D3100? dump D200?

[illusion]

Seems like my D200 is now antiquated. I have used it many of times, and barely at 15,000 accentuations. But after looking over the D3100. It seems theres not much going for it, other then CF cards, and build quality, and the fact that the D200 can interface with my 28mm D lens...

The ISO is unbelievably good. And thats drawing me too it, as well as it's small statue, and it'll probably a little lighter too...

any one think it's a bad move?

 

[jomike]

The D3100 has less dedicated buttons and dials (means more menu diving), no auto bracketing, slower FPS (3 vs 5), penta mirror vs pentaprism (smaller, dimmer viewfinder) no built in focus motor and no off camera flash control compared to the D200. (There are more, cons, but these would bug me)
OTOH, the D3100 has better high ISO, movie mode and is signifcantly smaller and lighter, meaning you would take it with you more.

Your call. Personally, I would look at a SH D90 or even D300.

 

[oldnick]

I moved from a D60 to the 3100, love it. Like you I love small, light cameras. There is nothing to touch the 3100 in this respect

 

[illusion]

The D3100 has less dedicated buttons and dials (means more menu diving), no auto bracketing, slower FPS (3 vs 5), penta mirror vs pentaprism (smaller, dimmer viewfinder) no built in focus motor and no off camera flash control compared to the D200. (There are more, cons, but these would bug me)
OTOH, the D3100 has better high ISO, movie mode and is signifcantly smaller and lighter, meaning you would take it with you more.

Your call. Personally, I would look at a SH D90 or even D300.

hmmm This is why I'm abit hesistant, Im always shooting in A and M nothing else, if the FN button can work as an iso, and i just have to alter the WB then I'm happy as pie. I really would like a quieter camera and the ability to happily use ISO800, and ISO1600. D3100 does just that. I'm use to rangefinders, and how quiet they are, the D200 is anything but quiet.

But I also have an elinchrom kit, and some other flash, but my friends d60 worked with it... I don't use nikon speedlites... but third party speed rings and what not (elinchrom quadra, etc.)

The AF motor does suck indeed, it means I would have to sell my 28mm D but It should work with my 24-70mm G no? and with the 35mm and 24mm G I'll just get one of them if they work since I love shooting around 28mm.

Viewfinder is important imo, but to be honest, I might get a cateyez later down the track, and I've worked on a d60 before... It would bug me, but not to the point of oblivion, as long as i have my horizontal, and vertical lines.

I moved from a D60 to the 3100, love it. Like you I love small, light cameras. There is nothing to touch the 3100 in this respect

Yeah Ive been shooting with rangefinders for a while i prefer smaller low profile cameras, especially when you're shooting round in dodgy areas. Is the D3100 made out of plastic again though? no magnesium? I assume nikon wouldn't spend much on the body design, but I haven't looked at upgrading since last year...

 

[tim_uk]

It really depends how much you will use the new features but you will have to get used to the cheaper feel of the D3100.

When I first went to try a D40 and indeed all the Nikon's in the shop they felt like children's toys and I was very sceptical about buying one - this was in comparison with the contax film cameras I was used to. However I bought it and it takes great pictures, just about fits in a coat pocket and weighs nothing with the 35/1.8 lens. This means you can have it with you all the time which is a great asset.

I am about to change to the D7000 as this doesn't seem much bigger yet has a lot more features but I would be dubious about getting anything bigger or heavier now. My D40 has had a few knocks and still looks mint so I wouldn't worry too much about the build quality differences.

 

[illusion]

It really depends how much you will use the new features but you will have to get used to the cheaper feel of the D3100.

When I first went to try a D40 and indeed all the Nikon's in the shop they felt like children's toys and I was very sceptical about buying one - this was in comparison with the contax film cameras I was used to. However I bought it and it takes great pictures, just about fits in a coat pocket and weighs nothing with the 35/1.8 lens. This means you can have it with you all the time which is a great asset.

I am about to change to the D7000 as this doesn't seem much bigger yet has a lot more features but I would be dubious about getting anything bigger or heavier now. My D40 has had a few knocks and still looks mint so I wouldn't worry too much about the build quality differences.

Yeah I like rangefinders too. The main issue with the D200 is the ISO. A lot of times I compensate myself by using close to base ISOs I do want a camera that can perform better. Again I what the same WB setting I have, especially the Kelvin, I use that the most.

The weight, and size can be such an issue at times... Like carrying all your mandarin, and swedish books to uni, and a laptop, and a camera with a prime. Even that requires effort for myself...

I like to take RAW+Jpeg Large fine.

Going to D3100 means switching medium from CF <3 to sdxc =/ But that shouldn't be an issue I suppose. I also just caught word about the Fujifilm Finepix X100, but again I don't knwo if I'll have the money for that, and if that camera ends up being a gimmick.

Either way I was planning waiting to janurary/feburary hoping prices would drop a bit on the D3100. D3100 for me has to work with the following lenses though

24-70mm G
24mm f/1.4G
35mm f/1.4G
85mm f/1.4G

If I'm going to change I still want acess to some hot glass, and of course my zoom.