>"One just can't produce/compete effectively today with a >D1- or D2- series or D70, D100, D200 (or even a D90 or >D300-series these days)." > >It all depends on what you shoot for a living - I shoot >professionally with a D2Xs and a D200 back up body.I shoot >Interiors, Architecture and Aerials every day and a D2Xs at >ISO 100 and good glass is as clean and crisp as anything from >a D4. If I need Movements I use a View Camera with Digital >Back anyway so a DSLR is not relevant. > >I would completely agree with you when in comes to sports or >low light though - older tech just can't go toe to toe with a >D4/D800 in those situations.
Yup, I was thinking wedding, magazine photojournalism (especially sports), stock, editorial, etc.
For what you do at ISO 100 on a tripod, the D2x/D200 is fine.
For what I do right now (newspaper photojournalism) the D1-series and D200 are fine, except for certain low-light stuff like night football (where I must use a flash).