Looking for a reliable replacement for a D200, asking for opinions...

Started Feb 4, 2013 | Questions
fredlord
Senior MemberPosts: 2,318
Like?
Looking for a reliable replacement for a D200, asking for opinions...
Feb 4, 2013

This D200 was purchased new around 2006. It's used mostly for reference images in street rod and other automotive paintings and illustrations.

It's been a good camera but it's getting a bit long in the tooth now. High ISO images are pretty noisy.

What is needed is something equally as reliable with a bit more ISO range, a larger LCD, and more resolution in megapixels.

I'd like opinions on what you might consider a good successor to this camera that is also reliable and relatively inexpensive.

It does not need to be a current model but I would like to be able to find a new or factory refurbished unit, if possible. It does not need to be an FX body.

Parameters in order of priority are:

1. High reliability

2. Relatively low sensor dust problems

3. Priced under US$2000

4. At least 12 megapixels in resolution

5. Larger rear LCD.

Thank you in advance for any practical experience or recommendations you might have.

-- hide signature --

Fred Lord

ANSWER:
This question has not been answered yet.
Nikon D200
If you believe there are incorrect tags, please send us this post using our feedback form.
pavi1
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,963Gear list
Like?
Re: Looking for a reliable replacement for a D200, asking for opinions...
In reply to fredlord, Feb 4, 2013

Lightly used D700 or new if you so choose should be perfect.

-- hide signature --

Everything happens for a reason. #1 reason: poor planning
WSSA #44

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
dwight3
Senior MemberPosts: 1,808Gear list
Like?
Re: Looking for a reliable replacement for a D200, asking for opinions...
In reply to fredlord, Feb 4, 2013

I started with a D200 around 2005. I moved up to a D3 in 2008 and have not regretted the move.

The D200 could be used reasonably up to ISO 400 with excursions to 800 occasionally. 1600 was rare for me. With the D3 ISO 800 was my normal setting (except in bright sunlight) and excursions to 3200 were fairly frequent. 6400 occasionally.

My photography is fairly eclectic, with a lot of work outdoors, but also a lot indoors. Once I got the D3, the indoor work became more of a focus since the capability was there. I should note that even using flash, moderately high ISO is useful. Since the flash can loaf at low power, you can use bursts. This makes it possible to avoid blinkers in group shots.

If you do mostly outdoor or studio work, the D200 is still up to the job. I kept mine and use it a lot for my "studio" work. But having high ISO capability makes the camera much more flexible.

The D7000 has a fairly good reputation for work at high ISO. I've never used one, so I can't confirm that.

One good thing about FX is the lens lineup. I used the 17-55 and the 70-200 on DX, but now I have 14-24-70-200 at f/2.8, all great lenses. I also have the 28-300 for FX.

When I got the D200 I got an 18-200, which I thought was great until I got the 17-55. Then I realized the images were a bit soft so I pretty much quit using it. The 28-300 is the FX equivalent of that lens, except that the images on FX are not soft. They may not quite match the 24-70-20 image quality, but they come close enough for 90% of my shots. And the flexibility of that lens makes lots of things possible. It's not as fast as the 24-70-200, but high ISO capability makes up for that lack.

Can you get along without high ISO capability? Sure, some people can. But having the capability will widen your possibilities and could even shift your photographic focus.

D7000 and you can use all your old lenses.

D700. D3. D3S and you may have to upgrade some lenses, depending on what you have.

 dwight3's gear list:dwight3's gear list
Nikon Coolpix S52c Nikon D200 Nikon D4 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 17-55mm f/2.8G ED-IF +9 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Kerry Pierce
Forum ProPosts: 17,294Gear list
Like?
Re: Looking for a reliable replacement for a D200, asking for opinions...
In reply to fredlord, Feb 5, 2013

The d300 or d300s is the natural replacement for the d200. It's a great camera.  It does well at the higher ISO's considering the age of the sensor.  If you need even better performance than the d300 at high ISO, then a d7000 would be a good choice, as would a d700, if you desire FX.

Kerry

-- hide signature --

my gallery of so-so photos
http://www.pbase.com/kerrypierce/root

 Kerry Pierce's gear list:Kerry Pierce's gear list
Nikon D300 Nikon D700 Nikon D3S Nikon D7000 Nikon D5100 +11 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
ABA DABA
Senior MemberPosts: 2,961
Like?
Re: Looking for a reliable replacement for a D200, asking for opinions...
In reply to fredlord, Feb 5, 2013

D-300 or D-3(little more expensive) go to the DPR review page and put them side by side for a comparison or any other comparisons.   simple.

-- hide signature --

ABA DABA

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
PHXAZCRAIG
Forum ProPosts: 10,890Gear list
Like?
Re: Looking for a reliable replacement for a D200, asking for opinions...
In reply to fredlord, Feb 5, 2013

The obvious replacement has been around since 2007.   Just get a lightly-used D300.  It has everything you listed, and more.   The specs may seem just a bit better than the D200 in a lot of ways, but it's really more than the sum of the parts.    The autofocus, 100% viewfinder, extra focus points, WAY better LCD, high ISO performance, etc, etc, will please you probably more than you expect.   It will also take the same batteries and cards you now use, and it will not run those batteries down nearly as quickly.

Alternatively, and mostly if you want even better high ISO performance and a bit better dynamic range, a D700.

Either (D300 or D700) will fall completely naturally to hand as the controls are almost the same.  You might miss the bracketing button of the D200 if you use that a lot.

I bought a D200 in early 2007 and a D300 in late 2007.   I loved using that combo for years (until the D200 went on the shelf in favor of a D700).    But any time I needed better autofocus (dim or low contrast conditions) or ISO above 400, I used the D300.

The grip for the D300 is also far superior to the one for the D200.   (And it interchanges with a D700, plus takes the EL4a battery and gives better speed and endless power).

-- hide signature --

Craig
www.cjcphoto.net

 PHXAZCRAIG's gear list:PHXAZCRAIG's gear list
Nikon D80 Nikon D200 Nikon D300 Nikon D700 Nikon 1 V1 +32 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Osvaldo Cristo
Senior MemberPosts: 2,178Gear list
Like?
D300S...
In reply to fredlord, Feb 5, 2013

D300S is your obvious choice. I came from a D200 to a D300S when it was released. I am very happy with my choice after more than 45,000 shots.

I was a very happy D200 user and as an amateur I made more than 65,000 pictures with it and skipped the D300. If you like the main features in the D200 certainly you will like also D300S filling all the requests you numbered into your post.

Best regards,

-- hide signature --

O.Cristo - An Amateur Photographer
Opinions of men are almost as various as their faces - so many men so many minds. B. Franklin

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
fft81
Contributing MemberPosts: 896
Like?
Re: D300S...
In reply to Osvaldo Cristo, Feb 6, 2013

D300S or D3S if you can find one. As i recall the non-S versions have different, worse, sensor and no sensor dust cleaning. D7000 would be probably a step down in terms of body ergonomics, but step up in terms of IQ as compared to d200.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
mistermejia
Senior MemberPosts: 2,826Gear list
Like?
There are not that many options
In reply to fredlord, Feb 6, 2013

If you want a reliable camera, then you would have to stick with a D300 or D700 (my choice).

If you get a newer camera after those models there is a 50/50 chance that you will have to put up with AF issues, dust ussues, oil issues, and the feel of a more plasticky body.  when i had my D200 the D300 did not seem like a HUGE upgrade, so i got a D7000 later on and the learning curve was HUGE.  The ISO capability of the D300 vs D200 to me is not that humongous compared to what's available now, so i would go for a pre owned D700 with low actuations, i think you will be happy with that.  MOST people really DO NOT NEED higher performance than what the D700 already provides, plus there is just something diffeent and unique about 12MP sensors, they are great.

Is really your choice 

 mistermejia's gear list:mistermejia's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix S5 Pro Fujifilm X-E1 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm f/1.8G Fujifilm XF 18-55mm F2.8-4 R LM OIS Rokinon 85mm F1.4 +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
yray
Contributing MemberPosts: 899
Like?
Re: Looking for a reliable replacement for a D200, asking for opinions...
In reply to fredlord, Feb 6, 2013

D300 is a natural replacement for D200. It is better in most regards. The rear LCD alone is worth the upgrade. The noise characteristics are better, the AF is better, some additional useful menu options (can't recall for sure anymore, but I think D200 may not have AF fine tune). The handling and body quality is very much the same, which is great.

Here is something to be aware of when buying used: dealers rate used merchandize pretty much on cosmetics alone, so you may buy a camera rated very high on cosmetics and looking like new, but when you check EXIF for shutter activation count you may be unpleasantly surprised. Did happen to me. Make sure returns/exchanges are accepted.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
unknown member
(unknown member)
Like?
Re: Looking for a reliable replacement for a D200, asking for opinions...
In reply to yray, Feb 6, 2013

yray wrote:

D300 is a natural replacement for D200. It is better in most regards. The rear LCD alone is worth the upgrade. The noise characteristics are better, the AF is better, some additional useful menu options (can't recall for sure anymore, but I think D200 may not have AF fine tune). The handling and body quality is very much the same, which is great.

Here is something to be aware of when buying used: dealers rate used merchandize pretty much on cosmetics alone, so you may buy a camera rated very high on cosmetics and looking like new, but when you check EXIF for shutter activation count you may be unpleasantly surprised. Did happen to me. Make sure returns/exchanges are accepted.

I have not used a D200, just got a D300. But when checking recently the differences were:

- sensor

- AF Tune in D300

- Liveview in D300

- Battery performance in D300 allegedly quite a lot better

- I think the 51 point AF is also new in D300

Regards

-- hide signature --

.....Just from an amateur......''Sometimes it's to your advantage for people to think you're crazy.” I am only a hoobyist, I cannot and do not give expert advice, dont expect it, just take it as a suggestion to think about, but only if you wish to. We should try to not wait for life to happen, while it passes us by.

 Bajerunner's gear list:Bajerunner's gear list
Nikon D300 Nikon AF-Nikkor 80-200mm f/2.8D ED +8 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
José S
Regular MemberPosts: 319
Like?
Re: Looking for a reliable replacement for a D200, asking for opinions...
In reply to Bajerunner, Feb 8, 2013

If you have any DX glass you don't want to waste, I would wait for the D400.  Just a thought, unless you need something now.  Otherwise the D300 is a VERY competent camera, but my choice would be the D700 which has never let me down, in fact it continues to amaze after three years.  Again, depending on DX lens "wastage."

-Jose

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
SiPat
Contributing MemberPosts: 928
Like?
Re: Looking for a reliable replacement for a D200, asking for opinions...
In reply to fredlord, Feb 20, 2013

I own a D40, D5000 and D700 (sold a D90 a couple of years ago to fund some lenses), and I have just acquired an almost unused D200 with battery pack and EH-6 AC adapter.

The D40 & D200 use CCD sensors whereas the D5000, D90 and D700 use CMOS.

In good light, you cannot beat the D40/D200 and these are now my go-to cameras. In fact, I'm almost tempted to give my son the D5000 and sell the (low shutter count) D700 to get some decent FF lenses to use on the DX bodies.

My suggestion would be to borrow or rent a D300s and/or a D700 and compare the images against the D200 -- you may just get a surprise at how decent the D200 really is. I wish I had "discovered" the D200 when I bought the D40 three years ago.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
mike concannon
Regular MemberPosts: 142
Like?
Re: Looking for a reliable replacement for a D200, asking for opinions...
In reply to SiPat, Feb 21, 2013

Consider keeping the d200. and wait for the d400
Here's why.
I wore out my d200, so had to replace mine afew years ago, so I bought a d300. Now I must say that the d300 images are great, but I did carry out a series of control shots to compare the two and there was no distinguishable difference between the d200 and the d300.
Sometimes when I am printing an old file, I think this is a knock out quality print, and look at the file info, to find its from the d200 !

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
toomanycanons
Veteran MemberPosts: 9,547
Like?
Re: Looking for a reliable replacement for a D200, asking for opinions...
In reply to fredlord, Feb 21, 2013

fredlord wrote:

This D200 was purchased new around 2006. It's used mostly for reference images in street rod and other automotive paintings and illustrations.

It's been a good camera but it's getting a bit long in the tooth now. High ISO images are pretty noisy.

What is needed is something equally as reliable with a bit more ISO range, a larger LCD, and more resolution in megapixels.

I'd like opinions on what you might consider a good successor to this camera that is also reliable and relatively inexpensive.

It does not need to be a current model but I would like to be able to find a new or factory refurbished unit, if possible. It does not need to be an FX body.

Parameters in order of priority are:

1. High reliability

2. Relatively low sensor dust problems

3. Priced under US$2000

4. At least 12 megapixels in resolution

5. Larger rear LCD.

Thank you in advance for any practical experience or recommendations you might have.

-- hide signature --

Fred Lord

D90.  Or D7000.  "Priced under $2000", jeez man, cameras are cheap these days, you can buy a camera, a used car and a box of cigars for $2000.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads