he sold his 350D to get a camera with a longer shutter life? doesn't that sound like backwards logic to anyone else? selling a camera that hasn't worn out for a camera that won't wear out as quickly?
the other reasons are good reasons though.
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Nikon D200 competitor?
- Thread starter Judderman
- Start date
the other reasons are good reasons though.
Judderman
Member
I understand what you're saying, but I can come up with another analogy that I hope explains why build quality is important to me.
Cars! - sure you can buy a cheap car, and it will get you from A to B, but will it be as reliable in the long run, will it be a better driving experience and, will it's resale value be decent and son on. Okay so your cheap car may do just fine and it might be the most reliable car you've ever had, but I'm shallow! I like nice things! When I purchased my First L lens I saw what really excellent lenses could be like and It made me want more decent glass.
The original intention of this thread I think is getting distorted a bit. My friend who posted (shamhead) earlier has bought his D200 and is happy - I still have my 350D and will simply see what canon do in the next 6 months to a year. The 30D whilst it looks like an excellent cam, isn't for me.
There are two sometimes quite separate issues: the "feeling in your hand" and the robustness of the camera. When you look the different forums you cannot help getting the feeling the Canon cameras are made to last even the cheapest ones of them. In some other brand forums you get a lot more report for the gear is breaking into parts or otherwise loosing its funstionality.
philbarrett
Senior Member
I have always, and probably will always, continue to shoot canon. Not because of some missed placed loyalty but simply because it does what it says on the tin and does it damn well. However, the d200 is a formidable beast. The LCD screen resolution alone is worthy of mention, the zoom function is awesome and the ccd aint half bad. I was at a local airshow a few weeks ago. The RAF have their own school of photography and boy was there some awesome images taken with their gear....all Nikon.
Mostly D2x (Ithink) but I did notice a fair few d200 bodies being lugged around. This made me stop and think...if the RAF are using Nikon, esp the d200, then this must be a fine body, pretty robust and great to handle.Canon do need to respond IMHO and soon.The advent of the d200 certainly stopped my buying into the 30d this year. I sold my 300d with the full intention of "upgrading" the 350d into a backup camera. I have now decided to put that on ice and wait a while...just to see what happens.
Next yearI have three weddings to shot, so I am hoping there will be some sort of announcement before then, just so I can avoid upgrading to the 30d just to find out a few weeks later that canons d200 beater is on its way...
cheers
phil
cheers
phil
--
http://www.pbase.com/digitaldreams
Mostly D2x (Ithink) but I did notice a fair few d200 bodies being lugged around. This made me stop and think...if the RAF are using Nikon, esp the d200, then this must be a fine body, pretty robust and great to handle.Canon do need to respond IMHO and soon.The advent of the d200 certainly stopped my buying into the 30d this year. I sold my 300d with the full intention of "upgrading" the 350d into a backup camera. I have now decided to put that on ice and wait a while...just to see what happens.
Next yearI have three weddings to shot, so I am hoping there will be some sort of announcement before then, just so I can avoid upgrading to the 30d just to find out a few weeks later that canons d200 beater is on its way...
cheers
phil
cheers
phil
--
http://www.pbase.com/digitaldreams
D
David Martin
Guest
They have their own fish to fry, including a development program for their future models which will stretch years into the future.
I can't quite make sense of your post, as in one part you are talking about images which may well have been taken with the far more expensive D2x, and then you are talking about seeing several people carrying the D200.
How do you know that the D200 would be equally capable of taking images of high-speed flight, whish is presumably what you are looking at?
And because the RAF think that the D200 is a 'fine body, pretty robust and great to handle' why do you think that the 30D is not?
I have nothing against the D200, but find your logic hard to follow - you could equally well have written after watching the World Cup and noticing that most of the cameras there were Canons that Nikon 'had to respond to the 30D' and it would have been just as much beside the point, as the actual cameras used there would have been 1DII's.
It makes a whole lot more sense, to me at least, to ask yourself what you want the camera to do, and if the cameras you can sensibly upgrade to in your present lens line-up will do the job.
Only if you get a decided 'no' to that question is it worht while considering changing.
The 30D will do you fine for your weddings -don't worry about what fighter pilots are using!
Regards,
DaveMart
'Just a wildebeast on the plain of life'
Please see profile for equipment
I can't quite make sense of your post, as in one part you are talking about images which may well have been taken with the far more expensive D2x, and then you are talking about seeing several people carrying the D200.
How do you know that the D200 would be equally capable of taking images of high-speed flight, whish is presumably what you are looking at?
And because the RAF think that the D200 is a 'fine body, pretty robust and great to handle' why do you think that the 30D is not?
I have nothing against the D200, but find your logic hard to follow - you could equally well have written after watching the World Cup and noticing that most of the cameras there were Canons that Nikon 'had to respond to the 30D' and it would have been just as much beside the point, as the actual cameras used there would have been 1DII's.
It makes a whole lot more sense, to me at least, to ask yourself what you want the camera to do, and if the cameras you can sensibly upgrade to in your present lens line-up will do the job.
Only if you get a decided 'no' to that question is it worht while considering changing.
The 30D will do you fine for your weddings -don't worry about what fighter pilots are using!
--
Regards,
DaveMart
'Just a wildebeast on the plain of life'
Please see profile for equipment
Think about it, the difference between 6 and 8 mp is almost nothing. You improve and lower the price and add features. That is how you keep people buying your camera. They are probably making more profit than Canon as well milking that old chip. If Nikon cannot compete with the chip then let them compete by building a cheaper more professional, dedicated weatherproof metal monster. Canon "experimented with a CMOS sensor.
If I were Nikon I would do the same thing, make some money milking the old 6mp sensor and put it into RandD for the next generation of chips, let Sony produce while I am working on something better. Think of the randd costs and production costs using the Sony chip. Seems logical to me.
I think you are wrong. When someone looks at a camera and is new to digital or someone with not very many lenses looks at a camera, they look for value. What I get for how much. Price wise the D200 squishes the 5d for an armature ( a pro will most likely not be looking at a 5d as his primary camera anyway and a canon guy buying a backup would never buy a Nikon) and compared to the 30d, you need only to pick up both cameras with the only advantage to the 30d is a little less noise at higher ISO's. Noise Ninja works wonders.
Canon already has tried to respond to the D200 by lowering the price of both of its cameras on either side of the D200. They really had no choice. I would prefer the 30d chip inside the D200 but if that is not possible, the difference of noise at higher level for most people will cannot compete with pro features the D200 has for a first time buyer or an armature wanting to upgrade. There is so little upgrade value from the Digital Rebal xt to a 30d (you have to go to the 5D which for an armature is price prohibitive) but if you compare it to a D200 the build quality, seals, better flash system, more 2mp dedicated buttons too many to mention.
If someone is printing large prints and in very low light situations, then I agree, they may be swayed toward the 30d over the D200, but there are frankly not many armatures that do that.
You have to look at what market share you are going after and Nikon is pretty smart by making a near pro body that is better than the 30d and the 5d) and prices it between the two to capture the armature market. When comparing to the 30d (a great camera because of the imager) it lose even when comparing the image quality loss at high ISO (Which for most armature photographers is probably less than 15% of all shooting)
..not changing the 20D when it put out the 30D. All that the D200 offers in 2 more MP at the sacrifice of 1 stop noisier imagery above iso400. The 5D is the camera that has put the D200 to shame and the 5D came out before the D200. Canon is not afraid or worried about the D200. Nikon cannot mass produce cameras like Canon can because Nikon has a sensor supplier that has entered the dSLR producing market which is a reason why the D200 is still in short supply in many places around the world.
Greg Terzian
Senior Member
Ubi,
I prefer the D200 the most, mainly because of the control layout and menu system. I believe the 20D to be on par with the D200.
Anyone that thinks one is really much better than the other is simply a brand loyalist. I have produced fantastic images with all of them, and I feel no limitation with either the D200 or 20D.
My favorite lenses for both are:
Nikkor 70-200 2.8 VR
Canon 70-200 F2.8L IS
Again, both lenses are equal my experience.
Greg
http://www.screamandfly.com/home
I prefer the D200 the most, mainly because of the control layout and menu system. I believe the 20D to be on par with the D200.
Anyone that thinks one is really much better than the other is simply a brand loyalist. I have produced fantastic images with all of them, and I feel no limitation with either the D200 or 20D.
My favorite lenses for both are:
Nikkor 70-200 2.8 VR
Canon 70-200 F2.8L IS
Again, both lenses are equal my experience.
Greg
--Which camera do you use most of the time from yer major arsenal?
Must be something keeping track of all the different glass too?
Nikon and Canon and others to fit wherever on the specific bodies????
Thanks for any details.
Ubi.
http://www.screamandfly.com/home
You have money to burn (possibly???) and like to drive Ferrari's.
Can't blame you if you are lucky enough, but your original post reads
as insulting for us camera users that actually try to get the most out of
our cameras and learn how to use them.
"Weather seals" on your camera won't let you take a better photo.
Have fun with your expensive toys, Judderman.
(Iso 1600 on a Nikon?... no thanks)
Lani.
Judderman,
Why have you not splurged for a 1Ds, 5D, or the other top-end
Canon DSLR's since you like "better equipment"??????
Lani.
===============
Why have you not splurged for a 1Ds, 5D, or the other top-end
Canon DSLR's since you like "better equipment"??????
Lani.
===============
You have money to burn (possibly???) and like to drive Ferrari's.
Can't blame you if you are lucky enough, but your original post reads
as insulting for us camera users that actually try to get the most
out of
our cameras and learn how to use them.
"Weather seals" on your camera won't let you take a better photo.
Have fun with your expensive toys, Judderman.
(Iso 1600 on a Nikon?... no thanks)
Lani.
You are wrong. Many, many pros use 5D as main body. Only sports and studio shooters will definitely use 1D models if Canon.
You are wrong again. For amateurs like myself low noise is much more important than D200 bells and whistles. Shooting in low light is just very frequent in my case. The same is right for any event shooter, PJ, traveller, etc. Again, only sports and studio shooters do not need good low light IQ.
Superiority on Nikon's flash system is just an urban legend, IMHO. Can you provide an example when using Nikon flash setup brought the better IQ compared to the similar Canon flash setup?
C'mon. Do you really believe D200 is better than 5D?
--
Vlad
skanter
Forum Pro
The build quality isn't up to -- what? Do you think your 350D will break, or fall apart? It seems extremely well-constructed to me.
I can see a war correspondent needing a camera he can depend on in unusually harsh and demanding circumstances, but other than that I think the XT will last longer than you'll want it. My main concern is better quality photos -- but that's just me...
;-)
Frankly, i needed to remind myself.
Please talk about Nikon and Canon "other" cams in the other talk
forums. 5D's and D200's are elsewhere.........
==========================
Please talk about Nikon and Canon "other" cams in the other talk
forums. 5D's and D200's are elsewhere.........
==========================
Darrel LaBossiere
Senior Member
Didn't see a lot of black lenses at the world cup did you? I would trust that spectacle of pro photogs with their white lenses over the RAF and their mass purchase done by tendered contract any day.
http://www.pbase.com/darrel_labossiere
--
http://www.pbase.com/darrel_labossiere
hmmmm, maybe this thread should just end here as half the people posting in it don't seem to be capable of coherent thought and its just turning into to a brand loyality flame war.
--
http://www.shamhead.com
--
http://www.shamhead.com
D
David Martin
Guest
Can't see where you get that from.
The original premise of this thread was that Canon was somehow 'behind' the D200.
Many here disagree.
What is wrong with that?
You have chosen to go with the D200 primarily for it's 'feel' as I take it, and use a convenient 18-200 all-purpose lens.
Nothing wrong with that, and that is great if it suits you.
For many here however, image quality is paramount, and that is not to be found in using a superzoom, however fine it is, nor in the D200 at higher ISO or where you need to push a shot.
And so for them it is Nikon who are not 'competitive' with the 30D, not the other way round.
You can hardly blame them for saying so.
I recently recommended a D50 with the 18-200 to someone just getting into digital photography, whose priority was convenience, hardly the work of a 'brand fanatic', however much I would personally prefer the 30D to the D200 for my type of use.
Have fun with your new camera anyway!
Regards,
DaveMart
'Just a wildebeast on the plain of life'
Please see profile for equipment
The original premise of this thread was that Canon was somehow 'behind' the D200.
Many here disagree.
What is wrong with that?
You have chosen to go with the D200 primarily for it's 'feel' as I take it, and use a convenient 18-200 all-purpose lens.
Nothing wrong with that, and that is great if it suits you.
For many here however, image quality is paramount, and that is not to be found in using a superzoom, however fine it is, nor in the D200 at higher ISO or where you need to push a shot.
And so for them it is Nikon who are not 'competitive' with the 30D, not the other way round.
You can hardly blame them for saying so.
I recently recommended a D50 with the 18-200 to someone just getting into digital photography, whose priority was convenience, hardly the work of a 'brand fanatic', however much I would personally prefer the 30D to the D200 for my type of use.
Have fun with your new camera anyway!
--
Regards,
DaveMart
'Just a wildebeast on the plain of life'
Please see profile for equipment
Before buying a D200, wait for the new 10.2 MP from Nikon :
http://nikonimaging.com/global/?
Probably the successor of d70?
http://nikonimaging.com/global/?
Probably the successor of d70?
thw
Veteran Member
-------------------------------------------
See the colors of my world in:
thw.smugmug.com
See the colors of my world in:
thw.smugmug.com
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum