D200 - Too little too late?

[HelmutS]

...and there's nothing wrong with THAT camera.

 

[Peter White]

The 5D is a step in the right direction. But 13mp isn't needed for most wedding shots. 6 would be plenty. And with 6mp you could have much lower noise at 3200 ISO than the 5D offers. The 5D is better than most cameras at 3200 ISO, but its noise level at 3200 is much higher than it is at 400. If you could have the same noise level at 3200 as the 5D has at 400 by increasing the photosite size and reducing the resolution to 6mp, that would be a very popular camera for wedding photogs.

That's what I'm talking about. The 5D's 3200 ISO noise is way too high for quality 8x10 prints.

--
Peter White

 

[Adam Kmiec]

if someone doesn't applaud nikon they are a troll. bravo.
--
Currently refusing to upgrade until Nikon gives me FF.

 

[Karl Jacobs191778]

I also shoot landscapes for stock and
have been waiting for a digicam that is competive resolution wise
without weighing and costing as much as a house (D2x 1DS mkII) at
£570 the Sony R1 looks a credible alternative to the D200 (for this
type of photography only I am not advocating a digicam over a DSLR)
but as I have said on another thread my S3 is probably still better
than both of them.

For doing high-quality landscape stock I'll say two words: mirror
lockup. Neither the Sony nor the Fujifilm have it.

Two more words.

Medium format.

 

[Ian Yаtes]

Seriously, this statement could only apply to the new offerings from Oly next year.

As for the D200, I'm seriously considering one, even started putting money away for it.

A Pro photographer I know bought the D100 back when so I reckon that must be a good camera. Checking his web site recently I learned that his newest camera is the S3. So NL isn't that far off the mark.
Personally I agree with Phil & think the S3 is overpriced.

Back to the D200

At $1699.95 ($1,499 with the Dell stackable coupons which are sure to follow) the D200 represents exceptional value for money on par with the E-500 2 lens kit that's out there. That's why people like me are becoming interested. We know the value of money, and cannot afford to change cameras on a yearly basis, instead having to wait 3 maybe 4 years for such a big investment.

--

 

[Martin Datzinger]

Btw: D2X vs. S2Pro: http://www.utopia-photography.ch/cameras/colors.html

Kind regards,
Martin

--
http://www.datzinger.net

 

[Karl Jacobs191778]

While the D200 may not be everything, it certainly is a MAJOR upgrade over a D100. A HUGE one.

But before you go kissing Canon's ss more, let's see what real D200 images look like, OK?...

 

[Quinn Porter]

The D200 is a beautiful camera. Congratulations Nikon users!

I'm not one to switch systems based on one camera body, but I sure look forward to Canon adopting some of the D200 features. In many ways, the D200 is the Canon 3D that I am waiting for.

 

[rander3127]

I agree with you that the D200 is targeted at the 20D contrary to
Phils statement. But if the D200 delivers in image quality I cannot
imagine what anymore could be asked of the D200 even 3 years down
the road. I think 10 MP will go a long long way into the future

--IMO, as long as Canon isn't making lenses that can properly support
a FF digital, the D200 is competition for the 5D and the 20D
-Rich

 

[jelizalde]

I have a 20D, and this camera rocks!!! Good to have Nikon back. It means both cheaper and better Canons and Nikons in the future.

 

[jb_va2001]

Considering that this camera will likely not be replaced for
another 3-4 years, I'm not sure it is enough and price wise it
needs to compete with the 20D not the 5D. My only caviat for this
statement is if the D200 turns out to have excellent ground
breaking high ISO performance (I'd be happy with a good noise free
6mp DSLR for my weddings)

I am a Nikon user and have a D70 and S3 pro kit. Being honest when
looking at the D200 other than shooting speed and iTTL I am
confident my S3 will deliver as much res and most likely more
pleasing images to the eye than the D200 and that is without
considering dynamic range. I also shoot landscapes for stock and
have been waiting for a digicam that is competive resolution wise
without weighing and costing as much as a house (D2x 1DS mkII) at
£570 the Sony R1 looks a credible alternative to the D200 (for this
type of photography only I am not advocating a digicam over a DSLR)
but as I have said on another thread my S3 is probably still better
than both of them.

8mp to 10mp is not a massive jump 8mp to 12mp is and at £1300 the
D200 looks expensive to me. The D100 was a competitor of the D60
and 10D, the D200 is a really in the same class as the 20D (and 30D
when it appears) I also predict that we will see a Canon 30D, 40D
and maybe even a 50D before we see a D300. This is not a Nikon vs
Canon thing but just something to consider for the enthusiast or
semi pro who wear out or replace bodies on a regular basis.

Don't get me wrong I may still buy one but I also may buy another
S3 instead. It's going to be an interesting few months.

 

[danp]

Despite the nice images, colors, skintones on the Fuji the camera body is just too lame to put up with. And that is compared with the lowly D70 not alone the D200. Any way I find the neutal colors of th e D70 to be more accurate when you are using the camera to document colors and shades etc. And the Fuji battery system ... Arrgh!!

Dan

 

[Dioni]

I don't think I'll bother posting again people like you just are
not worth the bother. I think my post has some valid points and
are remember just my opinion, I don't think there is any call for
the personal tone of your response.

IMO the only points you try to make in your post is the title: D200, too litle, too late. If you think that's a point, good for you.

I don't even know what a troll is!

You should know. Around here a troll is considered to be someone who starts a thread with the only intention to make inflamatory statements without any sense.

If you had taken the time to read the thread you will have seen the
context which my R1 comment was made in which was as a landscape
camera and that for other purposes a DSLR would be needed (and much
better). If I could only own one camera then it would not be the
R1. But horses for courses and as a landscape cam to take on hikes
I think it is worth a look. If you think the S3 is a 6mp piece of
slow plastic then you really have no place contributing to this
thread.

About the R1, I agree you could consider it for landscape photography. You can consider it for much more than that, I'm sure it's a fine piece of equipment. But comparing any P&S to a DSLR in any respect, being it landscape photography or else, is simply a not very good comparison. Have you ever seen a comparison between a P&S film and a SLR? Why should digital be different?

About the S3, I really think it is a 6mp (8mp real resolution according to some, same as S2) slow piece of plastic. I own a S2, I have own it for long time. I love it. Great camera, great picture quality. Way better than D100 at the time, IMO. The problem with the S3 is that the time has change. When S2 got out it was the best in its class. When S3 got out it was an S2 with wider DR, way overpriced, competing to cameras like the 20D with greater resolution, better AF, better body and way lower price. If I were to buy a new camera tomorrow, I'd pay 50% extra for the D200 over the S3. But wait, S3 is the one which is 50% more. Something weird here, don't you think?

I'll just let this one run it's course....... thanks to those who
have been objective in their responses.

I have been objective. But I think you are not being so.

Best,
Dioni
Things should be as simple as possible, but not simpler (Albert Einstein)

 

[Surfdog]

Did the D200 arrive late? Well yes in the sense that the D100 (while still an OK camera) was a stale point in the lineup for over a year in terms of exciting new buyers. I'm sure Nikon would have loved to have the D200 out a year ago.

Is the D200 too little at this time. No way. So long as nothing is wrong with it, it will be grabbed up by serious amateurs and wedding photographers and aspiring journalists and lots of other people. It appears to have a well balaced and capable set of features.

Ah, but what about the argument that Canon has something in the wings and this cam will have to suffice for three or four years. I speculate - which is what we are all doing about the future - that those answers are yes and no. Canon has something new in the wings (30D or whatever). Nikon appears to have leapfrogged ahead of the 20D in specs, maybe the Canon will catch back up. Nikon knows they have to shorten their product cycle. I suspect this body will be the basis of two models, this one and an update in 2007. It seems to me that this is a very viable chasis for the next four years (and as currently spec'd a very solid seller for the next two years or so).

 

[Bill Force]

Your reasoning is flawed! It isn't a matter of 8 to 10 MP's, it's 6 to 10 MP's. The D100, D70, D50 all are 6.....get it?

The D200 will entice NIKON lens holders to stay put, it isn't US against THEM. It's a marked improvement on every portion of the cameras logistics including the sensor. It's a WHIZ BANG, one up, left hook to the nads of the competition. There is no CURRENT comparison based upon price and features.
--
'Why do dogs chase cars that they have no intention of driving'?

 

[Arturo Fukuda]

Totally agree with you Dioni.
I couldnt say it better.......

--
http://www.pbase.com/afukuda/d50_shots



18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G ED AF-S DX Zoom-Nikkor
28-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED-IF AF Zoom-Nikkor

 

[notpc]

It's pretty obvious from the tone of your post that you care a great deal.

LeeLove wrote:
This back and forth crystal ball predictions about what Canon will
come out with is a waste of time. Who cares !!!

If you are a Nikon shooter then I only care about what Nikon has to
offer me and the SYSTEM I have invested in. Everyone whined about
how long it has taken Nikon to come up with a replacement for the
D100. Now they announce yet another home run product and the trolls
come out of the woodwork to predict what Canon will do.

So if you want to go on and on about Canon then please go to that
forum and enjoy yourself. I for one could careless and I think a
lot of others here feel the same.

Lee

 

[notpc]

If you get upset about something and make a fool of yourself, that's YOUR problem, not the person discussing a topic of interest.

Stop lying and be honest; your definition of "troll" is someone whose posts don't act as PR for your favorite camera company.

Dioni wrote:

You should know. Around here a troll is considered to be someone
who starts a thread with the only intention to make inflamatory
statements without any sense.

 

[SethG]

I thought your prediction was intriguing until I saw the Krispy Kreme part, which made me sell all of my Nikon gear in eater...I mean EAGER anticipation!

...run for your life before it's too late! Canon will soon be
introducing the 39MP Canon chip in a FF DSLR with 14 fps, Free
Wi-Max service, Laser Sighting and a coupon for a free dozen at
Krispy Kreme.

--
A 2005 Resolution for us all:
Shoot more, type less. : )

--

• Seth -

 

[Riku]

The 5D is a step in the right direction. But 13mp isn't needed for
most wedding shots. 6 would be plenty. And with 6mp you could have
much lower noise at 3200 ISO than the 5D offers.

Yes but 6 mpix with Nikons 1,5 crop gives a pixel size that is roughly the same as 5d's.

The 5D is better

than most cameras at 3200 ISO,

Actually it should be better than any other current camera on the market.

but its noise level at 3200 is much

higher than it is at 400. If you could have the same noise level at
3200 as the 5D has at 400 by increasing the photosite size and
reducing the resolution to 6mp,

Even if the 5d would have only 6 mpix on a full frame i doubt that iso 3200 would look like todays 400.

that would be a very popular camera

for wedding photogs.

That's what I'm talking about. The 5D's 3200 ISO noise is way too
high for quality 8x10 prints.

I'm actually not so shure about this. If you expose to the right and downsample a bit and perhaps even use a little noisereduction I think the quality would be high enough. I'm not shure but it's possible.

--
Peter White

--
Riku