PDA

View Full Version : 30D vs D200




Rower_CPU
Feb 21, 2006, 08:14 PM
OK, Canon finally announced the successor/replacement to the 20D today. I've been holding off on jumping into the DSLR arena, waiting for this very moment.

So, venerable digital photography forum regulars, lay it on me: which should I get and why?

Here's my situation:
- I have no lenses to start out with
- I shoot occasional portrait sessions for friends
- I like to shoot flora/fauna, landscape, etc. shots when traveling
- I'd like to work on action photography, too - e.g. mountain biking

In other words, I need an all-around solution. My initial inclination is to go with a package with the kit lens and then add a portrait lens and a telephoto. Feel free to suggest lenses.

Thanks! :)



kwajo.com
Feb 21, 2006, 08:17 PM
Between the two I'd pick the D200. I prefer the feel and controls of the Nikon, it is more usable and easier to make manual adjustments, at least in my opinion. you should really go check them both out in person and get a feel for them. they are so close technically that you should really think about how well you can use it, how comfortable you will be shooting with it, and how much you like the viewfinder (small dim ones are a real pain).

personally I would wait for the new professional Pentax body later this year, but apparently I'm nuts lol

mkaake
Feb 21, 2006, 08:24 PM
I've found that you're pitting two favorites against each other, and the reason they're favorites is because both have a rabid following... because certain people prefer the feel of one over the other. Can't overstate the importance of going to a store (a real photography store), and trying out both to see which you prefer.

Rower_CPU
Feb 21, 2006, 08:33 PM
I'll definitely be doing some hands-on with them before buying - I'm a big guy with decently sized hands, so the feel is important.

And I know pitting Nikon and Canon against each other can approach the Mac vs. PC in terms of fervor, but I trust we have an objective enough group to give me some good tips and heads-up on any quirks I should be aware of with the two.

homerjward
Feb 21, 2006, 08:35 PM
it seems to me that both cameras are good enough that unless you have any special lens needs (ie canon's 24mm ts-e or nikon's 1200-1700mm f/5.6-8) you should just go with whatever feels best to you. the photographer, not the camera will decide the results.
the canon would probably end up saving you money because it's cheaper than the d200 and canon's lenses tend to be cheaper, but if that's not a big issue you shouldn't consider it.
all that said, i have a d50 and love it. if the d200's ergonomics are like the d50's i'd love that too. i just need to get a telephoto zoom lens...:p

javabear90
Feb 21, 2006, 08:35 PM
I believe that the D200 beats the 30d in just about every single way. Except maybe cost. I would defiantly spend an extra $200 for better build, higher resolution, better seals, and many other things. The D200 is a professional camera with many elements coming from the $4500 D2X. The 30d simply cannot compete.

ChrisA
Feb 21, 2006, 08:36 PM
You have to look a few years down the line. Whatever body (d200 or 30d) you get will determine what lenses and strobes you buy over the next few years.

In my Opinion Nikon has a very nice strobe system now and has the best TTL flash metering. For people pictures I think "lighting maters"

People that have the D200 say that the auto focus speed really is good

Abstract
Feb 21, 2006, 10:53 PM
The D200 has a better build overall (body seam sealing, for starters), and after holding it only one time, I can say that it has similar ergonomics as the D50 and D70s, which I think are good (the D70s is too big but comfortable to hold, and the D50 feels great) --- much much better than the 350D (small size, button layout, changing settings, hand grip is too small) and 20D (button layout) that I have held.

Keep in mind that the 30D has a different body, so it might feel nicer in your hands than the 20D, although that wasn't a huge issue before anyway. However, I don't see a change in the button layout at the top, which I didn't like to begin with.

In terms of photo quality, the Canon is gonna give better results at high ISO due to lower noise in images directly out of the camera, although the noise issue is blown a little out of proportion. Since some people actually do image editing after they shoot, this narrows the small difference even greater. Also, people in the past had it much worse in terms of noise and still produced great photos.

However, if you want to shoot something where things are moving quickly, like action photography, Canon may be better because you can set the Canon at a high ISO and still get the same noise levels as a Nikon D200 at ISO 800 or something, which would then allow you to use a quicker shutter speed.

But again, I think the ergonomics of Nikons are superior and so I can be quicker overall using a Nikon, which is very important. Image quality is great from either camera. Just choose the one you like.

Clix Pix
Feb 21, 2006, 10:55 PM
Not impressed by what I'm seeing about this new Canon....

Perfectly happy to stick with my Nikon D200! :D

No, seriously, Rower....you need to spend some time handling each camera and seeing how it feels to you, how you like the controls, how you like the menu system, etc., and also how you like the selection of lenses offered in the system as a whole. Right now you may only have a couple of focal lengths in mind, but at some later time you might want to branch out, either in terms of lens length or lens speed. Also lighting is important, and now Nikon has definitely added an important new element to its "creative lighting system" by providing the R1C1 (I think that's what it is called).

Take your time in making this decision, because, yes, you won't be buying just a "camera," you'll be buying an entire system once you've made the choice of which manufacturer's camera body you want.

bousozoku
Feb 21, 2006, 11:54 PM
Out of the two, I'd buy the D200 without a second thought. Nikon just do a better job overall plus compatibility with 3rd party lenses and accessories is better.

BakedBeans
Feb 22, 2006, 12:28 AM
Another vote for the D200 here, I have only briefly looked over the 30D but I can't say I'm all that impressed with it.

You need to consider things ilke lenses and what you want to do in the future. But out of the two camera I would go with the D200 - which looks to be a fantastic camera

Chip NoVaMac
Feb 22, 2006, 06:30 AM
If this is all that Canon is going to announce for PMA, I have to say as one that shoots both Canon and Nikon; the D200 does appear on the surface to have more bang for the buck.

Now if a person will need and use every feature of the D200, that is up to the consumer to answer.

fstop95
Feb 22, 2006, 07:13 AM
I made the fatal mistake of borrowing my buddie's D2x last fall and fell in love with it. After a month or two of utter depression over the reality that I couldn't drop $4500 on a new camera, I discover the announcement of the D200. I've had it now for 3 weeks and love it!!! I would highly recommend adding the grip/extra battery/vertical shutter. I think I shot about 900 images (using the screen a fair amount) and I must say the battery info on the menu is very accurate. The huge screen is a delight (a real jumbotron compared to my Fuji S2). I am amazed at how fast this camera writes images, and the lightning speed at which you flip thru images on the camera.

I look forward to a good relationship with this wonderful camera! Good luck!

Chaszmyr
Feb 22, 2006, 07:21 AM
I like Canon's cameras quite a bit, but I find the 30D to be a very disappointing upgrade. I really wanted it to feature a 10mpx image sensor. I know there are plenty of people out there who say "8.2 is enough," but if there's anything the last 30 years of technological advances has taught us, it's that nothing is ever good enough

Rower_CPU
Feb 23, 2006, 08:46 PM
Anyone have any thoughts on the D200 review at dpreview.com (http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond200/)?

I was planning on shooting RAW primarily, so the sharpness issue doesn't bother me too much, and I don't think the high ISO noise should be an issue either.

bousozoku
Feb 23, 2006, 09:25 PM
Anyone have any thoughts on the D200 review at dpreview.com (http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond200/)?

I was planning on shooting RAW primarily, so the sharpness issue doesn't bother me too much, and I don't think the high ISO noise should be an issue either.

I wonder if the issues can be/have been corrected by firmware updates. Since I don't know anyone with one right now, I have no idea.

Wes Jordan
Feb 23, 2006, 10:39 PM
Get the Canon professionals are flocking to Canon right now. The DIGIC II is amazing and Canon has spent a lot developing it and the CMOS sensor they use, which is superior to the Nikon sensor, far less noise with the Canon.

Watch TV, the Olympics for example. You will see so many professionals with Canon's signature white lens on their camera. There is a reason. The quality is better.

Two professional photographers in town were comparing photographs. Both have high-end cameras, one a Canon, one a Nikon. The first time, the Nikon user compared and the colors and image from the Canon were better. The second time this happened he stormed out of the room to go order a Canon. he now sold all his Nikon equipment.

Canon has a great lineup of dSLRs, I don't even own a dSLR but study them constantly and am currently taking a studio class, so I am not biased. I shoot with a Panasonic and am sick of noise. I will buy anything with low noise.

You will enjoy for Canon 30d. Invest in a nice Canon lens with IS in the signature white color.

Mike Teezie
Feb 24, 2006, 12:42 AM
They are both silly sweet, and I'd feel damned lucky to have either one.

I'm a "Canon guy" so I'd personally go with the 30D. But I love the feel of those Nikons, and I imagine the D200 feels pretty nice in your hands.

I don't know if this has been posted, but here is a side by side comparison of the two:

20D v. D200 (http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/compare_post.asp?method=sidebyside&cameras=canon_eos20d%2Cnikon_d200&show=all)

Otto Rehhagel
Feb 24, 2006, 09:03 AM
This link may help some

D200 vs. 20D (http://www.potatobear.com/ND200/D200G.htm)

THe 20D's sensor is virtually identical to the 30D's so I thought this was a decent comparison.

From what I see, the D200 gives a better looking picture, but the 20D has lower noise.

I currently have an Elan 7 with a 24-85mm lens and a 420EX flash. I am not sure if I should ditch the Canon system for the Nikon. Both camera's look good.

Zeke
Feb 24, 2006, 11:24 AM
I wouldn't trust that link for the 20d vs D200. My bet is they were using the kit lenses from each because the sharpness wasn't really very good on the Canon (Nikon kit lens is worth $300 as opposed to Canon's $60 kit). If they had used a Tamron 28-75 on both cameras that would have been a good comparison but it's hard to tell (considering that it's in Japanese) what lenses they used.

Nevermind, I just saw they used an 85/1.8 for both. Don't know how these lenses compare but should be comparable.

Edited again: I think either something's wrong with the 20d or the lens in that review because the 85 should produce VERY sharp images and these aren't very good at all.

Mike Teezie
Feb 24, 2006, 07:06 PM
That's what I was thinking - I get much sharper images than shown in that comparison.

The Nikon shots have very nice contrast.

DerChef
Feb 26, 2006, 10:52 AM
As tied into the Canon system I must say I am rather disappointed by the spec of the 30D basically little improved in the internals over the 20D.

One thing that people have not mentioned however and thats alot of image software seems to have issues with Nikon Electronic Format (RAW files). It might support them and open but does unexpected things in the processing. That is not just hearsay Camera Magazines help pages are full of people with issues with Nikon RAW.

Clix Pix
Feb 26, 2006, 12:57 PM
As tied into the Canon system I must say I am rather disappointed by the spec of the 30D basically little improved in the internals over the 20D.

One thing that people have not mentioned however and thats alot of image software seems to have issues with Nikon Electronic Format (RAW files). It might support them and open but does unexpected things in the processing. That is not just hearsay Camera Magazines help pages are full of people with issues with Nikon RAW.

I think many people have problems with Nikon's own software (Nikon Capture), too. For years I have steadfastly refused to put their software into my computer because of problems I had long ago with Nikon View (which is now called something else in the more recent versions). The way I look at this is: Nikon is a camera and optics manufacturer by specialty, not a software company.

As for people having problems with other software being able to handle NEF, I haven't seen anything about that; I'm waaay behind on my reading as the camera magazines pile up and up. Adobe recently released an update for its Raw conversion program, which I've downloaded and added to my CS2, but I haven't tried it out yet. They added compatibility with several new cameras, including the D200.

Although I shoot Nikon rather than Canon, I was interested in the specs of the new 30D and was, just like everybody else, somewhat surprised and disappointed in the relatively few changes that were made. When they went from the 10D to the 20D there were a lot of good reasons for people to upgrade, but I don't see that happening this time.