40D or D200

ukrainetz · Oct 20, 2007

Hello to all at TPF! SCROLL DOWN TO #15 OR CLICK HERE

I am writing this because I need some experienced help and judgment in selecting a solid starting package. I would like to use it to do small, professional jobs on the side. However I am a full-time engineering student, and have a limited budget to begin with. Enough about me, lets talk about equipment!

I have narrowed my search down to two cameras: Canon EOS 40D and the Nikon D200. I know...plenty has already been said about the two, and I have done my research. Both are really good cameras that satisfy my needs and budget. But since I'm not a Canon or a Nikon guy yet, I have no real preference of one over the other. Both bodies are in the $650 - $700 range.

The deciding factor for my choice is based on the price and quality of the optics that I can begin my work with. Basically I need at least one good quality lens, that I can use in weddings, as well as in group and portrait photos. However, I'm aiming at spending around 1k for this whole kit. What are your recommendations for both Canon and Nikon lenses that will be good glass for shooting what I want and in the given price range? I have looked at the Canon 28-135 F/3.5-5.6 IS USM lens ($230) which seems to be of decent quality, but may be out of range for what I want because of the 1.6X of both cameras. I would love to get an L lens, but I don't know if I can afford it just yet (certainly #1 on the upgrade list the more I get into it). For Nikon, there seem to be mixed opinions. Some people actually claim that the lower end Nikkor lenses can be used professionally with great results. Can anyone give me any pointers for a good lens for either camera that can give me good quality for around $300? Like I said, the more I get into it, and the more work I see, the faster I'll be upgrading to something like the 27-105 F/4 L. Thank you all for reading and your recommendations!

DSLR noob · Oct 20, 2007

The 40D is around $1500 and the D200 is just a hair over $1,000, they're not in the $650 to $700 price range as you say.

thebeatpoet · Oct 20, 2007

Yeah, I just paid 1399.99 (CDN) before taxes for my 40D body. And although I don't know where you live, even if you're looking somewhere in the UK the body runs for around 750 pounds before taxes and after a rebate.

Sideburns · Oct 20, 2007

you could get a D20 for 650....lmfao
d40? not so much...

soylentgreen · Oct 20, 2007

With your $1K budget, you are really looking at either a Canon XT, XTi, 20D or Nikon D70, D50, D40x range. The other option will be out of your budget. My 40D body cost me $1300. All the bodies I mentioned are quite capable cameras, the 20D & D70 being more rugged in construct and a couple of more added features than their consumer counter-parts. Lenses are another matter. For weddings, indoor, low-light stuff; you really should use a large aperature lens in the f/2.8 range. They are not cheap, no matter which brand you use. You will probably need a couple of lenses to start. A general purpose zoom and a fast prime for portraiture. In Canon terms, the EF 50 f/1.8 or f/1.4 are great choices for the prime and zoom wise well...you might have to stick with the stock lens until you save some more cash. The EF-S 17-85 f/4-5.6 IS is a great starter lens, but a bit slow in low-light. The EF 24-70 f/2.8 L is the lens of choice but cost more than the camera. Sigma does make a 24-70 f/2.8 but I was not impressed with it's performance. But for $400 what could I expect really. Tamron makes a 17-55 f/2.8 I believe also. If your really strapped for cash, go with the lesser body and get the better lenses. That's where the picture quality will come into play rather than megapixels.

ukrainetz · Oct 20, 2007

Thank you for your opinions, and indeed the prices i said were a bit low. Both seem to obtainable for around $1000 (1100 for 40D) with all the accessories (btr & chrgr). However back to the original question of which lenses would you recommend? Should I make an investment in the D200 given that good quality glass is cheaper?

thebeatpoet · Oct 20, 2007

But what are you looking to spend?? If you're only wanting to spend 1000 in total then both the D200 and the 40D are out of the question for you. And in terms of lenses, since I have only ever used Canon than I can really only reccomend Canon lenses. I agree with what soylentgreen in terms of what you need. For indoor weddings you can expect horrible lighting and therefore should try and stick to something f/2.8 or better if you can work a way to afford it. If you were going for the 50mm then get the f/1.4, I bought the 1.8 and am kicking myself a little for not shelling out just that little bit extra.

Anyways, best of luck in your choice!

soylentgreen · Oct 20, 2007

ukrainetz said:
Should I make an investment in the D200 given that good quality glass is cheaper?

Other way around. Good glass is not cheaper. Nikon does offer the same range of lenses as Canon, but I highly doubt the price is much of a difference. Granted Canon L glass is sold at a premium, I am sure Nikon has their equivalent. As to your question of lens quality, any lens can take a decent picture. It's more in the photographer. Good lenses just make great pictures easier to take. IMO. While we all wish we could afford L lenses, they are a hefty investment. Anyway, great lenses can be had at any price range. It really depends on the quality of images you wish to take. Myself being very nit-picky over image quality, I went the L route.
The D200 is quite a bit of camera. Actually specs a little higher than the 30D as was Nikon's intent. Even if you went with the D200 at $1K, you left no budget for a lens. Camera really doesn't work well without one. Hence the lesser camera options. A D40x or XT with stock lens runs about $700. A 50mm f/1.8 about $90. Leaves you about $200 to maybe get a Sigma 24-70 f/2.8. Can go the used equipment route, but I have issue with that myself. If you really want a 40D or D200 with lenses for what you want ot shoot; you need to scrape together another grand.
BTW, I would not reccommend the EF 24-105 f/4 L for low-light shooting. As good as the lens is, that is the only draw-back.

Mike_E · Oct 20, 2007

The Nikon D200 does use older lenses. If you don't mind using manual focus lenses then the D200 would be the way to go. The older lenses work very well and as long as you are not shooting anything that moves quickly. You really don't have any trouble using them for anything else.

You can get an AId Q135mm f2.8 for around $30 which is the equivalent of having a 200mm f2.8- pretty good deal, eh?

ukrainetz · Oct 21, 2007

It is certainly hard to make a decision. In your opinion what do you think I should do...
- XTi (640) + Tam 17-50mm f/2.8 (380) + Canon 50mm f/1.8 (80) = 1100
- EOS 40D (1100) + same lenses as above = 1560
- D80 (840) + Nik 50mm f/1.4 AF D (170) + Sig 24-70mm f/2.8 (390) = 1400
- D200 (1150) + above lenses = 1710

Or any other similar lens combos for the nikons... I know what you're thinking... I'm out of my 1k bracket. But IYO is the upgrade from the XTi to the 40D worth it? or for the extra $460 should I obtain an extra lens for my XTi (like the beautiful 28-135 f/3.5-5.6 IS)? All of these are available with 1 or even 2 kit lenses for slight price increase (40D for 1250 w/2 tam lenses) which is also an option. And then of course there is Costco down the street which sells XTi kit for 940 and D40x kit for 999.
Most of the prices are from ebay and good reputable online shops. Thanks guys.

soylentgreen · Oct 21, 2007

Well, if you made it this far, the next step to to try out the cameras. Go to a shop and play with the models. I was dead-set on getting a Nikon D70 before heading to the store. My friends shoot Nikon, Co-workers, cousin, etc. All Nikon. Played with it and was not comfortable with the controls, menu, feel, etc. Bought a Canon 20D instead. No regrets what-so-ever. All the listed kits are good, but he higher you go the more out of your budget. You do get more camera though, but do you need it right now? Just test out the cameras and see what you think. Me personally I like the mid-range cameras( 20D,D80) for their build and heft. More stable and comfortable in my hands over the lighter XTi, D40x.

ukrainetz · Oct 21, 2007

Thanks soylentgreen, I'll try to go and play with them some time this week. Other than that, I'm starting to lean towads the XTi. I figured instead of spending the extra money on the 40D for now, I'd rather get the 50mm f/1.4 lens. And maybe even if I have some extra money left over, I'll get that IS lens I want. Plus I'll need the funds for all the extra equipment: flashes, memory, batteries, grip, etc. And if I ever do upgrade to the 40D, I'll have the XTi as an extra body

. Are those after market grips on ebay any good, or do I have to shell out the extra for canon equip?

A relative has asked me to shoot their wedding, which is in late December, and that finally gave the excuse to go ahead and start investing in the equipment I would need to do photo jobs. Don't worry, they understand I cannot promise them fully professional results, but it will be good practice and my present to them. Until then, I have some time to get my equipment together, and practice. Do you think its worthwhile to advertise around my neighborhood and offer family shots and children's portraits for discounted, "learning" fee? Especially with holidays like Thanksgiving coming up, I think there might be a window of opportunity for such work, which could give me the practice I need, and some funds for more equipment.

Thanks for all your suggestions guys, I really appreciate all the help.

soylentgreen · Oct 21, 2007

You're not really losing that much going with the XTi over the 40D. Mainly build ruggidness, Live-view and 6.5 fps. The XTi is a great camera. Definitley save the cash for a flash and diffuser, extra CF card and battery. They are a must for the wedding. The EF 50 f/1.4 is a lot better than the f/1.8; mainly build and the USM. I prefer the EF-S 17-85 f/4-5.6 IS over the EF 28-135 mainly due to the wider field of view. On a crop sensor, the 28 will be too long IMO on the wide end. Check things out and good luck.

Holy Ghosted · Oct 22, 2007

You should keep in mind you are not just buying a camera you are buying a system the body will upgrade soon and be better but the lenses have a longer life span so when buying a system you need to see who provides the glass you need to do the job the best. but for a 1,000 dollar budget I would look at a Olympus e510 kit with 2 lenses overall a good setup and Olympus has good glass to grow into. just another opinion it is worth what you paid for it.

ukrainetz · Oct 25, 2007

Well I handled the cameras, and the 40D seems huge and heavy, while the XTi is too small and featherweight.

can never be happy. So I decided to go ahead with the XTi, and like I said, it could become my extra body down the road. Now that I'm fixed on the cam and lenses, what are your opinions for accessories? Here are some questions:
-Speedlight 430EX - just under 200, do I really need spend the extra 150 for a 580EX? 430 looks like a great flash (I tried it at the store) and its already too huge for the XTi. Or do you recomend to get something non canon for a better deal? Ideas?
-Sandisk Extreme III - is what I've used and will use with this camera. Get one 16gb unit and save, or not put all my eggs in the same basket and buy two smaller ones? Even at a wedding it would yield over 1000 photos, hence no memory changes>>less likely to damage the card.
-Battery Grips - Opteka or Targus instead of BG-E3 and for third of the price? Many reviewed these, and were satisfied with both (sometimes more with the aftermarket one).
-NB-2LH Batteries - There are so many out there... any recomended afmkt brands? I just don't see a reason to spend $50 on one if I can get two for the same price.
-Flash diffusers (for built in, 430, 580), which are the best value/recomended? Lens filters, which are good aftermarket brands? Lens hoods, spend $$ on canon, or is the aftmkt no different? All ideas and experiences are welcome!