D200 up to D300...?

[Marmeduke]

Hello people,

I've been using a Nikon D200 for about 3 years - it's the only DSLR I've ever had and I love it! I'm taking better shots than I was when I first bought it and starting do some commissions/sell some prints.

So I've been thinking about upping the quality of my camera. I love how easy it is to use the camera controls on the D200 - they all have physical buttons - and the image quality is great :thumbup:.

But, the D200 seems to struggle at higher ISO's which is frustrating because I love street/documentary stuff where it can sometimes be dim light with lots of motion in a scene :thumbdown:.

Does the D300 perform better on higher ISO's, does it still have the same handy manual buttons and would I be able to enlarge photos to larger sizes (for canvases) due to more MP's and general better sensor quality?

I really appreciate your answers guys,
Cheers!

 

[Formatted]

Skip the D300 and get the D700. Its the same body with a better sensor, ergonomics and its Full Frame!

Does the D300 perform better on higher ISO's, does it still have the same handy manual buttons and would I be able to enlarge photos to larger sizes (for canvases) due to more MP's and general better sensor quality?

Yes the ISO is better, Yes it does and Yes it does! But so does the D700

 

[RONDAL]

Skip the D300 and get the D700. Its the same body with a better sensor, ergonomics and its Full Frame!

Does the D300 perform better on higher ISO's, does it still have the same handy manual buttons and would I be able to enlarge photos to larger sizes (for canvases) due to more MP's and general better sensor quality?

Yes the ISO is better, Yes it does and Yes it does! But so does the D700

so hang on, you'd tell someone to dump $2500 on a d700 vs $1000 on a d300 because of what? the small amount of information they provided?

yes the FX sensor will be a lot better in low light i wont dispute that, but depending on the OP's lenses in his current bag, that could make a huge difference. Also depending what lenses the OP has in his bag (DX?) the switch to FX could be a lot more expensive than just the D700, it could require a number of new lenses.

I wish people wouldn't so quick to jump on the D700 wagon so quickly without knowing a little more about the specific needs of the user. It could very well be the right answer, but there is not nearly enough information to determine that yet

 

[Formatted]

In the Uk there is not a huge difference between the D300 and the D700 price wise. I was going to add the lens question! I apologize since I do agree that I did jump on the FX band wagon to readily!

 

[cnutco]

I guess we will have to wait for more info from the OP.

 

[KmH]

Does the D300 perform better on higher ISO's, does it still have the same handy manual buttons and would I be able to enlarge photos to larger sizes (for canvases) due to more MP's and general better sensor quality?

Is this a trick question? http://dxomark.com/index.php/eng/Image-Quality-Database/Compare-cameras/(appareil1)/295%7C0/(appareil2)/203%7C0/(onglet)/0/(brand)/Nikon/(brand2)/Nikon

Have you visited Nikonusa.com or Wikipedia.org and looked at the D300? It's been on the market since the middle of 2007, or about 3 years now.

Actually, it's been replaced by the D300s recently, so it's to late to look at it at Nikonusa.com though the D300s is just an updated D300. They didn't change the button layout.

The D200 has a max image pixel size of 3,872 × 2,592 (10.2 M/10.0 M pixels sensor/effective).

So, that mean at 100 ppi images from the D200 can be printed at 38.72 inches by 25.92 inches.

While the D300 has a max image pixel size of 4,288 × 2,848 (13.1 M/12.3 M pixels sensor/effective).

Meaning at 100 ppi images from the D300 can be printed at 42.88 inches by 28.48 inches.

The big difference is the change from a CCD type image sensor to a CMOS type image sensor.

I'll let you do the research on the differences.

Suffice to say: Nikon does not introduce new cameras that have less capability than the unit they replace.

 

[Sw1tchFX]

if you can stretch it, try to go for a D700.

 

[benhasajeep]

I say wait for the D300s replacement which is more than a year away since the D300s was brought out for the intermediate replacement.

There will obviously be an improvement between the D200 and D300 if you find one, little bit more for D300s. But is it worth over $1000 for those limited improvements? That is assuming you sell / trade your D200 for $300-500 to make up the difference. I am not so sure the gains you would achieve would be worth it.

But I would think if you went to the D700 that even though the cost of acquiring one would be double. There would be a very large jump in quality and new technology.

I have 2 D300's- After looking into what is new on the D300s's I chose to stay where I am at. I would like a D700 but I think I am going to wait for the D700s or D800 what ever they are currently working on.

 

[NateS]

Does the D300 perform better on higher ISO's, does it still have the same handy manual buttons and would I be able to enlarge photos to larger sizes (for canvases) due to more MP's and general better sensor quality?

Is this a trick question? http://dxomark.com/index.php/eng/Image-Quality-Database/Compare-cameras/(appareil1)/295%7C0/(appareil2)/203%7C0/(onglet)/0/(brand)/Nikon/(brand2)/Nikon

Based on that link, it appears that the D200 would have better quality at ISO 100 than the D300. I wonder if that's true in reality. If so, I may be very interested in a used D200 as I want a lot of stuff from the D200.....such as

ISO 100
Better Image quality at ISO 100
Less grain at ISO 100
etc...

Hmm...this post has gotten me to thinking and thanks....now I'm gonna have to waste half my day researching stuff. :greenpbl:

 

[Marmeduke]

Thanks folks that's been a big help.

Right now I use 2 Nikkor lenses: 18-70 and 70-300mm, which I'm pretty sure aren't compatible with the D700. My chief reason for looking to upgrade is to be able to produce really high quality massive canvas prints, which images from my D200 are rarely adequate for.

I've only ever owned a D200 so am not familiar with the market. When a new model comes out does it bump the price of all preceeding ones down proportionately, or do those that are considered great value for money (which I think the D200 is) retain a higher relative value? I'm wondering because I'm tempted to wait for a follow up for the D700 to come out so its price lowers and I can grab it. But if, in turn, the D200 becomes more of an antique I'll get less for selling that on so won't end up gaining anything. In other words is the cost of a D700 minus a used D200 with 2 lenses now, likely to be more or less than a D700, after its successor is released, minus the reduced price of a then older D200...!? Any suggestions.

Much appreciated people!

 

[NateS]

At base ISO, I don't get it....the D200 should be able to produce larger canvas prints just fine. Even if my assumption two posts up is inaccurate, the D200 shouldn't be any less IQ than a D300 at base iso of iso 100.

Your current limiting factor is not your D200 as far as IQ. Your current limiting factor is those kit lenses which are not nearly as sharp and nearly as good a quality as what you could be shooting.

I'd suggest, for highest quality pictures and prints, that you spend that extra money on getting some higher quality glass. You'll notice a bigger difference in that than you will on a D300.

I also understand that you want to shoot lower light stuff....well in my opinion

D200 + Sigma/Nikon 50mm f1.4 at ISO 100-400 is going to be better than
D300 + Nikon 18-70 at ISO 1600-3200

Just my opinion, but with a f1.4 lens you'll be able to shoot the same shutter speed at iso 400 on the D200 as you can at iso 1600-3200 with a D300 and kit lens.

 

[KmH]

Does the D300 perform better on higher ISO's, does it still have the same handy manual buttons and would I be able to enlarge photos to larger sizes (for canvases) due to more MP's and general better sensor quality?

Is this a trick question? http://dxomark.com/index.php/eng/Image-Quality-Database/Compare-cameras/(appareil1)/295%7C0/(appareil2)/203%7C0/(onglet)/0/(brand)/Nikon/(brand2)/Nikon

Based on that link, it appears that the D200 would have better quality at ISO 100 than the D300. I wonder if that's true in reality. If so, I may be very interested in a used D200 as I want a lot of stuff from the D200.....such as

ISO 100
Better Image quality at ISO 100
Less grain at ISO 100
etc...

Hmm...this post has gotten me to thinking and thanks....now I'm gonna have to waste half my day researching stuff. :greenpbl:

ISO 100 is the base ISO for the D200 (an advantage of CCD sensors).

The base ISO of the D300 is ISO 200 (a disadvantage of CMOS sensors).

As it is I have both a D200 and a D300. :thumbup:

 

[KmH]

Thanks folks that's been a big help.

Right now I use 2 Nikkor lenses: 18-70 and 70-300mm, which I'm pretty sure aren't compatible with the D700.

It depends which versions of those lenses you are talking about.

The AF-S 70-300 mm f/4.5-5.6G ED VR is fully compatible with the D700.

If you have the DX version of the 18-70 you can use it on the D700 but at reduced resolution.

Define "massive". I recently had a client inquire about "massive" prints, 16x24.

Additionally, IMO "really high quality massive canvas prints" is kind of an oxymoron because the nature of the medium's surface texture negates any fine image detail.

 

[Marmeduke]

Thanks again for the advice.

Nate S - yeh I was a bit vague about the print size. At ISO 100 I've tried up to 16" x "24 so far which is obviously fine but would like to produce much larger ones.

Plus I had no idea I could be doing a lot better on the lens front.

D200 + Sigma/Nikon 50mm f1.4 at ISO 100-400 is going to be better than
D300 + Nikon 18-70 at ISO 1600-3200

That's handy to know - because I've often shot with my 18-70mm at ISO 800 and the results are a bit shoddy. Don't suppose you know whether the Sigma/Nikon 50mm lens would be compatible with a D700 should I upgrade later?

KmH - Great, looks like my 18-70 needs shifting anyway, but seems the AF-S 70-300 mm f/4.5-5.6G ED VR will do me for both cameras.

By 'massive' I was thinking about "33 x "47 - maybe I could use better lenses to make that poss. with a D200...?

Yeh I take your point about a pebbled canvas surface, but v.large prints still demand a fair degree of detail. Do you reckon canvas is quite forgiving on the quality of images?

So I'm veering towards finding some better lenses for my D200 which would be compatible with the D700 should I go for it a later point. But keen to hear your thoughts.

Thanks for helping!

 

[djacobox372]

Resolution wise, there isn't much difference between a d200 and d300.. only about 9%.

Like others have said, lenses will make a bigger difference. But you should make the decision to go full-frame or not before buying any new lenses.

If you really want to make some huge prints, then you may venture over to the medium/large format film forum on this site.