The D200 - how's it going?

[simpo two]

Despite it having been out for over a month, I can't find any real reviews about it. Dpreview only has a preview (!) and I'd like a more even-handed opinion than Mr Rockwell.

Anyone know anything about how it really performs under the facts and figures?

[350wedge]

There is a very good review in this months Practical Photography.....

They rate it very highly....

[beano500]

Reviews in two mags, Photo Monthly and Professional Photographer both rave about it generally.

Noise pretty acceptable, some issues focussing with erratically moving objects, white balance (auto) not infallible (blue cast on snowy outdoor scene - but easily correctable). Frame advance "as it says on the tin", metering impeccable, solidly built. Definitely a "baby" D2X rather than a built up 70. Streets beyond D100.

Better than the Dark Sdie equivalent, although new Canon to be released soon.

Welcome Home, BTW....

[LongQ]

This article is linked to from the Rob Galbraith site.

www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/D200/D200A.HTM

[simpo two]

beano500 said:

Welcome Home, BTW....

Thanks Beano - the new battery turned up so many thanks for that!
Now if I could get a second-hand D2X for the price of a new D200...

[mekondelta]

Nikonians has a discussion forum on the D200 at:-

www.nikonians.org/cgi-bin/dcforum/dcboard.cgi?az=list&forum=DCForumID202&conf=DCConfID3

Major issue is bandind. Some are saying it's a huge problem and recall needed. Some are saying it never happens. It definitely happens only in certain situations. Either way, it's interesting.

[V6GTO]

mekondelta said:

Nikonians has a discussion forum on the D200 at:- www.nikonians.org/cgi-bin/dcforum/dcboard.cgi?az=list&forum=DCForumID202&conf=DCConfID3 Major issue is bandind. Some are saying it's a huge problem and recall needed. Some are saying it never happens. It definitely happens only in certain situations. Either way, it's interesting.

Sounds like a very small problem, affecting not many cameras. I would imagine that by the time you get one here the problem will be forgotten. What new camera has been released without issues?

Martin.

[LongQ]

The 'banding' issue is covered in the link I posted above, with examples and a possible technical explanation.

[mekondelta]

mekondelta said:

Nikonians has a discussion forum on the D200 at:- www.nikonians.org/cgi-bin/dcforum/dcboard.cgi?az=list&forum=DCForumID202&conf=DCConfID3 Major issue is bandind. Some are saying it's a huge problem and recall needed. Some are saying it never happens. It definitely happens only in certain situations. Either way, it's interesting.

Sorry, typed that quickly. I don't personally think it's that big an issue and am sure it will be fixed if it is a problem. What I was trying to say is that is what is dominating the forum at the moment...

[simpo two]

mekondelta said:

I don't personally think it's that big an issue and am sure it will be fixed if it is a problem. What I was trying to say is that is what is dominating the forum at the moment...

Possibly like the D70 and its 'moire problem' - which I have noticed about twice in 11,000 shots and bothers me not at all.

Dynamic range is the thing I'm after.

[Bacardi]

simpo two said:

I'd like a more even-handed opinion than Mr Rockwell.

Ken Dickhead said:

Don't get the 5D for presumed better technical image quality: Pop Photo's review of the 5D in December 2005 said that at ISO 1600 the Nikon D50 and D2X had less noise!.

Yea right .

Have a read here:

http://forums.robgalbraith.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&am

here:

http://forums.robgalbraith.com/showflat.php?Cat=0&am

and here:

www.naturfotograf.com/index2_PC.html
(although he's not much better than Rockwell)

simpo two said:

Dynamic range is the thing I'm after.

Unfortunately, I don't think you will find it any better than your D70. You'll have to spend more money (a lot more), and change brands or cheat with multiple exposures. You can try this plug-in out: www.hdrsoft.com although overdoing this technique can make pics look flat IMHO. Not to mention it's more work and more captures to deal with. Some other useful info here: www.hdrsoft.com/resources/dri.html

[simpo two]

Bacardi said:

simpo two said: Dynamic range is the thing I'm after. Unfortunately, I don't think you will find it any better than your D70. You'll have to spend more money (a lot more), and change brands or cheat with multiple exposures. You can try this plug-in out: www.hdrsoft.com although overdoing this technique can make pics look flat IMHO. Not to mention it's more work and more captures to deal with. Some other useful info here: www.hdrsoft.com/resources/dri.html

Yes, I tried the HDR facility in CS2 and the result looked very flat. I can live with some limited DR if I can expose for the highlights and then lighten up the shadows without it getting noisy.

So - just remind me - why was I planning to get a D200?

Anyway, here are a few I like:

[LongQ]

Dynamic Range requirement = Fuji S3 PRO, apparently.

www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/S3/S3PA13.HTM

[beano500]

simpo two said:

So - just remind me - why was I planning to get a D200?

You need a reason?


(well there's always build quality, pose value, need for a second body,pose value, vertical capability, pose value, ISO range, better focussing, pose value and, er...... did I mention.....?)

[Bacardi]

Another review for you here:

www.outbackphoto.com/reviews/equipment/nikon_d200/Nikon_d200_review.html

LongQ said:

Dynamic Range requirement = Fuji S3 PRO, apparently.

Or maybe not much: www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/s3-pro.shtml

Here's another (cheap) plugin: www.fredmiranda.com/DRI/index.html

Not sure if it's any better than PS own built in job, but all of these software solutions look fake/false IMHO. For anyone shooing JPEG, the best way to achieve more DR is to shoot RAW. Thereafter it needs higher bit depth capture which, I'm afraid, just costs more.

Nice sky in that last one simpo, although the wires are distracting/could do with a bit of stamping.

[simpo two]

Bacardi said:

For anyone shooing JPEG, the best way to achieve more DR is to shoot RAW. Thereafter it needs higher bit depth capture which, I'm afraid, just costs more.

Yep. The potential 'gallery' shots were taken RAW. I would adjust the exposure with +/-EV until the highlights were just inside the histogram. Interestingly some of them look a bit flat when seen on the big screen... I know the JPGs are technically not as good but they're tending to look better out of the camera than the RAWs.

Also, although I know they were 'just in' for whites when shot (according to the D70 histogram), when I open the RAWs in PS CS they often still need more exposure, in some cases quite a bit. Then when I save as a TIF or JPG and do Levels they're *still* a bit low. Odd.

Bacardi said:

Nice sky in that last one simpo, although the wires are distracting/could do with a bit of stamping.

Absolutely, I just wasn't going to spend hours cloning them out for a quicky post on PH!

[LongQ]

Bacardi said:

LongQ said: Dynamic Range requirement = Fuji S3 PRO, apparently. Or maybe not much: www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/s3-pro.shtml

Yep, I think the L-L review approaches the issue from a different, and probably more professional, angle in terms of what DR is about. BUT the other review is partly about what can be recovered from an over exposed image (especially using software which I suspect was not part of the L-L reviews) when that in particual is the most important part of the image - hence the stress on wedding photography for example. The 3 samples they provide are almost exclusively concerned with getting detail back from a completely blown white at the expense of the shadows (probably) though it does suggest that with some manipulaiton you could get the best of both worlds if you needed to. At least as far as a typical wedding shoot customer would be interested in.

So perhaps the debate is about whether the S3 offers a truly extended DR or simply allows for much greater DR in the highlights in case it is needed for post processing. In that respect the any assessment of benefit is very much down to whether blown highlights are a natural hazard of the sort of images one typically shoots.

Is there not an S3 user on PH somewhere who can provide a definitive answer - though perhaps on another thread since this one started out as D200 related I seem to recall!

[imperialism2024]

We just got in a D200 at my store. I'm going to try to persuade the manager to let me put it on display, even though we're probably not supposed to. It's not supposed to be in our inventory, but was ordered by someone online and they returned it at the store. So otherwise it'll be setting in our camera security cage for 4 years and then sell for $100...

[rude girl]

imperialism2024 said:

it'll be setting in our camera security cage for 4 years and then sell for $100...

Let us know when that is then....

[406tm]

imperialism2024 said:

We just got in a D200 at my store. I'm going to try to persuade the manager to let me put it on display, even though we're probably not supposed to. It's not supposed to be in our inventory, but was ordered by someone online and they returned it at the store. So otherwise it'll be setting in our camera security cage for 4 years and then sell for $100...

Why was it returned?