On 8/2/06, Joseph Chamberlain <drjchamberlain@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
In order to utilize several Nikon lenses I already own I have been thinking about purchasing a Nikon D200. I just recently sold an used Nikon D70 I had and have already closed a deal on my Canon 20D. To place things into the proper perspective, I have a Canon EOS 1Ds Mark II that I use as my main camera. The Nikon D70 was purchased 2 and 1/2 years ago and has been replaced by a Canon 20D that I have been using as my second camera whenever I don't feel like carrying the weight or the value of the EOS 1Ds around with me. The 20D produces great results but I just feel sorry to have all those excellent Nikkor lenses stacked in a drawer without using them.
This problem is easily solved: Sell them. I don't think it makes sense to run both Canon and Nikon digital bodies and keep two lens sets. No doubt for extreme situations and very fussy photographers there are a few cases where one or the other has the *only* really good lens, and people working at that level and doing a wide enough variety of things might I suppose need both to handle that case. But mostly, drastic overkill.
After reading some reviews I am just as confused as I was before reading them as they point in different directions. Some compare the D200 with Canon's 5D claiming that both represent the latest designs from both companies. These articles claim that comparing the D200 to the 30D wouldn't be fair as the 30D represents technology that is more than a year old. Others compare the D200 to the 20D/30D since they in the same price point and the 5D is so much more expensive (this would be my rational for exchanging the 20D for the D200).
For nearly everybody, I think the comparison has to be within price bands. The price is too important a concern for all of us to do it any other way. I can imagine very special situations for very specialized photographers with heaps of money where the comparison starts somewhere else, but I don't see any reason to believe that's you. You need to compare what you can get today for what amount of money. (And the D200 technology isn't much less than a year old; I bought mine in March and it was nowhere near new then.)
What are your opinions and impressions from both cameras ? Are there any members that either own or have worked with both cameras that could provide some input on the differences between them and which is a better camera ?
I can't manage that, but maybe I have some information of value. Hope you find a couple of people with personal side-by-side experience to relay, that would certainly be good.
Some reviews I've read state that the D200 is a better engineered camera, with more ergonomically arranged controls, better and faster focusing, better optical quality and some other features not found on the Canon mid-priced bodies (20 D, 30 D and 5 D). However, they also state that Canon has invested its development efforts on the development of its own sensors, image processing chips and algorithms, which result in better image quality. I haven't worked with the D200 but based on my experience with the D70 and 20 D I would have to say that Canon's image quality is superior to that produced by Nikon (as far as my very limited experience is concerned).
I upgraded from a Fuji S2 to a D200. I believe the Fuji S2 is of roughly similar build quality to the Nikon D100, D70 -- and also the Canon 20D. I haven't shot enough with Canon cameras to really confirm that opinion in person, though -- and more with a 1Dii than with the ones actually in question here. Comparing the S2 to the D200, the D200 is a big jump up in camera body performance. It focuses faster and more acurately, and has more focus modes. It is heavier. It is better sealed. It supports pre-autofocus lenses better (it will meter with them and do some auto-exposure modes). The focusing performance difference in particular is *huge* -- if you do anything that requires AF on moving subjects. It will shoot faster (5 frames per second) and will shoot a longer burst before slowing down to card write speed (it has a bigger buffer in the camera body). It also has a bunch of advantages for flash photography that are specific to the Nikon environment -- like being able to serve as a commander for SB[68]00 units. It's a low-end pro body, or an honest-to-god "prosumer" body, or something. This may not help you, but to me it fits the position of the Nikon N90 film body and the more recent F100 film body in the lineup. It's tougher, more capable, and more expensive, but it isn't an F5 / D2X (on either axis). If you don't work with fast-moving subjects, don't work in environments hostile to your equipment, most of these features may not matter. For other kinds of work, these differences are life and death. So you have to figure out what you need. It's not a big step up in image quality from the S2 (but the S2 was a standout in its generation, especially in low light which is where I mostly make my comparisons). It's a big step up in resolution from the S2. You've got a 1Dxxx (whatever model). I'm assuming you've handled the 20D quite a lot before arranging to buy one. The D200 is more like a 1Dxxx than like a 20D in feel, to me. (The Nikon and Canon user interfaces are widely said to be philosophically enough different that you tend to like one or the other; I do okay with the Nikon, and haven't used a Canon steadily enough to reach an opinion about like or dislike; so far it's just "different".) I love the D200, and I think it's a spectacularly good price point in today's market. But I think you need a very strong reason to want to deal with using both Nikon and Canon bodies. I think you should sell off the spare lenses, rather than buying a body to fit them, unless you have such a strong reason. (It seems clear to me that you've chosen Canon as your primary system, and the only issue on the table is whether you should keep a secondary Nikon collection going or not.) Try writing down what the lenses are, and why they're better than Canon lenses you have or at least could get. Maybe it'd become clear what the strong reason is to keep the Nikon going, or maybe it'd become clear that you don't really need to? -- David Dyer-Bennet, <mailto:dd-b@xxxxxxxx>, <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/> RKBA: <http://www.dd-b.net/carry/> Pics: <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/> Dragaera/Steven Brust: <http://dragaera.info/>
