Nikon d200 is it worth $300 with a battery grip?

I have been wanting to buy a Nikon SLR and move away from Canon, I used to have a 5D mkii and I was planning to get a d7000 but I

don't know if I can justify it. A chance to get a d200 used for $300 with a battery grip and 11000 shutter count. Is this worth it at all? How

does it compare to my old 5D. I used to hate the focusing on that camera. I understand it won't be much better though on the d200?

 

Is it worth it for me? I'm not an advanced photographer, I really want to be I am super passionate but I just don't have artistic talent I

guess.

<p>If it was your 1st camera I would say that a D200 could be a good start. The camera is still capable of taking nice pictures. In your case, you are not happy with your Canon camera and wanted to have a D7K, I think it would be very hard to settle it with a D200......</p>

I can't really afford the d7000. :/ I was very satisfied with the canons quality. I just felt its focussing left a little to be

desired. I was never very good, the 5d was FAR to much for me. I basically want an slr camera with no bells and whistles

that I can just shoot with and practice composition and use to tide me over until I can afford a newer Nikon camera. I just

don't want to end up wih something unusable to too expensive. If you say the image quality is still nice I may decide its a

good choice.

<p>I have D300 and it is much better than the 200......<br>

Can you afford a D300? You don't really need the battery pack..... A plane D300 or D300s would be a much better choice....</p>

 

<p>If I was starting from scratch and on a low budget, I would go for a D5100 at a minimum which is bargain priced (well under $400 with a 1 year warranty, mid $300s w/o warranty) which I believe gives the same IQ as the D7000 (both are excellent).</p>

I have a D200 from 2006 onwards and still use it occasionally on lower ISO and with a good lense for stitching.

 

It produces excellent 10Mpx images. But as mentioned above, the D300 is much better image wise. And much like the almost identical D200: Sturdy, offers lots of controls, and accepts lenses from new to very old.

 

But recommended D5100 would probably work out fine too. .

Coskum, the d200 is a well made CCD crop sensor camera that came out in early 2006 the Canon 5D is a full frame

CMOs sensor camera that is very good that came out late 2005. I think the 5d was considered to have better image

quality. 7 years is ancient by todays standards. The D200 is the reason I stayed with Nikon. I owned the d200 from the

month it was released and sold this summer for $200. The grip and L bracket were sold close to $100. All the gear was

in good used condition with very little brassing. I loved the d200 like I do all my cameras. All in all the D7000 is just over

2 years old and will probably feed your passions more. It beats the d200 in every important specification and has a

similar solid feeling magnesium alloy frame. It has a 6 fps rate. Currently I use a d800e and d3s. My other cameras have

been a d2x and Fuji s2 as well as the d200. I would recommend purchasing the newer gear even though you will be able

to take great images with the d200. Good hunting. Andy

<p>We have seen similar questions from the OP, with other older Nikon DSLRs as the switch over target. However, the answer is not going to change much:</p>

<ul>

<li><em>Nikon D1x... $500 with lens... Scam?</em> <a href="00ZyJc">http://www.photo.net/nikon-camera-forum/00ZyJc</a></li>

<li><em>Nikon D2x, any good coming from a 5D mkii</em> <a href="00b5O1">http://www.photo.net/nikon-camera-forum/00b5O1</a></li>

</ul>

<p>In particular, if you are not happy with the Canon 5D/5D Mark II's AF, it is unlikely that the D200's AF will satisfy you.</p>

<p>If the OP still has Canon lenses, it would be costly to switch. Getting a 5D Mark III with its new AF or a 7D should make more sense.</p>

<p>Coskun,</p>

<p>unless you <em>know</em> that you'll only be shooting at low ISOs, I would very sincerely advise you to look elsewhere than the D200 - it's terrible in regard to higher ISOs (and in the D200's case, we're not talking about <em>high</em> ISO at all).</p>

<p>I also had <em>many and significant</em> focusing and metering problems with both of my D200s. These issues, along with the very poor noise handling, were why I moved to the Canon 30D, which improved over the D200 in every single respect that mattered to me.</p>

<p>Now then: the 30D has exactly the same AF as your 5D, so you can probably work out where that puts the D200 in AF terms, in comparison to what you've been using...</p>

<p>(Shun, your first link appears to relate to someone else with the same surname as the OP here).</p>

<p>Nope. I don't think it's worth it. I think you should take the budget and add a little more to it if you like the D7000. It's over two years old and the price (new and used) will likely continue to drop.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I basically want an slr camera with no bells and whistles that I can just shoot with and practice composition and use to tide me over until I can afford a newer Nikon camera.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Why do you think you need a slr to "practice composition"? For that purpose alone, a P&S or a cell phone will do.</p>

I have D200s that I use all the time on ISO125-400 sometimes 800, they have worked perfectly, no problems even under

some less than desireable conditions. That said, I would NOT buy one now, they are several versions back in technology

and any consumer Nikon such as a simple D3100 kit at about $350 will give you better image performance above ISO

400. D5100 is my personal favorite right now.

<blockquote>

<p><em>"...is it worth $300 with a battery grip?"</em></p>

</blockquote>

<p>Obviously, judging from some recently completed eBay sold auctions, quite a few people think a low usage D200 w/grip is worth <strong>more</strong> than $300. And obviously, just as many bidders did not.</p>

<p>As with all things, it (value) depends <strong>entirely</strong> on the user and his/her particular financial circumstances and photographic needs. Some here insist on being on the bleeding edge of technology, others don't care.</p>

<p>In the end, despite the well-intentioned advise above, only you can make that call in the end.</p>

I've been looking to get back into the game for a while, my friends keep coming to me with deals and I get excited. I guess

I have some romantic notion of getting a great deal on some old pro camera just because its old and still getting great

images. I keep coming and having sense knocked into me which soon goes away. Every time I've ended up biding my

time and borrowing my girlfriends Canon 1dmkii.

 

I've turned down the offer, thanks for, yet again, opening my eyes a bit. I have no doubt that ill probably keep falling in

love wih old Nikons even after I eventually get a d7000. Just have to convince myself that it's a bad relationship.

 

Thank you everyone!

IMO, you are much better off using compatible equipment with your girlfriend's, although it cuts both ways. She can

borrow stuffs from you as well.

Shun, I've considered that, but I just believe Nikons are better cameras. They've generally had much better focussing

systems, and even the d3200 gets a better rating on dxomark than my old 5dmkii.

What type of images are you wanting to do? Birds in flight? Landscapes? Portraits? That will make a difference in what

type of camera you look for, i.e. low light capabilities, fast frame rate, etc.

You also need to consider lenses. That's going to add to your cost, and will again depend on what you want to shoot. And

if you end up with a crop-sensor camera, unless you want to stay in that format long term, you should avoid DX lenses.

For what it's worth, I'm switching from Nikon to Canon, because Nikon's customer service is horrible.

I also agree with Robert--if you want to practice composition, a point and shoot is fine. Affordable, and there are some

really great ones out there. And unless you're really going to learn the nuts and bolts of using a DSLR in manual mode to

control shutter speed, aperture, etc. (unless you already have learned that), then in my opinion a DSLR isn't necessary.

<blockquote>

<p>I have no doubt that ill probably keep falling in love wih old Nikons even after I eventually get a d7000</p>

</blockquote>

<p>DSLR's are not the type of cameras to fall in love with.... That is what the film SLR's are for.... </p>

<blockquote>

<p> </p>

</blockquote>

"DSLR's are not the type of cameras to fall in love with.... That is what the film SLR's are for...."

 

:)

<p>Just starting out?...You can pick up a D5100 (with the D7000's sensor) for a good price...certainly less than $500 with the 18-55 kit lens. And don't poo poo this lens. Someone got the design right on this one. I have seen some incredibly sharp images and ones blown up on big prints. Its very good.<br>

The only down side to the D3000/5000 and children is a major Nikon blunder. And that is losing auto focus and metering for AFD an AIS lenses. The D300 and D300s does it. I'm not sure if this capability survived in the D7000. For this reason alone I am delaying my next purchase. I want to see if Nikon still commits to this feature in the D7000/D300s DX replacements. If not, then Nikon have lost me for the future. Panasonic beckons.</p>

<p>I have used a D200 for a couple of years and it was my first digital camera having previously only used medium format. The D200 is a good camera to start with and the shutter life should be about 100,000 actuations.</p>

<p>Sounds like a decent buy provided it is in reasonable condition. What lens is with it? or would you have to buy a lens? The kit lens 17-80 is ok as a starting point.</p>

<p>I would say a resounding yes to your question Coskun. I have used the camera extensively for portraits in the studio when it first came out in my professional career, so it is not an amateur tool. Though you are comparing the spec of current DSLRs your wrong to think you need expensive equiptment to shoot great images. That's why i am picking up an Nikon F3 (film 35mm) and a D200 also for my photographic work. You have to not let the marketing guys get a hold of you please belive me when I say it is very responsive and turns out some great results</p>

<p>I love my D200. About 75% of all my reptile, amphibian and insect shots are with a D200. However, it will drain a battery quickly. I can get about 45 minute star trail on one battery:(</p>

I like the feel and features of the d200 camera, especially the ability to use AIs and AFd lenses, and the camera fits

my budget. In use, the d200 reminds me of my f100, a favorite camera of mine.