Does the D200 really outperform the D50?

[cmvsm]

I'll go along with that.

Interesting Jules. You don't know what you believe do you? You say one thing and agree with something completely different. David just stated what I was referring to which was

"Agreed, it is possible to end up with more or less identical images regardless of which Nikon is used"

You either don't read posts and simply reply to them or you are the optima of a politician. And thanks to David for clarifying his position and affirming mine. By the way, referring to one of your other posts where you elude to the fact the D50 has a less pixel count than the D70s is ludicrous. I believe your quote was:

"WE need as many pixels as we can get. That is why the D70 is better than the D50 and the D2x is better thab the D200 which is in turn better than the D70."

Whoever WE is, just so you both know, the pixel count on the D70 is the SAME as the D50. Are you making this stuff up as you go?
--
http://cmvsm.zoto.com/galleries/favorites6227

 

[JoeyJoJoJuniorShabbaDoo]

Whoa Alan, kool yer jets, I mentioned the D50 noise because it is a benefit to many shooters, but I'm in no way saying that it makes the D50 a better camera, I'm only saying that it's better in that area. Remember, better is a subjective term that is open to interpretation. Perhaps you like the noise on the D70, whatever, it's all good.

And another thing, I'm not defending my choice of camera because I never mentioned what camera I have, because frankly it doesn't matter. Maybe I don't even shoot Nikon anymore. Gasp!!!

 

[JulesJ]

Wonderland? i think not. I just accept reality. Post two images of the same subject taken from the same viewpoint one straight agfter the other. A nice picture of a house in daylight would be good. Post them at 100% next to each other on the web. No cheating now, exactly the same subject, not high ISO. I want to see the detail, not the noise (we know about that).
Your move.
Jules

I'm a D70 owner as well. Hmmm....your logic is flawed. Again, a
sound resident of Wonderland Jules? And furthermore, I still never
heard back from you regarding your "ability" to choose a D70 image
over a D50. I have both...you want to try your luck? I'll be
sure to eliminate the exif data for your challenge.
--
http://cmvsm.zoto.com/galleries/favorites6227

--
Black holes do not destroy information.

 

[JulesJ]

I'll go along with that csvmnm. i get the feeling that you are getting a little hot under the collar.

You must calm down. To be a great photographer you must be cool, calm and reserved. i know the D50 is limited but I'm sure that you can still take nice pictures with it.

As to whether I am reading the replies properly or not. prpbably not. But I still get replies.

I understand that the D50 has got the same amout of pixels as the D70 and I admit I probably did deny that in an earlier post. The the d50 oixels are not as good as the D70 ones.

I look forward to your reply, who will tire first of this fast becoming useless correspondence I wonder? But it is fun isn't it. Do you have any other hobbies apart from photography. Perhaps we could change the subject and move on.
Jules

--
Black holes do not destroy information.

 

[dirtee1]

I second that, but again I have forgotten where I saw it. The D70s came close to last place.

It does not have the widest dynamic range.
I cannot quote where I saw it but the dunamic range was tested on a
number of cameras and the Fuji S3 was at the top with the D50 very
close behind. The D70s was two stops less. I have the D70s and I
know how limited that dynamic range can be.
Fuji velvia slide film also has a very limited dynamic range so in
itself limited dynamic range can make for great images but a wider
range is for easier shooting and less missed shots.
Looking at my friend's D2x, the dynamic range is not very wide at
all the way the camera is set up.
Happy shooting
--
Rinus of Calgary/Kelowna

--

'Life is not measured by how many breaths you take, but by how many moments that take your breath away.' - A friend

 

[JulesJ]

Joey dobe doshubyda. Thanks for joinging the debate. You must be right the D50 is wonderful I hope you enjoy it. Thanks for calling me a measurbator too. I've been called many things but not that before, but you made me laugh and that is what these forums are all about. I won't return the complimenbt in any form for fear of being childish.

Now back to sensible part of your post. You say High ISO noise is..."not acceptable" in your opinion and that you wouldn't use a D2x if given one.

Well bully for you boy. As I said before. We shoot 100% in a studio using strobe, lots of controlled light and don't need or use the High ISOs on the camera. Plus the large file size that we get from the camera it is ideal for what we need given that we do sell large prints. The D50 would not be big enough.

Hence the so called noise problem, for us...is not a problem. I don't know what you photograph with your D50, presumeably stars and night shots and long exposures or racing cars if you need the high isos. High isos always gave grain so nothing much has changed. Or perhaps you shoot hummingbirds, dogs, babies and ugly family members. Whatever, I'm sure your beloved little D50 will a handsome job for you. Good luck.

By the way, it is not neccessary to be rude (mearurbator, shut your trap, Suck it up buttercup????) in your replies. Try to use the English language to your advantage without resorting to such resources.
I expectantly await your civil reply.
jules

Jules,

You have this warped perception of reality that objects with a
higher price tag are always better; guess that's why marketing is
so successful these days. A first rate Measurebator. Your first
mistake is that the word "better" is very hard to define, what's
better for you is not always better for everyone. Case in point,
your much praised D2x. I personally would not own a D2x unless
you gave me one, not interested, sorry. High ISO noise is not
acceptable and it's a DX camera. In no way would I pay 5 grand for
a stinkin' DX camera. Remember, that's my opinion only. In this
case, the D200 would be a better camera because it's cheaper and
will satisfy 98% of what I'd need until such time as Nikon brings
us a FF DSLR at which time, any DX camera I own goes out the
window. Good riddance.

Concerning the D50, despite what you proclaim, almost every review
of the D50 and D70 rate them very close. If you'd close your trap
and read the reviews posted here, and actually look at the images,
you'd see that the IQ between these two cameras is essentially the
same. Also, the D50 does indeed have a wider dynamic range and has
better high ISO noise. Surely this can't be possible, it's a
cheaper camera right? Wrong, it's a newer camera with a more
advanced image processor. You think Nikon just sits around
twiddling their thumbs? Nope, they improved upon the D70's IQ and
reduced the price. The D80 may just have better IQ than the D200
when it arrives, so what! Sorry if that's a bitter pill to swallow,
but that's life, Suck it up buttercup. Actually, there again,
despite the D50's lower noise and higher dynamic range, the D70 is
still an excellent camera that will produce excellent images that
you or I would be hard pressed to tell from those of a D50, or
Rebel XT or D200 etc. etc. etc.

Perhaps you may want to read this, "Why your camera does not
matter". Enjoy.

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/notcamera.htm

--
Black holes do not destroy information.

 

[JulesJ]

Exactly English, I couldn't agree more. the D50 lot are an angry brigade indeed.
jules

--
Black holes do not destroy information.

 

[JulesJ]

Extraordinarily beautiful shots Ted. I was lucky enough to see the Norwegian sea eagle close up some years ago. My shots (taken with a nikon FE with a standard lens) were not up to much I'm afraid but a friend of mine did a half hour programme on that mighty bird for the BBC.
Jules

--
Black holes do not destroy information.

 

[JulesJ]

cvsmp, you say that don't necessarily even own a D50, or even ANY Nikon camera.

Could you come clean and let us know where your expertise DOES come from. What cameras do you own or at least use to have such experience to talk at lenght about them. What is your photography experience in life? Are you an aging pro, a young blood fresh to digital photography, or maybe just a lover of debate? I'm all three.
Jules

--
Black holes do not destroy information.

 

[English]

I second that, but again I have forgotten where I saw it. The D70s
came close to last place.

Well, that's a completely useless "fact" backed up by zero if ever I saw one!

I once saw a review that put the D70s as the best camera in the world. It beat all Canons and everything ever made. Just can't remember where I saw it. It was true though. Honestly... Sheesh!
;-)

Alan.

--
Spam Filter Reviews at: http://www.whichspamfilter.com

 

[dirtee1]

I think you should take a break. Your posts are becoming increasingly aggravated. I just mentioned the D70s came close to last in that test, I didn't say it was true, or that it was a fact.

I second that, but again I have forgotten where I saw it. The D70s
came close to last place.

Well, that's a completely useless "fact" backed up by zero if ever
I saw one!

I once saw a review that put the D70s as the best camera in the
world. It beat all Canons and everything ever made. Just can't
remember where I saw it. It was true though. Honestly... Sheesh!
;-)

Alan.

--
Spam Filter Reviews at: http://www.whichspamfilter.com

--

'Life is not measured by how many breaths you take, but by how many moments that take your breath away.' - A friend

 

[bmcent1]

Wow! What an informative thread and some heated debate. I didn't mean to stir up trouble, but clearly people have a lot to say on this subject and it is valuable to hear peoples opinions.

I think I've taken away what I need to from the thread. But I wanted to ask this:

Without placing value judgements on any of these, can basic, quantifiable, rules of thumb be stated?

• D200 has faster and more accurate AF performance
• D50 has the least noise at higher ISOs (maybe clarify that by saying 800 or higher.)
• D200 gives options over other cameras like lower ISO (100), higher FPS
• ... without restating the manufacturers specs, are there other generalities which can be laid out (again, without judgeing... everyone has to make decisions on tradeoffs.)

To rule out another variable, assume pro glass on the camera so that the lens is not the limiting factor.

 

[bmcent1]

Also would be interesting to answer the dynamic range comparison question.

Understand that there is often an "intangible" aspect it IQ. On the otherhand, some of these things should be measurable in a scientific sense. Yes photography is art, but it is also a very technical art which is why it appeals to some. f/stops and flash value charts and hyperbolic focus charts, etc... some people may take great pictures without these but there is a lot of math and science in photography and I personally like that and want to use a better understanding of these things to improve and use the cameras to their fullest potential.

 

[Goldeneye]

The test was on Imaging Resource:

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/D50/D50A17.HTM

Nick
--
Nikon D50

 

[English]

I just mentioned the D70s came close to
last in that test, I didn't say it was true, or that it was a fact.

Huh? Isn't mentioning it tantamount to confirming its veracity?
What would be the point of mentioning it otherwise?
I was merely pointing it out to be useless hearsay.

Alan.
--
Spam Filter Reviews at: http://www.whichspamfilter.com

 

[dirtee1]

Huh? Isn't mentioning it tantamount to confirming its veracity?
What would be the point of mentioning it otherwise?
I was merely pointing it out to be useless hearsay.

You also seemed to be expressing irritation, imho.

Here's an example of what I meant:

Someone said "I'm not sure about the details, but France won the world cup and and Italy came second. Australia lost to Italy quite early in the game."

Then I mentioned "Australia got past 3 matches(correct me if wrong) before losing their chances of winning the world cup this year."

I wasn't making a value judgement of Australia's playing skill, I just pointed out how far they got, or how little ground they covered. Extract that from the analogy of the World Cup, and you see they have been tested. Aussie fans would have said their team won in other ways, or at least felt it, but by the test that is the world cup, they have lost. I see things in photography that way - from both sides.

So no, I was not confirming the validity of the test. I just felt like adding some detail to the OP's post, to prove that this test does indeed exist, and no more.

 

[English]

Stuff about football...

Sorry, you lost me on the World cup thingy. My eyes glaze over as soon as football is mentioned ;-)

My point was that mentioning a fact without citing source is useless in this setting. The source has since been cited, which is an interesting read as it gives a more balanced take on the subject of the pros and cons of the D50.

If I am expressing irritation, it is because of the usual reason: Some D50 owners just have this unnatural need to bash the D70/s and harp on endlessly about some minor advantages their camera has to them and proclaim it to be the last word in cameras which "bests" higher spec cameras by the same company.

I really like this web site. I think Phil's reviews are second to none, and when I realised that there was an active forum here, I was very pleased.

In no time at all though, I became aware of the strong bias here and the endless harping on about the D50 and comparing/battling/jostling against the higher cameras in the range - particularly the D70/s.

It is unnecessary and frankly, yes, quite annoying. It is a real issue with this forum and a shame.

Alan.
--
Spam Filter Reviews at: http://www.whichspamfilter.com

 

[dirtee1]

Stuff about football...

Sorry, you lost me on the World cup thingy. My eyes glaze over as
soon as football is mentioned ;-)
My point was that mentioning a fact without citing source is
useless in this setting. The source has since been cited, which is
an interesting read as it gives a more balanced take on the subject
of the pros and cons of the D50.

I share your interest in football. I only know so much because a friend persuaded me to take photos at an outdoor fan gathering. Well perhaps I should not have made that one insignificant post, but at least I didn't start a new thread on it or bash the D70s, right? Just felt I'd add a bit more participation to the forum.

If I am expressing irritation, it is because of the usual reason:
Some D50 owners just have this unnatural need to bash the D70/s and
harp on endlessly about some minor advantages their camera has to
them and proclaim it to be the last word in cameras which "bests"
higher spec cameras by the same company.
I really like this web site. I think Phil's reviews are second to
none, and when I realised that there was an active forum here, I
was very pleased.

IMO the objective/neutral ones are staying out of the fight and they still grossly outnumber the few cryers out there. And while we are debating this very issue, dozens of newbies are coming to this part of the forum asking sincere questions, and the only ones answering them are the ones who do not respond to threads like these.

That said, believe me, I am no camera basher. I first used the D70 and had quite a love affair with it and I still love it despite its shortcomings. I still love even my Kodak DX6490, with its 2nd-class glass, terrible noise performance, mottled textures, crappy shutter response, etc. Even so I take a reality check and give credit and praise where they are due, and like many others I am excited in the advancements Nikon is making.

Unfortunately but understandably, my actions like so many like-minded others are contributing to the detrimental effect of real merciless bashers.

I share your opinion of this website.

In no time at all though, I became aware of the strong bias here
and the endless harping on about the D50 and
comparing/battling/jostling against the higher cameras in the range

• particularly the D70/s.

It is unnecessary and frankly, yes, quite annoying. It is a real
issue with this forum and a shame.

While what you say its true, I feel it is needed to be pointed out that some of these discussions are initiated merely out of technical interest. The recent D80 banding thread was one. The OP had to remind critics(most of whom seem to not have bothered reading the contents of the thread) time and again that it wasn't a complaint nor a nitpicking competition.

I do however agree that some users here have become too callous and judgemental, both of cameras and of other members. I believe that these unworthy few are the initiators and catalysts of the ongoing arguments.

--

'Life is not measured by how many breaths you take, but by how many moments that take your breath away.' - A friend