Nikon D200 is out!

The Nikon D200 hit the stores today. My local dealer got in 5 and I was #3 on their list. Very sweet camera. Haven't had a chance to formally test it yet, but my preliminary first 10 shots (about half with the Nikkor 10.5mm/2.8 DX fish-eye I couldn't resist picking up) look darn nice.

It's also nice that this camera has/does 99% of what I want for a solid $3000 less than the D2x.

 

Avatar was with the Nikon D70 SLR and a 17-35/2.8 zoom at 17mm.

 

No, each brand has it's own mount and are not interchangable.

 

Feature wise and build wise the D200 is a much better body. It's better sealed, has a much larger LCD, alloy body, the available vertical grip will be a huge plus for my shooting. It has more AF zones, a better AF module (ie faster). Higher megapixel count is nice too.

Image quality I can't say I've actually compared, though I have little doubt the D200 will offer visible improvement.

Is this a "true Pro body"--Probably not by the standards of a 50k frame per year PJ or sports shooter, but I can guarantee there are plenty of pros out there that will use this body as it makes good financial sense, takes high quality images, is feature loaded and versatile.

It's way more camera than a novice needs (a whole new subject--I go way out of my way to talk people out of a DSLR), but great for an advanced amature and some pro use.

 

We're getting way off topic now, but in older bodies there were some adapter rings for some brands that could be interchanged and made usable, but even so you lost almost all control over exposure and such. There are just too many electronics and connections that have to be made and it just wouldn't be worth it.

For instance, even if one could make the Canon lens project the proper size image on the film/sensor of a Nikon camera you probably couldn't do the same with a Nikon lens has a smaller image size and it probably wouldn't be possible to project the proper size image on the film/sensor while keeping it in focus.

Optix is complicated, electronics are proprietary and complicated, then the controls for the aperture and auto-focus are also in totally different places. Realize also that some Canon lenses aren't even usable on some Canon bodies! (likewise Nikon, but to a much less significant degree and most just b/c of the advanced technology of the digitals).

 

Some 3rd party lenses are quite good and as good as or superior to some manufacture branded lenses...in particular the standard "kit" lenses from both Nikon and Canon tend to be very low end.

That said, I stick to Nikkor lenses whenever possible and currently have only one old manual focus Tamron zoom buried in the closet that isn't a Nikkor.

 

No question about it....but most amatures who think they want a DSLR so they'll "take better pictures" don't know that and tend to balk at paying $1400 for a 17-55mm zoom lens for their $900 camera when they can get a 18-55mm zoom in a "kit" for only $100 more.

Thus, my previous comment about talking people OUT of buying a DSLR whenever possible b/c it's a rather small group of people who really need or want one and are willing to learn to use it well enough to actually take better pictures with it.

 

No way, you lose way more than just AF. A switch to Canon isn't an impossiblility for me, but it isn't going to happen any time soon. Nikon's going to have to fall even farther behind than they already have. Then I'd go all out.