# D60 vs. D200



## DScience (May 14, 2009)

Hello everyone!

Well I have been thinking a lot lately about my possibly poor decision in getting the D60...I never realized how much I would want various lenses, and at the time of purchase had no idea on the lens limitations of the D60. Basically, I want some prime lenses and realize how much more the AF-S ones cost in comparison to just AF ones. 

So, I really want the D90, but just don't think I can afford it. Then I saw the D200 for $599 at best buy right now. I can probably sell my D60 to a friend for $500....should I get the D200? Here are a few questions:

1. In terms of image quality, will the D200 produce better images than the D60, given everything else the same.

2. Is the lens flexibility with the D200 worth the upgrade?

3. I've looked at the specs, but can anyone tell me the pros and cons if I was to upgrade? (i.e. what will I gain with the D200, and possibly loose from the the D60 since it's a newer camera)

4. Can I use the SB-600 with the D200 as an off-camera strobe? 

Thank you so much, I really appreciate any help you can give me.


----------



## Garbz (May 14, 2009)

1. At low ISO the D200 would still win out in terms of image quality. I am not sure but given the D200 is now 3 years old the D90 may edge it out in high-ISO performance. Epecially given that this was the D200's only real weak point.

2. That is up to you. I personally have 4 out of 5 lenses which would not autofocus or work at all on the D60. That combined with the fact that old but still excellent glass can be found for a bargain if you are lucky makes the D200 a good choice.

3. D60 you loose lots of fancy worthless features like Active-D Lighting (whatever that is), dust removal (which never really works anyway), and the ability to retouch images in the camera (who would do this?). What you gain is a camera that is built like a truck. All magnesium body which is fully weather sealed, which works anywhere from -50degrees to +60degrees, and can easily survive a drop. I say this having done all the above before. Also if you have bigger hands it may be more comfortable to use too.

4. Yes the D200 was one of the first to fully support CLS.


----------



## DScience (May 15, 2009)

Garbz, I want to thank you for the well informed reply. That really was the info I was looking for. I don't know what to do now.


----------



## epp_b (May 15, 2009)

Between the two, there's no contest.  I'd drop my D40 (or a D60) for a D200 in a heartbeat if I could get it for that price (but I'm in Canada).

It's not just image quality, but also build quality and very useful advanced features that a D200 will give you over the D60.


----------



## benhasajeep (May 15, 2009)

I also agree on considering the D200 an upgrade to the D60.

What you may not know is, not only can you use the less expensive D lenses.  You can also use MF ai lenes with full metering capability!  You tell the camera the max aperture and focal length in a menu.  The camera will read the aperture setting from the lens and will meter propperly (you can save the lens info so your not entering it all the time).  That was a huge plus in my book when I decided on the D300 over the D90.

Even if you got less for the D60 than you think you might get.  I would still jump all over for the D200!

No brainer for me.


----------



## KmH (May 15, 2009)

I agree the D200 would be a step up from the D60.

Garbz mention the metal body, weather sealing, CLS


1/8000 sec shutter speed
5 fps
dual command dials
9 auto brackets compared to none
DOF preview
Compare the RAW image quality (not features) of the D60, D200, D90 at DXO Mark Labs

I have both the D60 and the D200. I carry the D60 every day, everywhere I go because it is so compact even with a battery grip and it suffices 80% of the time. When I want to make images using features the D60 doesn't have I use the D200 or the D90 since I have one of those to for the better IQ and high ISO performance.


----------



## DScience (May 15, 2009)

Thank you all for taking the time to help me. I am definitely going to try and get the d200! We'll see whAt happens


----------



## Michael.McBee (May 15, 2009)

I purchased my D200 from Best Buy about a week ago now.  I'm just waiting for it to be delivered.  I'm upgrading from a D40.


----------



## DScience (May 15, 2009)

Michael.McBee said:


> I purchased my D200 from Best Buy about a week ago now.  I'm just waiting for it to be delivered.  I'm upgrading from a D40.




What? Two weeks and it has not come yet??


----------



## Michael.McBee (May 16, 2009)

DScience said:


> What? Two weeks and it has not come yet??



Mine is being delivered to me in Guantanamo.  I actually received it last night.  9 days to be delivered down here is considered pretty fast.

As for the camera, the build quality is great!  Like I said, it makes my D40 feel like a paperweight.  It's hefty without even having the battery installed in it.

Just gotta get a lense and CF card and I'm off to shooting!


----------



## Dwig (May 16, 2009)

In "old school" terms, there are two broad classed of attributes to consider when comparing DSLRs. One is the "film" (read: sensor and processing circuitry) and the other is the "camera" (read: the box with VF, AF, and metering system).

As for the "film" portion, you will not see any improvement in image quality by replacing your D60 with a D200. They use the same sensor and virtually the same processing engine. Check out DXOmark's sensor tests:

Compare cameras

Its the "camera" portion that is different:

Pro D200 (in addition to those alread mentioned):
1. Brighter, crisper VF since it uses a prism instead of mirrors
2. Higher performance, though not more accurate, AF system.
3. Provision to AF with AF lenses lacking the internal motor (AF-S and AF-I lenses)
4. Provision for some metering with non-electronically coupled lenses (AF, AF-S, AF-I, & P) such as the older AI and AI-s lenses.

Pro D60:
1. lighter weight
2. more compact

There are other differences, some involving the flash system, but none that affect the actual quality of the resulting image. The differences are features that may make the D200 easier to use in some situations. The build _quality_ is no different, but the D200 is more robust.

If you want to get a better "film" component than that in your D60, you need to look at Nikon's newer CMOS based models; the DX format D5000, D90 & D300 and the FX format models.


----------



## DScience (May 17, 2009)

Dwig said:


> In "old school" terms, there are two broad classed of attributes to consider when comparing DSLRs. One is the "film" (read: sensor and processing circuitry) and the other is the "camera" (read: the box with VF, AF, and metering system).
> 
> As for the "film" portion, you will not see any improvement in image quality by replacing your D60 with a D200. They use the same sensor and virtually the same processing engine. Check out DXOmark's sensor tests:
> 
> ...




Thank you, this has helped much. I knew that the next step was the CMOS sensor, but I never realized the other factor: the camera portion. I definitely want this camera, but I don't know if I want to give up the size of the D60.

I am a little guy, have small hands, and LOVE how the D60 fits. hmmmmm...


----------



## epp_b (May 17, 2009)

> I am a little guy, have small hands, and LOVE how the D60 fits. hmmmmm...


I know exactly how you feel.  The D40 fits my little girl hands perfectly (I'm a guy )

For what it's worth, picked up a D300 with a 16-85 attached to see how it felt.  Even though it's too big for my hands, it's surprisingly comfortable and not nearly as bulky or heavy as I imagined or was led to believe.  The Canon 40D, by comparison, is like the photographic equivalent of fruitcake.


----------



## DScience (May 17, 2009)

epp_b said:


> The Canon 40D, by comparison, is like the photographic equivalent of fruitcake.



:lmao:

LOL Thanks, that makes me feel better. I am really leaning towards the D200! my friend might by my D60 in a few days, so we'll see!!


----------

