D200 opinions & suggested lens [Archive] - Digital Camera Resource Page Forums

George Riehm

05-25-2006, 07:09 AM

hello & thanks in advance to all.

i'm a complete novice but i'm determined. i'm reading & soaking all the knowledge i can.

"i think" i want to purchase the nikon d200. i'll be using it for weddings & maybe portraits, etc. pros & cons are appreciated.

also, pls suggest lenses....

It depends on how much money you want to spend. But you would be better off asking on the Nikon dSLR board. Our two resident WP's shoot Canon, but their advice transcends camera type. They can generally be found on the Canon dSLR board.

photozone.de has done an extensive amount of lens testing and is a good reference for comparing relative merits. They use a Canon XT for most 3rd party (Sigma, Tamron, Tokina) lens tests, and again this makes little difference in the results but, ignor the comments about focus issues as they generally don't apply to Nikon.

http://www.photozone.de/8Reviews/index.html

I shoot a D70 and have considered the D200, but can't seem to part with $1700 yet. It's a great camera and you should get many years of enjoyment from it. As a professional WP you need to consider a second body, so you might want to cut your teeth on a D70s, buy a few good lenses and then move up to the D200 using the D70s as your backup/second shooter.

Just my opinion. YMMV. Have fun with that D200.;)

cwphoto

05-25-2006, 08:00 AM

Seems awfully expensive to me and doesn't offer more than a D70 or EOS350D. Great lens advice here.

http://www.dcresource.com/forums/showthread.php?t=8089

If you can afford it it's the best thing in Nikon land this side of the D2X - and offers a crapload over the D70...:rolleyes:

coldrain

05-25-2006, 08:30 AM

If you can afford it it's the best thing in Nikon land this side of the D2X - and offers a crapload over the D70...:rolleyes:
You of course could always save a bit more and get a Canon EOS 5D ;).

George Riehm

05-25-2006, 09:59 AM

You of course could always save a bit more and get a Canon EOS 5D ;).

A bit more would be great, but I'm thinking that $1400 more, is more, than a bit more, and could buy a mighty nice lens (or lenses). I think that darkshadow is looking for a starting point, and the D200 would do that very nicely.

coldrain

05-25-2006, 12:00 PM

A bit more would be great, but I'm thinking that $1400 more, is more, than a bit more, and could buy a mighty nice lens (or lenses). I think that darkshadow is looking for a starting point, and the D200 would do that very nicely.
I guess you have not checked prices lately... And a starting point for what?
A D200 is hardly a starting point... since there is no upgrade path visible.
I would think a wedding and portrait photographer would appreciate the added dymanic range and lack of noise. And to give up the added tele range a 1.5x crop gives is not exactly a big thing, when you do weddings and portrait work.

http://www.potatobear.com/ND200/D200F.htm

http://www.digitalcamerainfo.com/content/Nikon-D200-vs-Canon-EOS-5D-Head-to-Head-Review-/Performance--Image-Quality.htm

George Riehm

05-25-2006, 12:41 PM

If you can afford it it's the best thing in Nikon land this side of the D2X - and offers a crapload over the D70...:rolleyes:

I think that darkshadow was actually looking for lens advice. Sorry to sidetrack the discussion toward camera possibilities. My thinking was to start with the D70s to get familiar with professional grade controls, and ergonomics, while also developing a RAW workflow, then move on the the D200, and use the D70s as a second camera and backup. If money is not an issue then the D200 would be the way to go and maybe using a D70s as the backup.

I think that you would agree that a backup camera is common practice when shooting weddings for a living. It's a big responsibility and almost unique in it's once-in-a-lifetime, emotional, and ultimate family event, qualities. If my camera fails, and I miss a cactus in bloom it's no big deal, as it will happen again next year. If you miss the bouquet being thrown or the kiss at the alter...:eek: :o

My take is that for $684 the D70 is full-featured insurance, and even a great value full featured entry level camera. Again as a JPEG shooter, it's just ok. As a NEF/RAW shooter, it's a whole different animal.

erichlund

05-25-2006, 08:21 PM

hello & thanks in advance to all.

i'm a complete novice but i'm determined. i'm reading & soaking all the knowledge i can.

"i think" i want to purchase the nikon d200. i'll be using it for weddings & maybe portraits, etc. pros & cons are appreciated.

also, pls suggest lenses....
When you say novice, are you a novice photographer, or a novice at digital photography.

If the latter, and you are familiar with Nikon cameras, the D200 will feel great in your hands. I love mine and would not go back to the D70. I especially would not give up the much better viewfinder on the D200. I also appreciate the access to camera controls and the much larger buttons and controls.

If you go to dpreview.com, you will find on the Nikon boards, many wedding and portrait photographers who can show you samples of their work. I believe you will find the D200 fully capable of producing excellent images.

If you are a total novice, even to photographry, I hate to recommend a high priced camera before you can really be sure if this is for you. In that case, George's recommendation of the D70s is a good one.

George Riehm

05-26-2006, 07:47 AM

I guess you have not checked prices lately... And a starting point for what?
A D200 is hardly a starting point... since there is no upgrade path visible.
I would think a wedding and portrait photographer would appreciate the added dymanic range and lack of noise. And to give up the added tele range a 1.5x crop gives is not exactly a big thing, when you do weddings and portrait work.

http://www.potatobear.com/ND200/D200F.htm

http://www.digitalcamerainfo.com/content/Nikon-D200-vs-Canon-EOS-5D-Head-to-Head-Review-/Performance--Image-Quality.htm

I erased my original answer. As promised I re-read this after a couple of brewskies, and just decided that this message warranted a different answer.

Sometimes I wonder if you can comprehend the effects of your advice. This guy, by his own admission, is a "complete novice" and you are recommending a $2600 (after $300 rebate!) full frame dSLR, which will require first class lenses to get the same results as an APS-C dSLR with mid-range lenses, when even the $1700 D200 is probably overkill.

My suggestion was to walk before running. Simple as that. Nikon offers a full featured entry level dSLR in the D70s, and the D200 as the next step. By the time darkshadow gets proficient there will be something even better, and he may just decide that it's a nice hobby, and that's it. The D70s will serve him well in either case.

coldrain

05-26-2006, 08:23 AM

I merely wonderd why a beginner would select a not exactly cheap D200 for exactly what he said, portrait and wedding work. My musings were about that IF you want to pay a lot, obviously for better IQ (why else), then keep on saving a bit more because the difference between a 5D and a D200 are quite big in certain areas, especially where portrait work is concerned.

Do I think it is smart for any novice without any knowledge to think "D200"? no. And same goes for "5D".

noyjimi

05-26-2006, 09:13 AM

darkshadow,

Do you have any existing Canon or Nikon lenses? If so, consider how much it would cost if you were to "switch brands."

Also, I shoot with a 20D but I've borrowed a friend's D200 on a few occasions. The ergonomics are different - and between the D70 and D200, it's also different. If you have a chance to try them out (or rent them) before deciding to spend a chunk of money, that would give you a pretty good idea of how each works. Compared to the 20D, the AF speed (maybe just in my head and/or lens difference) and larger LCD (30D has larger LCD now) of the D200 stood out every time I borrowed it. If you need a feature-for-feature comparison, there are plenty of online resources like www.dpreview.com.

For weddings, especially under subdued lighting with no flash and/or tripods, I'd prefer lenses that are fast - at least f/2.8 fast. Due to the crop factor of the 20D/30D/D70/D200, I'd prefer lenses that cover the 18mm to 85mm range for most of the work.

For portraits, get a good prime (fixed focal length) lens for maximum quality. Something between 50mm and 85mm on the same bodies is what I'd prefer.

What is your budget? How much gear do you want to get now with your budget? Do you need memory cards, flash, tripod, bag, photo software, etc.?

I'd say that the D200/5D commands a premium right now whereas the D70/30D has come down quite a bit in price. So if you don't think the D200/5D's features will be immediately advantageous to you, then the value is more apparent in the "lower end" bodies. While the pace of the megapix war has slowed down somewhat, it is still true that bodies come and go but good lenses are forever.

-noyjimi

George Riehm

05-26-2006, 12:29 PM

As for the D200 being cast in the premium price catagory (prices from Norman Camera):

30D - $1399
D200 - $1699

Difference - $300.

'Nuff said.

I'm starting to see where darkshadow is comming from, and maybe the D200 is the better choice after all... if you can find one (body only).

Uh-oh... I'm starting to feel that pull again. Doh! seems it's only available with the 18-70 ($1995). Anybody want an 18-70 DX for $250?:D

P.S. Never mind. It seems that Ritz on-line has them with free shipping and, of course, no sales tax.

noyjimi

05-26-2006, 05:56 PM

I misspoke and was thinking of the 20D (it occupies my head most of the time, hehe). For the same resolution ($/megapix), the 20D is a better bargain than the 30D.

But, clearly, "premium" is relative. Just like $300 relative to $1399 is a 21% "premium." Is that confusing enough? :D And just to put some perspective on this, I've had a few experiences in purchasing a car for myself or for a family member, and remember a few times holding out to get the price $300 lower...out of a $15k (or more) purchase. That is 2% of the price compared to 21%. Again, it's all relative but I digress... :D

The D200 is a great camera - I don't own it but I've used my friend's copy along with his 18-200 VR2 (is there still a shortage on this, George?), 50 prime, and 70-200 VR. He also has a Sigma UWA but I haven't had a chance to borrow that.

As for the D200 being cast in the premium price catagory (prices from Norman Camera):

30D - $1399
D200 - $1699

Difference - $300.

Esoterra

05-28-2006, 01:57 PM

coldrain

05-28-2006, 04:22 PM

Some people are just plain weird. How is pointing out that a 5D does things better in areas related to "brand bash", this says much more about you being protective of the camera make you have chosen than anything else. Get real.

aparmley

05-28-2006, 10:11 PM

If you can afford it it's the best thing in Nikon land this side of the D2X - and offers a crapload over the D70...:rolleyes:

I agree with that statement 100% - the D200 would be one killer camera to have. . . ;) "Submit order" - "Forget'bout it."

I think Coldrains comments were right on the money too - I don't think he did any brand bashing - he just trumped the D200 with the far superior 5D in the fields relating to what the OP expressed is interest. Thats how I see it.

ReF

05-29-2006, 01:45 AM

Things dont change!

- posts a thread asking for advice
- some good advice is given
- brand-bash!

You can count on THAT!!!!!

Darkshadow- Eric and George have offered very good advice in the past to many people looking for answers! Things haven't changed.

Thanks for keepin it real!

even though others mentioned good things about the nikon cams, only the nikon owners were praised here (by a nikon owner no less) - seems like a post more influenced by brand loyalty than anything else

BTW i also agree about the d200 - good stuff

George Riehm

05-29-2006, 08:10 AM

coldrain

05-29-2006, 09:34 AM

We all express brand loyalty in one form or another. Part of the problem is that when someone asks a question about lenses for a particular camera , the answers sometimes involve a recommendation having nothing to do with the request, and we end up in the same discussion. I did that by bringing up the D70s as a starter vs the D200, and from there it was more or less hijacked.

It would be nice if, in the future we try to answer questions based on experience rather than based on bias or hearsay. Actually the only people really qualified to answer darkshadows questions are owners of the D200 and the reviews up on photozone.de.

So I appologize for sidetracking this thread, and will try not to do this in the future. Hopefully others will follow suit. Sorry we didn't help much on this one darkshadow. Maybe next time.
It was not about "what lenses are best for a D200". He asked opinions about a D200. And thinking only D200 can have opinions about a D200 is quite aridiculous notion. And opinions are always related to something else. So, I expressed my opinion about the D200 in relation to the EOS 5D, with two sources where I for part base that opinion on.
You can not get it more clear and unbiased like that. Links that give you information where you can actually base your OWN opinion on. The most biased opinion will come from a D200 owner, especially a D200 owner who chose the D200 just because it is a nikon.

George Riehm

05-29-2006, 06:49 PM

It was not about "what lenses are best for a D200". He asked opinions about a D200. And thinking only D200 can have opinions about a D200 is quite aridiculous notion. And opinions are always related to something else. So, I expressed my opinion about the D200 in relation to the EOS 5D, with two sources where I for part base that opinion on.
You can not get it more clear and unbiased like that. Links that give you information where you can actually base your OWN opinion on. The most biased opinion will come from a D200 owner, especially a D200 owner who chose the D200 just because it is a nikon.

But... You (nor I) have no real life experience with either camera. And that is my point. If a 5D owner piped in then there is some credibility. Your only real expertise is with the XT. My only real expertise is with the D70. How about getting the opinions of actual users? They may be biased, but at least they own the cameras.

The fact that darkshadow asked opinions about the D200 should have been a clue for you and I to bow out. And I will do that in the future. I'm hoping that you will follow suit.

Come to think of it... Are there any 5D owners on the DCRP? If not then I guess you are, after all, as close to an expert spokesman as we get.

coldrain

05-29-2006, 07:40 PM

But... You (nor I) have no real life experience with either camera. And that is my point. If a 5D owner piped in then there is some credibility. Your only real expertise is with the XT. My only real expertise is with the D70. How about getting the opinions of actual users? They may be biased, but at least they own the cameras.

The fact that darkshadow asked opinions about the D200 should have been a clue for you and I to bow out. And I will do that in the future. I'm hoping that you will follow suit.

Come to think of it... Are there any 5D owners on the DCRP? If not then I guess you are, after all, as close to an expert spokesman as we get.
That is what tests are about. So YOU can have an idea about a camera (or car) with having to own it. What a concept, huh?
And hey, lets do comparative tests... lets test a D200 against a 5D... and lest see who does best IQ wise. Quite important are of course skin gradients and tones... for the OP's intended use.

So... I supply links to comparative tests. Not links to happy 5D owner stories that celebrate ts dynamic range and performance.

Of did you rather have I do NOT base my opinion on findings by others, and my own eyes? If you want to feel impressed by what a D200 produces, be my guest.

And one other thing, do yourself a favor and actually READ and/or look at the links I gave you. And look at the photo samples Jeff Keller made on the same day of the same subjects with comparable lenses with both the D200 and the 5D. Especially the chain photos are a big tell tale on what a big difference there is between these two sensors.
(If you still need to see that, after you read/looked at the links I gave in my earlier post... but maybe you do not want to see the difference, because one of the cameras has the name Nikon on it.)

This is the original post:
D200 opinions & suggested lens
hello & thanks in advance to all.

i'm a complete novice but i'm determined. i'm reading & soaking all the knowledge i can.

"i think" i want to purchase the nikon d200. i'll be using it for weddings & maybe portraits, etc. pros & cons are appreciated.

also, pls suggest lenses....

Red is my emphasys. As you can see, he wants opinions on the D200. I gave my opinion (nice but expensive, if you want IQ spend a little more for a 5D).

And the very last bit is that he would like lens suggestions... so it is NOT about "give me a lens suggestion". It is: what do you think of the D200.
No where it says, only Nikon fanbase need apply. So, my opinion is valid, and obviously a lot less biased than some others I could name. Bias does not come from linking to 2 comparative tests. And it also does not come from studying what a D200 does with skin tone gradients and shadows (again, please go ahead and look at the comparative samples with the D200, 20D and 5D).

George Riehm

05-30-2006, 07:16 AM

That is what tests are about. So YOU can have an idea about a camera (or car) with having to own it. What a concept, huh?
And hey, lets do comparative tests... lets test a D200 against a 5D... and lest see who does best IQ wise. Quite important are of course skin gradients and tones... for the OP's intended use.

So... I supply links to comparative tests. Not links to happy 5D owner stories that celebrate ts dynamic range and performance.

Of did you rather have I do NOT base my opinion on findings by others, and my own eyes? If you want to feel impressed by what a D200 produces, be my guest.

And one other thing, do yourself a favor and actually READ and/or look at the links I gave you. And look at the photo samples Jeff Keller made on the same day of the same subjects with comparable lenses with both the D200 and the 5D. Especially the chain photos are a big tell tale on what a big difference there is between these two sensors.
(If you still need to see that, after you read/looked at the links I gave in my earlier post... but maybe you do not want to see the difference, because one of the cameras has the name Nikon on it.)

This is the original post:

Red is my emphasys. As you can see, he wants opinions on the D200. I gave my opinion (nice but expensive, if you want IQ spend a little more for a 5D).

And the very last bit is that he would like lens suggestions... so it is NOT about "give me a lens suggestion". It is: what do you think of the D200.
No where it says, only Nikon fanbase need apply. So, my opinion is valid, and obviously a lot less biased than some others I could name. Bias does not come from linking to 2 comparative tests. And it also does not come from studying what a D200 does with skin tone gradients and shadows (again, please go ahead and look at the comparative samples with the D200, 20D and 5D).

Again my problem with many replys on the DCRP (including mine) is that opinion should be based on experience relative to the question. You do not own a D200 or a 5D and, to the best of my knowlege, you are not a professional portrait or wedding photographer (Nor am I). If that is not the case then my appologies.

I have no problem with members stating an opinion, just at least preface it with some sort of experience statement, like "I own an XT, but this qualifies me to expound on the relative merits of cameras I have never owned due to reading a lot of reviews".

We have real life expertise on this board, and they should be the people to reply. I would prefer that to getting into whizzing contests with members who don't agree with your point of view.

I'm betting that darkshadow (and many others) have read all the professional reviews and are now looking for hands on, advice from experienced owners of certain cameras, and lenses, but what they get is an opinion based on those same reviews.

coldrain

05-30-2006, 07:38 AM

You are being silly, for real.

I gave links, and you never ever seem to be interested in the links since you never ever comment on them. You do not comment on the obvious problems you can see the D200 has, which in my opinion do not make it the ideal portrait and wedding camera. You are just being a Nikonian here, simple as that.

But the links show VERY relevant info about how a D200 performs. The only reason you made this thread in what it is is because the camera involved is a Nikon.

And no, we have NO portrait or wedding photographer here that has a D200. And if we did, the only way that person could give unbiased info is if he/she knew about comparisons between the Nikon D200 and for instance the Canon EOS 30D/5D or Fuji S3 Pro.

So again, the points you raise are weird, and can not be explained differently than that you do not want anyone to buy a different brand than the brand you have lost your heart to, Nikon.
I on the other hand have adviced people Nikon DSLRs, Canons, Olympus, Pentax, Fuji, Sony cameras.... yet time and time again you accuse me of 1. being biased (I have a Canon, shame on me), and 2. "I have no personal experience in 'X' so I have no right to reply".

It really is wrong to think you can only have a valid opinion or knowledge when you actually own a certain product.
Anyway, this all means you should go use an EOS 5D, since that is the only way for you to know what kind of camera it is and how much better it preforms in areas that do matter :p

coldrain

05-30-2006, 07:52 AM

Just for your benefit, George, 2 samples made by Jeff Keller, of the same subject,, on the same day, with the same kind of lens.

The D200 with the Nikon 50mm f1.8 (has good reputation on Nikon),
the EOS 5D with Canon 50mm f1.4 (has good reputation on Canon).
Both as ISO 100 rating.

Careful, these are full size pictures.

Canon EOS 5D:
http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/canon/eos_5d-review/IMG_0208.JPG

Nikon D200:
http://www.dcresource.com/reviews/nikon/d200-review/DSC_0175.JPG

You really do not have to touch each camera to get an idea of how they perform.

George Riehm

05-30-2006, 07:56 PM

I'm thinking that final statement says it all.

coldrain

05-31-2006, 02:18 AM

I'm thinking that final statement says it all.
Ypur being silly and funny. Now... did you ever look at and read the comparitive tests and look at Jeff Keller's photos?

And if you did, how come you do not get an impression on the difference between the 2?

Or... did you... and you did not like seeing what you saw, and that is why you keep on about "only those who own a D200 can have an opinion"? I know it is not nice (maybe even impossible) for you to see that a camera does better than a Nikon (happend when the 20D performed better than the D70 too).

George Riehm

05-31-2006, 07:19 AM

I suggest you take a reading comprehension course, and then go back and read my post.

What I said was, that you are not qualified to give an "expert" opinion yet you continue to pontificate ad nausium.

I didn't say that the 5D wasn't a better camera, just that it was $900 more than the D200. Other than the XT's ergonomics I don't think I have ever said that the 20D or 30D (or any of the pro dSLR's) were not great cameras.

I like Nikon cameras. Sorry you have a problem with that. Get over it, and get some experience with other cameras and equipment, rather than repeating reviews as expert testimony.

SketchySmurf

05-31-2006, 04:44 PM

Esoterra

05-31-2006, 06:12 PM

Before I chime in, I have a disclaimer: I'm a D200 owner.

Now about those comparison pictures: you would be hard pressed to find the difference. I would say the 5D is very slightly contrastier, but its only obvious at 100% or higher crop. And even that, God knows what settings were dialed in to both cameras at the time.

The D200 is a great camera. The 5D is a great camera. In terms of image quality, neither is better than the other.

Thanks for the input Ssmurf. I'm sure that people will appreciate hearing from an Actual D200 owner with experience. Are there any 5D owners w/experience that want to give us some input? Coldrain I do see a slight difference in the 5D and D200 pictures that you linked but I dont think they warrant as much emphasis that you seem to put on it! I'm sure you will agree that glass is more important than the camera body and that being the case, if darkshadow has the budget, getting the D200 and using the difference on a great lens makes much more sense to me! The slight advantage in dynamic range and color is not worth the difference in price between the D200 and 5D in my opinion! However, the full frame sensor is worth the price difference to others, but If you will notice...the title of this thread is "D200 opinions & suggested lens " and says nothing about the 5D, so I dont know why you are arguing over a point that doesnt even help darkshadow in the first place. Seems to me that you are more concerned about being right than answering Darkshadows original question!

George Riehm

05-31-2006, 09:14 PM

Before I chime in, I have a disclaimer: I'm a D200 owner.

Now about those comparison pictures: you would be hard pressed to find the difference. I would say the 5D is very slightly contrastier, but its only obvious at 100% or higher crop. And even that, God knows what settings were dialed in to both cameras at the time.

The D200 is a great camera. The 5D is a great camera. In terms of image quality, neither is better than the other.

I know that we were amusing, but where were you 5 days ago?

Thanks for the expert input, as brief as it was. I may not be God, but I can read EXIF data and...

... In the spirit of fair play, and attention to detail:

I'm thinking that maybe a $300 f/1.4 lens may have slightly better contrast and color than a $100 f/1.8.

And... I'm wondering why the D200 settings were f/5 @ 1/100sec, and the 5D settings were f/3.5 @ 1/350sec. Handheld or tripod on a windy day by the bay... this might make a difference.

I'm sure it was just an honest oversight. But it would be interesting to see the results using the ($80) Canon 50mm f/1.8.@ f/3.5 with the D200 and Nikkor f/1.8 set accordingly.

erichlund

05-31-2006, 11:33 PM

coldrain

06-01-2006, 02:57 AM

I know that we were amusing, but where were you 5 days ago?

Thanks for the expert input, as brief as it was. I may not be God, but I can read EXIF data and...

... In the spirit of fair play, and attention to detail:

I'm thinking that maybe a $300 f/1.4 lens may have slightly better contrast and color than a $100 f/1.8.

And... I'm wondering why the D200 settings were f/5 @ 1/100sec, and the 5D settings were f/3.5 @ 1/350sec. Handheld or tripod on a windy day by the bay... this might make a difference.

I'm sure it was just an honest oversight. But it would be interesting to see the results using the ($80) Canon 50mm f/1.8.@ f/3.5 with the D200 and Nikkor f/1.8 set accordingly.

1. As you well know, the 1.8 nikkor has a better reputation that the 1.4, and with Canon it is the other way around. Since the lenses were NOT used at f1.4 and 1.8 respectivily, why do you place importance on that one has a larger max. aperture? And stopping down to f5 on the Nikkor will be hardly detrimental to the result, which you should know.

2. Those were just two comparable photos in addition to the 2 comparissons of the other urls, George. And there you get to see the real difference. Difference in how skin gradations are natural on the 5D, and strangely harsh with "errors" on the D200. It in ways messes up going to shady areas, especially noticable on portraits.

3. And then the contrast and colour difference are a constant through all comparissons.

4. Nice to see that having a D200 constitutes "expert input" but that comparisons by experts have no value.

And 5., to Eric, the OP asked for opinions on the D20, in respect to wedding and portrait photography. My opinion is, that if someone is starting from scratch (as we can assume the OP is/was), that a 5D or even 30D are a better idea since they seem to perform better where it matters, and I provided some links as to explain why I have that opinion. That really does constitute an opinion about the D200.

SketchySmurf

06-01-2006, 09:51 AM

1. As you well know, the 1.8 nikkor has a better reputation that the 1.4, and with Canon it is the other way around. Since the lenses were NOT used at f1.4 and 1.8 respectivily, why do you place importance on that one has a larger max. aperture? And stopping down to f5 on the Nikkor will be hardly detrimental to the result, which you should know.

2. Those were just two comparable photos in addition to the 2 comparissons of the other urls, George. And there you get to see the real difference. Difference in how skin gradations are natural on the 5D, and strangely harsh with "errors" on the D200. It in ways messes up going to shady areas, especially noticable on portraits.

3. And then the contrast and colour difference are a constant through all comparissons.

4. Nice to see that having a D200 constitutes "expert input" but that comparisons by experts have no value.

And 5., to Eric, the OP asked for opinions on the D20, in respect to wedding and portrait photography. My opinion is, that if someone is starting from scratch (as we can assume the OP is/was), that a 5D or even 30D are a better idea since they seem to perform better where it matters, and I provided some links as to explain why I have that opinion. That really does constitute an opinion about the D200.

1. Agree with your statement here, but you're BOTH right. The different f-stops are to normalize DOF captured between the two sensors. But they are not EXACT matches. It probably would have been smarter to stop down all the way to f8.

2. Every time someone brings a claim like this up, its always a subjective difference. But I'll reserve judgment until I actually see the pics.

3. "All comparisons" by the same tester is not representative of truly "ALL comparisons"

4. You're right. I'm far from an expert. But I think the OP would rather hear about someone who had half the story as opposed to others with 2nd hand info. I based my decision on several factors and included input from the "experts" and decided the Nikon system and the D200 was the best suited for my needs. The one thing I was sure of was the 5D was not worth the $900+ premium if we're dealing in terms of image quality.

5. Joe Buissink is a wedding photog. Nikon guy. Used D70s prior to D2Xs and presumably D200s (or at least his associates/backups do). Check out his website. Great portraits by any measure.

If the OP has any other questions, I'll be scanning this thread although I rarely check this board lately.

George Riehm

06-01-2006, 12:47 PM

1. Agree with your statement here, but you're BOTH right. The different f-stops are to normalize DOF captured between the two sensors. But they are not EXACT matches. It probably would have been smarter to stop down all the way to f8.

Note: In this case at f/8 the shutter speed would have been at ~1/50sec. Hence the relavance of having one camera shooting at 1/320sec. and another at 1/100sec. Shoot them equally or don't call it a side-by-side comparison. This still applies to the lenses as well shoot an f/1.8 against an f/1.8.

2. Every time someone brings a claim like this up, its always a subjective difference. But I'll reserve judgment until I actually see the pics.

3. "All comparisons" by the same tester is not representative of truly "ALL comparisons"

4. You're right. I'm far from an expert. But I think the OP would rather hear about someone who had half the story as opposed to others with 2nd hand info. I based my decision on several factors and included input from the "experts" and decided the Nikon system and the D200 was the best suited for my needs. The one thing I was sure of was the 5D was not worth the $900+ premium if we're dealing in terms of image quality.

5. Joe Buissink is a wedding photog. Nikon guy. Used D70s prior to D2Xs and presumably D200s (or at least his associates/backups do). Check out his website. Great portraits by any measure.

If the OP has any other questions, I'll be scanning this thread although I rarely check this board lately.

That was a much more thorough answer. Thanks. Your scanning is appreciated...

... although I think that the OP is long gone.

George Riehm

06-01-2006, 03:51 PM

1. As you well know, the 1.8 nikkor has a better reputation that the 1.4, and with Canon it is the other way around. Since the lenses were NOT used at f1.4 and 1.8 respectivily, why do you place importance on that one has a larger max. aperture? And stopping down to f5 on the Nikkor will be hardly detrimental to the result, which you should know.

2. Those were just two comparable photos in addition to the 2 comparissons of the other urls, George. And there you get to see the real difference. Difference in how skin gradations are natural on the 5D, and strangely harsh with "errors" on the D200. It in ways messes up going to shady areas, especially noticable on portraits.

3. And then the contrast and colour difference are a constant through all comparissons.

4. Nice to see that having a D200 constitutes "expert input" but that comparisons by experts have no value.

And 5., to Eric, the OP asked for opinions on the D20, in respect to wedding and portrait photography. My opinion is, that if someone is starting from scratch (as we can assume the OP is/was), that a 5D or even 30D are a better idea since they seem to perform better where it matters, and I provided some links as to explain why I have that opinion. That really does constitute an opinion about the D200.

Well... I see by that big counter in the sky that we're up to 4 pages, and starting to repeat issues, as often happens when dialog continues to repeat and wander off-topic.

I've made my points concerning expertise by proxy, believing everything you read, and then repeating it as fact. Apparently with little impact.

And how pathetic am I to be dragged into yet another asinine Nikon vs. Canon fiasco (rhetorical), although that was not my intent in the beginning. I won't bother with a patronizing quote, as that has become your recent modus operandi when it suits your needs.

You can continue to argue with yourself, or go hunting for yet another 3 page "dialog", where you can pontificate, intimidate, and agitate. At least you are no longer calling me weird and silly, so for now, I'll accept that as progress.;)

aparmley

06-01-2006, 05:57 PM

I have new socks on today, :D .

Oh and George - I just assumed your silliness was a given. . . ;) But, apparently will have to continue reminding you! LOL j/K ;)

SketchySmurf

06-01-2006, 06:33 PM

Note: In this case at f/8 the shutter speed would have been at ~1/50sec. Hence the relavance of having one camera shooting at 1/320sec. and another at 1/100sec. Shoot them equally or don't call it a side-by-side comparison. This still applies to the lenses as well shoot an f/1.8 against an f/1.8.

sorry, I should have clarified. Shoot a middle of the range aperture for both lenses (where D200 @ f/8 and 5D @ f7.2 [or whatever]) where DOF would be as normalized as possible. Middle of the range would leave any doubts about wide open performance off the table (after all we are comparing bodies, not glass). An f1.8 vs. f1.8 would give the 5D the greater DOF advantage. For an image like the rusted chain links, it would theoretically appear that the 5D was "sharper"

coldrain

06-02-2006, 03:55 AM

sorry, I should have clarified. Shoot a middle of the range aperture for both lenses (where D200 @ f/8 and 5D @ f7.2 [or whatever]) where DOF would be as normalized as possible. Middle of the range would leave any doubts about wide open performance off the table (after all we are comparing bodies, not glass). An f1.8 vs. f1.8 would give the 5D the greater DOF advantage. For an image like the rusted chain links, it would theoretically appear that the 5D was "sharper"
The lenses are already at sharpest around f2.8 (see tests), so worrying about that one is shot with f3.5 and one is shot at f5 is really not an issue here.
But that was not my purpose of those 2 links, which over all looks sharpest (comparing depth of field, essentially. Just look at the in focus parts, the difference between them. That is why I linked to the full size photos.

George Riehm

06-02-2006, 05:33 PM

I have new socks on today, :D .

Oh and George - I just assumed your silliness was a given. . . ;) But, apparently will have to continue reminding you! LOL j/K ;)

Thanks parm. One must always be reminded of their good points.;) and...

... congrats on the new socks! No one deserves them more.

P.S. Your old ones (after washing) make good prime lens sleves, or club covers (if you play golf). I also use them for wiping down the Mosin and SKS.:D

erichlund

06-02-2006, 11:53 PM

And 5., to Eric, the OP asked for opinions on the D20, in respect to wedding and portrait photography. My opinion is, that if someone is starting from scratch (as we can assume the OP is/was), that a 5D or even 30D are a better idea since they seem to perform better where it matters, and I provided some links as to explain why I have that opinion. That really does constitute an opinion about the D200.
Seeing as how I'm the only "Eric" I know of that responded to this thread, I presume you are speaking to me. I'm somewhat baffled as to your reason. My only contributions were a direct response to the OP concerning my knowledge of the D200 and and to congratulate SketchySmurf on his new toy. Personally, I'm not the least bit interested in your ravings and would prefer if you would leave me out of your discussions. Thank you.

coldrain

06-03-2006, 07:41 AM

Eric, I mixed up your name with Esotera, as it seems, for which I apologize. What I do not appreciate is calling my posts ravings though. I gave an opinion, got attacjed on that (which is fine), and as only one in this whole silly thread I gave reasons for my opinion, facts, real replies, and tried to keep the "discussion" as clean and as to the point as possible. George though seems to think it is ok to not keep it a clean discussion, and accuses the other (me) of a lot of things... I just say he is being silly in his replies, which he seems to interpret as me calling him silly. Oh well.

Again, sorry for apparently mixing you up with Esotera.