Nikon D200

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Glenn Wolsey, Feb 1, 2006.

  1. macrumors 65816

    Glenn Wolsey

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2005
    Location:
    New Zealand
    #1
    I'm just about ready to purchase a new digital camera, one that will be suitable for landscape shots, close up macro shots, and the occasional aircraft and sport shots.

    I have had a look at the Nikon D200 online today and it looks like a great camera. Does anyone have it, or can anyone advise me if its worth purchasing for my needs?
     
  2. ksz
    macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2003
    Location:
    San Jose, CA
    #2
    I am very very happy with my D200. See here. I haven't posted any photos yet, but will do so Real Soon Now.

    Can some things be better? Sure. I would like to see RAW images come off the camera sharper than they do now, I would like to see less noise at ISO 1250 and 1600, I would like to see a viewfinder with 100% coverage instead of 95%. But these are relatively minor issues since post-processing can alleviate most of these concerns.
     
  3. macrumors G3

    Chip NoVaMac

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2003
    Location:
    Northern Virginia
    #3
    It is a great camera, and would do any of the shots your described. But so would the D50 or D70s. Look at the reviews/previews over on DPReview to get an idea of the real differences between the cameras. Make a list of the must have features, not just the ones that sounds neat.

    Over the years I have bought tons of gear that I thought I must have because of its features - and found that I seldom use it, or take advantage of those "must have features".
     
  4. thread starter macrumors 65816

    Glenn Wolsey

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2005
    Location:
    New Zealand
    #4
    It's mainly the extra megapixels that make me want the D200 over the D50. Is that a viable reason to purchase the D200?
     
  5. macrumors 6502

    icloud

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2005
    #5
    I wouldnt say so...spending 1000 for a a 33% larger image (or something along those lines) is not worth it considering your entering the DSLR market...

    Personally, i would suggest something like a d70s or d50 and then invest in a goreous lens... which can easily be carried into the next nikon you buy...

    owning th d70s...im looking to upgrade to a new camera say in some 1.5-2 years...6 mp is more then enough for the enthusiast...

    that being said the d200 is no doubt a goreous camera...but megapixels are really the tip of the iceberg when looking at slr's
     
  6. macrumors 6502a

    JDar

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2003
    #6
    food for thought (or maybe argument)

    Ken Rockwell is a photographer who has written an article "The Megapixel Myth." It's worth a read for those debating whether to get that 6 MP or 8MP model digital camera. I hope someone who knows more than I do will digest this and give their opinions.

    http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/mpmyth.htm
     
  7. macrumors demi-goddess

    Clix Pix

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2005
    Location:
    8 miles from the Apple Store at Tysons (VA)
    #7
    It would behoove you to actually handle the camera in a local camera shop, play with the various controls, try a couple of lenses on it, before purchasing, rather than basing your purchasing decision on features you read about online. Don't ever just order a camera blindly without ever actually handling it. Yes, the D200 is a great camera (well worth the wait that many of us had during the many months of rumors) -- but is it something you really NEED for your first DSLR? What is your photographic experience to date? Do you have lenses already or would you be starting out fresh? Landscape shots, close-up macros, aircraft and sports shots all are done best by different lenses, not just one lens.

    Assuming you've got some kind of camera already, do you find that in post-processing you are doing a lot of cropping? Are you intending to make large prints, 11 x 17 or poster-sized? Shooting for commercial ventures? I ask this because that's when the extra megapixels would come in handy, but definitely 6 - 8 MP are quite sufficient in a DSLR. If you're shooting in such a way that you need to pretty heavily crop in order to get the results you want, that suggests that it's not more megapixels you need, it's more instruction in the photographic process.

    Buying a camera body based on the number of megapixels it has or all the bells and whistles it offers is not the wisest thing to do. Sure, buying one camera body over another or one brand over another will offer some advantages/disadvantages, but for the most part, you can do quite nicely with any of the current DSLR camera bodies on the market today. I'll repeat: 6 - 8 megapixels are plenty.

    I would venture to guess that most people who have bought or who will be buying the D200 are coming from experience with the D70 or the D100, rather than having the D200 as their first DSLR. It seems that for most people who are stepping into using a DSLR for the first time, camera bodies such as the D50, D70, D70s in the Nikon line or the Digital Rebels in the Canon line (and other models, too, but can't remember those just off the top of my head since I'm not a Canon user) are the way to go....

    The lenses are far more important than the camera body. It might be a much better use of your money to first buy a D50 or D70s (possibly even be able to pick up a D70 somewhere fairly inexpensively now that they're discontinued) and then put the balance of your funds into good lenses. You want to do macro? Great, use some money to get a nice macro lens. You want to do sports photography? Then you'll be looking at plunking down big bucks for a fairly fast tele lens. In purchasing the D50 or D70s now and putting your money into good lenses to use with that camera body, you'll be investing in the future, too, as of course when you later purchase the D200 or whatever the next model out of the pipeline is, you've still got those good lenses which can be used on it.

    When I bought my D70 I began to purchase and use lenses for it and now that I've got the D200, those same lenses are doing a fine job on that new camera body. Having the right lenses for specific photographic situations is far more important in the long run than how many megapixels the camera body has.

    Those extra megapixels make a difference in resolution, yes, but they also mean that you are going to have signficantly larger file sizes, both on the memory card (meaning the need to purchase larger and more expensive CF cards) and in the computer. Better be sure if you do go with a D200 that you've got the space in your hard drive and that you've got a good plan for backing up the images (ie, DVDs, external hard drive, etc.).

    Will you be using the camera to the extent that you can justify the costs of a D200 over a D70s or a D50? That is, are you intending to use it for fine art projects or for photojournalism projects (school newspaper), or for publication either in print or on the web?

    Before making any purchase, (1) read reviews and user comments, (2) go to the local camera shop and actually handle the different camera bodies and lenses and (3) take a look at your earlier photography projects and assess how a DSLR will make a difference for you and then assess which features are the most important to you and which lenses would be the most likely to help you achieve your creative potential.

    Only after all that, then fork over the money for a new camera body and lens(es)....
     
  8. macrumors regular

    revfife

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2006
    Location:
    In a far country
    #8
    I concur, most people that I talk to at the local camera store say that no more than 10% of their customers would ever use any feature not found on the basic D50.

    It is important to buy a camera that you will use, not one that you have a steep learning curve on because if it is too steep of a learning curve you end up not wanting to fool with it.

    Besides right now the D50 is an excellent buy. Save the extra money and put it into nice lenses and filters. Thats where you can make a difference in your photos.
     
  9. macrumors 6502

    icloud

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2005
    #9
    I agree D50 may be called a simple prosumer camera...but you really got nothing packed into d200 that d50 cannot offer...so theres not a DEDICATED 3 button Qual/ISO and Shutter button, but they still extremely easy and adjustable

    oh and d50 doesnt have iso 3200...but if you using 3200...your OUT OF YOU MIND....the grain youll incur makes it almost unusable... at 5MB per RAW image via d50, theres nothing you cant really enjoy about it...

    Invest in good glass
     
  10. thread starter macrumors 65816

    Glenn Wolsey

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2005
    Location:
    New Zealand
    #10
    Okay, I've pretty much decided on the D50 now, with a nice memory card too take advantage of RAW.

    How large are RAW files on the D50?
     
  11. macrumors G3

    Chip NoVaMac

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2003
    Location:
    Northern Virginia
    #11
    1gb SD cards will give you 120 RAW+JPEG-Basic (my preferred method of shooting).

    Before you jump at the D50 (which is great camera, I bought one), just to prevent buyers remorse wait three weeks and see if the D70s gets a bump in specs at the PMA show. NO, I don't know anything special about Nikon's plans.

    It will only help in that you won't feel that you "bought too soon". But at the same time you don't want to get in to a waiting game for the perfect camera, that can lead to a long wait.
     
  12. macrumors 6502

    icloud

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2005
    #12
    yeah i get around 180 RAW files on D70s...mind you thats a compressed RAW while D50 uses uncompressed...but thats just raw format...i dont shoot RAW all the time because 5-6mb per picture is only worth it when it comes down to "work" (ala my porfolio photography) and not casual

    you can get around 500-1500 using the different jpeg sizes as well per 1gig card...and if you really see a good moment switch to RAW format.
     
  13. macrumors 6502

    icloud

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2005
    #13
    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    some shots...mind you resized for web...but showing that youll still get respectable shots with any SLR...relies largely on glass and well...talent after that

    (hopefull these have talent :()
     
  14. macrumors G3

    Chip NoVaMac

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2003
    Location:
    Northern Virginia
    #14
     
  15. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago (by way of SF)
    #15
    I must concur concerning the D200 versus the D50. I, too, would love to have the D200 but since I am not a professional photographer I don't believe the D200 would be the right camera for me.

    The megapixel issue is an interesting one. As someone who has shot a lot of film and had my own working darkroom (ah, the good old days), I believe that for me the next important jump in pixels would not be from six megapixels to eight or ten -- but from six megapixels to 24 megapixels.

    Looking closely at some shots I took using RAW, I really would need to see a doubling of pixels for it to make a big difference for me.

    Lenses, however, are another matter. Investing in a better lens would make a huge difference versus megapixels. But for right now, being that I don't make a living off of photography, I plan on buying the inexpensive 70-300mm f/4-5.6G lens. I need something that will "reach out" -- but am not concerned about speed or VR (I use a tripod a lot). I know there are much better lenses, but economy is the most important factor in this case. My next lenses purchase will probably be to upgrade my main lenses from the one that comes with the D50 kit to the one that comes with the D70 kit -- that seems like a nice upgrade.

    Any thoughts about any of this? (I don't mind being told I'm going in the wrong direction.)

    By the way, iCloud, nice shots -- I'd love to see those in full resolution.
     
  16. thread starter macrumors 65816

    Glenn Wolsey

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2005
    Location:
    New Zealand
    #16
    Great photos, they sure do have some talent. Keep up the hard work, those are great!
     
  17. macrumors 6502

    icloud

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2005
    #17
    "My next lenses purchase will probably be to upgrade my main lenses from the one that comes with the D50 kit to the one that comes with the D70 kit -- that seems like a nice upgrade.

    Any thoughts about any of this? (I don't mind being told I'm going in the wrong direction.)
    "

    Personally...if you planning to buy the d70s kit lens...along with the 70-300mm....i would STRONGLY SUGGEST! buying the 18-200mm VR Lens. The reviews are really good...it pretty much covers your focal range and it has VR and would probably cost around 100 bucks more then the 2 lenses you got your eye on

    Thanks for the comments about my pics...BTW...they were all done with the 18-70 d70 kit lens...planning on going for a new lens (the one i mentioned to you) in the near future
     
  18. macrumors regular

    revfife

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2006
    Location:
    In a far country
    #18
    There is some speculation out and bout right now that the D70s is also receiving a "package" deal with the 18-200 lens. So I would buy D50 or D70s body-only and purchase the 18-200 lens. (Provided that they ship out or you can find them together ;) )
     
  19. Moderator emeritus

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    Gone but not forgotten.
    #19
    This is quite a change. Weren't you originally looking to spend $300?
     
  20. thread starter macrumors 65816

    Glenn Wolsey

    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2005
    Location:
    New Zealand
    #20
    Yeah, I have really got into photography more and more in that period, and now I want a good camera.
     
  21. macrumors demi-goddess

    Clix Pix

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2005
    Location:
    8 miles from the Apple Store at Tysons (VA)
    #21

    How fascinating that there is the possibility that the D200 and/or the D70s will ship with the 18-200 VR lens as a "kit." Huh! Makes sense in a lot of ways because the 18-200 VR lens is a great lens for the traveler but also a great lens for the person coming from a Coolpix or some other P&S camera who really wants a DSLR for some of the advantages inherent in using one, but who really does NOT want to change lenses.....

    There has been some speculation in the past that the CP 8800, which had a lens not unlike the 18-200 VR, was a camera meant to kind of test out the market for such a lens. That camera has many issues, the main ones being slowness (shutter lag, reading-to-memory card), so that it's not hard to imagine people going from it to the D70s or D200 and the 18-200 VR lens..... Hey, it was precisely because of my frustration with the CP 8800 that I bought a D70. I had come from a background of using SLRs in the past, though, so it felt like "coming home" to pick up a D70 and to once again change lenses..... However, I've seen comments from others who bought an SLR who were more than happy to have just one lens on the thing and that's it..... and I'm sure that Nikon has taken note of that potential market, too. For those people, it's a deal, the D70s (which would make more sense, actually, than the D200) and the 18-200 VR as it's kit lens.... a step up from using a P&S and yet not really having to deal with (unless one wanted to do so) the challenges (!?) in changing lenses and truly exploiting a DSLR....
     
  22. macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2006
    Location:
    Redondo Beach, California
    #22
    Not really. You have to work it out in terms of pixels per inch not total pixels. Pixels per inch is proportional to the square root of the total pixel count. so the D50/D70 is 2446 and the D100 is 3162 or about 30% more pixels per inch or for a fixed DPI you can make prints 30% wider. Well maybe 30% is enough to make the extra cost "worth it".

    If you print at 300 pixels per inch, which is a good standard then the d50/d70 can make 10 inch wide prints and the d200 can make 13 inch wide prints

    If you will never make large prints or if all you work will go onto a
    compter screen then the extra pixels are usless. But if it's large prints you want, you need the pixels.

    But there many other reasons to prefer the d200 over the d50.
     
  23. macrumors member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2004
    #23
    Not at your level. You currently use Aperture and a Canon P&S, right? ( :confused: )

    Thats cool if it works for you. Now, the D200, of which I own two, is an amazing camera. Its rugged and its built like a tank. But it is a professional grade body. I sincerely doubt that you'll use it to your full advantage. Thus, nab a D70s. While its pretty much a plastic camera, it is of a good quality and will serve you well. Then spend the rest of the money you planned on spending on the D200 and purchase a decent lens or two.

    The glass is what makes the image, of course next to your talent. Without talent, I could give you one of the new 36 megapixel studio backs, a Hasselblad setup, and their finest optics and you still would not have images that compare to Richard Burbridge.

    Trust me - spend the money on the optics. You can always upgrade a camera body, but a pro body with low grade optics will never do the camera justice.

    You're money is better spent on the D70s.

    Good luck!
     
  24. macrumors 68040

    XIII

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2004
    Location:
    England
    #24
    Nice! Can I ask for a few of those in high res. to use as desktop pics? Or if you sell them and make money out of them, then obviously no.. :)
     
  25. macrumors G3

    Chip NoVaMac

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2003
    Location:
    Northern Virginia
    #25
    I think that any packages with bodies other then the D200 will wait till the backorders for the D200's and the 18-200VR's are taken care of first IMO. And if I were a betting man, I think that by the end of the month we will see a D80 (or what ever they want to call it) replacement to the D70s.

    The recent D50 price drop helps in separating the D50 from the D70s, but both are still too close in capabilities. I can see a D80 with 8mp, 4fps, lighter weight, EN-EL3E battery compatibility, and some smaller improvements at a $1100-1200 price point for the body only.

    Actually it has to do with the price erosion in the digital camera market place, and the desire of manufactures wanting more to move into the DSLR market (better margins for the manufacturers). The D50 with the 18-200VR sells for about $1250. The original price of the CP8800 was like $999.

    BTW, when are you coming in for your Ego? :)
     

Share This Page