Will D700 Retire D200?

<p>Hello, I'm just about ready to pull the trigger on a D700. I currently have a D200 and a D80. The D80 is serving me well as a casual snapshot/ web/ email tool, but I wonder the fate of my D200. I wonder if after acquiring my D700 I won't want to use it anymore? I'm thinking right now that I can use it for some events, maybe photojouralist types of shots, parades, etc. The D700 I'm looking at as mostly a landscape/ tripod camera, and low-light/ night shots.</p>

<p>I have a Nikon 12-24/4 DX and 17-55/2.8 DX along with my 80-200/2.8 AF-D, so I'd hate to sell my D200 since I'd get practically nothing for it, and I have those two outstanding DX lenses. The lenses I plan on using with my D700 are a Tamron 17/3.5 Adaptall, Nikon 24/2.8 AF-D, Nikon 28/3.5 PC AIS, Nikon 35/2 AF-D, Nikon 35/1.4 AIS, Nikon 50/1.8 AF-D, Nikon 85/1.8 AF-D, Nikon 85/1.4 AIS, and my Nikon 80-200/2.8 AF-D.</p>

<p>So in a round-about-way, do you guys think I'll completely lose interest in my D200 after using my D700, or do you think it's possible the two cameras could co-exist? Thanks.</p>

<p>NO you will still used the D200 with the D 700 i have D300 and the D700 and i used both </p>

<p>NO you will still used the D200 with the D 700 i have D300 and the D700 and i used both </p>

<p>Glad to hear Dave, but the D200 is not exactly the same as a D300. I hope what you say applies to my D200 as well.</p>

<p>I forget to add in my original post whether you guys thought I will be okay with the lenses I have for using with a D700? I also have a Nikon 55/2.8 M AIS that I omitted from my list. The Tamron 17/3.5 might be problematic, although it's surprisingly good with film.</p>

<p>I planned to use my D300(10-20 + 17-55) with a new D700, but after three weeks I deceided to sell the D300 + DX lenses and bought a compatible set for the D700(Sigma 15-30 and a Tamron 28-75 2.8) and I'm very happy with it, special the Tamron.</p>

<p>Interesting Hans, so you decided to go 100% FX after getting your D700. I imagine the answers I get will have a lot to do with the types of photography one does too. Thanks.</p>

<p>Jeffrey i keep the D200 it will be okay with the D700 my son has a D200 and he used my D700 with, PS he took my D200 that how come i got the D300 have fun with you will fine it will work okay with the D700 </p>

<p>"...do you guys think I'll completely lose interest in my D200 after using my D700" Absolutey!</p>

<p>no keep it if not i will buy it from you </p>

<p>jeffrey, you have a nice set of lenses for the D700. while no one's going to be able to know how you'll feel, in my case the D700 practically zapped all my interest in the D300 -- just like the D300 overwhelmed my D80. just last weekend i carried around the D300 for a couple of days, and it was a nice reunion. there are some practical advantages to the cropped sensor -- you know what they are. for everyday photography, however, i believe you'll be so taken by the D700's images that the D200 will become very neglected. still, it's a good thing to have around...</p>

<p>Dave, all I'd consider selling is my 17-55/2.8DX since I have the 12-24/4DX and plenty of prime lenses that could replace the 17-55. Truth is I love my D200 and it's worth a lot more to me than what I could get for it. Thanks anyway.</p>

<p>Elliot and William, thanks! It will be interesting to see how it turns out for me. I do really love my D200 though.</p>

<p>If you are interested in infrared photography, you may consider to have your D200 modified. Then, you will have the incentive to continue to use your D200.<br>

jf</p>

<p>Jeffrey, this quesiton can only be answered by each individual, in this case you.</p>

<p>In my case, my D200 was always the backup camera. The D300 retired the D2X, but the D700 never retires the D300. Today, I use the D700 and D300 for different applications.</p>

<p>jf, never tried IR. IR images I've seen have never appealed to me.</p>

<p>So far it doesn't sound promising for my D200, except for Dave. I still think that for well lit events or photojournalism types of shots the D700 would be overkill.</p>

<p>Always the voice of reason, thanks Shun. And always glad to get your input!</p>

<p>Jeffrey, If you do not need the money to acquirer more lenses keep the D200 as your professional backup camera. Put your favorite lens you liked on the D200 and keep it ready to go along with the D80 or D700 when you are out and about. If you see no need for it, sell it so someone else can enjoy it.</p>

<p>Hi Tim, I'm all set with lenses I think for DX and FX. I like your thinking about having it as a backup just in case. That sounds good to me, and I don't really want to part with it anyway. Thanks!</p>

<p>Jeffrey, I used to shoot with a D200 and sold it to buy the D700. I don't have any DX lenses so that's not a concern (I use Nikon 17-35 f2.8, 70-200 f2.8 and 200-400 f4) I love the D700 but missed the reach for wildlife (mostly what I shoot) so I picked up a D300 (very similar to the D200 but better higher ISO quality and better autofocus). Now I carry both the D700 and D300 whenever I go shooting. I find that I actually use the D300 more because reach is usually a primary concern (my 400 becomes a 600). If the light is low, I'll put the longer lens on the D700 because it handles low light better. I'll go to ISO 1600 on the D700 without much concern and to ISO 800 on the D300. With the D200 I didn't like to shoot above ISO 400. The noise seems different, as well, with the newer cameras. With the D200 there was more color in the noise, with the D300 and D700 there's less color and it more resembles film grain (at least to me). The autofocus also, seems much crisper in the D300 and D700 and it's easier for me to track birds in flight, etc. Of course, I absolutely love that my 17-35 is a true 17-35 again on the D700 (I originally had this lens with an f100 film camera). Anyway, to answer your question, yes, I'd hold onto the D200 and use it when you need more reach. Use the D700 for everything else.</p>

<p>I added the D700 a few months ago. To my eye, the D200 images are as good as the D700 when there is enough light. I use the D200 and D700 at a 50/50 ratio. The D200 is nice in the studio with strobes (I have an L-bracket and diopter for the D200), and outdoors with the telephoto lenses. I also prefer the D200 with my 16-85VR as the casual day-outing kit with the family. And, I suppose, the D200 is the "knock-around" camera that I am less concerned about banging about or getting stolen. And, it's value in selling is far less than it's value for shooting.</p>

<p>There are two aspects here that sound kind of backwards to me. First, your lenses for DX are easily superior to those you have for Fx, even though the Fx is your primary camera. Second, you state you have a clear use for the D80 but not the D200. Most here are saying hang on to the D200, but don't seem to be taking into account you also have the very capable D80. So, if it were me, here's what I would do. I'd dump the old single focal lenses and replace with modern f2.8 zooms, such as a 24-70mm or maybe a 28-80mm f2.8. My thinking is my best camera needs my best lenses. Second, I'd sell off the 12-24mm and 17-55mm f2.8 and replace with Sigma 10-20mm and Nikon 16-85mm VR. My thinking here is the money tied up in Nikon's best DX lenses would be better placed in Nikon's best Fx zooms, and since the D80 is being kept as a family/vacation camera, having those smaller & lighter lenses for them would make more sense for its mission. For me, the D200 would clearly be odd man out.<br />Kent in SD</p>

<p>Remember that you won't get a lot for your D200 - even new D200s are fairly cheap now. So selling it may not give you enough money for a decent FX lens.</p>

<p>On the other hand you have 2 high end DX lenses. So perhaps you can sell the 200 + those 2 lenses and get more FX lenses with that money.</p>

<p>Well for general photography you probably would be fine with anyone of these camera's alone but you want the D700. To bad it dropped off the ISO 100 which is very nice for landscape. But to slow the shutter speeds you can always resort to a ND filter..The D200 is selling for $599.00 brand new at Best Buy.com currently so I would say the D200 would be worth a maximum of $400.00 in dead mint condition. I do not know what you should sell off if anything at all..If you have kids maybe you could just give away the D200 to one of them. That is what I usually do but I have six kids and somebody always needs a camera.</p>

<p>Keep the D200. DX lens quality will be better, a backup body is always nice to have, and you will use the D200 if you ever need the telephoto reach. At the 200 end you get an extra 100mm for free that you don't get with the full frame D700.</p>

<p>But, does he need BOTH a D80 and a D200? Obviously not. Dump one of them, upgrade the Fx lenses. That is your biggest weakness.<br>

Kent in SD</p>

<p>So many great replies, I really appreciate it!</p>

<p>The reply that stands out to me is Kent because I have had concern as to whether my "FX" lenses can stand up to the task. I'm pretty confident in the 35/2 AF-D, 50/1.8 AF-D, 85/1.8 AF-D and 80-200/2.8 AF-D. The 24/2.8 AF-D seems okay not great, and I've never used a manual AIS lens with my D200 or D80 or the Tamron SP. The lens I plan on being my workhorse lens with the D700 is the 28/3.5 PC on a tripod. I enjoy urban and natural landscapes as well as buildings and architecture-type shots. If that one lens works out for me with the D700 then I'll be very happy and believe that I can use my D200 and D80 for everthing else that isn't so technically crucial. Dave Petley has emailed interest to me in purchasing my 17-55/2.8DX, but I might have to think about that a little more (especially considering Dan Brown's message). Thanks Kent.</p>

<p>Thanks Sean, Dan Brown, Nish, Ross and Daniel Dexter. All very helpful. Thankyou!</p>