D200 users: Upgrade to a D200x/D300 if . . .

[rifcz]

-cam2000
-better dynamic range
-not interested in cleaner high ISO

rif

 

[G4Photo]

if you will permit me, did you win those awards using the D200?

the D200 is on my short list. unless a new model is due out with in 8 weeks. only 1 camera purchase for me to cover the next 5 years with a 2K USD budget.

 

[Marco]

More MP and better high ISO noise would always be nice, but what I'd like is:
1. Better dynamic range
2. Better AF in low light
3. Self timer with MLU option
4. Twice the shoots per battery

 

[RicAllan]

I'd have to develop a need I don't currently have...

I don't buy to be at the leading edge but rather to address a need.

The area I would most likely develop needs in would demand
Higher ISO/lower noise
Enlarged bufferng capabilities for extended burst shooting
Good bump in resolution (so I can have a physical buffer around my subject)

--
Ric

 

[pptphoto]

My number one reason to see a D300 come out, is to see how long it takes people on this forum to start speculating about the D400. My guess: about 6 weeks after the D300 hits the streets, whenever in the future that might possibly be.

 

[Gary0001]

Someone will find something to complain about aswell.
--

 

[TOF guy]

Lower noise at high iso is interesting. But what would really get me into a buying a D300 would be all AF sensors become of the cross type. Other desirable features:

• in-camera VR (by moving the sensor) which works in synergy with optical VR (in the lens)
• removable AA/IR/UV filter
• better DR in RAW

Note that 1 (cross-type AF sensors) and 2 (in-camera VR) are found in Pentax's dSLRs. So it is not unreasonable to see Nikon adding these features and keep the D200 successor price the same as the D200.
--
Thierry

 

[Radu Tenenbaum]

Improved high ISO performance would be useful for action/BIF shots in non-sunny conditions. Also, I was at an outdoor family reunion recently and I would have liked to keep shooting later into dusk without having to resort to the flash.

D2x focusing would be nice too, but the main thing for me would be the high ISO performance.
--
Radu
http://www.pbase.com/raduray

 

[Snappy one]

if you will permit me, did you win those awards using the D200?

the D200 is on my short list. unless a new model is due out with in
8 weeks. only 1 camera purchase for me to cover the next 5 years
with a 2K USD budget.

No i did not win those awards using the D 200 . The NIKON D200 camera has won all the awards on the list.

ANDREW HODGKINSON.

 

[slappomatt]

for under iso 400 the D200 is a great camera. above that I would rather have anylower $ nikon.
--
The past is just the future that already happened.....

 

[msolea]

I have a lot of Nikon glass and I do not like canon ergonomics and handling as well as focusing mechanism and selector. The 5D may have great IQ above the D200 at anything abouve ISO 800, but for some reason I prefer the look of Nikon and do not tend to use higher ISO... I would however like to have the option available to me without having to worry too much about image quality.

In a D200 upgrade, I would like to see:

1) CAM2000*
2) Improved ISO noise 2-stops*
3) Improved Dynamic Range*

4) Improved jpeg engine for casual use
5) If Megapixel increase, 14 MP and/or a better sensor (but for now
10 MP is fine) -- perhaps with Fuji S-CCDwith Nikon image
characteristics

6) Removable AA filter

Of these things, I think 1 and 3 would be the most important;
otherwise, I would be happy with a D80 (the only feature the D80 is
lacking thta I would want and utilize is the AI/AIS metering
ability). 6 would also be a desireable feature, but it is unlikely to
happen for quite some time.

--
http://www.screamandfly.com/home

 

[msolea]

-cam2000
-better dynamic range -- RAW and JPEG (perhaps slightly improved jpeg engine)

-not interested in cleaner high ISO -- but it would be nice so long as detail is maintained

rif

I would also like to see optional AA filter or no AA filter...

This would be a camera I would keep for a long time. Heck the D200 as it is is a camera I would keep for a long time if and when I get it.

 

[ez2laf]

--
It is better to be quiet and thought the fool, than speak and remove all doubt.

EZ

 

[Ronaldhogenboom]

1. Higher frame rate?

5fps is faster than I will ever need.

2. 12mp?

Nah, what difference would it make? I already can print ludicrously big with 10.

3. Better ISO performance by 1 stop

Nice, but not worth it yet.

4. Better ISO performance by 1.5-2 stops

Yes. I would switch for 2 stops.

5. Something else?

FF? And I DON'T want to hear that it's an arbitrary format, that it will mean bigger and more expensive lenses, that the sensor will be too expensive due to the production process and die yield... I KNOW all that. Yet, as a photographer, I want FF (better DOF control, bigger sensor and potentially less noise, bigger finder).

Fuji like high DR and then some. No blown highlights anymore, film like latitude and rolloff. Yes, it will mean big file sizes and a slower camera. So?

AF performance as good as my unbeatable Minolta Dynax 7.

Spot meter slaved to AF area.

Direct view.

In body IS/VR for all my poor old primes.

--
Ronald

http://www.lookupinwonder.nl

 

[robsinger]

Please more than 5fps!!!!!!

For nature and sport photography sometimes a must.
For those who do not need more than 5fps, switch to CL and set
the frame rate you want.

Robert

--
----------------------------
http://www.photograph-austria.at

 

[thomas2279]

The D200x/D300 may get the Cam 2000 as Nikon has often shared some features from the D2 series in D200 and other lower bodies, so the new pro body e.g., D3/h/x may have an updated AF with faster focusing more AF points, e.g., 19
--

 

[AAK]

Even if everything stayed the same:

1 More stop clean ISO and
a more reliable AF system would do it for me.
--
=~ AAK - http://www.aakatz.com
=~ Author of The White Paper
=~ http://www.aakatz.com/whitepaper

 

[Pedro Dias]

none of the above.

I'll upgrade when I see a higher dynamic range. poor ISO performance? try exposing correctly, I no longer have noise problems
--

If you find my gallery at http://www.digitaldias.com , you're welcome to use visitor/visitor for guest access

 

[Cpt Galant]

To justify a new body it would have to offer some more innovative features than those you mentioned, although I would ALSO require ISO performance like that of my D40. Overall I'm very happy with my D200.

1. Higher frame rate?

Nope. Never use 5fps as it is.

2. 12mp?

Nope. I'd be happier with 8MP.

3. Better ISO performance by 1 stop
4. Better ISO performance by 1.5-2 stops

Performance like the D40 for jpgs would be nice.

5. Something else?

Let's see...
Live, on-demand histogram in viewfinder
Better user banks that don't affect ISO, WB and quality when changed
User definable curves IN-CAMERA so I can adjust to the conditions on the spot
Selectable RAW resolution (full, half, etc)
Pop-up flash with bounce capability

and a D2esque battery, although it would need to be sized to fit where the current D200 battery goes.

If they could do a good portion of the above, I'd scrape together the funds.

--
A camera is just a tool - no matter how much one loves it.

 

[Tom Monego]

The only thing I'd like to see is 14 bit RAW processing instead of 12bit, better still 16 bit. After Canon's new "marvel" 14 bit processing should be the new standard.

No problems with frame rate, learn about anticipating the move, like all the photogs did before motors.
No problem with dust.
12mp instead of 10mp, nice but won't get me to buy one.

Tom