assessing used DSLR

In article
<tully.albrecht-8DF007.05482024022008.TakeThisOut@news.phx.highwinds-media.com>,
Tully <tully.albrecht.TakeThisOut@cox.net> wrote:

> (I sold the two D80's)
>
> I need to put off the purchase of a D300 for six months to a year. Maybe
> by then the price will be down around $1200-1400 USD for a new one.
> Until that day, I plan to buy a used D200. In the first stages of
> evaluating a used one, I'm thinking that a pro probably puts around 2k
> clicks on a DSLR shutter per month---if more than that, they would
> likely be using multiple cameras. More significant might be the number
> of lens changes and the type of maintenance.
>
> My experience with (film) cameras that are owned by a studio or a news
> organization is that they get pretty good preventive maintenance and
> even if the exteriors are rough the mechanical & electronic bits are
> well-cared-for. How much of this do you guys think is applicable to
> digital beasts?
>
> If I'm on the wrong track someone please set me straight.

I think I'd rather have a camera that hadn't experienced wear, rather
than one that had been maintained - especially with modern, mostly
electronic products. There are far fewer components where "CLA"
applies.

A professional organization doesn't usually upgrade for the fun of it.
Their equipment has to earn a living, and unless there's a huge
advantage in a newer model (not the case here) they don't cycle
equipment until it's wearing out.

No, what you want is a camera from a well-heeled amateur who's
upgrading solely because he must have the latest and greatest. A
dentist is the stereotypical example. Check the want ads from better
neighborhoods, or (if any are left) camera stores that take trade ins.
 >> Stay informed about: assessing used DSLR 

In article <240220080845469729%not@aol.com>,
Scott Schuckert <not.TakeThisOut@aol.com> wrote:

> In article
> <tully.albrecht-8DF007.05482024022008.TakeThisOut@news.phx.highwinds-media.com>,
> Tully <tully.albrecht.TakeThisOut@cox.net> wrote:
>
> > (I sold the two D80's)
> >
> > I need to put off the purchase of a D300 for six months to a year. Maybe
> > by then the price will be down around $1200-1400 USD for a new one.
> > Until that day, I plan to buy a used D200. In the first stages of
> > evaluating a used one, I'm thinking that a pro probably puts around 2k
> > clicks on a DSLR shutter per month---if more than that, they would
> > likely be using multiple cameras. More significant might be the number
> > of lens changes and the type of maintenance.
> >
> > My experience with (film) cameras that are owned by a studio or a news
> > organization is that they get pretty good preventive maintenance and
> > even if the exteriors are rough the mechanical & electronic bits are
> > well-cared-for. How much of this do you guys think is applicable to
> > digital beasts?
> >
> > If I'm on the wrong track someone please set me straight.
>
> I think I'd rather have a camera that hadn't experienced wear, rather
> than one that had been maintained - especially with modern, mostly
> electronic products. There are far fewer components where "CLA"
> applies.
>
> A professional organization doesn't usually upgrade for the fun of it.
> Their equipment has to earn a living, and unless there's a huge
> advantage in a newer model (not the case here) they don't cycle
> equipment until it's wearing out.
>
> No, what you want is a camera from a well-heeled amateur who's
> upgrading solely because he must have the latest and greatest. A
> dentist is the stereotypical example. Check the want ads from better
> neighborhoods, or (if any are left) camera stores that take trade ins.

Sound advice. Thanks for that.
--
"It is the individual alone who is timeless. The individual's
hungers, anxieties, dreams, and preoccupations have remained
unchanged throughout the millennia." Eric Hoffer (1902-1983)
 >> Stay informed about: assessing used DSLR 

Tully <tully.albrecht RemoveThis @cox.net> wrote:
>In article <87prumcwnv.fld RemoveThis @apaflo.com>,
> floyd RemoveThis @apaflo.com (Floyd L. Davidson) wrote:
>
>> Tully <tully.albrecht RemoveThis @cox.net> wrote:
>> >(I sold the two D80's)
>> >
>> >I need to put off the purchase of a D300 for six months to a year. Maybe
>> >by then the price will be down around $1200-1400 USD for a new one.
>> >Until that day, I plan to buy a used D200. In the first stages of
>> >evaluating a used one, I'm thinking that a pro probably puts around 2k
>> >clicks on a DSLR shutter per month---if more than that, they would
>> >likely be using multiple cameras. More significant might be the number
>> >of lens changes and the type of maintenance.
>>
>> I wouldn't try to assume that much. Professional
>> photographers are a varied lot, and while one might
>> shoot hundreds of images per day and never put a scratch
>> on the camera, another might backpack the camera all
>> over the back country, beating it unmercifully, all for
>> a few dozen shots per week.
>>
>> Take each instance in isolation, and look at what the
>> camera is and isn't.
>I don't know exactly what you mean here; this sounds like "it is what it
>is" and I tune out statements like that.

I mean do not apply a "rule of thumb" to buying used
equipment. Not all "pro" cameras are beat up. Not all
enthusiast cameras are well cared for. Look at each
camera, not at generalizations.

>> Also, I doubt that new D300's will be dropping that far
>> in price that soon, but there will soon enough be used
>> D300's for sale at those prices, or lower if the camera
>> is significantly used.
>I need to get something to tide me over until I can accumulate $1800 or
>(hopefully) less. based on my experience with two refurb "factory demos"
>from Cameta Auctions, I wouldn't hesitate to buy a similar D300 as long
>as it represents a savings of at least 20% off the prevailing street
>price of a new one.

That's one very distinct possibility. Plus there are
sure to be at least a few people who are today buying a
D300 that next month will decide, for whatever reason,
to sell it. Initially there won't be many, but there'll
be more as time goes on.

I'd be watching eBay on a daily basis. In particular,
look at the "most recently listed" sort for used items
with a Buy-It-Now price.

....

>> >My experience with (film) cameras that are owned by a studio or a news
>> >organization is that they get pretty good preventive maintenance and
>> >even if the exteriors are rough the mechanical & electronic bits are
>> >well-cared-for. How much of this do you guys think is applicable to
>> >digital beasts?
>>
>> It's all about the same...

>Not according to Scott...

He's saying the same thing I am. My "all about the
same" was in reference to any difference between film
and digital cameras. I think equipment that is worked
is going to be, well... *worked*. You buy something off
the local news agencies shelf with 90,000 on the
counter, and it simply is not as good a bet as a camera
with a peg count of 1500, no matter who owns it.

--
Floyd L. Davidson <http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson>
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) floyd RemoveThis @apaflo.com
 >> Stay informed about: assessing used DSLR 

In article <87prumcwnv.fld.DeleteThis@apaflo.com>,
floyd.DeleteThis@apaflo.com (Floyd L. Davidson) wrote:

> Tully <tully.albrecht.DeleteThis@cox.net> wrote:
> >(I sold the two D80's)
> >
> >I need to put off the purchase of a D300 for six months to a year. Maybe
> >by then the price will be down around $1200-1400 USD for a new one.
> >Until that day, I plan to buy a used D200. In the first stages of
> >evaluating a used one, I'm thinking that a pro probably puts around 2k
> >clicks on a DSLR shutter per month---if more than that, they would
> >likely be using multiple cameras. More significant might be the number
> >of lens changes and the type of maintenance.
>
> I wouldn't try to assume that much. Professional
> photographers are a varied lot, and while one might
> shoot hundreds of images per day and never put a scratch
> on the camera, another might backpack the camera all
> over the back country, beating it unmercifully, all for
> a few dozen shots per week.
>
> Take each instance in isolation, and look at what the
> camera is and isn't.
I don't know exactly what you mean here; this sounds like "it is what it
is" and I tune out statements like that.
> Also, I doubt that new D300's will be dropping that far
> in price that soon, but there will soon enough be used
> D300's for sale at those prices, or lower if the camera
> is significantly used.
I need to get something to tide me over until I can accumulate $1800 or
(hopefully) less. based on my experience with two refurb "factory demos"
from Cameta Auctions, I wouldn't hesitate to buy a similar D300 as long
as it represents a savings of at least 20% off the prevailing street
price of a new one.
> Personally, I'd start looking for someone unloading a
> D300 now. If you buy a D200 (unless you plan on keeping
> it when you do get a D300) the cost of later swapping
> to a D300 is just as much as the extra cost of the D300
> now, so why not just do it right the first time and have
> a D300 to use for the next few months instead of the
> D200.
If I could have retained every dime I got for selling the D80 bodies I'd
only be about $400 short today, but expenses seem to occur in droves
when I have ready cash. I had to spend some money on the car this
weekend...couldn't be put off. I have an F2, but I only take about 10%
as many pictures when I use film. Not only that, but I've gotten into
the habit of using digital the way we used to use Polaroid backs before
exposing large format film =^)
>(And I do think that is a truly significant
> difference, as opposed to I think making a choice
> between a D2x and a D300 is a very difficult decision.)
Probably by the time I find a used (or refurb) D300 I would be close to
getting the full amount together, but I'm looking.
> >My experience with (film) cameras that are owned by a studio or a news
> >organization is that they get pretty good preventive maintenance and
> >even if the exteriors are rough the mechanical & electronic bits are
> >well-cared-for. How much of this do you guys think is applicable to
> >digital beasts?
>
> It's all about the same...
Not according to Scott...
--
"It is the individual alone who is timeless. The individual's
hungers, anxieties, dreams, and preoccupations have remained
unchanged throughout the millennia." Eric Hoffer (1902-1983)
 >> Stay informed about: assessing used DSLR 

Tully wrote:
> (I sold the two D80's)
>
> I need to put off the purchase of a D300 for six months to a year. Maybe
> by then the price will be down around $1200-1400 USD for a new one.

What do you expect to pay for a used D200?

> Until that day, I plan to buy a used D200. In the first stages of
> evaluating a used one, I'm thinking that a pro probably puts around 2k
> clicks on a DSLR shutter per month---if more than that, they would
> likely be using multiple cameras.

Ask for a jpeg & check the total shutter count in the exif. This is
certainly something significant to look at.

> More significant might be the number
> of lens changes and the type of maintenance.
>
> My experience with (film) cameras that are owned by a studio or a news
> organization is that they get pretty good preventive maintenance and
> even if the exteriors are rough the mechanical & electronic bits are
> well-cared-for. How much of this do you guys think is applicable to
> digital beasts?

I've bought some old lenses which belonged to news agencies or something
& they were severely abused inside & out. Who else would use a lens so hard?
 >> Stay informed about: assessing used DSLR 

In article <AXhwj.12356$J41.3508@newssvr14.news.prodigy.net>,
Paul Furman <paul- RemoveThis @-edgehill.net> wrote:

> Tully wrote:
> > (I sold the two D80's)
> >
> > I need to put off the purchase of a D300 for six months to a year. Maybe
> > by then the price will be down around $1200-1400 USD for a new one.
>
> What do you expect to pay for a used D200?
Not much more than $900. A new D300 is about twice that.
>
> > Until that day, I plan to buy a used D200. In the first stages of
> > evaluating a used one, I'm thinking that a pro probably puts around 2k
> > clicks on a DSLR shutter per month---if more than that, they would
> > likely be using multiple cameras.
>
> Ask for a jpeg & check the total shutter count in the exif. This is
> certainly something significant to look at.
Agreed, and a precaution both simple and obvious.
>
> > More significant might be the number
> > of lens changes and the type of maintenance.
> >
> > My experience with (film) cameras that are owned by a studio or a news
> > organization is that they get pretty good preventive maintenance and
> > even if the exteriors are rough the mechanical & electronic bits are
> > well-cared-for. How much of this do you guys think is applicable to
> > digital beasts?
>
> I've bought some old lenses which belonged to news agencies or something
> & they were severely abused inside & out. Who else would use a lens so hard?
Concur with this also. A few years back I bought a couple of F4's (the
camera, not the airplane) from a newspaper that had gone to F5's (and to
all-digital soon after that). They had a guy who had been tasked with
sorting through the gear and giving an honest appraisal. He steered me
away from the ones that were unreliable. i got plenty of service out of
some ugly equipment, and considered it a good deal. I know from time
spent in a studio and ad agency that anything that's passed around gets
abused. It doesn't have to be ex-newsie stuff, although PJ's are
notorious...even fleet vehicles lead an amazingly rough life.
--
"It is the individual alone who is timeless. The individual's
hungers, anxieties, dreams, and preoccupations have remained
unchanged throughout the millennia." Eric Hoffer (1902-1983)
 >> Stay informed about: assessing used DSLR 

On Feb 24, 9:38 pm, Tully <tully.albre... RemoveThis @cox.net> wrote:
> In article <AXhwj.12356$J41.3...@newssvr14.news.prodigy.net>,
> Paul Furman <pa... RemoveThis @-edgehill.net> wrote:
>
> > Tully wrote:
> > > (I sold the two D80's)
>
> > > I need to put off the purchase of a D300 for six months to a year. Maybe
> > > by then the price will be down around $1200-1400 USD for a new one.
>
> > What do you expect to pay for a used D200?
>
> Not much more than $900. A new D300 is about twice that.
>
> > > Until that day, I plan to buy a used D200. In the first stages of
> > > evaluating a used one, I'm thinking that a pro probably puts around 2k
> > > clicks on a DSLR shutter per month---if more than that, they would
> > > likely be using multiple cameras.
>
> > Ask for a jpeg & check the total shutter count in the exif. This is
> > certainly something significant to look at.
>
> Agreed, and a precaution both simple and obvious.

I would suggest that this is almost the only thing you can rely on
(other than obvious signs of problems, such as cracks indicating a
drop etc). The total shutter count, an indication of the number of
shots taken, tells you how much it's been used. How could you tell
anything else?

My own d200, for example, is covered in black tape (the rubber started
coming unglued so I taped the whole thing up to not have to worry
about it); also there's brassing in various places, from where the
rings connecting to the strap I use rub against the camera etc. But
it's never been dropped, it's clean, the metering is fine, the AF is
fine, everything works perfectly. A friend has a pentax k10d which
looks brand new and yet I've seen him drop the camera a couple of
times! You could never tell by looking at it.

So I think your safest bet would be to get a used one with as low a
shutter count as possible and from a single user, preferably one with
no other camera if you can determine that (since he'll then have had
extra incentive to take care of it, not having a backup).

Alternatively, have you given any thought to just getting a used d40
or maybe d100/d70 until you get money for the d300? Should work with
your lenses (maybe without AF/metering etc) and minimise expenditure.
 >> Stay informed about: assessing used DSLR 

Tully wrote:
> (I sold the two D80's)
>
> I need to put off the purchase of a D300 for six months to a year. Maybe
> by then the price will be down around $1200-1400 USD for a new one.
> Until that day, I plan to buy a used D200. In the first stages of
> evaluating a used one, I'm thinking that a pro probably puts around 2k
> clicks on a DSLR shutter per month---if more than that, they would
> likely be using multiple cameras. More significant might be the number
> of lens changes and the type of maintenance.
>
> My experience with (film) cameras that are owned by a studio or a news
> organization is that they get pretty good preventive maintenance and
> even if the exteriors are rough the mechanical & electronic bits are
> well-cared-for. How much of this do you guys think is applicable to
> digital beasts?
>
> If I'm on the wrong track someone please set me straight.

You are possibly on the wrong track.
Unless a D200 offers some specific feature that you *need* over the D80s
that you have sold (ie weather sealing, full mirror lock up, better
compatibility with old manual focus lenses, or faster burst rate) then
you're probably grabbing at straws. The D200 won't allow you to take
better pictures than the D80s. Why did you sell them?
The D300 quite possibly will allow you to take better pictures -
especially at higher iso and/or if you shoot jpeg rather than raw.
On the price of the D300, it seems that we live in a USA-centric world.
In most currencies / countries outside the US, the D300 is priced
lower than the D200 was when first released. You could say that the D300
isn't "more expensive", just that US dollars are a bit cheaper these
days. It's also much cheaper than a D2Xs, and in many ways a much better
camera.
It will get cheaper (but perhaps not where you are if the US dollar
stays weak), but I'll wager that it depreciates at a slower rate than a
laptop computer, TV set, or car.
 >> Stay informed about: assessing used DSLR 

On 2008-02-24 13:16:37 -0700, frederick <lost.DeleteThis@sea.com> said:

> Tully wrote:
>> (I sold the two D80's)
>>
>> I need to put off the purchase of a D300 for six months to a year.
>> Maybe by then the price will be down around $1200-1400 USD for a new
>> one. Until that day, I plan to buy a used D200. In the first stages of
>> evaluating a used one, I'm thinking that a pro probably puts around 2k
>> clicks on a DSLR shutter per month---if more than that, they would
>> likely be using multiple cameras. More significant might be the number
>> of lens changes and the type of maintenance.
>> My experience with (film) cameras that are owned by a studio or a news
>> organization is that they get pretty good preventive maintenance and
>> even if the exteriors are rough the mechanical & electronic bits are
>> well-cared-for. How much of this do you guys think is applicable to
>> digital beasts?
>>
>> If I'm on the wrong track someone please set me straight.
>
> You are possibly on the wrong track.
> Unless a D200 offers some specific feature that you *need* over the
> D80s that you have sold (ie weather sealing, full mirror lock up,
> better compatibility with old manual focus lenses, or faster burst
> rate) then you're probably grabbing at straws. The D200 won't allow
> you to take better pictures than the D80s. Why did you sell them?
> The D300 quite possibly will allow you to take better pictures -
> especially at higher iso and/or if you shoot jpeg rather than raw.
> On the price of the D300, it seems that we live in a USA-centric world.
> In most currencies / countries outside the US, the D300 is priced
> lower than the D200 was when first released. You could say that the
> D300 isn't "more expensive", just that US dollars are a bit cheaper
> these days. It's also much cheaper than a D2Xs, and in many ways a much
> better camera.
> It will get cheaper (but perhaps not where you are if the US dollar
> stays weak), but I'll wager that it depreciates at a slower rate than a
> laptop computer, TV set, or car.

Thank you for the economics lecture--not really pertinent to the topic
(as expressed succinctly in the subject line--but that's OK. The course
is already set, I just wanted some input and I appreciate everyone's
ideas who responded.
--
M: Yes I have. If you're arguing, I must have paid.
A: Not necessarily. I could be arguing in my spare time.
 >> Stay informed about: assessing used DSLR 

Will Ritson wrote:
> On 2008-02-24 13:16:37 -0700, frederick <lost.TakeThisOut@sea.com> said:
>
>> Tully wrote:
>>> (I sold the two D80's)
>>>
>>> I need to put off the purchase of a D300 for six months to a year.
>>> Maybe by then the price will be down around $1200-1400 USD for a new
>>> one. Until that day, I plan to buy a used D200. In the first stages
>>> of evaluating a used one, I'm thinking that a pro probably puts
>>> around 2k clicks on a DSLR shutter per month---if more than that,
>>> they would likely be using multiple cameras. More significant might
>>> be the number of lens changes and the type of maintenance.
>>> My experience with (film) cameras that are owned by a studio or a
>>> news organization is that they get pretty good preventive maintenance
>>> and even if the exteriors are rough the mechanical & electronic bits
>>> are well-cared-for. How much of this do you guys think is applicable
>>> to digital beasts?
>>>
>>> If I'm on the wrong track someone please set me straight.
>>
>> You are possibly on the wrong track.
>> Unless a D200 offers some specific feature that you *need* over the
>> D80s that you have sold (ie weather sealing, full mirror lock up,
>> better compatibility with old manual focus lenses, or faster burst
>> rate) then you're probably grabbing at straws. The D200 won't allow
>> you to take better pictures than the D80s. Why did you sell them?
>> The D300 quite possibly will allow you to take better pictures -
>> especially at higher iso and/or if you shoot jpeg rather than raw.
>> On the price of the D300, it seems that we live in a USA-centric
>> world. In most currencies / countries outside the US, the D300 is
>> priced lower than the D200 was when first released. You could say that
>> the D300 isn't "more expensive", just that US dollars are a bit
>> cheaper these days. It's also much cheaper than a D2Xs, and in many
>> ways a much better camera.
>> It will get cheaper (but perhaps not where you are if the US dollar
>> stays weak), but I'll wager that it depreciates at a slower rate than
>> a laptop computer, TV set, or car.
>
> Thank you for the economics lecture--not really pertinent to the topic
> (as expressed succinctly in the subject line--but that's OK.
You're welcome.

> The course
> is already set, I just wanted some input and I appreciate everyone's
> ideas who responded.

NP. You specifically asked for an opinion if you were on the wrong
track. I think that you possibly are. Are you? What is a D200 going to
do for you that a D80 wouldn't?
 >> Stay informed about: assessing used DSLR 

On Feb 24, 7:48 am, Tully <tully.albre... DeleteThis @cox.net> wrote:
> (I sold the two D80's)
>
> I need to put off the purchase of a D300 for six months to a year. Maybe
> by then the price will be down around $1200-1400 USD for a new one.
> Until that day, I plan to buy a used D200. In the first stages of
> evaluating a used one, I'm thinking that a pro probably puts around 2k
> clicks on a DSLR shutter per month---if more than that, they would
> likely be using multiple cameras. More significant might be the number
> of lens changes and the type of maintenance.
>
> My experience with (film) cameras that are owned by a studio or a news
> organization is that they get pretty good preventive maintenance and
> even if the exteriors are rough the mechanical & electronic bits are
> well-cared-for. How much of this do you guys think is applicable to
> digital beasts?
>
> If I'm on the wrong track someone please set me straight.
> --
> "It is the individual alone who is timeless. The individual's
> hungers, anxieties, dreams, and preoccupations have remained
> unchanged throughout the millennia." Eric Hoffer (1902-1983)


Go for the D200, prices are dropping, you will have a well made
durable camera, that will give you great pics. There is noise at
higher ISOs, more recent camera designs have set the bar high for
noise. If you find yourself shooting a lot above ISO 800, buy noise
reduction software. By all means check the shutter count, this can be
easily done on a low use camera by just sticking a CF card in it and
getting the image number, but Nikon resets every 10000 images so the
EXIF is safer. There is always a risk with buying beater cameras, but
I bought a trashed Leica M2 for $150 and it worked fine for 25+ years,
and it is still ugly. $900 should buy you a decent D200, price have
dropped that much.
Allin all if you can afford a D300 go for it, but a D200 will work and
produce good images, RAW better than jpeg.

Tom
 >> Stay informed about: assessing used DSLR 

Tully wrote:
>
> (I sold the two D80's)
>
> I need to put off the purchase of a D300 for six months to a year. Maybe
> by then the price will be down around $1200-1400 USD for a new one.
> Until that day, I plan to buy a used D200. In the first stages of
> evaluating a used one, I'm thinking that a pro probably puts around 2k
> clicks on a DSLR shutter per month---if more than that, they would
> likely be using multiple cameras. More significant might be the number
> of lens changes and the type of maintenance.
>
> My experience with (film) cameras that are owned by a studio or a news
> organization is that they get pretty good preventive maintenance and
> even if the exteriors are rough the mechanical & electronic bits are
> well-cared-for. How much of this do you guys think is applicable to
> digital beasts?
>
> If I'm on the wrong track someone please set me straight.


Hello, Tully:

For what it's worth, the Nikon D200 has a stated shutter life of 100,000
actuations.

Good luck and happy hunting!


Cordially,
John Turco <jtur.TakeThisOut@concentric.net>
 >> Stay informed about: assessing used DSLR 

On 2008-02-26 06:59:35 -0700, John Turco <jtur RemoveThis @concentric.net> said:

> Tully wrote:
>>
>> (I sold the two D80's)
>>
>> I need to put off the purchase of a D300 for six months to a year. Maybe
>> by then the price will be down around $1200-1400 USD for a new one.
>> Until that day, I plan to buy a used D200. In the first stages of
>> evaluating a used one, I'm thinking that a pro probably puts around 2k
>> clicks on a DSLR shutter per month---if more than that, they would
>> likely be using multiple cameras. More significant might be the number
>> of lens changes and the type of maintenance.
>>
>> My experience with (film) cameras that are owned by a studio or a news
>> organization is that they get pretty good preventive maintenance and
>> even if the exteriors are rough the mechanical & electronic bits are
>> well-cared-for. How much of this do you guys think is applicable to
>> digital beasts?
>>
>> If I'm on the wrong track someone please set me straight.
>
>
> Hello, Tully:
>
> For what it's worth, the Nikon D200 has a stated shutter life of
> 100,000 actuations.
>
> Good luck and happy hunting!
>
>
> Cordially,
> John Turco <jtur RemoveThis @concentric.net>

Thanks, John. And thanks to all who offered the benefit of experience
and opinions in this thread. The choice was never between a D200 and
some other body. I did a cold-blooded eval. of finances and decided to
put off buying the D300 for perhaps a year, possibly even following the
"18-mo. rule" =^)

The 200 is one I always admired. I long ago decided it's not practical
for me to lug more than two cameras at any one time. I just recently
decided NOT to give up film entirely, so the load will be one film (F2)
and one digital (for now, D200).

The input I was looking for was: take a chance on used w/o warranty, or
go with a refurb with a 90-day Nikon + a dealer warranty for the
balance of a full year, (or alternatively, a local buy from someone who
would stand behind a "lightly used" D200).

I'm still shopping, but leaning in the direction of the refurb, since
that's where my D80s came from and they were fine.

The CF cards, spare batteries etc. I acquire in the coming months--and
of course the lenses--will transfer to the D300 when that upgrade
happens, probably in Spring 2009. As for the reasons, I want to meter
with all my manual Nikkors (both models will do that), and my older
Macs will be happier with a FireWire card reader (thus the reason for
changing from SD to CF). Eventually, I'll be looking forward to the
allegedly better low EV performance of the D300. The 12Mpx vs 10
wouldn't influence me much, but the newer sensor may be just the ticket
for natural light + fast action, a combination I've always favored.

As for using a camera upgrade as a crutch for "taking better pictures",
watch for the Zeiss Contaflex stuff I'll be posting when I get some
good scans out of the film I've shot lately. We're talkin'
fifty-year-old equipment with stunning performance on the part of those
uncoated optics.
--
"Our ignorance is not so vast as our failure to use what we know."
 >> Stay informed about: assessing used DSLR