Nikon D90 or D200

[lamergod]

I was in the same dilema a few months back too.But I shoot sports very often,almost every week.The choice was clear,5fps and 4.5 fps.You might say Awww 5 and 4.5,the difference is so small.....But if you are a seasoned sports photographer,the difference is there.

D200 is built like a tank.Give d200 a month and hold the d90 again,it's like a small toy.Weather seal,AIS compability.....swap all these for video?

 

[george elsasser]

D90 HANDS down - Especially if your gonna shoot wedding ceremonies (read no flash), why simple, better high ISO performance period- way less noise at say 1600. I've shot plenty and 1600, wide open with a fast lens is almost mandatory.

The D90 will allow you to shoot without a flash in darker situations than the D200, it produces a smoother image than the D200.


I am on sabbatical from 10 yrs. of journalistic weddings, shot em with D70s and D200, D200 high ISO performance only slightly better than D70. D3 series cameras are substantial improvement, over the last generation.

The whole line D3, D700 for FX and the D300, D90 for DX are major advancements over the D200, D80 camera.

Yes the metal D300 would be tougher, I would take 2 D90s over 1 D300 any day. Do not shoot a wedding without a backup camera unless your client has been warned your just starting out and charging start out low prices. You can not re-shoot a wedding. Bring something else with you a D40, 50 or 60 or what ever.

I currently have a D3 and would use a D90 as a back up for a wedding or an extra camera for some of the flash work with out batting an eye. Remember the photographer behind the camera is more important than the camera.

 

[chip]

In terms of image quality, the D90 is a far better camera than the D200!!!

"Far better" is an overstatement; it's better at higher-iso's--that's about it. Below 800iso they're nearly identical.

But isn't that big enough of a reason already? I would not use ISO 800 on a D200 or D2XS - I have both. I would use ISO 1600 on a D90 or D5000 or D300 all day (I have a D300). The difference is day and night. FYI - far better is an understatement!

 

[AlexColeman]

In terms of image quality, the D90 is a far better camera than the D200!!!

"Far better" is an overstatement; it's better at higher-iso's--that's about it. Below 800iso they're nearly identical.

At 200, my 3S will be similar to a D80, it only shows when you start to crank it, and if he is shooting as a business, you will need high ISO.

 

[Garbz]

I would not use ISO 800 on a D200

Crap ideological fear of noise which would otherwise prevent you from getting a photo. ISO800 may have noise, but to not use it when needed is just pure silliness.

I would not have gotten this shot: http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2250/2130215253_01e4ab8e6d_b.jpg Following your rules as the D90 would have broken while I was over seas (Dropped it), and the D200 was set at ISO1250 when I took the picture.

High ISO performance is nice, but it definitely doesn't overrule the fact that the D200 is a far more rugged camera for those people who care about that sort of thing (uncoordinated clumsy me)

 

[chip]

I would not use ISO 800 on a D200

Crap ideological fear of noise which would otherwise prevent you from getting a photo. ISO800 may have noise, but to not use it when needed is just pure silliness.

I would not have gotten this shot: http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2250/2130215253_01e4ab8e6d_b.jpg Following your rules as the D90 would have broken while I was over seas (Dropped it), and the D200 was set at ISO1250 when I took the picture.

High ISO performance is nice, but it definitely doesn't overrule the fact that the D200 is a far more rugged camera for those people who care about that sort of thing (uncoordinated clumsy me)

I guess different folks have different quality standards. I don't know if I am silly or you are silly. I don't have any fear to use ISO 800 on a D200. I have done that again and again. I just don't like low quality pictures. Based on my own tests, the ISO 800 noise level on a D100 is actually lower than on a D200. Probably due to the D100 having larger photosites.

 

[Dominantly]

I've taken my DSLR's through many rainy/multiple mile mountain backpacking trips, and I've never had any issues with "plastic" bodies. I mean I dont go around swinging it into rocks and trees, so I may be missing out.
Metal body or not, if you drop it the right way, it's going to break. The body might not crack, but the internals are still subject to shock/g-force.

I'd take something useful (high ISO) over the false sense of security of damage-proof.

 

[Joshua907]

Lots of great info...for that, thanks. I ended up buying a used D300 with 4K accuations. Will be here on Tues. Now the next thing is a lens. I got offered a gig to go around and shoot kitchens for a website. I need a lens to get most, if not all the kitchen in a good shot. Ive been looking at the 10.5mm fisheye, but its a little pricey. Im also trying to get on with a local newsletter, shooting in clubs, so i need a lens that will get me up close and personal, low light, ect. Any ideas? I want to keep it under $600-700 if i can. Maybe a Sigma or Tokina?

 

[djacobox372]

In terms of image quality, the D90 is a far better camera than the D200!!!

"Far better" is an overstatement; it's better at higher-iso's--that's about it. Below 800iso they're nearly identical.

But isn't that big enough of a reason already? I would not use ISO 800 on a D200 or D2XS - I have both. I would use ISO 1600 on a D90 or D5000 or D300 all day (I have a D300). The difference is day and night. FYI - far better is an understatement!

I have a d200, d90 and a d700... when shooting raw iso 800 on the d200 looks about the same as iso 1600 on the d90--that's one stop difference; in jpeg mode the improved noise reduction SOFTWARE in the d90 gives you another 0.5 more stops.

Is 1-1.5 stops a big deal?--it depends on the photographer. I guess for you it's FAR FAR better... but for me it's just a little better. I prefer the fact that my ais lenses work on my d200. It's all subjective.

 

[lamergod]

Lots of great info...for that, thanks. I ended up buying a used D300 with 4K accuations. Will be here on Tues. Now the next thing is a lens. I got offered a gig to go around and shoot kitchens for a website. I need a lens to get most, if not all the kitchen in a good shot. Ive been looking at the 10.5mm fisheye, but its a little pricey. Im also trying to get on with a local newsletter, shooting in clubs, so i need a lens that will get me up close and personal, low light, ect. Any ideas? I want to keep it under $600-700 if i can. Maybe a Sigma or Tokina?

the best lens for interior is fisheye and 14-24.Nice and bright aperture and very well controlled distortion.

 

[AtominoPhotoForum]

D90 is great, if you want that the camera eats all MF ... AFS-lenses, than take the D300. I use it with a great fun: also 100/2.8 series E is than great - or if you want a newer please take 35/1.8 ,,, BR Atomino
Homepage