D200....worth buying

Started May 30, 2011 | Discussions thread
larrytusaz Senior Member • Posts: 2,449
Re: D200....worth buying

It's a common scenario isn't it. For $400 or so you can get a D200 which once would've set you back $1500. Ah, that wonderful body, those tons of features, for only 1/3 or even 1/4th of what you would've paid before.

But meanwhile, newer sensor technology has been created--not that the D200 is awful by any means, but improvements have occurred--and for the same money or close to it you could get that instead. What to do?

I tend to be one that does think that newer technology would be the way to go, although the prior poster's comments about the D200's matrix metering do have some merit. (I got the D200 in March 2009 as an upgrade from the D80, and the D200's meter was FAR superior--but then, the D80 is somewhat notorious for having a schizophrenic meter.)

I had a D200 in March 2009, and was loving it--but alas financial concerns hit & I was compelled to downgrade to the D60--after all, it had the same sensor. Later, funds allowed me to upgrade and I could've returned to the D200. However, the D5000 had since been introduced, giving me access to the newer sensor from the D300 & D90, and it still had more features than the D60. That's the route I went and was really liking it that way.

But features are attractive aren't they? After a year with the D5000, last September year I pondered upgrading to the D90, and meanwhile sold the D5000 for a D80 because I thought I "needed" the features (I figured I'd add a D90 and the D80 would be the "beater" model). But I missed the high ISO excellence more than the features, meanwhile the D7000 had arrived which had even MORE improvements, making all of this "body shuffle" seem silly. I found a mint D5000 kit (18-55mm VR lens included) for only $430, and went back--and have stayed there since (only adding a D3000 kit for my wife to beat up all she wants, she doesn't know what ISO and white balance are anyway, heck a D40 would be plenty for her). I'm settled in my mind--yes, for $400 I could have a D200, but I prefer having the newer technology, and besides, the D5000 is a bit above "entry level" anyway.

My point? Me personally, I go with newer sensor technology over features, but then I'm a mere hobbyist so others may have different views on the matter.

I think it goes much the same with the D200 here. Yes the D200 has a great "like a tank" body and tons of features, but I'd have a hard time not realizing that for the same money I could get a D5000--which has fewer features but enough to not be absolute "entry level" either--and have newer sensor technology with it. Or, as one person said, for not much more vs a D200 you could get a D90, which gives up far less features-wise to the D200 and in fact gains a few things (like the 3" 920k LCD).

Decisions, decisions.

 larrytusaz's gear list:larrytusaz's gear list
Nikon D3100 Nikon D3300 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.8G Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G VR II
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow