Hi Nikon people
I come from the Canon side, and have been using a Canon 1Ds and
various L zooms. While I loved the 1Ds' image quality, resolution
and build quality I never really cared much for Full Frame or
whatever buzz is beeing pulled on that account. Besides, a 1Ds does
balance heavy lenses quite nicely, but carrying the thing around is
cumbersome and I have for a long time been throwing envies looks to
the D200.
Now things got a whole lot easier since my 1Ds and most lenses was
lifted from my car
Annoying, but fortunately for me my insurance
will cover.
So on the bright side , I am now "a free man" , and I can choose to
stay with Canon or jump ship, if that is what will work best for me.
The thing is, I want that D200. It is so close to beeing my dream
camera in terms of size, weight, build quality, "feel",
features... even the popup flash I'll much rather have than not. I
have been toying a lot with one at the local shop, I even like the
viewfinder although it does lack compared to the Canon FF's.
BUT ... high ISO performance does worry me. 1Ds was considered one
of Canons weekest models when it comes to high ISO performance, and
it topped out at 1250. My particular 1Ds was maybe better than the
average 1Ds (it was also one of the last bodies produced), and I
used it whenever I had to at 800 and even 1250 without hesitation.
For small prints I could even pull it a stop or two, to get the
equivalent of around ISO3200, although chroma noise would be quite
overwhelming and usually I would apply Noise Ninja and just live
with the reduction in details.
I guess this is the one area that Canon 5D would really shine - the
question remains , does the D200 advantages make up for this one
advantage of the 5D.
Does anyone have some samples of what the D200 is capable of at
ISO1600/3200 ? And what are your experinces of making prints of
high ISO pictures ? How much noise am I going to see at say , 10 x
8 ?
For what its worth , I dont care much for pixel peeping at 100% but
I'd like at least usable ISO1600 prints at normal-large print size.
Now another thing I have considered is my lens options. On the 1Ds
I used the Canon 24-70/2.8L as my walk around. I tried that lens on
a 5D once, and didnt care much for it. Without battery grip it is
too heavy. So should I decide on the Canon 5D my new walk around
would be the 24-105/4L. I guess on Nikon D200 the one lens in this
range to go for would be the 17-55/2.8. Thats already one full stop
advantage to the Nikon in this setup + I dont have to worry so much
about DOF restrictions of the FF 5D.´
Does anyone knows how the 17-55/2.8 compares to the Canon 24-105/4L
in regards to sharpness, color, contrast ?
On a side note, the 17-55 will cost me the double of the 24-105 and
it will eat up the price difference on the bodies... though I'll
rather spend my money on glass than on bodies that will be
obsoloted in 2-3 years.
One last question, mostly to the people who have handled and used
both cameras... I'd like to hear any observations you made in
regards to IQ, auto focus performance etc.
NB: I am shooting mostly still life and landscape stuff. But I
enjoy playing with long exposures, night photography and occasional
portraits and family snapshots too (small, fast moving kids...).
