D200 vs. D300 - really that extreme?

Discussion in 'Photography Equipment & Products' started by Roger_Federer, Oct 28, 2008.

  1. Roger_Federer

    Roger_Federer TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2008
    Messages:
    7
    Likes Received:
    0
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    Hello!

    I've read at Ken Rockwell's webpage, that the D300 is far superior to the D200 in nearly all respects (sharpness, colours, speed, battery life, display, contrast, etc.). Read here!
    He recommends to sell the D200 for funding a D300...now I have a D200, would it really be worth it, to sell the D200 for buying a D300? Can anybody contribue from his/her own experience? Is it really that extreme?

    Best Regards Timo
     
  2. Mike_E

    Mike_E No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2007
    Messages:
    5,327
    Likes Received:
    264
    Location:
    The Upper West Side of Mississippi (you have no i
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    Maybe Ken is better than his D200, but I'm not better than mine so I'll be keeping it for a while. :)
     
  3. dEARlEADER

    dEARlEADER TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2008
    Messages:
    1,312
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    Canada
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    well ... it's not just Ken... you could check out reviews from Thom Hogan and DPreview as well....

    the consensus is the D300 is a drastic redesign from the D200 and is a better camera..... that doesn't mean the D200 isn't a great camera....

    as far as switching you should evaluate the differences and decide whether or not this is important to you.... nobody here can make up your mind for you.... if you are happy with your D200 I don't see any reason to switch.... the D200 has already dumped it's value so there is certainly no financial advantage to getting out now....
     
  4. skiboarder72

    skiboarder72 No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2005
    Messages:
    2,109
    Likes Received:
    77
    Location:
    Greenville, SC
    The D300 is to the D200 as the D200 is to the D100
     
  5. Sw1tchFX

    Sw1tchFX TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    May 3, 2006
    Messages:
    7,500
    Likes Received:
    478
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    If you don't shoot above ISO 400 much, shoot only RAW, don't shoot sports, and don't need 51 AF points, stick with your D200, wait for the D400.

    Consider the 17-55 f/2.8 instead.
     
  6. TamiyaGuy

    TamiyaGuy No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2007
    Messages:
    1,078
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Chelmsford, UK
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    In my opinion, the D300 is much better than the D200, but not enough to warrant instantly upgrading. Yes, the battery life, FPS, image noise, quality, etc are all better, but you would be much better off getting a £900 lens instead. Remember, using ISO 200 with an f/2.8 lens is much better, no matter what difference the camera body makes, than ISO 800 with an f/5.6 lens.
     
  7. stsinner

    stsinner TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2008
    Messages:
    1,860
    Likes Received:
    8
    Location:
    Massachusetts
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    I think that a lot of people think that a better camera will make them a better photographer, but most of them probably never leave the AUTO setting much. The D300 is only worth the money, imho, if you're making money with your photography and you are a trained professional.. If you're not a professional with a very trained eye and a penchant for the very fine subtleties of the picture, using an eye loupe and blowing things up to 40 inches, unless you've just got money to burn, the D300 is just a status symbol. Ken Rockwell even says that in his reviews-if you don't understand ISO, White Balance, metering, stopping down/up, etc., the more complicated cameras are a waste of money for you, and you won't realize their full potential. Now you may, but I surely don't. I could give you a short dissertation of each, but as for using them each effectively enough to justify upgrading my camera body, I won't claim to be able to do that.
    As a recreational photographer, I think that the D200 is more than sufficient. Invest in better glass to hang from it.
     
  8. JerryPH

    JerryPH No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2007
    Messages:
    6,111
    Likes Received:
    15
    Location:
    Montreal, QC, Canada
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    The only people that want you to believe that the D300 is FAR better than a D200 are the marketing people. It has a couple of advantages, and shoots pictures SLIGHTLY cleaner at ISO 1600 than the D200 (which can be cleaned in noise reduction software so that its as good as ISO 200!).

    I have my next camera going to be a D700 or D3, for me thats a proven real upgrade. A lot of people did the upgrade from D200 to D300, but its now a thousand dollar upgrade, and I am sorry if I offend anyone, the D300 is not a thousand dollars worth better than a D200.

    Everytime I grab my friend's D300, its so close that you have to REALLY be pushing the envelope to see the differences... and how often does anyone shoot at those levels? Maybe 2-5% of those times?
     
  9. D40

    D40 TPF Noob!

    Joined:
    May 25, 2007
    Messages:
    475
    Likes Received:
    0
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    I would say even if the D300 is a lot better, that you are better off keeping the D200 (as it is a great camera) and saveing for a D700/D3 with a full fame sensor. Like the previouse posters said, that is a much better reason to upgrade...and it may be that most pro bodies will be moveing to the full frame sensor and then you would want to upgrade from the D300 again...:) Just my thought!
     
  10. sabbath999

    sabbath999 No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2007
    Messages:
    2,694
    Likes Received:
    61
    Location:
    Missouri
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos OK to edit
    +1
     
  11. Joves

    Joves No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2007
    Messages:
    2,399
    Likes Received:
    21
    Location:
    Flagstaff/Az
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    I upgraded from the D80 to the D300 which I think made more sense. I dont think that if I had the D200 I would have myself. I still have my D80 and use it as a back up and, my general abuse camera.
     
  12. djacobox372

    djacobox372 No longer a newbie, moving up!

    Joined:
    May 4, 2008
    Messages:
    2,925
    Likes Received:
    129
    Location:
    Seattle, WA
    Can others edit my Photos:
    Photos NOT OK to edit
    No... the d200 was a bigger step. Not only did they improve the imaging system more dramatically, they added compatibility with non-cpu lenses.
     

Share This Page

Search tags for this page

d200 should i upgrade to d300

,

d200 vs d300

,
d200 vs d300 for wedding photography?
,
have d200 is it worth upgrading to d300 ken rockwell
,

nikon d2x or d300 rockwell

,
sharpness of nikon d200 vs d300