D200 or D2Hs?

Going from s2 to D200, I was always frustrated with the metering of the d200. A couple months ago, I got a D2H for $700 and now realize that maybe it's just my meter that is off. I was getting tired of having to shoot everything in raw. I've tried grey cards and every other surface to get a good white balance. To me, JPeg or Raw on D2H is awesome. Finally, told my wife that I'll send the D200 in to have it looked at.

Part of my purchasing logic is that, even when D3 (argh, sorry!) comes out, it won't stop D2Hs creating great images or being great for what I want. Yeah, 8mp LBCAST would be good, but if 4MP is honestly enough (I think it is), that's just a waste of drive space again. And, D2Hs is already expensive enough - my bet will be the new model will be more..

So, maybe the perfect pair is D2Hs and D200. But I'm not buying both at the moment!

Problem is, D2Hs is already fairly scarce - if it really will be that good for me, and be my 90% of shots camera, maybe that's the one to go for first and then add a high-res body when the right model/deal/time comes.

D200 (or it's replacement if/when one ever arrives) will always be readily available and at a lower price than the D2Hs or equivalent. Seems that the D2Hs would be my more used body, even if I had D200 as well, and (to me) it kind of makes sense to sink more into the more used bit of kit. The just comes down to the fact I'm uneasy about spending that much on a 2-year old design...

--
We only ask for advice when we already have the answer...

Yes these can be agonizing decisions mostly because we all wrestle with what we "want" vs what we "need". I moved from my D1x to a d2hs almost exactly a year ago, it was not a difficult decision for me at all as I shoot 90% sports and when I do on site events my print size is never larger than 8x10. I absolutely love the d2hs for its incredible low light focusing ability and high ISO performance.

One thing to keep in my mind though is you really have to be aware of filling the frame, you just don't have the flexibility of being able to crop out 50 percent of an image because your lens didn't have enough reach in the first place, there simply isn't enough data for the image to hold up.

I really don't think you could go wrong with either body, if you go with the d2hs there will be times when you wish for the the higher res of the d200 and of course if you go d200 there will just as likely be times when you wished for the some of the attributes of the d2hs.
Bottom line, if money isn't an issue then I say buy what you really want.

Yes the d2hs will be replaced, probably sooner than later, I will likely "want" it's replacement but will hold off for at least 2 more years, I find this game is a lot cheaper if you stay a bit behind the development curve compared to grabbing the "latest" bodies the second they come out.

Good Luck!

Not to take anything away from these fantastic images, but to say the D200 can not touch that is completely wrong.

These images do not truly show the capability of the D2Hs. What you are seeing here in addition to a great camera is most likely good glass and definitely proficient post processing skills.

s3prokw said:

primo stuff pierre. the D200 can't touch that.

Click to expand...

I'd like to site Fred James. He just posted a couple of minutes ago. He will ease your worries. He a master of the D2h. Really nice stuff.

Well one thing the D3 will do is force a price drop in the D2Hs, which imo already is a bit too pricey compared to a used D2h or Canon 1d Mk II. Great camera, but price is high right now imo.
--
http://www.southfloridapics.com

I've been debating this same purchase choice since last year. When the Fuji S5 came out earlier this year, it just delayed that decision even longer. All it has bought me is an extended period without owning a DSLR.

Reading your other posts, we have some similar shooting preferences. I rarely enlarge past 8"x10", which would make the D2Hs quite suitable. I also like to shoot a lot of candids, but I also like to shoot some landscapes near the coast. I will also be shooting some high school sports starting in this Fall.

I actually sold off my Canon equipment and purchased some Nikon lenses based on my long-time shooting preferences. I ended up with several prosumer zooms and some primes. All are screw-driven lenses. Because of that, I think I would appreciate the D2Hs more than the D200 in driving these lenses.

I am less concerned about what is going to replace the D2Hs than many others. It would be siginificant overkill for my needs, and it would probably cost far more than I want to spend. I just have a hard time justifying the $3000+ cost to purchase a D2Hs new. And since this will be my first DSLR (25+ years with film SLRs), I want it to be new.

Ideally, I would want a D2Hs and a D200. With both, I would be hard pressed to think of a shooting situation that I could not cover. If only I would find a new D2Hs for around $2000-2200 ...

Here's an even more economical way to go - get a used D2H. It gives you all the speed, focusing accuracy, and LBcast sensor that the D2Hs does, at about a third the price. Buy Noise Ninja or another noise reduction software and you've essentially got a D2Hs for not too much money.

Then, when a new body comes out, you can decide at that time whether or not to upgrade.

One caveat though. The D2 series cameras are heavy and large. If you do much traveling the D200 might be a better choice from that standpoint.

Zolton

Yep - we're on exactly the same page!

Good point there about screw drive - I have 80-200 AF (not AF-S), would D2Hs be signficantly better for driving this?

--
We only ask for advice when we already have the answer...

Yeah, I've considered that but, other than noise issue (which I accept you can get around - I shoot all RAW anyway), my understanding is that the Hs adds better AF tracking, bigger buffer and a couple of other features. Is D2H near enough the same as the s?

I'm also even more nervous of spending $2000 (I'm in the UK) on a 4 year old body that's secondhand.

--
We only ask for advice when we already have the answer...

Jeweller,
I bet you have some experience sharing your working knowledge of
both of these cameras.
Thank you,
Kevin P.
--
Kevin P.

Well yes, the D2H(s) has a stronger torque motor then a D200 and can drive the 80-200 to focus more quickly. It's more noticeable on even slower lenses like the 80-400VR or 300 f/4 ED (non AF-S version).

plusfour said:

Yep - we're on exactly the same page!

Good point there about screw drive - I have 80-200 AF (not AF-S),
would D2Hs be signficantly better for driving this?

--
We only ask for advice when we already have the answer...

Click to expand...

--
http://www.southfloridapics.com

There is not much I can add to what has already been said but I am at least talking from experience.

I bought a D2HS less than two weeks ago to replace a D70 that I broke. This was to be a back up to my D2x which I absolutely love. For the price I paid I could almost have bought another D2x but as my main interest is motorsport I fancied the faster frame rate and slightly better AF.

I have put over 2000 clicks on it already and printed a number of images (from crops in some cases) to 13*19. Now I would be lying if I said there was no difference between the HS and the X in terms of resolution but those differences are nowhere near as big as some would have you believe especially if you shoot raw and use good up- rezzing techniques (Thanks Roman). I am told by those in the know that Genuine Fractals or Q Image or some of the better printer rips are even better. What you do get with the HS is a file quality that is hard to describe but those that have seen it all love it. I liken it to film and think the results are fantastic.

At the end of the day you will have to make your own mind up but the D2HS has cult status amongst many of those that use it and for good reason.

For my type of photography would I do the same again. You bet!
--
Ellar

http://web.mac.com/paullloydroach

well said.

Ellar said:

There is not much I can add to what has already been said but I am
at least talking from experience.
I bought a D2HS less than two weeks ago to replace a D70 that I
broke. This was to be a back up to my D2x which I absolutely love.
For the price I paid I could almost have bought another D2x but as
my main interest is motorsport I fancied the faster frame rate and
slightly better AF.

I have put over 2000 clicks on it already and printed a number of
images (from crops in some cases) to 13*19. Now I would be lying if
I said there was no difference between the HS and the X in terms of
resolution but those differences are nowhere near as big as some
would have you believe especially if you shoot raw and use good up-
rezzing techniques (Thanks Roman). I am told by those in the know
that Genuine Fractals or Q Image or some of the better printer rips
are even better. What you do get with the HS is a file quality that
is hard to describe but those that have seen it all love it. I
liken it to film and think the results are fantastic.

At the end of the day you will have to make your own mind up but
the D2HS has cult status amongst many of those that use it and for
good reason.

For my type of photography would I do the same again. You bet!
--
Ellar

http://web.mac.com/paullloydroach

Click to expand...

--
'Procrastinate now, don't put it off.'

1600+ images in 15 hours of coverage (I'm just getting over the soreness). I shot over 1000 frames with the D2Hs, and the balance with the D200. Last night I spent 4 hours sorting and processing the images and the differences stood out clearly while processing them: the D2Hs simply is better all around. The colors were great, the WB (even on auto WB) is perfect all the time (depending on taste, you could tweak a little in either direction), the sharpness with a little USM seems to really look great. Not to even mention the fact that I could process and save about 3 D2Hs images in the time NX was taking to process and save a single D200 image.

I feel I made one mistake during the past weekend's wedding shoot: using the D200 for the formals, indoors and out. I think, based on the other results I got, that the D2Hs would have produced more pleasing results regarding skintones and colors.

I'm still processnig images and will be posting a thread containing some samples here in the next couple days.

Hope this info helps. I own both, and am finding myself rarely using the D200 anymore. After I pay off all my gear, I'll be looking to ditch the D200 in favor of either a D2Xs or whatever new body Nikon releases.

Sean

Thanks for the 'real world' evaluation. Unfortunately, however, you are not making my decision any easier : )

Allan

wow! so were there times you were checking out the detail in the 10MP D200 images thanking God for the extra resolution?

smhagger said:

1600+ images in 15 hours of coverage (I'm just getting over the
soreness). I shot over 1000 frames with the D2Hs, and the balance
with the D200. Last night I spent 4 hours sorting and processing
the images and the differences stood out clearly while processing
them: the D2Hs simply is better all around. The colors were great,
the WB (even on auto WB) is perfect all the time (depending on
taste, you could tweak a little in either direction), the sharpness
with a little USM seems to really look great. Not to even mention
the fact that I could process and save about 3 D2Hs images in the
time NX was taking to process and save a single D200 image.

I feel I made one mistake during the past weekend's wedding shoot:
using the D200 for the formals, indoors and out. I think, based on
the other results I got, that the D2Hs would have produced more
pleasing results regarding skintones and colors.

I'm still processnig images and will be posting a thread containing
some samples here in the next couple days.

Hope this info helps. I own both, and am finding myself rarely
using the D200 anymore. After I pay off all my gear, I'll be
looking to ditch the D200 in favor of either a D2Xs or whatever new
body Nikon releases.

Sean

Click to expand...

--
'Procrastinate now, don't put it off.'

I currently shoot with a D200 and my dad has a D200 too. I shoot alost all sports, so speed is very important to me. I have been finding that my D200 is not quite up to the job, so I am about to get a good used D2Hs for a good price. The High ISO is really good for indoor sports, too. I couldn not go for a D2H because of the terrible high ISO, and I lve the bigger LCD. I was telling myself before that 10MP was nto enough for me, butt hen i remembered that when i shot canon I had a 1D which was 4MP and got a long fine, nice prints at 11x14 and have a 16x20 from the 1D coming any minute now, we will see how it looks.The ergonomics of the D2Hs are much better than the D200 + grip, too.
--
Nikon,Biatch.

If you want to shoot concerts, the D2Hs is the way to go. Nothing comes close, unless you can carry a tripod. My keeper rate is so much higher with the D2Hs over my D200 & D2Xs that is simply no competition.

GenoP

Nikon D2Hs ,Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED-IF AF-S VR
1/30s f/2.8 at 78.0mm iso1600



Nikon D2Hs ,Nikkor 17-55mm f/2.8G ED-IF AF-S DX
1/160s f/3.5 at 17.0mm iso1250



Nikon D2Hs ,Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED-IF AF-S VR
1/90s f/2.8 at 125.0mm iso1600



Nikon D2Hs ,Nikkor 300mm f/2.8G ED-IF AF-S VR
1/60s f/5.6 at 420.0mm iso400



and portraits:

Nikon D2Hs ,Nikkor 28-70mm f/2.8 ED-IF AF-S
1/250s f/8.0 at 65.0mm iso200



Nikon D2Hs ,Nikkor 85mm f/1.4D IF AF
1/250s f/5.6 at 85.0mm iso200



and sports:

Nikon D2Hs ,Nikkor 200mm f/2G IF-ED AF-S VR
1/800s f/2.0 at 200.0mm @ 3200 ISO (NO Noise Reduction at all)



--
Web: http://www.pbase.com/genop754
Send eMail to: [email protected]

On the contrary, I was thanking God for the superior AF of the D2Hs, actually! All the resolution in the world doesn't do any good if the image isn't in focus!

Honestly, right about now I'd like to sell my D200 and pick up a second D2Hs. Unfortunately I need a better backup camera than my D70 for my upcoming weddings. The idea will definetly be mulling around my head though...

Good question, and probably not a popular answer. The AF differences really shone through during the dance at night. The D200 just doesn't compare, while the D2Hs doesn't even break a sweat.

Sean