The Amazing D200.

Started Jun 13, 2013 | Discussions
Cytokine
Contributing MemberPosts: 626
Like?
Re: Beautiful image…which lens? (no text)
In reply to jimoyer, Jul 16, 2013

John,

The D200 seems to have a more linear response, from light to dark, a property of CCD's that Nikon calls fine colour gradation. There is a washed out look in the D7xxx series, that I have commented on before,  I was told it is wider dynamic range!!!

A sensor has everything to do with colour, otherwise we would just have pixels that were either on or off. it is the subtle variations of light behind the colour filter that it must record in relation to other pixels.

The digital camera, is like any other computer, Rubbish in= Rubbish out.

John

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
HRonen
Regular MemberPosts: 218Gear list
Like?
Re: Beautiful image…which lens? (no text)
In reply to Cytokine, Jul 16, 2013

It takes two (and a D200) to dance

Bronze Leaf Begonias captured on our screened porch a few days ago.

 HRonen's gear list:HRonen's gear list
Nikon D700 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.4G Nikon AF-S Micro-Nikkor 105mm f/2.8G IF-ED VR
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
jimoyer
Senior MemberPosts: 1,673Gear list
Like?
Re: Beautiful image…which lens? (no text)
In reply to Cytokine, Jul 16, 2013

Agreed completely about rubbish in rubbish out.

The D7100 is an amazing tool.  I understand people's complaints about buffer capacity although I've yet to come across a situation where I found it hindered my shooting after just a slight modification to my shooting style (essentially shooting in bursts instead of a more "spray and pray" approach as the buffer, despite it's  size, clears incredibly fast).  But, if you stop for a moment and look at what the D7100 brings to the table, compared to what we had just a generation or two ago, it's absolutely amazing.  I often find myself thinking, when reading people's complaints about it, that it's abilities probably exceed the abilities of 99% of the photographers using it, myself included.  Hell, the D200 exceeds most photographers abilities (myself included) and that's kind of why I got involved in this thread.  I've recommended the D200 to quite a few upgrading photographers looking to upgrade from a Dxx series body.  When you think about the quality and capability you get from the D200 for just a few hundred dollars anymore it's difficult not to recommend.

The D200 is a significantly better camera IMHO than it receives credit for.  It was produced/released in a period where everyone was dwelling on low light ability and it was easy to overlook what the D200 does well by focusing on what it does poorly.  Shooting in low light...for me, shooting pro level sports under stadium lights....is not an area where the D200 excels so in those cases I shoot the D7100.  During daylight games it depends primarily on where I am shooting from, and what glass I'm shooting.  The 1.3x crop of the D7100 is surprisingly useful in both frame rage and additional range.  Even in standard DX mode, the MP count is very useful for cropping images.  That said, if I am in a position that I have enough reach with the glass I have, and don't need the frame rate (some professional level pitchers are INCREDIBLY fast in their delivery), I try to shoot the D200 for it's smoothness and color rendition.

The next day game I'm shooting is the 31st.  I'll try to get some comparison images from both.

 jimoyer's gear list:jimoyer's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-G5 Nikon D7100 Nikon D4s Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-45mm F3.5-5.6 ASPH OIS Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED VR +8 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
jimoyer
Senior MemberPosts: 1,673Gear list
Like?
Two OOC JPEGs
In reply to jimoyer, Jul 21, 2013

Here are two OOC JPEGs from this afternoon that do a decent job of highlighting (no pun intended) the D200's colors and how smooth it is.  With a little tweaking in post processing, I'm interested to see how they turn out with a little tweaking in post processing, but I was on the road from about 8am until almost 1am (Sat into Sun).  I'll try to get some better versions up this afternoon.  I took several similar images with the D7100 as well that I can get a few comparisons up.

 jimoyer's gear list:jimoyer's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-G5 Nikon D7100 Nikon D4s Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-45mm F3.5-5.6 ASPH OIS Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED VR +8 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Robert A F
Contributing MemberPosts: 518Gear list
Like?
Re: The Amazing D200.
In reply to PhotoKhan, Jul 21, 2013

Is the D80 sensor the same as the D200?

Thank, Robert

 Robert A F's gear list:Robert A F's gear list
Nikon D300S Nikon Df
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
marcio_napoli
Contributing MemberPosts: 837
Like?
Re: The Amazing D200.
In reply to Robert A F, Jul 21, 2013

AFAIK, the same sensor Robert.

But both these cameras do not ouput the same final IQ.

AFAIK, there're differences in CFA, read-out channels, possibly A/D converter and (that's for sure) color profiles.

At the end of the day, you can see a difference between a D80 and a D200 shot, IMO.

The Sony A100 was supposed to have that sensor too, and as a previous Sony A100 and D200 user, I can tell there's a world appart (D200 being much better).

That difference comes from all the other aspects in the IQ chain. The sensor is just 1 part among many other factors.

But take these with a grain of salt, as I'm no sensor engineer.

-- hide signature --

Marcio Napoli

www.marcionapoli.com

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Robert A F
Contributing MemberPosts: 518Gear list
Like?
Re: The Amazing D200.
In reply to marcio_napoli, Jul 21, 2013

That difference comes from all the other aspects in the IQ chain. The sensor is just 1 part among many other factors.

But take these with a grain of salt, as I'm no sensor engineer.

-- hide signature --

Marcio Napoli

Interesting answer. I believe you're right about the IQ chain in the two cameras. I'm going to get a D200 and find out.

Thanks, Robert

 Robert A F's gear list:Robert A F's gear list
Nikon D300S Nikon Df
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Stacey_K
Veteran MemberPosts: 5,709Gear list
Like?
Re: The Amazing D200.
In reply to Robert A F, Jul 21, 2013

Robert A F wrote:

That difference comes from all the other aspects in the IQ chain. The sensor is just 1 part among many other factors.

But take these with a grain of salt, as I'm no sensor engineer.

-- hide signature --

Marcio Napoli

Interesting answer. I believe you're right about the IQ chain in the two cameras. I'm going to get a D200 and find out.

You won't be sorry. At the time it was made, everyone was screaming for a camera with clean iso3200 and for the most part since then IQ has been judged on that + how many MP.

I'm starting to see when I don't need over iso400, there is something to the look to a few of these older models produced that can't be duplicated with the later low light marvels. This and the Olympus E1 both have a certain look to their images that always impress me.

-- hide signature --

Stacey

 Stacey_K's gear list:Stacey_K's gear list
Nikon D200 Nikon D700 Nikon D7000 Nikon D800 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 300mm f/4D ED-IF +17 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Trevor G
Veteran MemberPosts: 6,473Gear list
Like?
Re: Beautiful image…which lens? (no text)
In reply to jimoyer, Jul 22, 2013

jimoyer wrote:

.  The D7100 image definitely shows more detail

I don't know where.  Not here, in the way you have presented them, anyway.

Look at the vein structure in the purple flower - even though focus point is different between the two of them, there is more detail visible in the D200 version, both in the translucent part and in the lower part of the purple petal as well.

Color wise, it really doesn't show as clearly here as the original files do, but the D200 colors are much deeper and smoother than the D7100 files.

That might be because the D7100 image is over-exposed by 0.3 EV.

That's not the camera's fault - it's up to you to make sure that your exposures are spot on, using the RGB+L histogram, and adjusting EV comp when shooting, or master exposure control during PP.

In the sizes you have made available, and with exposure matched, there is no discernible difference between the two images, except that the vein structure is very slighly more visible in the D200 shot.  Very slightly.

-- hide signature --

Cheers
Trevor G
Silkypix tutorials at: http://photo.computerwyse.com

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Trevor G
Veteran MemberPosts: 6,473Gear list
Like?
Re: Match exposure and cropping and you cannot see much difference
In reply to Cytokine, Jul 22, 2013

Cytokine wrote:

John,

The D200 seems to have a more linear response, from light to dark, a property of CCD's that Nikon calls fine colour gradation. There is a washed out look in the D7xxx series, that I have commented on before,  I was told it is wider dynamic range!!!

I can see that you didn't look at these images in processing software.

Had you done that you would have seen that the D7100 was simply over-exposed by 0.3EV.

Match exposure and cropping in PP and there is no way to determine which camera is which, unless you realise that the D200 shows slightly (and I mean slightly) more detail in the vein structure of the petals.

A sensor has everything to do with colour, otherwise we would just have pixels that were either on or off. it is the subtle variations of light behind the colour filter that it must record in relation to other pixels.

The Bayer or X-Trans/demosaiced sensor (all digital cameras except Foveon)  is totally colour blind; it's a monochrome device.

If you had said "A sensor has everything to do with contrast" I would have been able to agree with you.

It's possible that CCDs produce different results to CMOS, but no shots shown so far have demonstrated that.

The digital camera, is like any other computer, Rubbish in= Rubbish out.

-- hide signature --

Cheers
Trevor G
Silkypix tutorials at: http://photo.computerwyse.com

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
jimoyer
Senior MemberPosts: 1,673Gear list
Like?
Re: Beautiful image…which lens? (no text)
In reply to Trevor G, Jul 22, 2013

Trevor G wrote:

jimoyer wrote:

. The D7100 image definitely shows more detail

I don't know where. Not here, in the way you have presented them, anyway.

Look at the vein structure in the purple flower - even though focus point is different between the two of them, there is more detail visible in the D200 version, both in the translucent part and in the lower part of the purple petal as well.

Color wise, it really doesn't show as clearly here as the original files do, but the D200 colors are much deeper and smoother than the D7100 files.

That might be because the D7100 image is over-exposed by 0.3 EV.

That's not the camera's fault - it's up to you to make sure that your exposures are spot on, using the RGB+L histogram, and adjusting EV comp when shooting, or master exposure control during PP.

In the sizes you have made available, and with exposure matched, there is no discernible difference between the two images, except that the vein structure is very slighly more visible in the D200 shot. Very slightly.

-- hide signature --

Cheers
Trevor G
Silkypix tutorials at: http://photo.computerwyse.com

Trevor,

Perhaps that's because you're looking at a processed image after being converted from NEF to JPEG, and after going through whatever DPR does to them and I'm comparing original image/file to original image/file.

As far as making sure the exposure is spot on and whether it's my fault or the camera's the point of the exercise was not a scientific comparison at absolute identical EV's, angles, etc. I grabbed a flower, set it on a table, grabbed a chair, sat in it, used the same lens on both bodies, set the aperture and shutter speed to identical values and took the images within several seconds of each other, with no external exposure compensation, etc. to present two images exactly as the camera presents them at identical aperture and shutter speed.

I do appreciate your input though.

 jimoyer's gear list:jimoyer's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-G5 Nikon D7100 Nikon D4s Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-45mm F3.5-5.6 ASPH OIS Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED VR +8 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Trevor G
Veteran MemberPosts: 6,473Gear list
Like?
Is Nikon CCD really better?
In reply to jimoyer, Jul 22, 2013

jimoyer wrote:,

Perhaps that's because you're looking at a processed image after being converted from NEF to JPEG, and after going through whatever DPR does to them and I'm comparing original image/file to original image/file.

Because whatever DPR does to images is done to both images, the result will surely be the same - if there is a discernible difference between 2 images it will surely show up.

I've just bought a D200 to go with my D700 and am looking forward to testing side by side (I have a very demanding low light situation that I hope the D200 will work in).

I was hoping to see something quantifiable in this thread but I have not, as yet.

I believe the difference you saw is due to a slightly different focus point between the two cameras. If you check the main purple petal that is in focus you should see slightly more detail in the D200, but it is so slight as to be almost not worth talking about.

The D7100 should show more detail, but this is not the image to demonstrate that.

As far as making sure the exposure is spot on and whether it's my fault or the camera's the point of the exercise was not a scientific comparison at absolute identical EV's, angles, etc. I grabbed a flower, set it on a table, grabbed a chair, sat in it, used the same lens on both bodies, set the aperture and shutter speed to identical values and took the images within several seconds of each other, with no external exposure compensation, etc. to present two images exactly as the camera presents them at identical aperture and shutter speed.

And we thank you for doing that.

However, because the images are not set identically for exposure (which is easily doen in PP), that has lead to at least one viewer thinking that the D7100 is inferior in some way.

The only CCD camera I have seen which produces images way above its station is the tiny sensor, Fuji S100fs, a 2/3" sensor bridge camera from 2008.

How about this, from the I-R Comparometer:

The Fuji used what they called a Super CCD design, and produces amazing JPEG and RAW images, way beyond its size expectations.  That red swatch, for example, is not handled cleanly by virtually any APS-C camera, even current-era ones.

I know Fuji's Super CCD is superior to similar CMOS designs, but I cannot get a similar result for the D200. I'm keen to see, though.

I do appreciate your input though.

Well, because I do a lot of tests (and get plenty of criticism from folk for one reason or another) I'm keen to see if I can find any way to show that "ordinary" CCDs really do do a better job.

I'm beginning to doubt it.

-- hide signature --

Cheers
Trevor G
Silkypix tutorials at: http://photo.computerwyse.com

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Stacey_K
Veteran MemberPosts: 5,709Gear list
Like?
Re: Is Nikon CCD really better?
In reply to Trevor G, Jul 22, 2013

Trevor G wrote:


I've just bought a D200 to go with my D700 and am looking forward to testing side by side (I have a very demanding low light situation that I hope the D200 will work in).

Why would you pick a D200 for low light work? O.o Of course it won't work -well- in low light. In reasonable light, when iso400 or lower can be used, it should work fine.

I'm sick of trying to argue if it's the CCD sensor, the bayer filter tuning or something further down the pipeline. No one has any way of knowing why certain cameras record colors in different ways in different light but they do. I happen to like the color rendering I get from my olympus E1 and this D200. Maybe it's a coincidence that both happen to have CCD sensors, doesn't really matter to me if I like the images they output at iso 400 and lower, especially shooting skin tones and red flowers. For me the D200 is like a 10MP E1

-- hide signature --

Stacey

 Stacey_K's gear list:Stacey_K's gear list
Nikon D200 Nikon D700 Nikon D7000 Nikon D800 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 300mm f/4D ED-IF +17 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Stacey_K
Veteran MemberPosts: 5,709Gear list
Like?
My contribution to the thread
In reply to PhotoKhan, Jul 22, 2013

I just recently got one of these after another forum recommended I try one and like others here, love the output I am getting, especially the colors. I have learned for my shooting style it needs +.3EV set for most shots. Also have the in camera sharpening turned up a good bit.

This was done in late afternoon light outdoors with an 85mm F1.8G at F2. This is now my go to combo for shooting portraits!

-- hide signature --

Stacey

 Stacey_K's gear list:Stacey_K's gear list
Nikon D200 Nikon D700 Nikon D7000 Nikon D800 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 300mm f/4D ED-IF +17 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
n057
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,326Gear list
Like?
Re: Is Nikon CCD really better?
In reply to Stacey_K, Jul 22, 2013

Stacey_K wrote:

Trevor G wrote:

I've just bought a D200 to go with my D700 and am looking forward to testing side by side (I have a very demanding low light situation that I hope the D200 will work in).

Why would you pick a D200 for low light work? O.o Of course it won't work -well- in low light. In reasonable light, when iso400 or lower can be used, it should work fine.

... ( some stuff deleted ) ...

Stacey

Generally no, but there are cases where it is acceptable. How about this?

You can see more here .

JC
Some cameras, some lenses, some computers

 n057's gear list:n057's gear list
Nikon Coolpix 995 Nikon D200 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm f/1.8G Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 17-55mm f/2.8G ED-IF +6 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Stacey_K
Veteran MemberPosts: 5,709Gear list
Like?
Re: Is Nikon CCD really better?
In reply to n057, Jul 22, 2013

In that size image, it looks fine. Any NR done or?

I guess what I was saying was, if I was going out to shoot in low light and had to choose between my D200 and my D7000, I would use the D7K. I don't think anyone would argue the D7000 is cleaner at high ISO.

-- hide signature --

Stacey

 Stacey_K's gear list:Stacey_K's gear list
Nikon D200 Nikon D700 Nikon D7000 Nikon D800 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 300mm f/4D ED-IF +17 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
n057
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,326Gear list
Like?
Re: Is Nikon CCD really better?
In reply to Stacey_K, Jul 22, 2013

Stacey_K wrote:

In that size image, it looks fine. Any NR done or?

I guess what I was saying was, if I was going out to shoot in low light and had to choose between my D200 and my D7000, I would use the D7K. I don't think anyone would argue the D7000 is cleaner at high ISO.

-- hide signature --

Stacey

Yes, at ISO 3200 it begs for noise reduction and it got it.  I also had to sharpen and anjust the curves.  The lens was the 70-300 at f/4.8, 1/10s

When the D7000 was announced, I thought it would be the answer to my prayers. I borrowed one and I did try it in that type of environment. It would not focus because there was not enough light ... Sure it would be cleaner but OOF.

JC
Some cameras, some lenses, some computers

 n057's gear list:n057's gear list
Nikon Coolpix 995 Nikon D200 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm f/1.8G Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 17-55mm f/2.8G ED-IF +6 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
jimoyer
Senior MemberPosts: 1,673Gear list
Like?
Re: Is Nikon CCD really better?
In reply to n057, Jul 22, 2013

JC, give the D7100 a look (you probably have already).

I've been very impressed with the low light ability of the sensor, but more so of the AF.

It's by no means a miracle, and FF is still the way to go for the ultimate in what's currently available for low light imaging, but I've been impressed with how much detail I've been able to retain with high ISO images with spot on AF.  It isn't until +6400 that things start to muddy.  I posted another thread about this in DX SLR.......

ISO 5000

ISO 1400

ISO 3200

Anyway, back to on topic.................................

 jimoyer's gear list:jimoyer's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-G5 Nikon D7100 Nikon D4s Panasonic Lumix G Vario 14-45mm F3.5-5.6 ASPH OIS Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED VR +8 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Stacey_K
Veteran MemberPosts: 5,709Gear list
Like?
Re: Is Nikon CCD really better?
In reply to n057, Jul 22, 2013

n057 wrote:

Stacey_K wrote:

In that size image, it looks fine. Any NR done or?

I guess what I was saying was, if I was going out to shoot in low light and had to choose between my D200 and my D7000, I would use the D7K. I don't think anyone would argue the D7000 is cleaner at high ISO.

-- hide signature --

Stacey

Yes, at ISO 3200 it begs for noise reduction and it got it. I also had to sharpen and anjust the curves. The lens was the 70-300 at f/4.8, 1/10s

When the D7000 was announced, I thought it would be the answer to my prayers. I borrowed one and I did try it in that type of environment. It would not focus because there was not enough light ... Sure it would be cleaner but OOF.

I think later copies or firmware must have fixed this? Mine has no issues with AF when setup right.  And the default "point and shoot" AF settings are horrible!

-- hide signature --

Stacey

 Stacey_K's gear list:Stacey_K's gear list
Nikon D200 Nikon D700 Nikon D7000 Nikon D800 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 300mm f/4D ED-IF +17 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
n057
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,326Gear list
Like?
Re: Is Nikon CCD really better?
In reply to Stacey_K, Jul 22, 2013

Stacey_K wrote:

n057 wrote:

Stacey_K wrote:

In that size image, it looks fine. Any NR done or?

I guess what I was saying was, if I was going out to shoot in low light and had to choose between my D200 and my D7000, I would use the D7K. I don't think anyone would argue the D7000 is cleaner at high ISO.

-- hide signature --

Stacey

Yes, at ISO 3200 it begs for noise reduction and it got it. I also had to sharpen and anjust the curves. The lens was the 70-300 at f/4.8, 1/10s

When the D7000 was announced, I thought it would be the answer to my prayers. I borrowed one and I did try it in that type of environment. It would not focus because there was not enough light ... Sure it would be cleaner but OOF.

I think later copies or firmware must have fixed this? Mine has no issues with AF when setup right. And the default "point and shoot" AF settings are horrible!

-- hide signature --

Stacey

I did not give it a second look. My mind is pretty set that the next body I get will be a true D300s follow-up and DX only.

JC
Some cameras, some lenses, some computers

 n057's gear list:n057's gear list
Nikon Coolpix 995 Nikon D200 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm f/1.8G Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 17-55mm f/2.8G ED-IF +6 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads