Nikon D100 comparison.

[CivicMan]

Seeing the price of a Nikon D100 body being below the £200 mark (from nearly £2000 when new), where does it rate in the quality stakes in comparison with the current crop of Nikon DSLRS? Anyone with any practical experience who can comment?

[pixelpimp]

I have a D100, D200 and a D300.
I would have to say as far as image quality goes the D200 is the best, the D100 is too noisy and a bit limited compared to the exceptional value for money D200. If you can go for a D200.

[Simpo Two]

pixelpimp said:

I have a D100, D200 and a D300. I would have to say as far as image quality goes the D200 is the best

Better than a D300 - interesting. How/why?

[pixelpimp]

Honestly I can't seem to shake off the "noise".
At 200 ISO compared to the D200 at 100 ISO the D200 it's streets ahead in image quality.
Having shot nearly 140,000 on my D200s I and slightly disappointed with the D300.
Any answers?

[...Mole...]

pixelpimp said:

Honestly I can't seem to shake off the "noise".
At 200 ISO compared to the D200 at 100 ISO the D200 it's streets ahead in image quality.
Having shot nearly 140,000 on my D200s I and slightly disappointed with the D300.
Any answers?

That's interesting im stuck between saving some cash for a D300 or just picking up a second hand D200.
The D200 seems to be the best option at the moment.

[Simpo Two]

pixelpimp said:

Honestly I can't seem to shake off the "noise".
At 200 ISO compared to the D200 at 100 ISO the D200 it's streets ahead in image quality.
Having shot nearly 140,000 on my D200s I and slightly disappointed with the D300.
Any answers?

I recently bought a D300 to supersede my D200 (to be retained as backup), and noticed a difference, which at first I thought was down to the fact it's CMOS and not CCD. However people on Nikonians assured me that CMOS/CCD made no difference, and of course the D3 is CMOS and that's going very well, so I reckoned any difference must be down to the fact I changed my RAW processing software at the same time.

Have you tried the 'Lo' settings?

(apologies to OP!)

[trackdemon]

How strange..... I find the D300 noise performance much better than D200 @ equivalent ISO (for surely that is the only fair comparison?)...... thats before the other benefits the D300 brings (biggest for me being 8fps with MBD10 & Liveview allowing car-to-car tracking shots from right down on the deck).

Clearly, both knock the D100 into a cocked hat although the old girl is still capable of delivering perfectly useable images as long as you stay @ lowest ISO. I don't have any experience of the latest lower-mid range Nikon DSLR's but I'd be surprised if they didn't offer better high-ISO performance than the D100 (as well as greater resolution if thats of use to you).

Edited by trackdemon on Tuesday 23 December 12:29