This is a little late as I am just now having the chance to evaluate all the information I received here. I had the opportunity to test a D200 over the weekend and see what it feels like to work with this camera. I haven't made a decision yet on whether or not to purchase it but have better hands-on experience now upon which to base my decision. I have to agree with most or all that has been said here about this camera. The D200's body is the same (although with some minor modifications) as that used for the F100. This is good news as I rate the F100 as one of the best (if not the best) camera I have ever worked with. Ergonomics can't be compared to that on both the 20D and 30D. The camera feels more "solid", being both stronger and easier to use in terms of location of all controls. It is, in short, a superb camera. This is a camera I am thinking about as a second camera to take with me to places I don't want to take my primary camera which is the EOS 1Ds MK II. This is a superb camera but sometimes it is a little heavy to carry around. The lenses I own are all "L" lenses and they are also heavy. The D200 would be a good second camera. The D200 is in many aspects a better camera than the EOS 1Ds MK II which I consider to be the "Rolls Royce" of digital SLR cameras today. Some of the buttons on the EOS 1Ds MK II are small and not always easy to activate. The ISO setting controls, for instance, require you to press to small round buttons on top of the camera and this can be difficult at times. Don't take me wrong. The EOS 1Ds produces the best results I have seen from any digital camera. This camera's performance at high ISO speeds up to 3200 is like that of no other camera. However, I must admit that the D200 is a pleasure to hold and really easy to handle. Another reason to have the D200 as a second camera is to take advantage of all the Nikkor glass I already own. I would hate to see all those good and expensive lenses collecting dust somewhere in the back of my office. The Nikon D200 would allow me to use all those good lenses. The only area I am still not convinced is that of image quality. Canon seems to have invested a great deal on the development of its chips (DIGIC 2) and the its own CMOS sensors. These efforts show in the form of outstanding image quality. From all the research I have done it seems that Nikon still haven't been able to address some problems that relate to issues such as noise at higher ISO speeds and other image quality issues. Thank you again for all your feedback and for sharing your experiences. Best regards, Joseph Chamberlain ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- On 8/2/06 3:20 PM, "Elgenper" <elgenper@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > As I wrote in another post a few days ago, I now own a Nikon D200 > after using a Canon D60 a few years ago. While I have no shooting > experience with the current Canon DSLR´s, I certainly looked over the > 20D and 5D thoroughly (and handled them in a couple of shops) before > finally settling on the D200. > > The main reasons for me to go with Nikon were the superior build and > sealing of the D200, and the layout of the different camera controls > (the D200 has a simple, well working mirror lockup; Canon has it > deeply buried in the menus. The D200 shows the ISO setting in the > viewfinder all the time; the Canons have to be "asked" what ISO is > currently set. The Canons have a focus point selector button right > under your right thumb that you forever keep pressing by mistake; no > such problems with D200). > > Also, the viewfinder image (apparent size and brightness) of the D200 > is markedly better than on the 20D (the 5D does beat the Nikon, being > full frame). > > The Nikon lens mount accepts lots of older, manual-focussing lenses, > and these can easily be focussed using the focusing screen, with the > aid of a focus indicator in the finder; also the exposure metering > works with most of them. I´ve yet to use any old Nikon lenses on > mine, but it´s nice to know that I can if I want to. > > The camera is extremely fast and responsive, fully up to film based > cameras. It doesn´t even go into a sleep mode like all other > digitals I´ve used so far. Still, I often leave it with power on in > my bag for days without having the battery go flat; I don´t know how > they do it, but it´s always and instantly ready, like my old Leicas. > And that´s just GREAT! > > Image quality is very good. Most tests indicate that it shows more > noise than the Canons at high ISO´s. That´s possibly so; all I know > is that the noise is nothing compared to the grain in 35 mm films > with similar speed, and it can be further reduced with software after > the fact. The images have none of the excessive red that often > marred my Canon D60 images. > > I always shoot raw, so I cannot comment on the jpeg quality. The > images do look a little soft without sharpening, but the detail is > there, and even a slight sharpening shows it. > > One small thing, if you do plan to use both Nikon and Canon: Both > lens mount and focus on all Nikons are "left turn", the opposite > direction from Canons (and Leicas, and most other cameras except > Pentax), and that might be a source of confusion if you will use > both. It certainly took several days of "unlearning and relearning" > for me.... > > To sum it up, I would unhesitatingly recommend the D200 to anyone > looking for a state-of-art DSLR, but not wanting to suffer the bulk > and cost of a "full pro" model. That said, I do not think owners of > either the 20D (now 30D) or the 5D are dissatisfied either.... > Still, I personally feel the D200 comes far closer to my needs and > preferences. > > Good luck! > > Per > > > > Per Öfverbeck > http://ofverbeck.se > > "In a world without walls or fences, who needs Windows or Gates?"
