Nikon D200 review on CreativePro

Discussion in 'Nikon' started by Frank ess, Apr 3, 2006.

  1. Frank ess

    Frank ess Guest

    1. Advertisements

  2. Frank ess

    Rich Guest



    "Full disclosure: I am a confessed Canon shooter. As such, I find the
    Nikon interface annoying."

    From the review, it seems you get higher ISO noise than one of the 8
    meg DSLRs like the Canon 30D, and entry-level Nikon D50 but you get
    the extra resolution of the 10 megapixels and a host of more advanced
    features (he called them "pro" but I had some of them on my prosumer)
    than either of the other two cameras.
    -Rich
     
    Rich, Apr 3, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Unless we know the exact shooting conditions for each shot (i.e. exposure for
    each shot as well as an assumption that the lighting did not change), we can
    not draw a conclusion about the noise based on these images. If the
    "confessed Canon shooter" didn't pay attention to details of exposure (and
    keep in mind "actual" iso ratings will likely differ between models), then
    there is bound to be more noise in one of those photos when trying to match
    exposure in post processing. Also, doesn't Digic II automatically apply noise
    reduction algorithms?
     
    Thomas T. Veldhouse, Apr 3, 2006
    #3
  4. Frank ess

    cjcampbell Guest

    Seems like a nice review. Too bad he did not like the button layout,
    but that, as he says several times, is extremely subjective and largely
    a matter of what you are used to.

    What a shock: the Nikon is noisier than the Canon at ISO 1600. Oddly,
    although I use Nikons and I shoot a lot of night pictures, I have never
    really found that this bothers me a lot. Possibly it is because even my
    night pictures are usually no more than ISO 400. It is a habit that I
    developed from the old film days, so maybe I just adjusted more easily
    to Nikon.
     
    cjcampbell, Apr 4, 2006
    #4
  5. Frank ess

    Paul Furman Guest

    The noise comparison shown looks awful. I hope there was some error in
    the testing, that doesn't seem right.
    http://www.creativepro.com/img/story/20060403_fg3.jpg
     
    Paul Furman, Apr 4, 2006
    #5
  6. Frank ess

    cjcampbell Guest

    The D200 noise does look like it is worse than usual. Noise comparison
    with Canon on other sites does not look nearly as bad. Most Nikon users
    would agree that Nikons are noisier than Canons, but not that much
    worse.
     
    cjcampbell, Apr 4, 2006
    #6
  7. Frank ess

    Bill Guest

    To be honest, I've never cared much about noise levels for myself. I
    usually shoot at or below 400 as well simply because it gets the best
    results regardless of camera model. If you can't get a good shot at
    100-400, then your technique is lacking.

    :)

    I know, I know...there are times where high ISO values are needed. But
    if you came prepared, you don't need anything beyond the default setting
    of 100 or 200.
     
    Bill, Apr 4, 2006
    #7
  8. Yeah, well, my technique is lacking. I can't reliably enough time the
    shot to get the musicians with their heads sharp if I'm shooting at
    1/4 second. So I end up shooting at high ISO a lot.
    I've *got* a flash, but it won't look right and it will annoy the
    subjects (at 3am at an informal musician's jam session).
     
    David Dyer-Bennet, Apr 4, 2006
    #8
  9. Frank ess

    cjcampbell Guest

    1/4 second? Yeah, it does sound like your technique is lacking.
     
    cjcampbell, Apr 5, 2006
    #9
  10. Yep, any decent photographer *ought* to be able to time his shot to
    hit that 1/4 second when the performer isn't moving his head enough to
    blur it. I'm just a wuss, is all.
     
    David Dyer-Bennet, Apr 5, 2006
    #10
  11. While his technique *may* be lacking, I fail to understand what you are
    alluding too here. If he has a slow lens and dim light, then he may indeed
    have to increase the ISO or use a slower shutter speed (obviously the latter
    requires a static subject for a sharp image). So, how is his technique
    lacking if he shoots at a higher ISO?
     
    Thomas T. Veldhouse, Apr 5, 2006
    #11
  12. Especially the "dim light"; I rarely use a lens slower than f/2 for
    this sort of thing, with the 58mm f/1.2 NOCT available for the worst
    cases. (The 1/4 second is what I'd end up with *without* high ISO).
     
    David Dyer-Bennet, Apr 5, 2006
    #12
  13. So, unless the OP owns such a lens and isn't using it, I don't think it is
    actually an issue of technique. I don't think 1/4 second is appropriate for
    anything that moves unless it is for an artistic effect (i.e. motion blur).
     
    Thomas T. Veldhouse, Apr 5, 2006
    #13
  14. Frank ess

    Brian Guest

    I think, also, that a lot of tests don't really show the true capability
    of digital cameras. I am a Canon user, but I like any camera that takes
    good shots. I took a dislike to the Nikon D70s purely due to its test on
    a site, it showed a lot of noise at ISO 400. A friend of mine has that
    same camera and we have been doing some comparisons between his Nikon
    and my Canon EOS 20D and his noise level is not that much higher than
    mine; both cameras have very little noise from our experiences. I think
    the quality of the images off his camera are fine. They would surely be
    a LOT better off the D200.

    Even on DPreview.com I have seen out of focus images taken on cameras
    which have 1st class focusing systems.

    Regards,
    Brian.
     
    Brian, Apr 7, 2006
    #14
    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.