[TWiTCHY]

It's the new versus the old again, but this time price is not the selling point. After owning my D60 for no more than 5 months, I'm already feeling the pain from the mistake I made of buying a user-friendly camera.

The D60 is great and all, but it is very limited when it comes to HDR photography, lens compatibility, and low light situations. There's no AEB, it won't cooperate with regular AF lenses, and its metering is off, making it hard to get the right exposure when a photo op turns up.

So I've decided between the new D90 and not so new D200.

The D90 is very new, and the only reason I would want it is because it's, well, new. Unlike the D60 it supports all AF lenses, has a total of 11 focus points, and more. And I have no care for the D90's movie-mode capability, but it is a nice touch. I just wouldn't take it as one of the many reasons to buy it. The additional 2mp isn't necessary - it'll just take up more space on my card when I shoot in RAW. But because it's such a new model, I would expect Nikon to support it fully through the years.

The D200 was based on the D2H (or vice-versa) as a downgraded model for amateur photographers. While it may be downgraded, it still contains some of the D2H's features, like the "perfect metering" Rockwell praises. The only reason I would get this is because it's very flexible unlike the D90. It's oriented towards the user's demands, rather than trying to help out by offering tips on how to improve the picture, like the D60 does every so often.

After this upgrade, I plan to stick with this camera for 5 years plus. Hopefully the one I pick won't be as limiting in the future.

with opinions

[The_AMG_Hunter]

D90 ftw

[jpsum]

I have the D200. When i got the D200, the D90 was just a rumor. So I got it to replace my D40. If I get to choose again, I'll get the D90 just because the D200 had been out for so long and I bet Nikon is going to discontinue it very soon so the resell value is going to drop like crazy. Plus, the D90 can shoot HD video; first in the DSLR industry.

I can always trade with you if you get the D90 and don't like it afterwards!

[TWiTCHY]

Yay, a D200 owner! I haven't been able to find out the facts yet, so I guess I'll have to ask you whether or not the D200 has AEB.

[jpsum]

Yeap, the D200 has AEB. Something that I don't use much.

[Bomb617]

Originally Posted by jpsum

Yeap, the D200 has AEB. Something that I don't use much.

What is AEB?

[jpsum]

Originally Posted by Bomb617

What is AEB?

It's called Automatic Exposure Bracketing. If you are not into photography, you will probably never use it on the camera.

[TWiTCHY]

It seems like D200 is the way to go for me. I have a relative in Thailand who's been using Nikon since the 35mm ages and he has tons of lenses from the 1970s and 80s. With the D90, you can only use AF, AF-D, and AF-S. The D200 is compatible with those along with AI lenses.

Now it's a matter of finding a used one at the right price with warranty!

About warranty - if you buy a camera second-hand, how do you register for manufacturer warranty?

[jpsum]

I'm not sure, but I would guess if the first owner registered it, it should carry over.

Good luck with your search for a D200.

[TurboFan]

I love my D200. For me it was the D80 or D200. The larger frame size, plus the sealed metal body were the key deciding points for me.

Now, I believe the D90 has technology from the D300/700 line, which supports a few advances. I'd say go handle both cameras, and see which one feels more comfortable to you.

[Vudoo4u2]

I have to say the quality of output on a D90 is better than the D200...

The D200 is a good camera, but it was superceded by the D300, and D700 (for full frame). The D90 is based off the D300...

Yes, it doesnt support AFI lenses, but it supports almost all others, and most importantly, some of nikons better more recent lenses are amazing to say the least.

The video support shouldnt win you over, as its useless to me, but the size of the D90, plus the quality of the shots if you have a good lens, is something that I would take over the D200 anyday. After all, dont you buy a good dSLR for the quality of shots?

[SixDegrees]

As a D80 owner looking to upgrade, I was waiting for the D90 but all things considered (and I think you are thinking like me) then the D300 is the one you want. While you get all the stuff you want just now with the D90 like 11AF, AF lenses, etc etc its not a majot step up from the 60 (its only a minor step up from the 80), where-as the D300 is in a different league.

The thing I find a bit odd is that the D700, name wise, seems to fit into the D200, D300 range when in rfact its a baby D3. I suspect that as the D90 has just been released and Nikon have the bottem end covered with the D40, D60, D80 and D90 they'll need something to sit inbetween the D300 and D700 (D700 should've been a D5 or D7 IMO) so the D300 should see a price drop as soon as rumours about what fills the 'gap' styart to spread around.... but saying that the D300 is bloody good value just now.

[watrob]

Buy the D300, the D200 is nowhere near as good as the D300. The D300 does great HDR with 3 frames!

Or else wait and get the D700, that my next camera!

[TWiTCHY]

Thanks for the feedback guys. I wasn't expecting any more posts in this thread.

I think I will wait for full-frame Nikons to become more affordable to the amateur's budget. At this time little upgrades are not worth it when full-frame is the next big thing :P

[UdubBadger]

I vote 50d



...friends don't let friends shoot Nikon.

[TWiTCHY]

What's the cheapest full-frame Canon?

[UdubBadger]

5d should be with the mkII on the market now

[SixDegrees]

Originally Posted by TWiTCHY

Thanks for the feedback guys. I wasn't expecting any more posts in this thread.

I think I will wait for full-frame Nikons to become more affordable to the amateur's budget. At this time little upgrades are not worth it when full-frame is the next big thing :P

Full-farme cameras might get cheaper, but its the glass that you want to watch. Lenses for full-frame are quite a bit mreo money and many of the 'good' lenses for APC sized sensors do not work well on full-frame.

So, while you might be able to afford £1700 for the body, budget another £3000 for glass! Stepping up to full-farme is yet another league (not mine; photograpgy skills or funds)

[TWiTCHY]

I keep telling myself that the extra money for a full-frame is worth it, but then again that means getting full-frame lenses like you said that most amateurs would not be able to afford, including me. Is it overkill for just a hobby?

[UdubBadger]

yes

i'm a photography student (who will be a pro one day) and I'm still hesitant on buying a full frame just yet.

[TWiTCHY]

I'm not sure why Nikon had to get rid of AF support on their D40/D60. It's all I want!

[SixDegrees]

Originally Posted by TWiTCHY

I'm not sure why Nikon had to get rid of AF support on their D40/D60. It's all I want!

2 reasons... smaller body, hard to fit in, and cost !

Plus, at that end of the market the user will be buying cheaper, new to market AF-S lenses or taking the kit option which comes with AF-S, so no need for AF drive in the body.

Plus, AF on 3 points isn't the best so Manual focus can be much better in many situations. I've found (over the past 1 1/2 years) with the D80 that I switch to manual focus a lot more.... easier and quicker to get the point of focus I want, particularly with a wide aperture.