D300...maybe I can afford a D200 now

Discussion in 'Digital SLR' started by rcyoung, Aug 24, 2007.

  1. rcyoung

    rcyoung Guest

    Now that the D300 has been announced, maybe the D200 will drop in
    price to where I can affford it. I still like my 1/500 sync on the D70
    however.
     
    rcyoung, Aug 24, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. rcyoung

    Don Wiss Guest

    I don't know about new ones. They may discontinue them after the D300 is
    actually shipping. But at that time used D200s should become plentiful.
    There will be no shortage of D200 owners upgrading.

    Don <www.donwiss.com/pictures/> (e-mail link at page bottoms).
     
    Don Wiss, Aug 24, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Hope that works out for you! Unfortunately I will not be contributing
    to the used D200 price crash (by putting mine on the market).

    (Well, may not be *that* unfortunate; early days yet understanding the
    D300 and D3, and the D3 is quite solidly out of my reach
    unfortunately.)
     
    David Dyer-Bennet, Aug 25, 2007
    #3
  4. rcyoung

    Paul Furman Guest

    If I upgrade, it will be the D3 and I'll probably want to keep my D200
    for a more compact body for street shooting and telephoto range for
    nature shooting when the light is good. I never would have thought about
    spending that much on a camera but the fact is I paid $10,000 for my car
    almost 20 years ago and it's still got another 10 years on it :) and
    photography is pretty important to me these days. I've been collecting
    old glass (and new) and it would be damn amazing to put those old f/2,
    f/1.2 lenses on a full sensor with metering & spectacular high-ISO
    performance. Wow, that's tempting. My only DX lens is the 10.5 fisheye
    which actually is supposed to make a neat almost-circular fisheye on
    full frame. I've got the Sigma 12-24 full frame, which is actually sort
    of compact compared to the new 14-24 zoom.
     
    Paul Furman, Aug 25, 2007
    #4
  5. If you can afford it, go for it.

    12MP in FF is really sweet.

    David J. Littleboy
    Tokyo, Japan
     
    David J. Littleboy, Aug 25, 2007
    #5
  6. rcyoung

    Alan Browne Guest

    Not much resolution gain in upgrading from 10 to 12.3 Mpix... 11%, so it
    will be a while while people wait for the D300 price to settle before
    they commit to it. Mpix drives most people more than the other
    improvements.
     
    Alan Browne, Aug 25, 2007
    #6
  7. rcyoung

    acl Guest

    Well I don't think the D300 is worth the upgrade. It's a neat camera,
    no doubt, and better than the D200, but, besides the AF, I don't think
    there's anything different that I'd particularly notice after a couple
    of days. Maybe the live view if the LCD can be viewed from a large
    enough angle (for shots from awkward angles).

    The D3 would be nice for higher ISOs, but not at this price :)
     
    acl, Aug 25, 2007
    #7
  8. rcyoung

    Don Wiss Guest

    Not for me. The pixel increase I consider a disadvantage. I now shoot at
    2.5 Mp. The D300 will force me to shoot at 3 Mp. I only shoot for the web.
    Large pictures are more cumbersome and gain me nothing. I want the higher
    ISO, better focusing, etc.

    Don <www.donwiss.com/pictures/> (e-mail link at page bottoms).
     
    Don Wiss, Aug 25, 2007
    #8
  9. rcyoung

    newsmb Guest


    I don't foresee a lot of D200 owners upgrading, quite honestly.

    There is almost no difference between 10MP and 12MP. The live view and
    51-point AF are impressive features, but they're not exactly must-
    haves. The $1,000 or so it would cost to upgrade is probably better
    spent on e.g. a good lens.
     
    newsmb, Aug 25, 2007
    #9
  10. All the ones that crave high ISO performance of a CMOS sensor will be the
    first to buy.
    Where do you get the $1,000 figure? Had you followed the 18-month rule
    you'd be sliding into a shiny new D300 for $400 or less.






    Rita
     
    Rita Ä Berkowitz, Aug 25, 2007
    #10
  11. Now people are starting to see the sheer stupidity of buying DX lenses.
    Some are starting to sweat like Saddam Hussein at a rope tying party.






    Rita
     
    Rita Ä Berkowitz, Aug 25, 2007
    #11
  12. rcyoung

    Apteryx Guest

    Well, you did say almost. You should try it on a Nikon film body before
    buying a D3 in expectation of using it a lot. The effect is interesting, but
    you will either like it or you won't. The main thing to not like is that the
    top and bottom of the built-in hood intrude into the image (though even
    without that, the image circle wouldn't quite fit into the 35mm frame).

    You would also have to find out whether the D3's assumption that when you
    fit a DX lens, you want to shoot in DX format, can be altered.
     
    Apteryx, Aug 25, 2007
    #12
  13. Cute line, but I love my DX lenses and will buy more as Nikon introduces new
    ones.

    What fraction of one percent of camera buyers are ever going to want FX
    cameras?

    Neil
     
    Neil Harrington, Aug 26, 2007
    #13
  14. I give DX five years before being totally phased out and no longer
    supported. So, you will see about 6% of the dSLR population suffering with
    DX because they got emotionally attached to it and kick themselves in the
    ass for not following the 18-month rule.







    Rita
     
    Rita Ä Berkowitz, Aug 26, 2007
    #14
  15. rcyoung

    Paul Furman Guest

    I heard about people using it on a 5D and didn't notice the lens hood
    issue... sounds not nice. Their purpose was creating 3D web virtual tour
    images with just a couple snaps.

    Yes, that would be a stinker, only for the fisheye really so probably
    not possible I'm guessing without filing off a tab or something.
     
    Paul Furman, Aug 26, 2007
    #15
  16. rcyoung

    Don Wiss Guest

    Certainly a lot less than 100%. Nikon will always want to offer a low-end
    beginner's body like the D40. Now the FX could end up someday cheap enough,
    but will they be able to make the camera small enough?

    Don <www.donwiss.com> (e-mail link at home page bottom).
     
    Don Wiss, Aug 26, 2007
    #16
  17. rcyoung

    newsmb Guest


    That's assuming a resale value of about $800 for a used D200 and a
    purchase price of $1800 for the D300.

    And that's being optimistic.
     
    newsmb, Aug 26, 2007
    #17
  18. rcyoung

    frederick Guest

    You might be right. Suddenly there are more used D200
    cameras for sale on our local auction site than I've ever
    seen. Most are giving a "reason for sale" that they need the
    $$ and are getting out of photography, but this doesn't tie
    in with the fact that they're being sold with either no
    lens, or cruddy old zooms like 28-80s salvaged for a few
    bucks from an old film slr kit.
    Had a quick check, and there hasn't been a bid placed on any
    of them for over 24 hours. Lol - only about a month ago
    Nikon were running some good specials - but auction buyers
    were winding each other up and bidding higher for used D200s
    than they could have bought a brand new non grey market one.
     
    frederick, Aug 26, 2007
    #18
  19. rcyoung

    ASAAR Guest

    Or like Der Bush using makeup to hide the flop-sweat before a
    press conference.
     
    ASAAR, Aug 26, 2007
    #19
  20. Timing is everything. The 18-month rule has this carefully figured in. You
    buy into your first camera at a decent price point and sell it 18-months
    later when your new body will be at an optimal price. Of course, if you
    like to overpay for your dSLR the 18-month rule doesn't work as well. The
    18-moth rules takes into account and assumes you have minimal ability to do
    research and find good deals.






    Rita
     
    Rita Ä Berkowitz, Aug 26, 2007
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.