stay with D200 or get new D7100?? need advice

jtopping

perfect thanks! hopefully that wont box me in too much.
I just started a thread in lenses, asking about the differences in lenses in the 80-200 range. If i buy used, i want to make sure i know what im buying.

thanks everyone for your terrific feedback and knowledge. Great stuff!

Nick0n

I switched from the D80 which has a comparable 10MP CCD sensor to the D5100.

The improvement of image quality at high ISOs is breathtaking. I do not use noice reduction filter in NX2 anymore since I have this camera, even not at ISO 6400.

I also replaced my old AF-D 2/35 and AF-D 1.8/50 with AF-S 1.8/35 DX and AF-S 1.8/50. My old primes were soft when wide open, sharp at f/2.8 and very sharp at f/4. The new AF-S lenses are stunning right from f/1.8.

I recommend to get better lenses first and if that's not good enough to replace the body in the next step.

Regards

Martin

NSXTypeR

I switched from the D80 which has a comparable 10MP CCD sensor to the D5100.

The improvement of image quality at high ISOs is breathtaking. I do not use noice reduction filter in NX2 anymore since I have this camera, even not at ISO 6400.

I also replaced my old AF-D 2/35 and AF-D 1.8/50 with AF-S 1.8/35 DX and AF-S 1.8/50. My old primes were soft when wide open, sharp at f/2.8 and very sharp at f/4. The new AF-S lenses are stunning right from f/1.8.

I recommend to get better lenses first and if that's not good enough to replace the body in the next step.

Regards

Martin

It would be breath taking because the D5100 sensor isn't CCD, it's CMOS. The D5100 is around 2 generations ahead of the D80.

The last CCD chip used in a Nikon was the D40.

Ironheart

What Nick0n is saying is that the D200 and the D80 have the same 10 megapixel CCD sensor, which they do. He switched to the D5100 and noticed a big difference in high ISO noise handling, which would be expected when going to CMOS.

DaveyJ

I'd keep my D200 and add the D7100 and later get newer lens

Photobug

Buy the D7100 now and sell that D200 before the price drops more. If you don't need the money from selling the D200 for the D7100 then apply that to your slush fund to buy a lens in the future. If you need the money to buy the D7100 do it now. Then do as PitchBlack said, cut back on things and put that money into your slush fund and then use it to buy the lens.

I had my D200 for 15 months and when the D300 came out I jumped on it. What an improvement that was. It addressed my issues with the D200. That D7100 is so much better than the D200 you will not regret it.

heartyfisher

The D200 is still a good camera. From what you describe of what you take, you are right .. that 18-200 and D200 combination is really not the best. However, there are a few things you can do with your current gear.

The first thing I would do is go with RAW instead of Jpg. The Noise reduction algorithms nowadays are amazing. You will get at least a 1 stop improvement over the JPG output from your D200.

Once you play with the new NR software you may feel that you wont need an upgrade anymore. But if you do then A lens would be good. For your kind of shots I use an old 35-70 F2.8. You can get them used but they Flare more so than your 18-200, The old 50-150 F2.8 Sigma (Non OS) is also a good choice the flare is well controlled but a bit hard to find these days, the size is also really small for an F2.8 lens.

As many have said the D7100 is really a good choice. I have the D7000 and it is a nice improvement for lowish light shots like the ones you described.

But If you look at our thread here on High Iso performance. The Best Bang for Buck is the D600(only beaten by the D4). You can use your 18-200 on the D600 in DX mode and it will still give you more pixels than your D200. I think it would be at least a 3 stop advantage over your D200.

Good Luck with your choices. go Raw first! then see how it goes.

Re: CCD vs CMOS. CCD is actually better but its more expensive to make so all camera manufacturers switched to CMOS, nikon being one of the last to do so. I still prefer the Colours that come out of a D200 in normal light (not high ISO) Only now in the latest D4 do I see that the colours are better than the D200.

kyoshinikon

Get the D7100. It is better in every way. I have a D7000 and a D200 and there isnt a single thing the D200 does better (aside of the larger buffer) Better in low light, much more dynamic range, more robust internal features, just as durable to a regular user, Af options not on the D200 and just as accurate, etc. Aside from my D700 the D7000 is my go to camera and I hear the D7100 is a bit better. I usually suggest lens before body but in this case...

heartyfisher

So what did you decide ?

haroldp

The D200's control system is the pro version with more dedicated controls and fewer modal or menu controls and is much faster to adjust in the field than the prosumer D7000, D7100 controls. That is why my DX camera is still a D300 even though the newer ones are electrically superior.

.... H

phxflyer

I'm in the exact same situation, I have a D200 which I really like, but the low light/noise issue is a limiting factor for me, at this point 50% of what I shoot is indoors, concerts, lower light, no flash.

I've been waiting for the D400, which will more than likely fill my needs, but... well.. It doesn't really exist.

So, I've started to re-evaluate what is available in my price range (the D7100 and the D600) I've played around with each of them and to be honest, I'm just not feeling it, the controls, the body, are not exactly what I'm looking for which is an updated D200 (I've considered the D300 and the D300s and they are not enough of an improvement)

So today, I had a bit of an epiphany, why not a refurbished D800? they are available from in the $2300-$2400 range, and it should do everything I need it to do and then some.

My concern are my lenses... from what I have read, I should be able to use the DX lenses in the crop mode as an interim solution, the FX lenses will obviously work, but I will lose some of the range that I value in the 80-200 2.8 (I'm guessing I could crop those images to get the extra range, is that a reasonable?)

I have the following lenses

DX Tamron 18-200 (cheapy)
DX Nikon 35mm 1.8

FX Nikon 80-200mm 2.8
FX Nikon 50mm 1.8

Any ideas? opinions?

JJ_SO

The D200's control system is the pro version with more dedicated controls and fewer modal or menu controls and is much faster to adjust in the field than the prosumer D7000, D7100 controls. That is why my DX camera is still a D300 even though the newer ones are electrically superior.

.... H

Interesting to me. I started with D7000 and the first thing I desparately tried to figure out were the U1 and U2 settings. It took me a while and some mails with Nikon support to realize that's one of the main difference between consumer and pro-bodies.

What can I say? I use them all the time I'm with the D7000, but I'll never adapt to the 4 banks of camera and individual-settings because it takes too long to find out how I left them. They are useless to me. Even more because they are no safe starting point (and not meant to be one) and not saving some settings the User settings include. If set up properly, there's no faster way to change from an individual landscape-mode into sports or dance at lowlight by just a simple turn of a knob, including ISO and AF settings.

But so far, I didn't set up the D7100 the same way: For landscape I use the D800 and for low-light too. I bought the D7100 as a "next-generation" travel cam, but with it's energy hunger... well, I don't manage so far to grow to it.

KnockKnock

@phxflyer If you can swing it, that refurb D800 sounds like a great option. Consider selling your DX lenses and replace with the Nikon 28mm f/1.8. Only thing you'll miss out on is FPS.

Ironheart

Let's not forget the D800 makes a fine 16MP DX camera with 6fps. Or you can shoot in FX and choose which 16MP you want :-)

kyoshinikon

I actually Disagree about the controls... While they are better positioned on the D200 The D7000 has all of the same controls on it minus a dedicated AF-on button and PC sync port. I don't use the menus for anything except to set my self timer settings (which are amazing on the D7000). I can set how many shots it will take, when it will take them, and how far apart from each other it will take them.

sevencrossing

...... why not a refurbished D800? they are available from in the $2300-$2400 range, and it should do everything I need it to do and then some.

My concern are my lenses...?

The big down side of Fx is cost
not only the body but the lenses to go with it
Yes, you can use dx lenses with the D800 as temporary measure
If you want "range" then the new 80 -400 is the answer but I am afraid it is very expensive
As you will be able to crank up the ISO a lot more, you might look at the 70 -300
The new Nikon 24-85mm f/2.8-4D is Nikon's budget mid range FX zoom
You will find some of the older primes ( all FX) at bargain prices on e bay

MrD200

As the owner of a D200 and a D7000, there are definitely things I like better about the D200 such as the autofocus being faster and more accurate, and like someone said above, the photos can be breathtaking in a way I don't find with the D7000.
One trick I learned, when shooting my D200 at ISO1600 is to add in .7 of positive exposure compensation. it really helps get rid of the noise. And like others have said, switch to shooting in RAW and use the newest software you can afford, I reckon i have gained two extra full stops of usable ISO between the release of Photoshop CS1 and CS6, same for Lightroom going from LR1 to LR4. The other thing you can do is step up just one model and buy a D300 or 300s. They're cheap now and very amazing. You might be able to afford one of those plus a 17-50 Nikkor or the midranger that Thom Hogan likes, the Sigma 17-50mm f/2.8 EX HSM.

mtsmphoto

hi, if shooting in low light is really matter to you ... I think u need a FX dslr and a prime likee 85mm ...

safyre

Jeff,

Didn't have time to look through all the replies, but as someone who has been in your similar situation with a limited budget, here's my recommendations.

Swap out the D200 for a D90; I believe these two are pretty much similar in price in the used market.
The sensor improvement from D200 to D90 is much greater than the D90 to D7100, hence more bang for your buck.

Unless you absolutely need the range, I'd rather opt for primes than the 80-200mm 2.8. The 80-200mm is still around $800 used and if you're shooting lowlight situations like concerts, the 2.8 still doesn't let in enough light in some cases. I'd get a 50mm prime, and an 85mm f/1.8 af-d (which is around $300 used). If you really need more reach, look at getting a teleconverter or a third party telephoto zooms if you want a more affordable alternative.

Shoot in raw. Raw stores so much more data so when it comes to post processing, you will have much more flexibility. Also use noise reduction. If you're in a more static environment, use a tripod to keep your ISO lower.

phxflyer

Well, Finally pulled the trigger!!

Initially I resisted the D600, but after a weekend of research I decided the D600 with the 24-85mm VR kit lens was the best starting point for me. Adorama has a refurb deal for $1749 on ebay that was impossible to pass up.

Ultimately, I may not be happy with the kit lens, but at a net cost of $150 over the price of the refurb body alone it was a no brainer. (I could easily sell the lens for $350)

I sold off my 35mm DX 1.8 this weekend

That leaves me with the

24-85mm f/3.5-4.5G ED AF-S VR (kit lens)

80-200mm f/2.8 D ED AF

and the 50mm f/1.8G AF-S

and oh yeah, I cheapy Tamron 18-200 DX lens

Not too terrible a place to start in FX?

sevencrossing

Well, Finally pulled the trigger!!....

Not too terrible a place to start in FX?

No at all

IMHO The D600 plus the 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5G ED AF-S VR was released make the jump from DX to FX affordable
Let us know how you get on

sevencrossing

Well, Finally pulled the trigger!!....
.......Not too terrible a place to start in FX?

No at all

IMHO The D600 plus the 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5G was released make the jump from to DX to FX more affordable
Please let us know how you get on

SNRatio

I think it was a good decision - and for the DX crop on the D600 you have about the same number of megapixels as in the D200. The 85/1.8G is a lens you may want to check out for low-light work. Very, very nice. The only thing I wouldn't have done, is selling off the 35/1.8 - in a pinch, it can be used on FX too.