D200 to D2X upgrade worth it?

[MK3Brent]

Recently came across a very affordable D2X. ($500)
My current camera body is a D200.

I need a low light performing camera.

From my own research, the D2X ISO performance is very comparable to the D200.
Frame enlargement accounts for a 10.7% in the D200.

Looking at sample noise vs ISO images, it doesn't look like I'm going to get what I need in the D2X.


Based on first hand experience, how do you like the D2X?
Would you recommend it as a upgrade?

I'm looking to go D3S within 6 months, so perhaps I will just wait.

 

[MK3Brent]

I think I might have answered my own question....
Looks like ISO performance isn't very good.

 

[Markw]

D200 is slightly better than the D2x as far as ISO is concerned. But, only like 1/3 stop better. So, it's not really worth it in my opinion. You can find the D3100 for like $375. And that's about a full stop better than the D200 for ISO. The D90 is a good alternative, too. But, I'd likely just wait for the D3s.

Mark

 

[MK3Brent]

Totally agree, after some further reading.

Dee Three Esses for all.

 

[Markw]

Dee Three Esses for all.

:lmao:
Mark

 

[StandingBear1983]

its not that the D2x is a crap camera, but today in 2012 it has no real money value anymore...when you can see point and shoots get better quality then the D2x...+1 on mark, get the D3s.

 

[KmH]

I'm sure glad my even older D1X sold for $300 then, if a well cared for D2x is worthless.

P&S cameras don't have built-in vertical grips, an interchangable lens capability, RAW and TIFF options, 3D color matrix metering, and lots of other very useful features.

Nikon D2X Review: Digital Photography Review

But yes, wait till you can get the D3s.