D2X and D200-Your opinions please.

I realise a great deal has already been written/discussed about these

2 cameras, as well as there being numerous in depth and comprehensive

reviews of each out there. However, I've been considering buying one

and as I'm not too knowledgable with digital I was wondering if its

the right move and whether either will be suitable to the type of work

I do.

 

I currently shoot on film using an F100 or Mamiya RB. Its mainly

location based portaits and fashion for editorial or occasional

advertising. I often just use available light with minimal additional

lighting and it can be in fairly low or flat light situations (UK

based, sunlight being non-existent). Also, like to shoot at night with

ambient light sources. My reasons for looking into going digital are

firstly I'm increasingly using photoshop in post production (used to

spend many happy hours in the darkroom...), I love the idea of being

able to preview your shots for exposure/focus etc with greater

accuracy than polaroid and the time/cost factor (ie.film/processing etc).

 

I tried out a D2X a couple of weeks ago and was extremley impressed,

my only small worry being with the amount of noise in lower light

shots. I'm unsure if going down the digital path is right for me at

this time and am unsure if digital will meet my needs (reproduction

wise etc). I'd greatly appreciate anyones thoughts. Also, any

comparisons between D2X and D200.

 

Thanks, Doug

I would also post this question in the wedding and social forum.

First all of, if your question is about portrait and fashion photography, please don't post it to the Wedding Forum, whose moderator Mary Ball does not welcome those off-topic threads. Moreover, in photo.net we don't like cross-posting the same topic to multiple forums.

 

If you want, we can delete your thread here and you can repost it else where.

 

I have gotten very good results from the D2X at ISO 800. Beyond that, it is pushing things. The bottomline between the D2X and D200 is whether you can afford the D2X. Moreover, for your types of applications, I would also consider the Canon 1Ds Mark II and 5D as well.

I had just copied my question into the wedding/social section. Apoligies to anyone, its first posting and wasn't aware of forum etiquette etc.

 

I've looked into Cannon 5D (1Ds Mark II is proabaly out of budget) though as I'm familiar and happy with Nikon I'd prefer to stick with them. I guess I'm wondering whether the price difference between the D200 and D2X is justifed, from what I can gather there doesn't seem to be much between them. Does the additional 2MP make a real difference or am I missing something? And what the quality is like in reproduction.

First of all, my knowledge on the D200 is somewhat limited, restricted to playing around with a pre-production model. I would ignore the 2MP difference. The main advantages for the D2X is its 9 cross-type AF points vs. 1 on the D200 and the D2X is better built. Moreover, the D2X is larger and about 30% heavier. Whether the difference justifies the price difference is up to each individual to decide.

Before worrying about digital noise, what kinds of films do you use? For most of the photography you mentioned, I suspect you never use anything faster than ISO 400. If that's the case, there's no reason to set the ISO on a digital camera faster. Just because it's there doesn't mean we're forced to use it.

 

That's one of the preposterous non-issues that's frequently raised about Brand X digital camera vs. Brand Y: ISO noise performance. Why is it that photographers who once used Velvia 50 or Portra are suddenly worried about how their dSLR performs at 1600? I'd think they'd be happy that they can change ISO at will without having to change film. But noooooo...

 

If you do occasionally shoot fast film you know what grain looks like. If you don't mind the grain of Tri-X pushed to 800 or 1600, Delta 3200 or Fuji Superia X-tra 800, you won't mind digital noise.

 

It's easy to fix. Get a good noise reduction program (Noise Ninja, Neat Image, a plug-in from The Imaging Factory, and several others). Tweak the adjustments to remove chroma noise, the most objectionable blotchy red and green stuff. This won't soften desirable detail. Go easy with the luminance noise removal - that's the stuff that resembles film grain. Go too far and essential detail will be removed.

 

If you've used Polaroids to help set up studio shots you'll appreciate being able to instantly review dSLR photos using Nikon Capture's camera control software. By tethering the camera to a computer via a USB cord you can not only review your photos on a full sized monitor, you can control the camera from the computer, doing almost everything except adjusting the tripod, composing and focusing.

The D2x has several levels of noise reduction in the camera, which are highly effective. These measure and subtract the effect of baseline sensor noise from the results. The downside is that it takes somewhat longer to process the image. You won't notice the delay in most cases. This processing takes much less time than in the D2h, which essentially equals the exposure time. As per Lex, I don't bother using NR with ISO 400 - it is extremely good as is.

Above my response you will find very good information and pertinent oopinions about noise.

Since you're not using your cameras in a jungle or rough environment (conflict zones, desert, rock, marshes etc.) you really don't need the D2X. If you want it and can afford it, by all means, go get one. It is beautifull. But for what you said you need the D200 will do the job wonderfully. With respect to the available light it is not the camera that will help you out, but rather a good fast lens. So think also about a 50 mm 1.8 or 1.4 and also a 85 mm 1.4 or 1.8.

 

Cheers,

Cristi

An useful finding:

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00F64t&tag=

 

Yes, you will get what you pay for.

Many thanks to everyone for taking the time with your informed responses. All very useful and some extra points for consideration I hadn't thought of before. Will definatley help with my decision. Doug

"That's one of the preposterous non-issues that's frequently raised about Brand X digital camera vs. Brand Y: ISO noise performance. Why is it that photographers who once used Velvia 50 or Portra are suddenly worried about how their dSLR performs at 1600?"

 

It's not preposterous in the least. I used Velvia on a tripod almost exclusively. Never was happy with 800 film, hell I was never thrilled with 400 speed film but used it when I had to. However with my current DSLR I am shooting 3200 handheld, at night, with very good results. I don't have to explain why it's nice not to be always wedded to a tripod, or why flash doesn't necessarily work.

 

Times are changing, technology enables new styles of shooting. If you don't prefer to shoot that way, that's totally fine, but please don't assume that everyone else should share your lack of enthusiasm. And the time has come to abandon comparisons to grainy high-speed film with a dismissive "count your blessings." We're way past that now.

 

So to the original topic, in my opinion it is *not* ridiculous to be very concerned with the high-ISO performance of these cameras and to compare them critically.

"Times are changing, technology enables new styles of shooting."

 

Very well put Andy. In 2004 I shot a wedding where no flash photography was allowed. I used two different types of ISO 800 film plus my D100 at ISO 800; all of those were disappointing. Last year, I shot some similar situations with my D2X at ISO 800 and the results were great. I tried a Canon 20D and even at ISO 1600 it was great.

 

The newer technologies certainly enable different ways to shoot.

Shun, thanks for pointing out the wedding forum. Somehow or other, I never noticed it (maybe never looked for it).

 

I'm going to go take a look.

Actually, it was John Baxendell who first mentioned the Wedding and Social Events Forum in this thread. Its primary moderator Mary Ball is an excellent professional wedding photographer on her own right. She has kindly given me some tips in previous weddings. Some of the characters who frequent the Leica Forum are also active in the Wedding Fourm.

 

Mary has a fairly strict and narrow definition for Wedding and Social Events. That is why I would suggest sticking with those topics in that forum.

Shun, Yes, Mary is an accomplished photographer. I would use a bit less colorful terms for the Leica forum participants. Just a request.

Vivek, all I meant was that some of the people who frequently post in the Leica Forum also frequently post in the Wedding Forum, nothing more. Since I normally don't read the Leica Forum, I am actually not super familiar with who is there. There is also no need to parse every single word I use here. This is just a regular discussion; I am not writing some formal legal document here where every word is carefully crafted.

 

If you have any further questions, please send me e-mail.