I sold my D5100 and bought a used D200 . The only negative is low light performance. It was better on D5100, but it seems I have clicked more pictures with D200 in 6 months than what i clicked with D5100 in 9 years.. that makes a big statement to me. The D200 just feels right in my hand and it's a joy to use it. No way i am letting go of my D200 now.
D200 is built like a tank D200 controls are great D200 is weather sealed D200 battery last a long time D200 OVF is great D200 has a fantastic color rendition
I don't doubt it, it did feel good to use, I just struggled compared to my other old cameras to get consistent results out of it. Others might have different experiences but this is just my view.
So if youre shooting the d200 in raw and are getting confused by why what you’re seeing on the back of the camera isn’t as awesome it’s because the d200 is showing you the jpeg preview rendering. Shoot your d200 in fine jpeg to get the ccd color science for the desired result. Shooting Raw or Nef isn’t gonna get you those film like colors and image rendering. So unfortunately you’re using it wrong if you’re trying to get on board with the ccd trend.
I definitely did shoot both and ultimately I struggled to get acceptable/good results regardless; the opposite is true with my other old big camera, the 5D where I am constantly bowled over by the ease in which it captures amazing images that has a look that I struggle to achieve with my more modern cameras.
Got a D200 as a permanent fixture in my car. 35mm attached. The 17-55mm is within reach 😉. My D5 follows me when I travel though. I love the Nikon ergonomy over Canon/Sony etc.
I love my Nikon f3.5-5.6/18-55 VR lenses. With VR, f3.5 suddenly doesn’t seem slow anymore. And it has incredible sharp optics. Light-weight too. Great bang for the buck! People say with prime lenses, one can zoom with the feet. But that won’t change the perspective. I love the compacting effect only long focal lengths can give.
@@ChrisEdgecombePhoto Then may I suggest keeping an eye out for a Nikon D3300 or D5100. The D5100 came out in 2011, 16MP, Live View, HDR. With the 18-55 VR lens, it produces very sharp images. The HDR capability is useful in high contrast situations. Live View makes D5100 half a MILC. Despite its size and weight, I don’t mind lugging it around town. A capable all-round DSLR. Perhaps my favourite Nikon DX camera. The D3300 came out in 2014. 24.4MP, compact, Live View, with Low Pass filter removed. My only Nikon DSLR modern enough to use the amazing AF-P f4.5-5.6/10-20 VR lens.
The main reason I have kept a D200 for years is you can use Nikon ai and ai-s manual focus lenses and enter the lens into the non-cpu lens settings and get full matrix metering. If you want film like images - use a lens designed for film cameras. I have a Canon 5d too - I love it but its not as versatile as the D200 as far as old manual lenses are concerned - in fact it's worse than usless in that respect.
I used my d200 and 18-200mm vr lens for landscape yesterday beside my z7ii. The photos from the d200 I liked better. Having the extra reach and zoom range was just amazing to use in the field. I shop jpeg and raws and just adjusted the jpegs some in post and they are great. The black and whites also from this camera are just unreal. I also have a d700, zf, df. Sold my 5d classic. I liked that camera but just wasn't for me. The photos are sometimes too warm for me. I like cool more ektachrome film style images. My favorite digital camera of all time though is the d700. It is just an amazing camera. I go back and forth all the time. I had d750, then a z7, then a d700. Shot with a d700 for awhile and started playing with my old z7 raw files and was like wow the detail. So I bought another, the z7ii, but to be honest im not happy with the results out of that camera at all. For black and white I do love it. Espcially using vintage lenses, but naw. I think I am selling all of that and sticking with the d200 for reach and d700 for everything combo.
Thanks for the reply, when I was looking into getting a mirrorless FF camera I wasn't keen on trying the Nikon Z mount for some reason. I'm currently trying a Sony A9; mainly because I needed something with fast AF for tracking my dog and also the E mount system has so many lens options at differering budgets - this was a big draw. Admittedly, the Z mount system does finally appear to be opening up and that might help people switch to Nikon in the future.
@@mistergiovanni7183 another thing to note is the d700 is way better built than the 5d. D700 is weather sealed, 5d classic is not. This really made a difference for me in the field. I didn’t want to have to worry about the camera failing on me or getting wet. Which I’m sure a lot of people use them and get them wet. I just didn’t want to risk it. 5d classic does take beautiful pictures. It just made more sense for me to stick to one brand.
Thanks for your video. I have a D200, 5D, 30D and others. I prefer the viewfinder information on the Nikon as well as the button layout. Photo colours and imagery are different .
I can still see the advantages of m43/aps-c but in a smaller form for a more compact setup hence why I'm reluctant to sell my XE1 and EM1 cameras even though after buying a Sony A9 they aren't going to get much use.
I love my Canon 6D and Sigma 85mm 1.4 original. It is a heavy clunker. When I go to my Olympus em1 mkIII Yongnuo 85mm 1.7 II. It is like curling into to a fluffy bedspread on a cold day. I like the background separation on the cheap MFT lens.
I must say that on my screen the D200 waterwheel shot looks miles more appealing that that from the 5D. As for having to delve into the menu system too often.. what are all the buttons for then? I have a D300 and D700 and rarely have to delve into the menu and they are similar in terms of button driven functions. 😉
Funny, I found your video as I just picked up a D200 myself. A little bit of context, I was a long time Canon 1D classic owner. With the 4mp files, poor lowlight performance, poor battery performance (factory batteries haven't been available for a long time and aftermarket ones died quickly for me) and WEIGHT lead me to not use it much. But, I loved the performance of it and the images that came straight from the camera. Wanting that CCD look (and there really is a difference), the interwebs lead me down the rabbit hole to the D200. Coming from mainly Canon (my main camera is a R6 MkII) the Nikon layout does take some getting used to (lens mount twists the opposite direction!) And most importantly, initially, I was a little disappointed from the images, soft and kind of flat. As you mentioned, it has a strong AA filter. I found the images do really well with some sharpening (without looking oversharpened). I'm just using the nikon software. Obviously paring with sharp lenses help, as you found with the 35mm f1.8. Same with the colors, with some minor tweaks to the saturation, I'm generally pleased with the images. I am getting that "film" look I was looking for. However, I was really hoping (maybe it's wishful thinking) I would get clean, sharp, punchy JPG's straight out of the camera. The reality is, with the D200, I have to shoot in RAW and then make some minor tweaks to the images in post. is it worth it to have another system just for that CCD look? As this is not my main camera. I'm going to give it some more time to make any final decision.
I was expecting to like the cc'd colours better than I did but I just prefer the 5D colours. If I want a CCD fix, I have a Ricoh GR Digital but then I don't particularly like it's colours either but it's worth keeping for it's B&W images.
For holiday and everyday pics I use the D200 with af-d 50, for portraits etc I use Sigma DP2 Quattro. Those 2 cameras work best for me , but prolly isn't everyone's cup of tea.
Hi Chris, great video, thank you! As soon as you said you were not too happy with the results from a D200 I was waiting for you to say “Lightroom”… And a minute or two later you said that L-word. Here’s a short version of the longer story: I tried many different raw converters and I find that the best one (for me) is Nikon’s native software. When I tried importing my Nikon raw files into Lightroom / adobe camera raw - they lacked colour nuance; they looked dirty and underwhelming. Not so in Nikon’s software. Big enough difference to warrant the switch. Personally, I really enjoy old software: ViewNX2 + CaptureNX2. But the new NX Studio is I guess ok. Give it a try; it may change your perception of D200. On this specific topic, I really enjoy my D200. In some cases it produces substantially better colours than my other cameras, including D3x and other full-frame Nikon flagships. It works particularly well on portraits *in some conditions*. D200 is clearly not a camera for every occasion, but in some instances it is spectacular!
Your probably right, Lightroom is not always the best but it can sure help simplify your workflow. My Canon 5D Classic is that camera for me though in terms of not an everyday carry but when I do use it I'm blown away by the quality of its output and I tended to prefer the 5d's IQ and consistency for getting good results over the Nikon D200. Thanks for watching.
Crikey, anything's better than Lightroom. It's raw demosaicer is so poor compared to other Raw editors even the open source program Rawtherapee! I've been using DXO's PhotoLab & it's miles better than Lightroom.
The Nikon D200 reminds me of a cat; it shoots fantastic photos only when it feels like it! I shot some autumn foliage last weekend (Australia) & I found my D200 excelled with the colour even better than my D700 at times. Yes, the D200 is an awesome camera& it pairs up well with the D700.
My D200 kit: 2x D200 bodies, 35mm f1.8 G (should be a requirement for all Nikon DX DSLRs, amazing quality for the price) plus 20mm AF f2.8 (close to 28mm FOV) and 60mm AF f2.8 Micro (90mm FOV).
Hi Chris, I have seen and commented several times on Nigel's video where he compares a D200 with a Z7. And as happened to you and many people who commented on that video, there are tons of arguments in favor of the D200 in terms of colors and naturalness of the scene. I am one of those who remembers the moment of the shot and when I see the image on the monitor, the editing in principle is to make it as faithful as possible to what I saw. There are people who value the opposite, who do not want to see so much reality reflected in the image and then make a "spectacular" edition to impress. What I think is happening between several classic film-style cameras and the more modern ones is that even in RAW the files from modern cameras are already pre-cooked. For this reason, many tell Nigel that in the Z7 they see "things" that were not in "reality", such as higher contrast, somewhat inflated colors, over sharpness, to name a few. I was just considering whether to buy a D200 or a 5D and at Nikon I already have several lenses because I use D700 and D3S and I love them. I also use M43, an E-M5 for when I need to go light and have better quality, much better quality than my beloved Pentax Q. It is a shame that on You Tube you cannot see the difference in quality between the D200 and the 5D. I live in Japan and here a used 5D is even cheaper than a D200. Maybe I'll end up with both. Thank you so much. PD. One thing about Sony, it is assumed that a few years ago they improved their color science, since it had gained a bad reputation for reproducing skin tones and artificial skies. However, some photographers still say that they find the colors strange on Sony for photography. I hope you can try that A9 before buying it.
Thanks for the comment. I'm just at the stage where I am reducing what I own and I decided I didn't need another old camera and consistently got better results from the 5D. I did buy a Sony A9 and it's colours are better than the A7S it replaced.
I managed to snag a D200 last year with a shutter count under 1500. I really enjoy it. It's not as "good" as my D850 or my D5 but I really appreciate the aesthetic of the D200s CCD censor.
Thanks for the comment, ultimately I just preferred using the 5D over the D200. If I could of achieved more consistent results with the d200 then I might have kept it but I just find it easier to get stellar images out of the 5D every time I use it.
I have had both and the 5D did feel like a cheap full frame camera, while the D200 feels like a professional crop sensor camera (I still have it). They were both released around the same time, but the 5D did feel a lot older in use. It was also around that time that DSLR's started having AUTO-ISO, letting the user focus on aperture or speed (or both). The 5D doesn't have it, but the D200 does.
Comparing a crop sensor with a full frame doesn't make much sense to me! How about comparing your 5D with a Hasselblad or a the Fuji medium frame? Would it make sense?
To me, the D200 was equal or better that the other 2 cameras, with the exception of DoF when compared to the 5D. I also have the D200 and a slew of Fujifilm cameras.and the CCD look is very good and a little different, dare I say, filmic?
Hey Chris I absolutely love my 5D. Mirror has fallen out twice and it just keeps chugging along delivering me beautiful family snaps over and over again. I have added a Nikon DF to my stable which I also really enjoy; the color SOOC isn't as good as the 5D but it takes to presets I use better and is impeccable in low light. I did some side by side shots recently and was impressed to see I could match the quality of the photos and colors between the two easily despite the $800 difference but it's still a really fun camera to use so I am holding onto it as it looks like new. I am also curious about the 6D and the D700 but don't think I could ever not also have a 5D in my arsenal...I have experimented with Fuji twice in the past but the apsc and mirrorless life just doesn't work for me personally.
I still really love the 5D and some old lenses that I have. They work a treat on the Canon R8 that I have just bought as well as I like the Canon system over other FF cameras that I have tried but I really wish they would open up the RF mount. Thanks for the comment.
I shoot jpegs only. I have the D200 but I get more pictures that I like with the D5000 for some reason. But the camera I like the most is the fuji X-T100. X-T1 is very different from the T100. i dont compare pictures from different cameras though. I just take one camera and use it and see what I get. I love the XF10. It crops digitally and upscales in camera. Its great. And I love the Samsung nex mini with the 8mm lens. I think comparing images from different cameras is unnecessary. Yes the D200 pictures are not sharp. This is a problem when I photograph landscapes from far away particularly. But close to the subjects I like it.
Each to their own, I like comparing images from different cameras....🤣. I am trying to slim down my digital cameras a lot so there will be less to compare them to moving forward. Thanks for watching. Agree, that the images from this camera on close up subjects were better than for more traditional landscape scenes.
I have an old canon 400D, and I love the entry level camera, because the outputs color amazingly beautiful. Just now I found 400D and 5D both have the same image processor, DIGIC II, so I think I maybe should get a 5D.
I was thinking: APS-C vs Full Frame Sensor, also different anti aliasing filter. The Nikon does have the CCD colors, (klunky menus) the Canon has a very particular image profile, rather warm. The canon will almost always look better. But the D200 like all CCD sensor camera's has its own perks (also highlight control problems). You might like Sony too ;-) - Fuji makes excellent camera's with beautiful camera workflow, but you have to like the output of the files. Olympus great. Panasonic not so much.
It doesn't matter really, I ultimately preferred and kept the 5D and sold the D200. I know it was like comparing apples and oranges as has been pointed out but I just decided that I didn't really need any other big, heavy or old cameras as the 5D in that regards is enough for me.
My experience with Auto IsO on Nikon bodies, is that it greatly depends on your metering settings. You're probably better off setting the metering to Matrix metering.
Thanks for this brilliant video! I own two D200, a D5100 and a D5300 - and I dare say, the D5100 is far best. Of course, D5300 creating "razor sharp" images, but best balanced images come out of my D5100. Value for money - D200 of course. Got one for only 25€ with 20.000 pics taken.
Thank you for sharing your opinions on D200. I have suffered GAS for a while, but I primarily use D500 to shoot my three four-legged furry mates. That is my go-to camera with dogs. The D3 is too chunky for me, and I don't want to spend more money to buy more lenses for the mirrorless systems.
No problems, happy to help with any GAS afflictions 😂. I recently bought a Sony A9 to help with photographing my four legged companions on the back of selling the D200 and some other bits and bobs.
It's a 1.5 crop on aps-c, so it would be circa 50mm FF equivalent (well Google says it's about 52.5mm if we are splitting hairs). Like the Fuji 35mm f1.4 is equivalent to 50mm full frame (approx.) and an Olympus m43 25mm lens would be equivalent to 50mm FF.., no?
bro what are you on about. a 35mm lens that is made for dx is still equivalent to a 50mm lens on a full frame camera. doesn't matter if it is a dx or fx lens...@@noremacbeez
Good informative video Chris 👍. I still have both the 5d and d200. Both great cameras. I use the d200 more, with a 50mm f1.8 af lens mainly for b&w jpegs. At iso 1600 it Creates a nice grainy filmic image. If you're looking for a modernish FF camera, check out the reasonably priced sony A99 translucent mirror dslr, takes all the superb , but cheap minolta af lenses, plus the more modern Sony dslr lenses. light enough , with ultrafast performance. Technically Top notch iq. Regards Dan.
Looking at your gallery on my phone was pointless my eyes and brain barely notice any difference. I have a 5D mk 2 and have problems with vignettes in the corners.
@@ChrisEdgecombePhoto I think a lot of the Canon v Nikon debate really falls on which one bought first . My first DSLR was a D70 I now use a D2x , D3s , D4 , D200 and D800 semi regularly my main camera is now an Olympus M1x due to shoulder issues . I also have several Canons including a 40d , 50d , 7d , 5D mk 2 and a 1ds mk2 which is a brick . I also have other micro 4/3 cameras . Major GAS!
The Canon 5D was 3x the price of the D200 when they were new, and the 5D is a full frame camera. They are totally different cameras and you’re trying to compare them. Total nonsense.
Well on those points yes, but are they both old - yes, are they both big - yes, are they both heavy - yes,- so it was mainly on those points I compared as well as their ability to take and achieve consisent results! So not total nonsense!
@@MrSmileyshaun I just found as per the video that it was easier for me achieve consistent good results with the 5D; I struggled to achieve similar with the D200.
I sold my D5100 and bought a used D200 . The only negative is low light performance. It was better on D5100, but it seems I have clicked more pictures with D200 in 6 months than what i clicked with D5100 in 9 years.. that makes a big statement to me. The D200 just feels right in my hand and it's a joy to use it. No way i am letting go of my D200 now.
Thanks for the comment, it did feel great in the hand and in operation, I just wasn't keen on the results.
D200 is built like a tank
D200 controls are great
D200 is weather sealed
D200 battery last a long time
D200 OVF is great
D200 has a fantastic color rendition
I don't doubt it, it did feel good to use, I just struggled compared to my other old cameras to get consistent results out of it. Others might have different experiences but this is just my view.
So if youre shooting the d200 in raw and are getting confused by why what you’re seeing on the back of the camera isn’t as awesome it’s because the d200 is showing you the jpeg preview rendering. Shoot your d200 in fine jpeg to get the ccd color science for the desired result. Shooting Raw or Nef isn’t gonna get you those film like colors and image rendering. So unfortunately you’re using it wrong if you’re trying to get on board with the ccd trend.
I definitely did shoot both and ultimately I struggled to get acceptable/good results regardless; the opposite is true with my other old big camera, the 5D where I am constantly bowled over by the ease in which it captures amazing images that has a look that I struggle to achieve with my more modern cameras.
Plus you rendered it under the "Adobe Colour" profile; try a Nikon profile instead.
@@PhillipConroy Again, for taste I try all profiles and pick the one for my starting position that is most pleasing to my eye 😀
I have to say the D200 waterwheel pic looked way better than the 5D.
Maybe, maybe not. I struggled to get consistently good results with the D200 over my other old cameras and that ultimately sealed it's fate.
I agree the D200 Looks natural the 5D looks over processed and clinical
definitely D200 better, more details in highlight aera and more pleasure to look at.
" Do I Need Another Old Camera in my Life" could be the title for a LONG ongoing series ;)
Agree, enough is enough 🤣.
Got a D200 as a permanent fixture in my car. 35mm attached. The 17-55mm is within reach 😉. My D5 follows me when I travel though. I love the Nikon ergonomy over Canon/Sony etc.
Thanks for sharing.
I love my Nikon f3.5-5.6/18-55 VR lenses. With VR, f3.5 suddenly doesn’t seem slow anymore. And it has incredible sharp optics. Light-weight too. Great bang for the buck!
People say with prime lenses, one can zoom with the feet. But that won’t change the perspective. I love the compacting effect only long focal lengths can give.
That lens was nothing but trouble for me, perhaps it was faulty.
@@ChrisEdgecombePhoto Give the lens a try again. Only a $60 CAN gamble. I have three of them. Two VRs. But even the non-VR one is sharp…and light.
@@chakwong I no longer have the D200.
@@ChrisEdgecombePhoto Then may I suggest keeping an eye out for a Nikon D3300 or D5100.
The D5100 came out in 2011, 16MP, Live View, HDR. With the 18-55 VR lens, it produces very sharp images. The HDR capability is useful in high contrast situations. Live View makes D5100 half a MILC. Despite its size and weight, I don’t mind lugging it around town. A capable all-round DSLR. Perhaps my favourite Nikon DX camera.
The D3300 came out in 2014. 24.4MP, compact, Live View, with Low Pass filter removed. My only Nikon DSLR modern enough to use the amazing AF-P f4.5-5.6/10-20 VR lens.
@@chakwong This video was all about slimming down my big old digital cameras, not adding to it 🤣
I just paid 200for this camera with the 18-200 lens. Hope I got a good deal.
What currency? If £ that seems a little steep.
The main reason I have kept a D200 for years is you can use Nikon ai and ai-s manual focus lenses and enter the lens into the non-cpu lens settings and get full matrix metering.
If you want film like images - use a lens designed for film cameras. I have a Canon 5d too - I love it but its not as versatile as the D200 as far as old manual lenses are concerned - in fact it's worse than usless in that respect.
I don't have any old Nikon or canon lenses; if I did it may have sat on my shelf a little longer. Thanks for the comment.
I used my d200 and 18-200mm vr lens for landscape yesterday beside my z7ii. The photos from the d200 I liked better. Having the extra reach and zoom range was just amazing to use in the field. I shop jpeg and raws and just adjusted the jpegs some in post and they are great. The black and whites also from this camera are just unreal. I also have a d700, zf, df. Sold my 5d classic. I liked that camera but just wasn't for me. The photos are sometimes too warm for me. I like cool more ektachrome film style images. My favorite digital camera of all time though is the d700. It is just an amazing camera. I go back and forth all the time. I had d750, then a z7, then a d700. Shot with a d700 for awhile and started playing with my old z7 raw files and was like wow the detail. So I bought another, the z7ii, but to be honest im not happy with the results out of that camera at all. For black and white I do love it. Espcially using vintage lenses, but naw. I think I am selling all of that and sticking with the d200 for reach and d700 for everything combo.
Thanks for the reply, when I was looking into getting a mirrorless FF camera I wasn't keen on trying the Nikon Z mount for some reason. I'm currently trying a Sony A9; mainly because I needed something with fast AF for tracking my dog and also the E mount system has so many lens options at differering budgets - this was a big draw. Admittedly, the Z mount system does finally appear to be opening up and that might help people switch to Nikon in the future.
Ohhh I also use the D700 and I have D3S and I'm just evaluating between a D200 or a 5D. Your opinion and experience was interesting to me.
@@mistergiovanni7183 another thing to note is the d700 is way better built than the 5d. D700 is weather sealed, 5d classic is not. This really made a difference for me in the field. I didn’t want to have to worry about the camera failing on me or getting wet. Which I’m sure a lot of people use them and get them wet. I just didn’t want to risk it. 5d classic does take beautiful pictures. It just made more sense for me to stick to one brand.
@@jharrelphoto oh, I assumed 5D was sealed too. Thanks for the warning.
Great video I’m seriously considering this camera
Thanks for the comment. Hope you enjoy it.
Thanks for your video. I have a D200, 5D, 30D and others. I prefer the viewfinder information on the Nikon as well as the button layout. Photo colours and imagery are different .
No problem, I just needed to rationalise my gear.
It's FF vs. APS-C, that's why.
I too can't imagine myself ever going back to APS-C after I went FF back in 2013 with the 6D.
I can still see the advantages of m43/aps-c but in a smaller form for a more compact setup hence why I'm reluctant to sell my XE1 and EM1 cameras even though after buying a Sony A9 they aren't going to get much use.
Wait until you're old and weight starts to matter or if you want to do bird photography and need some more reach.
I love my Canon 6D and Sigma 85mm 1.4 original. It is a heavy clunker. When I go to my Olympus em1 mkIII Yongnuo 85mm 1.7 II. It is like curling into to a fluffy bedspread on a cold day. I like the background separation on the cheap MFT lens.
I must say that on my screen the D200 waterwheel shot looks miles more appealing that that from the 5D. As for having to delve into the menu system too often.. what are all the buttons for then? I have a D300 and D700 and rarely have to delve into the menu and they are similar in terms of button driven functions. 😉
Fair points but on the whole I just prefer using the Canon 5D and the results were consistently good, mord so then when I used the D200.
Funny, I found your video as I just picked up a D200 myself. A little bit of context, I was a long time Canon 1D classic owner. With the 4mp files, poor lowlight performance, poor battery performance (factory batteries haven't been available for a long time and aftermarket ones died quickly for me) and WEIGHT lead me to not use it much. But, I loved the performance of it and the images that came straight from the camera. Wanting that CCD look (and there really is a difference), the interwebs lead me down the rabbit hole to the D200. Coming from mainly Canon (my main camera is a R6 MkII) the Nikon layout does take some getting used to (lens mount twists the opposite direction!) And most importantly, initially, I was a little disappointed from the images, soft and kind of flat. As you mentioned, it has a strong AA filter. I found the images do really well with some sharpening (without looking oversharpened). I'm just using the nikon software. Obviously paring with sharp lenses help, as you found with the 35mm f1.8. Same with the colors, with some minor tweaks to the saturation, I'm generally pleased with the images. I am getting that "film" look I was looking for. However, I was really hoping (maybe it's wishful thinking) I would get clean, sharp, punchy JPG's straight out of the camera. The reality is, with the D200, I have to shoot in RAW and then make some minor tweaks to the images in post. is it worth it to have another system just for that CCD look? As this is not my main camera. I'm going to give it some more time to make any final decision.
I was expecting to like the cc'd colours better than I did but I just prefer the 5D colours. If I want a CCD fix, I have a Ricoh GR Digital but then I don't particularly like it's colours either but it's worth keeping for it's B&W images.
@@ChrisEdgecombePhoto Once i pump up the saturation and sharpening I am getting the look I want.
For holiday and everyday pics I use the D200 with af-d 50, for portraits etc I use Sigma DP2 Quattro. Those 2 cameras work best for me , but prolly isn't everyone's cup of tea.
Thanks for the comment. I'd like to try a Sigma but they are too £££ for me to just try them.
Hi Chris, great video, thank you!
As soon as you said you were not too happy with the results from a D200 I was waiting for you to say “Lightroom”… And a minute or two later you said that L-word.
Here’s a short version of the longer story: I tried many different raw converters and I find that the best one (for me) is Nikon’s native software. When I tried importing my Nikon raw files into Lightroom / adobe camera raw - they lacked colour nuance; they looked dirty and underwhelming. Not so in Nikon’s software. Big enough difference to warrant the switch.
Personally, I really enjoy old software: ViewNX2 + CaptureNX2. But the new NX Studio is I guess ok.
Give it a try; it may change your perception of D200.
On this specific topic, I really enjoy my D200. In some cases it produces substantially better colours than my other cameras, including D3x and other full-frame Nikon flagships. It works particularly well on portraits *in some conditions*. D200 is clearly not a camera for every occasion, but in some instances it is spectacular!
Your probably right, Lightroom is not always the best but it can sure help simplify your workflow. My Canon 5D Classic is that camera for me though in terms of not an everyday carry but when I do use it I'm blown away by the quality of its output and I tended to prefer the 5d's IQ and consistency for getting good results over the Nikon D200. Thanks for watching.
Crikey, anything's better than Lightroom. It's raw demosaicer is so poor compared to other Raw editors even the open source program Rawtherapee! I've been using DXO's PhotoLab & it's miles better than Lightroom.
The Nikon D200 reminds me of a cat; it shoots fantastic photos only when it feels like it! I shot some autumn foliage last weekend (Australia) & I found my D200 excelled with the colour even better than my D700 at times. Yes, the D200 is an awesome camera& it pairs up well with the D700.
My D200 kit: 2x D200 bodies, 35mm f1.8 G (should be a requirement for all Nikon DX DSLRs, amazing quality for the price) plus 20mm AF f2.8 (close to 28mm FOV) and 60mm AF f2.8 Micro (90mm FOV).
Thanks for the comment, I really liked the 35mm f1.8, I just struggled to get consistency with this combo compared to my other cameras.
60mm macro 2.8 good all round 👍
I had a D200 on launch and found it noisy above 400iso but below that however it’s quite lovely. The CCD sensor creates lovely filmic images.
Thanks for the comment.
Hi Chris, I have seen and commented several times on Nigel's video where he compares a D200 with a Z7. And as happened to you and many people who commented on that video, there are tons of arguments in favor of the D200 in terms of colors and naturalness of the scene. I am one of those who remembers the moment of the shot and when I see the image on the monitor, the editing in principle is to make it as faithful as possible to what I saw. There are people who value the opposite, who do not want to see so much reality reflected in the image and then make a "spectacular" edition to impress. What I think is happening between several classic film-style cameras and the more modern ones is that even in RAW the files from modern cameras are already pre-cooked. For this reason, many tell Nigel that in the Z7 they see "things" that were not in "reality", such as higher contrast, somewhat inflated colors, over sharpness, to name a few. I was just considering whether to buy a D200 or a 5D and at Nikon I already have several lenses because I use D700 and D3S and I love them. I also use M43, an E-M5 for when I need to go light and have better quality, much better quality than my beloved Pentax Q. It is a shame that on You Tube you cannot see the difference in quality between the D200 and the 5D. I live in Japan and here a used 5D is even cheaper than a D200. Maybe I'll end up with both. Thank you so much.
PD.
One thing about Sony, it is assumed that a few years ago they improved their color science, since it had gained a bad reputation for reproducing skin tones and artificial skies.
However, some photographers still say that they find the colors strange on Sony for photography. I hope you can try that A9 before buying it.
Thanks for the comment. I'm just at the stage where I am reducing what I own and I decided I didn't need another old camera and consistently got better results from the 5D. I did buy a Sony A9 and it's colours are better than the A7S it replaced.
I managed to snag a D200 last year with a shutter count under 1500. I really enjoy it. It's not as "good" as my D850 or my D5 but I really appreciate the aesthetic of the D200s CCD censor.
Thanks for the comment, ultimately I just preferred using the 5D over the D200. If I could of achieved more consistent results with the d200 then I might have kept it but I just find it easier to get stellar images out of the 5D every time I use it.
I have had both and the 5D did feel like a cheap full frame camera, while the D200 feels like a professional crop sensor camera (I still have it).
They were both released around the same time, but the 5D did feel a lot older in use. It was also around that time that DSLR's started having AUTO-ISO, letting the user focus on aperture or speed (or both). The 5D doesn't have it, but the D200 does.
I didn't find auto ISO on the D200 to be that great on my experience.
Comparing a crop sensor with a full frame doesn't make much sense to me! How about comparing your 5D with a Hasselblad or a the Fuji medium frame? Would it make sense?
Probably not but it is another old camera....
To me, the D200 was equal or better that the other 2 cameras, with the exception of DoF when compared to the 5D. I also have the D200 and a slew of Fujifilm cameras.and the CCD look is very good and a little different, dare I say, filmic?
I have the X-E1 and I struggle to get rid of that one because of it's filmic rendering.
I love both the D200 and 5DC
Thanks for the comment, obviously I preferred the 5Dc.
Hey Chris I absolutely love my 5D. Mirror has fallen out twice and it just keeps chugging along delivering me beautiful family snaps over and over again. I have added a Nikon DF to my stable which I also really enjoy; the color SOOC isn't as good as the 5D but it takes to presets I use better and is impeccable in low light. I did some side by side shots recently and was impressed to see I could match the quality of the photos and colors between the two easily despite the $800 difference but it's still a really fun camera to use so I am holding onto it as it looks like new. I am also curious about the 6D and the D700 but don't think I could ever not also have a 5D in my arsenal...I have experimented with Fuji twice in the past but the apsc and mirrorless life just doesn't work for me personally.
I still really love the 5D and some old lenses that I have. They work a treat on the Canon R8 that I have just bought as well as I like the Canon system over other FF cameras that I have tried but I really wish they would open up the RF mount. Thanks for the comment.
I shoot jpegs only. I have the D200 but I get more pictures that I like with the D5000 for some reason. But the camera I like the most is the fuji X-T100. X-T1 is very different from the T100. i dont compare pictures from different cameras though. I just take one camera and use it and see what I get. I love the XF10. It crops digitally and upscales in camera. Its great. And I love the Samsung nex mini with the 8mm lens. I think comparing images from different cameras is unnecessary. Yes the D200 pictures are not sharp. This is a problem when I photograph landscapes from far away particularly. But close to the subjects I like it.
Each to their own, I like comparing images from different cameras....🤣. I am trying to slim down my digital cameras a lot so there will be less to compare them to moving forward. Thanks for watching. Agree, that the images from this camera on close up subjects were better than for more traditional landscape scenes.
I have an old canon 400D, and I love the entry level camera, because the outputs color amazingly beautiful. Just now I found 400D and 5D both have the same image processor, DIGIC II, so I think I maybe should get a 5D.
Definitely, it produces amazing images.
I was thinking: APS-C vs Full Frame Sensor, also different anti aliasing filter. The Nikon does have the CCD colors, (klunky menus)
the Canon has a very particular image profile, rather warm. The canon will almost always look better. But the D200 like all CCD sensor camera's has its own perks (also highlight control problems). You might like Sony too ;-) - Fuji makes excellent camera's with beautiful camera workflow, but you have to like the output of the files. Olympus great. Panasonic not so much.
It doesn't matter really, I ultimately preferred and kept the 5D and sold the D200. I know it was like comparing apples and oranges as has been pointed out but I just decided that I didn't really need any other big, heavy or old cameras as the 5D in that regards is enough for me.
Get the Sigma 17 50 2.8. You will not need a different lens for 90% of your shooting.
Thanks for the tip but I no longer have the camera.
My experience with Auto IsO on Nikon bodies, is that it greatly depends on your metering settings. You're probably better off setting the metering to Matrix metering.
Thanks for the tip, it might be useful for others. I no longer have the camera.
Thanks for this brilliant video! I own two D200, a D5100 and a D5300 - and I dare say, the D5100 is far best. Of course, D5300 creating "razor sharp" images, but best balanced images come out of my D5100. Value for money - D200 of course. Got one for only 25€ with 20.000 pics taken.
The D200 is certainly cheap, thanks for the comment.
@@ChrisEdgecombePhoto Well, 25€ was sheer luck, normally you should be able to get a D200 for 70 to 100 euros, depending on its condition.
Thank you for sharing your opinions on D200. I have suffered GAS for a while, but I primarily use D500 to shoot my three four-legged furry mates. That is my go-to camera with dogs. The D3 is too chunky for me, and I don't want to spend more money to buy more lenses for the mirrorless systems.
No problems, happy to help with any GAS afflictions 😂. I recently bought a Sony A9 to help with photographing my four legged companions on the back of selling the D200 and some other bits and bobs.
Ummm .... the 35mm dx lens on the d200 (APS C) is not eqivalent to 50mm full frame. Its 35mm!
It's a 1.5 crop on aps-c, so it would be circa 50mm FF equivalent (well Google says it's about 52.5mm if we are splitting hairs). Like the Fuji 35mm f1.4 is equivalent to 50mm full frame (approx.) and an Olympus m43 25mm lens would be equivalent to 50mm FF.., no?
@ChrisEdgecombePhoto correct... if your lens is a full frame 35mm eg (ai-s f2 35mm).... but not if it is the DX f1.8 ...
Assuming you were using the 35mm dx...Nikon DX lenses are crop sensor lenses.... not full frame....
bro what are you on about. a 35mm lens that is made for dx is still equivalent to a 50mm lens on a full frame camera. doesn't matter if it is a dx or fx lens...@@noremacbeez
Good informative video Chris 👍.
I still have both the 5d and d200. Both great cameras. I use the d200 more, with a 50mm f1.8 af lens mainly for b&w jpegs. At iso 1600 it Creates a nice grainy filmic image.
If you're looking for a modernish FF camera, check out the reasonably priced sony A99 translucent mirror dslr, takes all the superb , but cheap minolta af lenses, plus the more modern Sony dslr lenses. light enough , with ultrafast performance. Technically Top notch iq. Regards Dan.
No more old cameras 🤣, I've just bought a Sony A9 which isn't that old....Glad you enjoyed the video.
Looking at your gallery on my phone was pointless my eyes and brain barely notice any difference. I have a 5D mk 2 and have problems with vignettes in the corners.
Thanks for the comment.
@@ChrisEdgecombePhoto I think a lot of the Canon v Nikon debate really falls on which one bought first . My first DSLR was a D70 I now use a D2x , D3s , D4 , D200 and D800 semi regularly my main camera is now an Olympus M1x due to shoulder issues . I also have several Canons including a 40d , 50d , 7d , 5D mk 2 and a 1ds mk2 which is a brick . I also have other micro 4/3 cameras . Major GAS!
@@gp60m122 My first canon was a recent 5D and then the Nikon so that argument doesn't really apply to me as I had no prior experience of either brand.
Superb images. Can u pls share you settings for Nikon and Canon as well. Thanks, MAN!
I didn't use any specific settings, just the defaults. Thanks for the comment.
The D200 compared to Canon 5D is strange! I think you need the D700 in this experiment!
Not another big heavy camera 😂
The Canon 5D was 3x the price of the D200 when they were new, and the 5D is a full frame camera. They are totally different cameras and you’re trying to compare them. Total nonsense.
Well on those points yes, but are they both old - yes, are they both big - yes, are they both heavy - yes,- so it was mainly on those points I compared as well as their ability to take and achieve consisent results! So not total nonsense!
@@ChrisEdgecombePhoto D200 was a nice 5-series BMW and the 5D was a Ferrari. Both great at what they do, but incomparable in every way.
@@thesushifiend As above, I disagree.
@@ChrisEdgecombePhoto As above, so do I!
Well said. This guy is a canon fanboy thats why. Biased review
You are comparing with a full frame 🤔😂📷 both good cameras
Comparing with another old big camera.
Both great cameras but different one being a full frame, I think they are both great in different ways but that my opinion off course 😁🤷🏻♂️
@@MrSmileyshaun I just found as per the video that it was easier for me achieve consistent good results with the 5D; I struggled to achieve similar with the D200.