for anything other than sport reporters)
- somewhat big and heavy - hello? what do you expect?
- hands-down, no-questions-asked, a top-of-the line portrait camera for studio or flash use
- DX users who need a top pro body without going to FX
- any pictures at base ISO (flash or plenty of light)
- available light photography. Image quality beyond ISO 400 pretty bad for today's standards
- those who want to travel light - obviously enough
- those who can live with the limitations of a D7000
I just love my D2x. It's my first choice for portraits with flash (which is the majority of my shots). For a DX user, a combo D2x + D300 is very sense-making in terms of the two bodies complementing each other. I often carry them both and use the D2x for flash and the D300 for available light. The D7000 is a better option for the latter, but I don't like its ergonomics.