D200 / D300 with Nikon mf lenses?

frons

I am interested in going digital, probably a DSLR, but am not sure whether to get a D200/D300 to go with my Nikon mf lenses, or start over from scratch. I do mainly landscapes with my Nikkor 24/2.8 and 35/2 AI-s, and macro work (dragonflies) with the Nikkor 200/4 AI. AF hasn't really been an issue, so I am mostly concerned about the viewfinder and manual focus and in-camera metering. I use an FM2 so I'm accustomed to all-manual operation.

A used D200 is in my price range, though I understand the D300 is a much better body. A DX body also makes my Nikkor 200/4 an effective 300/4. Or should I sell off the mf gear to go toward a D90 or cheaper body and new lenses?

Another possible option I have considered is one of the superzoom models like the P80/P90 or Canon SX1. The far-ranging zoom might cover my dragonfly photo needs (depending on close focus distance?) and would be far more convenient for my wife and I to use for taking pictures of the kids.

Thanks for any advice or experience from those who've already been down this road.

NoahDL88

I'd keep the MF lenses, with the photos you are taking a quick focus won't be an issue, and the older lenses most often then not have better optics then the new ones.

I'd go with the 300 over the 200, and pick up a used AF for people and what not.

Don't sell great lenses that will work on every Nikon for ones that will only work on some (DX)

Cygnus Studios

You have quality glass now. No reason the change.

ziggy53

Frons, welcome to the Digital Grin.

If you are accustomed to the responsiveness of the FM2 I think the speed of any digicam is going to leave you feeling they are much too slow.

A Nikon D200 or D300 would accept your manual focus lenses as long as they are AI. The previous non-AI lenses may be converted in many cases.

Manual focus operation would not be the same as the FM2 in that the dSLRs only have a simple matte screen and are not really suitable for manual focus. The good news is that you can use the AF confirmation of the camera to let you know when you have achieved focus. You can also purchase an aftermarket finder screen from Katz Eye, for instance:

http://www.katzeyeoptics.com/item--Katz-Eye-Focusing-Screen-for-the-Nikon-D200--prod_D200.html

frons

Thanks for the feedback; the mf lenses probably are worth more in my bag. Thanks especially for the info on the focusing screens. Looks like they would be a required accessory for a dSLR.

ziggy53 wrote:

Frons, welcome to the Digital Grin.
If you are accustomed to the responsiveness of the FM2 I think the speed of any digicam is going to leave you feeling they are much too slow.

I am not sure I understand your comment. Could you elaborate?

ziggy53

frons wrote:

... I am not sure I understand your comment. Could you elaborate?

The digicams that you mentioned before, the P80/P90 or Canon SX1, have a considerable amount of "lag" compared to an SLR and dSLR. They tend not to be very viable for action activities. Depending on the age of your kids a digicam may not be a very good choice for much of what you may wish to capture.

frons

ziggy53 wrote:

The digicams that you mentioned before, the P80/P90 or Canon SX1, have a considerable amount of "lag" compared to an SLR and dSLR. They tend not to be very viable for action activities. Depending on the age of your kids a digicam may not be a very good choice for much of what you may wish to capture.

digicam "not equal to" dSLR. Got it!

seymore wrote:

Keep your lenses. They will meter and focus just fine on the D200 or 300. I have MINE on a D200 and luv em!

Thanks! Do you use an after-market focusing screen or do you find the stock one sufficient?

nancyr

I think the 3rd-party focus screens are overrated, but then I chose to shoot with a matte screen in the MF days. Easier to compose on a clean screen. BTW, I shot gymnastics back then; predictable action, but action nonetheless.

The D200 screen is excellent for MF, as it has enough bite to go "sparkly" when just out of focus. And there's always the rangefinder (green dot). I've done plenty of MF on my little D40 too... maybe I'm just weird.

ziggy53

nancyr wrote:

I think the 3rd-party focus screens are overrated, but then I chose to shoot with a matte screen in the MF days. Easier to compose on a clean screen. BTW, I shot gymnastics back then; predictable action, but action nonetheless.

The D200 screen is excellent for MF, as it has enough bite to go "sparkly" when just out of focus. And there's always the rangefinder (green dot). I've done plenty of MF on my little D40 too... maybe I'm just weird.

Nancyr, welcome to the Digital Grin.

Whatever works. I love options.

M.MoranPhotography

frons wrote:

I am interested in going digital, probably a DSLR, but am not sure whether to get a D200/D300 to go with my Nikon mf lenses, or start over from scratch. I do mainly landscapes with my Nikkor 24/2.8 and 35/2 AI-s, and macro work (dragonflies) with the Nikkor 200/4 AI. AF hasn't really been an issue, so I am mostly concerned about the viewfinder and manual focus and in-camera metering. I use an FM2 so I'm accustomed to all-manual operation.

A used D200 is in my price range, though I understand the D300 is a much better body. A DX body also makes my Nikkor 200/4 an effective 300/4. Or should I sell off the mf gear to go toward a D90 or cheaper body and new lenses?

Another possible option I have considered is one of the superzoom models like the P80/P90 or Canon SX1. The far-ranging zoom might cover my dragonfly photo needs (depending on close focus distance?) and would be far more convenient for my wife and I to use for taking pictures of the kids.

Thanks for any advice or experience from those who've already been down this road.

The D200 is currently selling cheap at best buy, I would do that if I were you, and never look back. (I shoot mine with a few AI-S lenses, and it works flawlessly)

gonzo2k

Act Now on M. Moran's recommendation.
I picked up my second D200 body yesterday for $660/shipped.
($599 + shipping and NJ tax).

Body includes battery & charger.

frons

nancyr wrote:

I think the 3rd-party focus screens are overrated, but then I chose to shoot with a matte screen in the MF days. Easier to compose on a clean screen. BTW, I shot gymnastics back then; predictable action, but action nonetheless.

The D200 screen is excellent for MF, as it has enough bite to go "sparkly" when just out of focus. And there's always the rangefinder (green dot). I've done plenty of MF on my little D40 too... maybe I'm just weird.

Thanks to everyone for the help and especially to gmonkeh for the initial heads-up in the flea market. My D200 should be here Monday.