# Nikon D90 or D200



## Joshua907 (Jan 10, 2010)

Im trying to do some photography on the side for some extra cash and want to get a second, upgrade camera. I currently have a D60, and am looking at either the D90 or the D200, because of budget issues. I can/will do most anything from weddings, concerts, sports, even family portraits if your not looking for studio quality, ect. 

I have the 18-55mm and also a 70-200mm Nikkor AF VR  G lenses, will these be compatible with either/both these cameras?


----------



## Dominantly (Jan 10, 2010)

D90.

CMOS > CCD

D200 does have 1/8000 shutter and a metal body... but Meh... I'd take the newer technology.


----------



## dhilberg (Jan 11, 2010)

Yep D90. Much better sensor than the D200. You might consider a used D300 instead if you really need the build and AF system. The D200 is old technology. Your lenses will work fine on all three.


----------



## Sam6644 (Jan 11, 2010)

I'd snag a used D300 or refurbished as well. They can be had for a pretty good price these days.


----------



## inTempus (Jan 11, 2010)

D90, with out a doubt.


----------



## Tappout (Jan 11, 2010)

D90


----------



## Tweaker (Jan 11, 2010)

D90


----------



## DScience (Jan 11, 2010)

Joshua907 said:


> *Im trying to do some photography on the side for some extra cash* and want to get a second, upgrade camera. I currently have a D60, and am looking at either the D90 or the D200, because of budget issues. I can/will do most anything from weddings, concerts, sports, even family portraits if your not looking for studio quality, ect.
> 
> I have the 18-55mm and also a 70-200mm Nikkor AF VR  G lenses, will these be compatible with either/both these cameras?




D700 or D3s


----------



## Garbz (Jan 12, 2010)

I have a D200 and got the chance to use a D90 + grip the other day. Works well. Picture are great and I'd recommend the camera to anyone. I wouldn't buy one myself because of the body materials, and how reckless I am with cameras. My criteria is that a camera must have a metal body. But realistically the D200 is quite old technology by now. It still takes good pictures, but feature wise, and in high iso conditions the D90 really matches or outdoes the D200.

That said if you can find a D200 for a steal than I say go for it. But if you can pick up a new D90 for the same price, I'd recommend the D90.



Dominantly said:


> CMOS > CCD



Oft quoted, and wrong. But the D90's sensor is > D200's.


----------



## SLRJoe (Jan 12, 2010)

I think probably go for the D90...


----------



## Mike_E (Jan 12, 2010)

What Garbz said!  The 200 is a tank!!  An ageing tank but still a tank.


----------



## djacobox372 (Jan 13, 2010)

d200 pros:
about $200 cheaper used
will meter with ais lenses (this is huge for me)
metal body

d200 cons:
low battery life
no video
lower quality sensor (d90 has the d300 sensor)

summary: if u want to save $$ on the body and by using ais glass the d200 is a good choice.


----------



## chip (Jan 13, 2010)

In terms of image quality, the D90 is a far better camera than the D200!!!


----------



## Dominantly (Jan 13, 2010)

Garbz said:


> Dominantly said:
> 
> 
> > CMOS > CCD
> ...


Please do explain........ I'll pull up a chair.


----------



## djacobox372 (Jan 15, 2010)

chip said:


> In terms of image quality, the D90 is a far better camera than the D200!!!



"Far better" is an overstatement; it's better at higher-iso's--that's about it.  Below 800iso they're nearly identical.


----------



## lamergod (Jan 15, 2010)

I was in the same dilema a few months back too.But I shoot sports very often,almost every week.The choice was clear,5fps and 4.5 fps.You might say Awww 5 and 4.5,the difference is so small.....But if you are a seasoned sports photographer,the difference is there.

D200 is built like a tank.Give d200 a month and hold the d90 again,it's like a small toy.Weather seal,AIS compability.....swap all these for video?


----------



## george elsasser (Jan 15, 2010)

D90 HANDS down - Especially if your gonna shoot wedding ceremonies (read no flash), why simple, better high ISO performance period- way less noise at say 1600.  I've shot plenty and 1600, wide open with a fast lens is almost mandatory.

The D90 will allow you to shoot without a flash in darker situations than the D200, it produces a smoother image than the D200.  


I am on sabbatical from 10 yrs. of journalistic weddings, shot em with D70s and D200, D200 high ISO performance only slightly better than D70.  D3 series cameras are substantial improvement, over the last generation.

The whole line D3, D700 for FX and the D300, D90 for DX are major advancements over the D200, D80 camera.

Yes the metal D300 would be tougher, I would take 2 D90s over 1 D300 any day.  Do not shoot a wedding without a backup camera unless your client has been warned your just starting out and charging start out low prices.  You can not re-shoot a wedding.  Bring something else with you a D40, 50 or 60 or what ever.

I currently have a D3 and would use a D90 as a back up for a wedding or an extra  camera for some of the flash work with out batting an eye.  Remember the photographer behind the camera is more important than the camera.


----------



## chip (Jan 15, 2010)

djacobox372 said:


> chip said:
> 
> 
> > In terms of image quality, the D90 is a far better camera than the D200!!!
> ...


But isn't that big enough of a reason already? I would not use ISO 800 on a D200 or D2XS - I have both. I would use ISO 1600 on a D90 or D5000 or D300 all day (I have a D300). The difference is day and night. FYI - far better is an understatement!


----------



## AlexColeman (Jan 16, 2010)

djacobox372 said:


> chip said:
> 
> 
> > In terms of image quality, the D90 is a far better camera than the D200!!!
> ...



At 200, my 3S will be similar to a D80, it only shows when you start to crank it, and if he is shooting as a business, you will need high ISO.


----------



## Garbz (Jan 16, 2010)

chip said:


> I would not use ISO 800 on a D200



Crap ideological fear of noise which would otherwise prevent you from getting a photo. ISO800 may have noise, but to not use it when needed is just pure silliness. 

I would not have gotten this shot: http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2250/2130215253_01e4ab8e6d_b.jpg Following your rules as the D90 would have broken while I was over seas (Dropped it), and the D200 was set at ISO1250 when I took the picture.

High ISO performance is nice, but it definitely doesn't overrule the fact that the D200 is a far more rugged camera for those people who care about that sort of thing (uncoordinated clumsy me)


----------



## chip (Jan 16, 2010)

Garbz said:


> chip said:
> 
> 
> > I would not use ISO 800 on a D200
> ...



I guess different folks have different quality standards. I don't know if I am silly or you are silly. I don't have any fear to use ISO 800 on a D200. I have done that again and again. I just don't like low quality pictures. Based on my own tests, the ISO 800 noise level on a D100 is actually lower than on a D200. Probably due to the D100 having larger photosites.


----------



## Dominantly (Jan 16, 2010)

I've taken my DSLR's through many rainy/multiple mile mountain backpacking trips, and I've never had any issues with "plastic" bodies. I mean I dont go around swinging it into rocks and trees, so I may be missing out.
Metal body or not, if you drop it the right way, it's going to break. The body might not crack, but the internals are still subject to shock/g-force.

I'd take something useful (high ISO) over the false sense of security of damage-proof.


----------



## Joshua907 (Jan 16, 2010)

Lots of great info...for that, thanks. I ended up buying a used D300 with 4K accuations. Will be here on Tues. Now the next thing is a lens. I got offered a gig to go around and shoot kitchens for a website. I need a lens to get most, if not all the kitchen in a good shot. Ive been looking at the 10.5mm fisheye, but its a little pricey. Im also trying to get on with a local newsletter, shooting in clubs, so i need a lens that will get me up close and personal, low light, ect. Any ideas? I want to keep it under $600-700 if i can. Maybe a Sigma or Tokina?


----------



## djacobox372 (Jan 16, 2010)

chip said:


> djacobox372 said:
> 
> 
> > chip said:
> ...



I have a d200, d90 and a d700... when shooting raw iso 800 on the d200 looks about the same as iso 1600 on the d90--that's one stop difference; in jpeg mode the improved noise reduction SOFTWARE in the d90 gives you another 0.5 more stops.

Is 1-1.5 stops a big deal?--it depends on the photographer.  I guess for you it's FAR FAR better... but for me it's just a little better.  I prefer the fact that my ais lenses work on my d200. It's all subjective.


----------



## lamergod (Jan 17, 2010)

Joshua907 said:


> Lots of great info...for that, thanks. I ended up buying a used D300 with 4K accuations. Will be here on Tues. Now the next thing is a lens. I got offered a gig to go around and shoot kitchens for a website. I need a lens to get most, if not all the kitchen in a good shot. Ive been looking at the 10.5mm fisheye, but its a little pricey. Im also trying to get on with a local newsletter, shooting in clubs, so i need a lens that will get me up close and personal, low light, ect. Any ideas? I want to keep it under $600-700 if i can. Maybe a Sigma or Tokina?



the best lens for interior is fisheye and 14-24.Nice and bright aperture and very well controlled distortion.


----------



## AtominoPhotoForum (Jan 17, 2010)

D90 is great, if you want that the camera eats all MF ... AFS-lenses, than take the D300. I use it with a great fun: also 100/2.8 series E is than great - or if you want a newer please take 35/1.8 ,,, BR Atomino 
Homepage


----------

