New or Old - Nikon

BarryG

BarryG

I'll stick to my 2 inches
Messages
1,264
Edit My Images
No
Hi all,

I am looking to get another SLR.

What are the benefits of very new models as opposed to ones that are say, 10 years old?

I know we are over the megapixel thing now, but what else am I going to be losing out on? I'm not worried about the amount of focal points or frames per second.

Really I am after a clean image that isn't noisy. And user friendly of course.

Let's say I was looking at a D90, D200 and a D300 - is there really that much difference?
 
I know you said Nikon, but the Canon 5D Mk1 really is the bargain of the used DSLR. It has a picture quality to rival the current crop of FF sensors but without the FPS, high ISO peformance, focus speed and focal points of the newer models. But the image from the sensor still holds its own.

That's where I'd (and did at one time) put my money if the above caveats weren't an issue.
 
That's an interesting option.

Do you have any idea what sort of performance you get ISO wise? If it an produce a noise free image at 1600 I would certainly consider it.
 
Out of the 3 you listed, most of the differences are resolution and handling.
The D90 and D300 are both very similar when it comes to Image quality and noise handling.
The D200 is obviously older. but still performs very well, although it doesnt have the high ISO capability of the other two.
I had a D200 and a D90 at the same time, and the D200 always felt better to use, although the D90 was no slouch either.

I used my D200 mainly for low light live gig stuff, at ISO 1600, and whilst it was noisy, a once over with Noise Ninja or similar soon cured it.
The D200 does have a smaller LCD than both the D90 and D300, if you arent used to the big 3 inch screens, then I doubt its an issue.

The D200 will give you noise free images upto ISO 800 when exposed correctly, after that you may need to think about noise removal software.
The D90 and D300, probably give you a bit more, maybe ISO 1600 at a push with the right subject.

It would come down to your budget, what you want to shoot and where you priority lies. Do you want a newer camera for more money so less to to spend on glass, or an older body for less money and more to spend on glass.
 
BarryG said:
Hi all,

I am looking to get another SLR.[/quote


What are the benefits of very new models as opposed to ones that are say, 10 years old?
Click to expand...


It would help people make suggestions if we knew what body you were using at present.

There have been huge strides in digital camera development over that period, although 10 years is probably a bit of a stretch - the Canon 10D which most people thought was the first really viable alternative to film was only launched in 2003. It was followed in 2004 by the Digital Rebel at a price which undoubtedly brought more people into DSLR usage than any other single camera

If you're looking at cameras of around that vintage and for quite a while afterwards, Nikon were lagging badly behind Canon in the noise handling stakes, although they've made up for it in spades in recent years. If noise is your prime consideration and you're considering models of around that period, then Canon might be your best bet depending on how committed you are in terms of Nikon lenses and kit.

I know we are over the megapixel thing now, but what else am I going to be losing out on? I'm not worried about the amount of focal points or frames per second.
Click to expand...
I hardly think we're over the megapixel thing - the trend is still more pixels with each new model, coupled with improved noise performance -in fact the proportionate increase in pixels tends to be getting larger with each new model. As long as it's accompanied by improved noise performance it's no bad thing.

Really I am after a clean image that isn't noisy. And user friendly of course.


Let's say I was looking at a D90, D200 and a D300 - is there really that much difference?
Click to expand...
I'm sure the Nikon users will advise you on this. :)
 
Last edited:
TCR4x4: I guess I am looking for a good body for as little as possible. I'll be using a 50mm prime for the most part, so I just want something that will let me navigate easily and get some decent pictures out of it. Looking forward, new lenses will come, so a cheap good body is my aim.

The D90 I was using didn't do much over ISO800, so that is the limit I am used to anyway.

CT: I am not committed to any system at the moment, so a good position when it comes to it. I can choose whatever I want really. I know Nikon and like it, so that's why I am leaning towards it again.

Thanks for the advice guys, it all helps.
 
Not really.

If it had continual auto focus like the D7000 I would use it, but it's not a deal breaker at all.

I am using a MFT Olympus at the moment and having to wander round the menu to change the most basic of settings is annoying me.

The different between D300 and D300s is just video?
 
So am I right in assuming you now dont have a camera as you said you were using a D90?

I ask because I wouldnt advocate selling a D90 for a D200, but if you are cameraless currently then a D200 would be a good starting point if you dont have the biggest of budgets. However a D300 would give better IQ and be closer to the D90 that you were used to.
 
Sold a D90 a few months ago assuming the Olympus PEN would satisfy my needs.

Currently only have the PEN.
 
Ta mate.

I am leaning towards the D300 I think.

But this Canon 5D Mk1 swerve ball has thrown me a bit :P
 
Noooooo, dont do it!
J/K

Its an option, and its full frame. Just bear in mind the canon ergonomics and menus are very different from Nikon. I tried it, and hated it. Cost me a fortune.
 
TCR4x4 said:
Noooooo, dont do it!
J/K

Its an option, and its full frame. Just bear in mind the canon ergonomics and menus are very different from Nikon. I tried it, and hated it. Cost me a fortune.
Click to expand...

I've got a friend with a 5d mk 2, so I might see if I can borrow it for the weekend. I know its not the same, but at least I can have a trail run with menus etc...
 
BarryG said:
I've got a friend with a 5d mk 2, so I might see if I can borrow it for the weekend. I know its not the same, but at least I can have a trail run with menus etc...
Click to expand...

I would certainly advise that before buying one just incase you dont get on with it.
 
b****r. Could I really be a Canon man??

The weather sealing would be good though.
 
I have to say that for what I do I'd go straight for the D300, and given your leaning towards Nikon anyway, it seems a no-brainer. ;)
 
The D200 is a real bargain just now - pro build quality, a button for everything and great image quality at a true ISO 100. If you don't need high ISO (most people don't, but think they do!) it's a winner every time....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top