D50 v. D200 statement please respond

[D-50]

I have read alot of comments about how if you have the D50 upgrading the body will not makemuch of a difference. I strongly disagree with this statement. I understand investing in glass is always a good choise but I upgraded to the D200 about two months ago and feel its images are far superior to those of the D50. Any thought?

 

[Sw1tchFX]

i've used a D200 a little bit and took home the images. They processed exactly the same as the nefs from my D70, and looked exactly the same. sans a little bit of aliasing.

 

[Snyder]

Well first off your comparing 6.3mp to 10.2mp. I dont believe the D50 even compares or come close to the D200.

 

[D-50]

Megapixels have little effect on the resulting image, they really only come into play when cropping and enlarging but as for image quality they have no bearing.

Im talking about things like the D200 ability to interpret colors vs the D50s, I have found myself doing less post processing on images from my D200 than I did on my D50.

Sw1tch did you take the photos in the store or did you go outside? In my opinion the D200 takes better pictures than the D50.

 

[Garbz]

AJ just mentioned he was processing NEFs, I do that too. At this point the camera retains no more control over colour but the processing software does, and I find Lightroom does it better than the D200's onboard processor or CaptureNX ever did.

You will get an improvement. If you're talking about me saying in the other thread there's nothing to be gained I should clarify this is from a utility point of view. You will get slightly less noise, and slightly better colour. The images will NOT be any sharper which is often the reason people upgrade cameras especially if they are new to SLRs. The question then becomes is it worth spending $1000+ on slightly better colour, or a new lens which may be sharper, have less CA, allows you to shoot in more conditions, etc.

Even with a 6 megapixel sensor modern GOOD lenses will only just outperform it. And I assume if you have a D50 you haven't got any $3000 lenses on it.

I have minor bias here, I don't care about noise or colour as much as the art itself. Photography is more to me than the clarity of the result, and one of my favourite pictures from the Time Life books is grainy as heck.

 

[Photofiend]

while I am NO pro I went and spent the money on the D80 and I have been nothing but HAPPY! I love it ans its a nice inbetween the D50 and the D80 I had read also that optics are the same..

 

[Don Simon]

I would imagine that whether the optics are the same depends on what optics you happen to stick on the front

 

[Sw1tchFX]

AJ just mentioned he was processing NEFs, I do that too. At this point the camera retains no more control over colour but the processing software does, and I find Lightroom does it better than the D200's onboard processor or CaptureNX ever did.

You will get an improvement. If you're talking about me saying in the other thread there's nothing to be gained I should clarify this is from a utility point of view. You will get slightly less noise, and slightly better colour. The images will NOT be any sharper which is often the reason people upgrade cameras especially if they are new to SLRs. The question then becomes is it worth spending $1000+ on slightly better colour, or a new lens which may be sharper, have less CA, allows you to shoot in more conditions, etc.

Even with a 6 megapixel sensor modern GOOD lenses will only just outperform it. And I assume if you have a D50 you haven't got any $3000 lenses on it.

I have minor bias here, I don't care about noise or colour as much as the art itself. Photography is more to me than the clarity of the result, and one of my favourite pictures from the Time Life books is grainy as heck.

Exactly.

Sw1tch did you take the photos in the store or did you go outside? In my opinion the D200 takes better pictures than the D50.

It was outside. I borrowed a friends D200 for a day. The D200/D80/D40x have a slightly warmer color in AWB than the D70, D50, and D40.

 

[Garbz]

Damn! I hate the D200's auto white balance, it always came out too cold / tinted to purple for my tastes. But hey, shoot raw or lock it in at a preset WB, they'll be the same.

 

[D-50]

I have found that the ease of use with the d200 is much better than the D50, everything is at my fingertips and therefore I dont miss shots having to go into the menu. I do find a big difference in the white balances. I shot the samne scene of the morning ocean with both cameras I found the D50 to be much cooler though, extreamly blue water.

Overall I love the D200 and the D50 is great to I just find that the D200 for me is much nicer. Next investment will be some better glass. Looking for a good all around lens. Anyone have any comments on the 18 to 200 VR Nikon?

 

[Don Simon]

Regarding the 18-200mm, I would expect compromise at either extreme... probably too much compromise if you are used to primes or good zooms with shorter range. Do you need to have one all-round lens as opposed to two?