D200 vs D2x

I dont know if this particular comparison chart has been posted earlier but I found it

to be quick to the point with a clear understanding of the D2x and the D200.

This has nothing to do with housing the SLR's just a straight technical and practical comparison.

http://www.cleanimages.com/Review-D2xVsD200.asp

The conclusion...get them both! Funny guy.

Mauricio Handler

I'm kinka glad that I didn't have to make this choice when I bought my D2x last year. It is a tough one!

Mr Handler - I saw your Kodaks in the classifieds, and it is highly unusual for you to camera compare (a trait I've learned to appreciate). Are you upgrading?

This certainly is a hot topic at the moment.

My feeling is that for 9 out of 10 people the D200 is the better underwater camera.

It is smaller and cheaper - meaning housings are more compact and it is less expensive to flood and backup (there have been several D2X flood stories here on WP). Plus most of the flashy D2X features that aren't on the D200 aren't relevant for UW shooting anyway. And finally the difference between 10 and 12 MP is not much really.

Alex

Nikon I am sure knows exactly what they are doing. I bet they will soon stop production of the D2x and come out with something worth the cost difference, dropping the D2x price and releasing a D3X or whatever. It's all good for most people as better high quality cameras will be cheaper used. Wait and see what a D70 or D100 will go for in 2-3 years. And these will still be great cameras. Sucks for us as the housings are spank to the wallet but they will be dropping in price also. Great and to the point comparison.

I am to sure that Nikon will release a D3? on the end of this year.

So for those that can wait it will be a very good year plendy aff d2X and usesd housings :-)

The comparison of the d200 with the D2X is intresting but more intresting is the comparison off the D200 and the Canon 5D

especially for new uw photographers that whant to move from compact to DSLR

I am sure that Canon to will release a new model Canon 30D??

in the same price of the Nikon d200 very soon

Its not only the quality but also the price that is importand to be a model sucessfull.

Now Nikon d200 is the king in everything untill the price off 2000 usd

I dont think that somebosy will now go with a canon 20D

Canon know it and will make the move..

A very intesting year will be.....

The Canon 20D still has a better sensor: lower noise, better dynamic range, better high ISO performance, and cost ~$500 less.

You are right that with it's replacement probably a month or two away, it's better to wait to see what that is.

The Canon 20D still has a better sensor: lower noise, better dynamic range, better high ISO performance, and cost ~$500 less.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Herb, specs on paper don't make the difference......consider USC and Texas.....

Karl

I'm with Alex.

I upgraded from the D100 to the D2X. If I had the choice today, assuming available housings for the D200, I would choose the D200 and I'd buy 2.

Most of the advantages of the D2X just don't apply underwater. Even topside there are times when I would prefer the size of the D200 and the included flash. Before selling my D100 rig, I would often grab it first.

I have no backup right now, so I'm still debating what to get as my backup. As much as I would like to have a backup that can fit in my D2X housing, I'm not going to spend $5k. The D2Hs would fit, but I don't find the camera that desirable. Not a great value.

Such a dilemma.

I just wanted to add for those who don't know or haven't compared lenses that the lens is really the key. If you have a 5-6 megapixel camera with a $200-$300 lens your not going to see a huge difference in your pics with the same lens on a new D200 aside from high cropping quality. If you bought a high end lens for your 5-6 megapixel camera you would see a tremendous difference.

I don't think D2X replacement will come out anytime soon. Looking at the history, Nikon shelf life is significantly longer than Canon. Beside D70/70s which is more of a production strategy, each upgrade for Nikon usually takes longer and is more substantial than Canon.

I think that Canon 30D will be interesting. Beside high ISO performence, there is not a big gap between 5D and D200 and D200 already has a better body in term of FPS,buffer etc so I definitely would like to see how Canon will fit 30D into its range withtout impacting 5D sale too much

If Canon basically make 30D a 5D equavalent but with cropped sensor then I think D200 will be a better buy, all else being equal, just because Nikon has a much better line of cropped sensor lens and I don't expect picture quality to be a big difference.

he Canon 20D still has a better sensor: lower noise, better dynamic range, better high ISO performance, and cost ~$500 less.

Gee, someone asks a question about a D2X vs. D200 and gets a reply "Canon is better".

I guess if someone asks, "Should I get a E-500 or an E-300?" the answer will be the same.

While in theory lower noise and better high ISO performance are separate issues, any difference in noise at lower ISO's (i.e. below 400) are insignificant.

I would like to see the data on dynamic range differences.

If I were to choose between the D200 and the D2X now, it'd be a very tough decision. I'd probably end up with a D200, just because I doubt the price difference would result in a similar image quality difference for me. But I've already bought a D2X, and I dont regret it one bit. With digital cameras I think people should stop second guessing their buys. Be happy with what you have if it takes good images and dont continously think you need to be on the lookout for the next camera. In about 3 years I'll go see what's new

George,

I don't believe Herb was jumping in to say "Canon is better." He was merely responding to some incorrect conjecture by Lambis comparing the D200 to the Canon 5D.

Cheers

James

maybe my English are not that great but i have not try to compare the D200 to the Canon 5D and forget the d2X

I was more saying that in this times where we have new models from Nikon and canon that will make every UW photographer happy maybe

we just dont forget the 5D

The price difference between the D2X and d200 is to high just now

and we will see in coming reviews and UW tests if the new nikon is all what we hope.

I dont either say that canon or Nikon is better becauce both cameras are so different.. apples and oranges for me.

lambis

George,

 

I don't believe Herb was jumping in to say "Canon is better."  He was merely responding to some incorrect conjecture by Lambis comparing the D200 to the Canon 5D.

 

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Right!

James / Herb,

I didn't know the 20D has still better high ISO / noise performance than the D200. Just read the opposite in a photo mag. It's not that I trust them much. But I am surprised if Nikon's new D200 would not overtake Canon’s 20D (which is from 2004) in this respect.

Sorry, don’t want to interrupt the chat about D200 / D2x

Julian

I spent a lot of time in the Nikon booth at Mac World last week working on just this question, D200 or D2X. I used both, and looked at the issue from a totaly underwater prospective.

Interesting, as the Nikon sales people kept trying to convince me that the D200 was he way to go...

When I took low light higly saturated test shots, and then did test prints, the X still looked more saturated to me.

OK, as an S2 shooter, I am all about the look and saturation. I am often accused of over proccessing with the S2, but I know better. It just looks beter than most. I know, we can have all sorts of "arguments" about it, but the D2X is the first sensor I have seen that matches or exceedes the quality I see in the Fuji.

The D200 does not seem to have the same saturated look the D2X has. OK, the autofocus is fast, and they "claim" Cam-1000 is as good as Cam-2000, but I am not convinced. In really low light situations, using a 105mm, I "felt" that the X was really faster.

Trust me, I wanted to find an excuse to lower my expectations for the 200, so I could save 3 grand on the next purchase, but I left the show wanting the D2X.

Hope this helps a bit...

BTW, I spent pleny of time in the Canon booth as well, and I still think the D2X wins...

Richard

In a older topic I have put the quastion about the cam 1000 & cam 2000

I am to sure that in low light , low contrat the d2X will produce better contrast & saturation & more important. It wil be easy to focus..

I was always looking on the canon 5D as a altenative but there it is the same question.. AF system, dynamic saturation.

( I have put again the Canon 5D or a other full fomat senson in the game, James sorry, becuace you cant speek aboud God without thinking on the Devil :-)

If i was diving in Cayman and have a strobes i am sure that i can fo the same job with my D70s

But if you are diving with available light, low contrast etc.. the you see very fast the big diference.

Like Alex say d200 will be enough for 90 % off the job but many off us do the 10 % off the job. All my photos are done this 10% and I am soon a expert on the shortcommings :-)

wait and see....

Lambis

Useful info, Richard.

I had the chance to shoot the D70s and D70 in Cayman at the same time as my D2X last week and I rarely found their AF limiting. It never was for wide angle. And although the D2X was clearly better for moving fish and macro, it didn't stop you getting the shot.

Fish spawning at dusk (moving subjects in low light conditions) is one of the few times that you notice that the D2X can continue to lock when other cameras need focusing lights to help them. But very few people do this type of photography - so I don't think it is that important.

Alex

p.s. this shot was taken with a long exposure and wide aperture to get the blue background in very low light conditions.