D2H vs D200

I just viewed your photos and they are very very nice!! Tell me about your background in photography, the cameras you have used in the past, etc.

Helen is questioning a D2h (not "hs") acquisition. Your information on the hs, as it relates to hi-iso noise, is not relelvant to the "h". (Although I have the D2h and love it.)
--
Jerry

Here are the lens that I currently have/use:

1. Nikkor AF 28-70 1:3.5-4.5
2. Nikkor AF 35-105 1:3.5-4.5
3. kNikkor AF 70-210 1:4-5.6
4. Nikkor AF 20 1:2.8
5. Nikkor AFS-300 ??

Flash: SB600 Speedlight

With these lens on my D2H, I have to have the aperature locked at the highest f stop, ie f32, F22, etc.

I have a monopod and a tripod and will definitely start using them again

Thinking about the 17-55 DX...or perhaps the 28-77?? What do you think?

SebastianJ said:

This demonstrates the resolution difference quite well...



--



Equipment in Profile

Click to expand...

Very nicely done Sebastion.
Is it a double page spread or actually a single at 300dpi?
How's the D2x compare magazine-wise to the D200?
--
Rudi

It's about time we started to take photography seriously and treat it as a hobby. - Elliott Erwitt

1. Nikkor AF 28-70 1:3.5-4.5
2. Nikkor AF 35-105 1:3.5-4.5
3. kNikkor AF 70-210 1:4-5.6
4. Nikkor AF 20 1:2.8
5. Nikkor AFS-300 ??

Flash: SB600 Speedlight

What would you suggest for the lens/lenses I should have/use??

Thank you, for the input about the D2h"s"; you're right...I own a D2H and that is what I'm questioning. Whether to keep the D2H or switch to the D200....I'm still considering keeping the D2H and buying one of the newer DX lenses, ie 17-55 or 28-77...what do you think?

1. Nikkor AF 28-70 1:3.5-4.5
2. Nikkor AF 35-105 1:3.5-4.5
3. kNikkor AF 70-210 1:4-5.6
4. Nikkor AF 20 1:2.8
5. Nikkor AFS-300 ??

These are the older AF lenses that I had with my Nikon 8008

I haven't used either of them, but the 17-55 seems to be a great lens. I've been using the 12-24AFS, 24-120VR (recently changed to the 18-200) and the 80-400VR. Of these, the 12-24 is the sharpest but surprisingly the 18-200 isn't far behind. I believe the 17-55 is probably sharper than either of these.

That being said, there's nothing magic about DX lenses. There's good and poor glass in both "formats" And the D2h, despite it's "lowly" 4mp, is capable of terrific sharpness as you've seen on some of these posts.

I'm not in the same league as some of these shooters, and I typically (almost always) shoot hand-held, but for my purposes I've been very happy with the crispness and color of the D2h out of the camera.

Some samples are here (these are ones with deliberately no post processing except last one is a 20% crop):

http://imageevent.com/shattners/d2hsamples

I always shoot Compressed Raw+Jpeg Fine with in-camera sharpening set to +2. I find that way the jpegs are often usable out of the box but I can always go back to the RAW, remove the sharpening and set things up the way I want in post.
--
Jerry

Excellent response, and I really liked your photos as they did show clarity and crispness! I have not used any sharpening in the D2H, so I will try the +2 as you have and see how that works! I've typically had to use a sharpening mask in Photoshop CS2 and it's been amazing to me how much that is needed to make the photos look sharp. They appear quite "dull" until I use the Smart Sharpen filter. I would much prefer that the photos look good as they come out of the camera! I guess I'm a purist as I don't particularly like manipulating my photos, just want them to look great out of the camera. I was always able to do that with my FE2, and it seems since I switched to digital that that is not the case, that a lot of work is required in Photoshop to make the pictures look sharp/crisp.

I have as I've posted, a number of older lenses that I bought 15 years ago, so they are not AFS, just AF, and I guess that makes some difference. They say, whoever "they" are that the DX lenses are more compatible with digital cameras and that therefore they will provide one with better images, we'll see

All being said, it seems that I would be better off keeping my D2H and not purchasing the D200. Buy a "newer" lens at least if not the DX and go from there with the + 2 sharpening! Thanks for that bit of information.

Appreciate very much your help!

Helen Meier said:

Since I've been using older AF lenses, I think that's
part of the reason my photos have not been tack sharp, along with
not using a tripod as faithfully as I did in past years!!

Click to expand...

I own 6 lenses, Helen. Five are AF, one is AF-S, and none of them are DX. I haven't found any of that to be an issue in producing sharp images. But part of the formula involves photo-finishing, which I feel is your Achilles Heel.

As far changing to a d200 to get sharper pictures, I feel it would be counterproductive. It's pretty well accepteded that high resolution sensors, like those used in the d200 and d2x, are more vulnerable to camera shake than the 4MP sensor in your d2h. In other words, if you're suffering from camera stabilization issues, your pictures may be even softer if you switch to a d200.

--
Warm regards, Uncle Frank
FCAS Founder, Hummingbird Hunter, Egret Stalker
Dilettante Appassionato
Galleries at http://www.pbase.com/unclefrank

Helen Meier said:

Would you buy a new DX lens for the D2H vs buying a new D200?? I'm
using my old AF lenses that I had with my Nikon 8008, maybe that's
why my photos are not tack sharp????

Click to expand...

d200 would produce inferior results with your current set of lenses. its higher resolution would only amplify their weaknesses. you also questioned your hand-holding technique in previous posts - the d200 would be less forgiving in this regard as well. and you're used to working with the d2h's (better) af system.

so you should probably work on your technique and if you want to spend some money, get a new lens. considering your current kit and the amount you are willing to spend, the 17-55 is your best option.

Uncle Frank said:

I own 6 lenses, Helen. Five are AF, one is AF-S, and none of them
are DX. I haven't found any of that to be an issue in producing
sharp images. But part of the formula involves photo-finishing,
which I feel is your Achilles Heel.

Click to expand...

helen, having read frank's response i think you should realize that DX is probably one of the least important combinations of letters in a lens name. as long as you purchase a professional grade lens that suits your needs, it doesn't matter if it's a dx lens or not (with a few exceptions such as the 14 mm f/2.8 for example which doesn't really like to project images on a digital sensor).

RudivanS said:

RudivanS said:

This demonstrates the resolution difference quite well...

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

...yet doesn't prove anything. recently i had a d2h picture cropped by nearly 20 % printed on the cover of a catalogue (a4), right now i'm processing LANDSCAPE shots (+some wildlife) that are to be used in a brochure (a bit larger than a5), some will make double page spreads. according to sebastian it should not be possible. i used the d2h because there was no need to shoot slides (i don't have a camera with more mp because i rarely need to PRINT larger than A4). btw, the largest print i made from the d2h was 1 m wide.

--Hi helen,

That's strange. I always have tack sharp pictures with my d2h.

I went BACK from a d2x to a d2h , specially for the sport. They are ALWAYS tack sharp.

Don't you know someone whoa has the same body to do a check.
Wich lenses do you use ??

Happy Shooting

alex from holland

http://www.pbase.com/alex28

gear : Just two eyes

'You don't take a picture, it's given to you'

the only way i would get rid of my d2h is if i bought a d2hs...i mainly us it for sports but i have shot weddings with it...to me they are 2 entirely different cameras.

--
And if a day goes by without my doing something related to photography,
it's as though I've neglected something essential to my existence, as
though I had forgotten to wake up. I know that the accident of my being
a photographer has made my life possible.'-Richard Avedon

Hi Helen,

from all of your previous answers, I understand that you only shoot jpeg out of the camera (not Raw) and do not post process much your images.

If this is the case, I strongly suggest you provide us with the camera settings you use to shoot your D2H (such as sharpness, contrast, white balance, hue, and also AF mode and settings...).

--
Be seeing you,
François

Helen

I would also be very interested in your settings.

I have just bought a D2h and literally took delivery yesterday.

Helen Meier said:

Here are the lens that I currently have/use:

1. Nikkor AF 28-70 1:3.5-4.5
2. Nikkor AF 35-105 1:3.5-4.5
3. kNikkor AF 70-210 1:4-5.6
4. Nikkor AF 20 1:2.8
5. Nikkor AFS-300 ??

Click to expand...

Helen Meier said:

With these lens on my D2H, I have to have the aperature locked at
the highest f stop, ie f32, F22, etc.

Click to expand...

are u serious? you really shoot stopped down to F22 and f32 on these non-macro lenses all the time? Well there is your problem of 'softness' in images.. Just stay above f/11 to avoid diffraction.

--
I see dead pixels

I'm assuming Helen means that, since the older lenses have aperture rings, they must be set at smallest aperture to work with A, S, P modes on the D2h, and not that the actual photos are taken at those openings.
--
Jerry