D70s to a D80 or D200?

<p>At this time I have a D70s as backup. Works great, lightweight but with the cost of the D80/D200 falling on the used market, I am thinking it might be time to move up to something a bit newer. At this time I have a D300, the D70s, 20mm f2.8D, 18-70 AF-S f3.5, 80-200 AF-S f2.8.<br>

I would like comments from anyone who may have done this or just comments on good/bad move and why. <br>

Thank you for your help,<br>

Randy</p>

<p>I'd stick with the D200. Uses the same CF cards as your D300, and the external control layout and other behavior is very similar. Better AF system than the D80, too, of course - though not as good as the D300.</p>

<p>I would also go with a D200 as the control set is similiar as is the weight :~(</p>

<p>another vote for D200</p>

<p>I would go with the D200. I have a D80 at the moment and although it works OK and is almost just a plastic D200 minus a few features the D200 does feel much nicer.</p>

<p>Go for the 200 if anything, having the same media trumps the lighter weight of the D80.</p>

<p>Thank you everyone. That was where I was heading but just wanted to hear other thoughts.<br>

Happy shooting.....<br>

Randy</p>

<p>I don't think either camera is a significant upgrade.</p>

<p>I think a D5000 would be a better backup than either, even though it won't AF with one of your lenses.</p>

<p>For a back up I would go with either a D200 or a D90. I would not go to a D70s nor D80 as their lcd screens are small. (Though the D80 has the same size as the D200).<br>

I have my D70 IR converted & the one thing which drives me nuts is the small lcd screen on the back. I can't see a thing on it. So ready to trade up & have my D300 converted...... Please please please Nikon - - please deliver a D700x or a D400 soon.....<br>

Lil</p>

<p>I have a Nikon D70, D200, and D90. The D90 is the top performer in my group. My only nit to pick is that it is not as convenient as the D200 when I use my older Nikon AI lenses. The D90 has the same high rez LCD as the D300.</p>

<p>Exactly how do you use this "backup" body?</p>

<p>If it is a true backup that is needed only when your D300 fails, which shouldn't be very often at all, I would say don't even bother to spend money on upgrading this backup. If you do use two bodies simultaneously, e.g. putting different lenses on two bodies for faster switching back and forther, maybe it is worthwhile to invest in a better second body.</p>

<p>I tend to say just hang onto the D300 and when something better comes around, e.g. if you want a D300s or some future D400, D500, get that and use the D300 as a "backup."</p>

<p>I was using a D80 before I bought D300 and kept it as my second camera. I think for me it's better than a D200. Here's why. The D300 is a somewhat bulky and heavy camera; the D80 is more compact & lighter. It's my backpacking and family outing camera. The D80 has maybe one stop better ISO performance. It's pretty clean at ISO 800 where the D200 has problems. SD cards are now very cheap. I've come to think that it may be better to have two different cameras with different capabilities. I have a compact & light camera + lenses for times that is important, and I have a semi-pro camera + pro lenses for when I need those capabilities. I have my cake and can eat it too.<br>

Kent in SD</p>

<p>The D70s is used as a second camera at weddings. I use it with the 80-200 but the D300 is what I use for most everything. It is also along if for any reason the D300 has trouble, I have it to keep working.<br>

Thank you everyone...<br>

Randy</p>

<p>As a back-up I'd get the D80. It's about $200 less and there are times that you may appreciate the lighter weight.</p>

<p>I almost have the same tools as you previously, D300, D70s, 18-70, 17-55, 80-200, 50, 85.<br>

That time D70s really is just a backup for me, most of the time it just sit there and do nothing, because mostly I shoot is wedding dinner which is with quite dim light, D70s just quite hard to control in such environment.<br>

Now, I just got my 2nd body (not backup body), D700, work great with me, I mount it with 80-200 and then use together with D300+17-55. It just complete each other.<br>

I able to capture more moment photo because of I do not need to change lens.<br>

My suggest is, if you just want a backup body, keep your D70s and save more money to move up FF or atlease D300<br>

If you need a 2nd body, get an used D300 or better camera.</p>

<p>My vote goes with the D200. It cannot be beat in my book.</p>

<p>keep the D70s. i wouldn't waste my money on the cameras you are eyeing on. funny but when i bought the D200, it ended up as a second camera for the D70s :-) in most of my shoots. </p>

<p>i will echo what shun said.</p>

<p>I would go with the D200, but I'd keep the D70S.<br /> <br /> The D200 has a better viewfinder, faster framerate, better autofocus system, better weather sealing, etc than the D80. Its also nice to have WB/ISO/Qual buttons on a dial rather than in menus. Honestly, I prefer the D200 over the D90.</p>

<p>If you shoot any type of sports/action you are going to notice a huge jump in performance with the D200 as its bigger autofocus motor can keep up much better.</p>

<p>I echo that also.<br>

I wouldnt even bother selling that d70s for the price they go now. Its a great little camera with a very weak AA filter. I love to do macro with it, you can use it as a dedicated camera for your wedding detail shots and eventually even convert it to IR photography. thats what I would do.</p>

<p>I don't do weddings but, the D200 may not have enough low light abilities for weddings. I have one and iso 400 would be about the limit of usability. After getting a D700, the IR D70 actually sees more use than the D200. I'd say, sell the D300 and get a D700.</p>

<p>I would sell the D70S and get a D90. You may get $350 for the D70s and the D90 can be found for around $850. Your out of pocket net cost would be $500, similar to what you would pay for a used D200. D90 is a much more capable camera although it is not weather sealed and lacks some of the controls that a pro body has. However its better ISO performance, better dynamic range, better AF, and the the ability to shoot video, should more than enough make up for what it lacks. </p>

<p>Interesting...for a backup, I want a camera that has a very similar if not exact interface. When I go to my backup D200 for my D300s, I don't have a problem switching over. But when I borrow a D90 or D80, the control and interface is different. If you're an event photog, I'd think similar is more important than different.<br>

Sell your D70s, make your D300 the backup and get a D300s.</p>

<p>Go with what Shun said!!!!</p>

<p>On second thought, while the D80 would be a nice relatively inexpensive upgrade for the D70s, I also agree with Shun. Keep the D70s and wait to upgrade the D300. Then sell the D70s and make the D300 your second body.</p>

<p>A friend whose been into high tech for a long time always advises not to buy yesterday's technology. I agree unless that's all that you can afford.</p>

<p>I had D200 and was never happy with it, consistently underexposed. I sold it and bought a D300 and think D300 is a much, much better camera. My understanding is D90 a great "junior" version of the D300 with similar quality. I'd much sooner by a D90 than a D200. D200 is significantly dated technology, which is a big deal for a digital camera body -- personally I'd avoid it.</p>