What to buy? D90 or D200? Or a new lens?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by 66217, Sep 7, 2008.

  1. 66217 Guest

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2006
    #1
    Hi, I had been saving up some money, and I'm in the middle of a big dilemma.:)

    The new D90 looks fantastic. But seeing the D200, I noticed I can get it for the same price. I really don't mind about having Live View or Video, I don't think I'll use them that much. BUT, it seems the D90 has better image quality than the D200, specially in low-light.

    And I really don't know how big the difference is. I like the D200 for its size, it fits nicely in my hands and I don't mind the extra weight. I haven't used a D90, but judging from the photos, I'll guess the D200 also has more dedicated buttons for changing things.

    In the other hand, I could invest the money in glass. I'm looking at the 18-55mm f/2.8. Currently I have my D40x, an SB-600, the kit lens, a 105mm f/2.8 Micro, and a 50mm and 80-200mm MF lenses.

    I would like seeing what you guys recommend to buy, and specially, why would you recommend that.
     
  2. taylorwilsdon macrumors 68000

    taylorwilsdon

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2006
    Location:
    Bay Area
    #2
    D200 is much bigger, has poorer high ISO performance, a very dreary screen, slower AF, no live view, no movie mode. Those are the cons. The pros - its bigger, more rugged, more dedicated buttons, metering for non-cpu lenses.

    I say d90 unless you love the d200, and that's coming from a d300 (and previously d200) owner :D

    There is no such thing as an 18-55mm f/2.8, maybe you mean 17-55mm f/2.8 or 18-55mm VR.
     
  3. Westside guy macrumors 601

    Westside guy

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2003
    Location:
    The soggy side of the Pacific NW
    #3
    I'd say unless you're a big tripod user, go for the D90. Your glass is new enough that the D200 won't have an advantage (per the comments made previously), and you didn't mention mirror up mode so I'm guessing you don't use it. The D90 may have fewer AF points but I bet its AF performance is at least on par with the D200 (note: that opinion is based on almost nothing :D).
     
  4. 66217 thread starter Guest

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2006
    #4
    Sorry, I meant the 17-55 f/2.8.

    :D I think they both have 11 focus points. But I don't know what else comes into consideration for how fast AF is.

    One concern I have is the viewfinder size. Are both the same size? I have never quite understood how to know, since the coverage % seems to be irrelevant when comparing cameras.

    Now, there is also the option of going for a new lens. My concern here is that I don't know how long my current camera is going to last me.
     
  5. ChrisA macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2006
    Location:
    Redondo Beach, California
    #5
    Nikon just dropped the price of the D80 to $570. Amazon has it for that price right now. If you sold the D40 for $275 it would sell fast. and the D80 would be a great upgrade for $300.

    How do you use the camera? What do you shoot?
     
  6. Westside guy macrumors 601

    Westside guy

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2003
    Location:
    The soggy side of the Pacific NW
    #6
    Looked them both up on dpreview. The magnification and coverage are about the same (.94 magnification, 96% coverage). They're both pentaprisms, so I'd think the brightness should be comparable. With either one, your viewfinder will be bigger and brighter than the viewfinder on your current D40x (.8 magnification, 95% coverage, pentamirror).
     
  7. 66217 thread starter Guest

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2006
    #7
    I just saw in the other thread that the D80 is now available at $570 USD. And just today someone told me that she would be willing to buy my D40x for $300. I have to check if she expected to get the 18-55mm with it. This adds one more option into my list: get a D80 and a 18-70mm or 16-85mm. Tho, I'm not sure how a big difference it would be from the D40x to the D80. And from the 18-55 to the 18-70 or 16-85.

    I have photography as a hobby mostly, and like macro photography and portraits. In fact, most of the time I only use my 105mm. Tho I think I make this because now I find the kit lens not good enough.

    Thanks for the info. A bigger viewfinder is definitely a big plus.
     

Share This Page