D200 vs D5100

Started May 18, 2011 | Discussions
Bonita
Regular MemberPosts: 260
Like?
D200 vs D5100
May 18, 2011

I know the video is on the 5100. I am interested in the image quality and other things to compare on the two cameras. What i want to know is if I sell my D200 and buy the D5100 would I be improving my image quality and is the 5100 a better camera. Please help.

toomanycanons
Veteran MemberPosts: 9,554
Like?
Re: D200 vs D5100
In reply to Bonita, May 18, 2011

The definitive answer is: it depends.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
David V
Contributing MemberPosts: 986Gear list
Like?
Re: D200 vs D5100
In reply to toomanycanons, May 18, 2011

moving from a D200 to a D5100:

Build quality/pro features = Downgrade

Image quality/dynamic range = Upgrade

Video requirement = Upgrade

Depends on your requirements.

 David V's gear list:David V's gear list
Fujifilm X-E2 Fujifilm X-T1 Fujifilm XF 60mm F2.4 R Macro Fujifilm XF 18-55mm F2.8-4 R LM OIS Fujifilm XF 55-200mm F3.5-4.8 R LM OIS +6 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
John Nollendorfs
Contributing MemberPosts: 783Gear list
Like?
Re: D200 vs D5100
In reply to Bonita, May 18, 2011

Smaller, much lighter. Fantastic ISO 6400 results from straight jpegs.

Yep, it's a cheaper build, but for $900 with kit lens, it's a hell of a deal. That kit lens isn't too shabby at all either.

And you'll love the high rez 3" screen, with articulated display. Your D200 couldn't do that!

But if you want a bigger, heavier body with 7 fps, then get the D7000--same sensor, IQ., but no articulated display!
--
John

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Bonita
Regular MemberPosts: 260
Like?
Re: D200 vs D5100
In reply to John Nollendorfs, May 18, 2011

Thanks for your input. I really appreciate it. I need to sell my D200 before I can purchase the D5100. Just needed some help.
.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Reilly Diefenbach
Senior MemberPosts: 8,245Gear list
Like?
Re: D200 vs D5100
In reply to Bonita, May 18, 2011

Yes, yes and yes.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Enjoihcky247
Contributing MemberPosts: 735
Like?
Re: D200 vs D5100
In reply to Reilly Diefenbach, May 19, 2011

He only asked two questions and only one could reasonably be answered with, "yes". What are the other 2 yesses for?

Let's see the first question was whether the image quality from the D5100 is better. Invariably, the answer is yes (grats you got one right). The reason it's yes is because it's backed up by facts and statistics.

The other question was whether or not it was a better camera. Well there is no correct answer here except, "it depends". The reason is the D200 actually has some features that out-do the D5100 and also has a completely different build. The D200 has better durability but is also bigger and bulkier. For you to say, "yes," is completely wrong.

And, as previously mentioned, there wasn't a third question. 1/3 isn't bad, I guess.

Reilly Diefenbach wrote:

Yes, yes and yes.

-- hide signature --

Truthful C&C appreciated. No need to sugar-coat things for me!
http://www.flickr.com/photos/zachsa/

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
toomanycanons
Veteran MemberPosts: 9,554
Like?
Re: D200 vs D5100
In reply to Enjoihcky247, May 19, 2011

I'm surprised somebody hasn't chimed in with "...the D200s outdated technology..."

I never owned a D200 but I've handled one and it's a tank. Some prefer a heavy bulky camera for their own reasons. I'm into lighter bodies, don't care about weather sealing (always indoors for the most part) and don't mind menu diving to change settings.

Anybody who owns a D200 care to comment on its CCD images vs the D5100's CMOS images? I see D200's come up all the time on my local Craigslist, some "lightly used", is there any reason I'd want one around just to have it? Under what scenarios would I break out the D200 and leave a D5100 at home?

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Cytokine
Contributing MemberPosts: 626
Like?
Re: D200 vs D5100
In reply to toomanycanons, May 19, 2011

Anybody who owns a D200 care to comment on its CCD images vs the D5100's CMOS images? I see D200's come up all the time on my local Craigslist, some "lightly used", is there any reason I'd want one around just to have it? Under what scenarios would I break out the D200 and leave a D5100 at home?

Firstly compare the two bodies, The D200 has ergonomics that set the bench mark in its category. The controls and functions are where you need them, when you need them. it is to my mind as small as a serious camera can get and still balance long lenses etc. You pick it up and you feel inspired.

Some people including me (and Leica), consider CCD images have an aesthetic quality that CMOS can't yet match. And Ironically Nikon CCD's implementation of CCD was especially good. The D2x was Nikon's first CMOS camera and it used a dual channel sensor with colour pre-conditioning prior to digital conversion. This allowed the colours to be tweaked easily and the camera became a bench mark for colour. Then they released the D200 which also had a dual channel chip with better colour hardware (The only dual channel CCD sensor ever made) which gave the D200 the benefits of CCD and the speed of CMOS = 5fps still good in 2011 . These four independent Analogue Digital converters and Nikon magic produced a camera that some feel is exceptionally good at producing pictures with something intangible that they don't see in the D300 which was a cmos with AD conversion on chip so analogue preconditioning was not possible. (The D300 can also produce accurate and very good images but requires lots more post processing. (D200 pictures usually just require a little sharpening).

But the D200 has no video, its a base (100) ISO camera than can be pushed too 400 and 800, its a camera that is best with Raw. It is a very good camera to learn photography with. No idiot modes, nor any half baked Nikon technology to cause confusion. Its not a family do everything and put it in your pocket camera. But if you want to do serious photography have a natural eye for colour (many people don't). Then for the current price it should be on your list, especially if you are on a budget. Lets reverse the question do I feel disadvantaged with my D200 compared to the latest offerings = A big no.

John

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
carguy
Regular MemberPosts: 271Gear list
Like?
Re: D200 vs D5100
In reply to Cytokine, May 20, 2011

I will 2nd that John

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
rubicon
Senior MemberPosts: 1,630Gear list
Like?
Re: D200 vs D5100
In reply to Bonita, May 20, 2011

I am still using my D200, and love it, but lets face it! the D5100 has got to be a great improvement, I love the colors and yes its a better built camera than any of the lower end Nikons.

I'm in a unique position I have several Nikon bodys, from tha D700, down to my old D70s, each has a use for me, D2h sports and zoos D90 just out hiking with a 18 200, and D200 with 17 50 2.8 Tamron for streets and car shows, and the D700 for landscapes and so on and so on.

Now I'm not planning to replace my D200 soon, but I'm thinking in couple years the next upgrade of the 5100 and or D7k then maybe sell the d90 and D200 or put them back into the box and set on a shelf.

I find the D200 a wonderful tool! I considered selling the two I mentioned and get the D7000, but not yet.

I think the articulating LCD will become common on future models and I'd like that.

So all this wasted time and jibberish is just that the 5100 is better but the D200 still has a very "tuff" build, if thats a priority look for a used D300s no matter good luck I wish I could have even more Nikon bodys I like what they are doing, it will be great to see the next generation D300 and D700 bodys, but they don't interest meto replace my D700.

Rubicon:

 rubicon's gear list:rubicon's gear list
Nikon D90 Nikon D2X Nikon D200 Nikon D700 Nikon AF DX Fisheye-Nikkor 10.5mm f/2.8G ED +6 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Bonita
Regular MemberPosts: 260
Like?
Re: D200 vs D5100
In reply to rubicon, May 20, 2011

I knew I would get the right answers to my questions. I am wanting to get a lighter camera because I have lots of pain in my shoulders and I need something lighter. You have helped me make my decision!! I am selling my D200 and getting the D5100.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Cytokine
Contributing MemberPosts: 626
Like?
Re: D200 vs D5100
In reply to Bonita, May 20, 2011

Bonita,

It sounds like the D5100 is the right choice for you. Once the D800 and D400 are out there really is a camera in the Nikon line up for every taste.

And it beats the D300s and the D3 in more than just pixels!

DXOMark Scores for Sensitivity metamerism index (higher = better ability to reproduce accurate colour consistently.

Standard ISO 17321. CIE/D50 (Matching Daylight Source)
D300/D200/D70 = 84
D2Xs D700/D5000 = 83
D3000 = 80
D80/D3x = 79
D7000/D5100 = 78
D3/D300s = 77

ISO 17321-1:2006 specifies colour stimuli, metrology, and test procedures for the colour characterization of a digital still camera (DSC) to be used for photography and graphic technology. Two methods are provided, one using narrow spectral band illumination and the other using a spectrally and colorimetrically calibrated target. Except for a specific set of permitted data operations, these DSC data are raw. International Standards Organisation.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
toomanycanons
Veteran MemberPosts: 9,554
Like?
Re: D200 vs D5100
In reply to Cytokine, May 20, 2011

So, Cytokine, according to your chart the D7000/D5100 are next to last in ability to reproduce accurate colors. And the D200 is first. Are you sure LOWER isn't better than HIGHER?

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
novice123
New MemberPosts: 16
Like?
Re: D200 vs D5100
In reply to Bonita, May 20, 2011

I just sold my d200 and moved to d5100 and the smaller size, lower weight and better iso have all been welcome changes. I am getting very strange results though with sb400 in full auto mode where the camera is pushing the iso way up so even with bounce flash I am getting very grainy and noisy photos. Oddly enough I am getting better results from the built in flash.

Overall very happy with the move.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Jakes
Senior MemberPosts: 1,510
Like?
Re: D200 vs D5100
In reply to novice123, May 20, 2011

novice123 wrote:

I just sold my d200 and moved to d5100 and the smaller size, lower weight and better iso have all been welcome changes. I am getting very strange results though with sb400 in full auto mode where the camera is pushing the iso way up so even with bounce flash I am getting very grainy and noisy photos. Oddly enough I am getting better results from the built in flash.

Overall very happy with the move.

Try M , f 5.6, 1/60 , auto iso and see if that's not a whole lot better with the sb 400.
--
jakes
WSSA# 107

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
nfpotter
Senior MemberPosts: 4,072
Like?
screw-drive lenses
In reply to Bonita, May 20, 2011

Something that, surprisingly no one has mentioned:

The D5100 doesn't have an internal focus motor like your D200 has, so if you want to use any lenses that don't have their own focus motors, they will be manual focus only.

Personally, for me, that would be a deal-breaker. My glass is ALWAYS more important than what body I'm using, and I wouldn't ever want to give up the internal focus motor, because I have a bunch of lenses that do not have their own focus motors built in. So, if I was in your situation, I would have to go for a D7000 instead.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
toomanycanons
Veteran MemberPosts: 9,554
Like?
Re: screw-drive lenses
In reply to nfpotter, May 20, 2011

I'm "fortunate" in that I have no legacy glass to guide my buying decisions. All my lenses have focus motors. My D90 has an in-body motor but that hasn't led me to scour the internet for lenses that don't autofocus themselves.

nfpotter wrote:

Something that, surprisingly no one has mentioned:

The D5100 doesn't have an internal focus motor like your D200 has, so if you want to use any lenses that don't have their own focus motors, they will be manual focus only.

Personally, for me, that would be a deal-breaker. My glass is ALWAYS more important than what body I'm using, and I wouldn't ever want to give up the internal focus motor, because I have a bunch of lenses that do not have their own focus motors built in. So, if I was in your situation, I would have to go for a D7000 instead.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
nfpotter
Senior MemberPosts: 4,072
Like?
Re: screw-drive lenses
In reply to toomanycanons, May 20, 2011

toomanycanons wrote:

I'm "fortunate" in that I have no legacy glass to guide my buying decisions. All my lenses have focus motors. My D90 has an in-body motor but that hasn't led me to scour the internet for lenses that don't autofocus themselves.

Yeah, that's true of many people. I don't have a ton of "legacy" glass either, but I have 3 lenses that I wouldn't want to part with that don't have internal motors:

Nikon 50mm f/1.8 D - AWESOME lens for the money (about $110 new, got mine for $8 slightly used)

Tokina 12-24mm f/4 - fantastic super-wide, but mine's the earlier version with no internal motor, got it used for about $340, much cheaper than the similar Nikon

Sigma 105mm f/2.8 EX DG Macro - a FANTASTIC macro (and portrait) lens - no internal motor - got mine used for $220

My point is you obviously don't HAVE TO search hard for "legacy" glass, but sometimes you stumble onto some great finds for cheap, so I'll ALWAYS want an internal focus motor in my cameras.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Cytokine
Contributing MemberPosts: 626
Like?
Re: D200 vs D5100
In reply to toomanycanons, May 20, 2011

toomanycanons wrote:

So, Cytokine, according to your chart the D7000/D5100 are next to last in ability to reproduce accurate colors. And the D200 is first. Are you sure LOWER isn't better than HIGHER?

Unfortunately No! but like many of the scores at DXO, its difficult to put them into perspective, for example what difference does a few points make. I don't think that these scores are taken into account in giving the overall DXO rating so not taken too seriously. There are several ways of interpreting the information.

Looking at the scores in a superficial way would be that CCD is easier to configure than CMOS. And that D2xs and D300 and D700 had allot of fine tuning put into the configuration. Or it could reflect the technology approach taken by similar cameras, if you look at all the new cameras they are all grouped together.

There are some colours that all Digital cameras cant produce and the top cameras here could reflect Nikon attempting to match these. Nikon have probably found a new Colour approach that is less precise in the top few percent, but does the main colours better. Because the D3000 beating the D3x!!!. The D3 and D3X have so many off chip circuits dedicated to colour that they cant fit in the smaller body of the D700.

One other possible conclusion is a trade off between high ISO noise reduction and a few points in colour accuracy. Click on this link and click color response tab.

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/en/Camera-Sensor/All-tested-sensors/Nikon/D5100

I think Thom is the only person who could explain these scores outside of Nikon.

John

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads