Canon 40D vs Nikon D200

2»

Comments

  • bsclark_1bsclark_1 Registered Users Posts: 34 Big grins
    edited February 1, 2011
    Thank you!!!
    Hey gang,

    I just realized that I had never gotten back to this thread to thank you all for your input... I went ahead and bought the $1,000 setup from my friend, and I couldn't be happier...

    Of course, now I have a wish list that is about $2,500 - $3,000 long, but I love what I was ale to get for the money.

    The D200 with the battery grip feels large and sturdy in my hands, and the 18-200 is very versatile. Granted, I'd love to have a 70-200 2.8 someday, but perhaps that will come in time...

    Thans again for your input!!!
  • Matthew SavilleMatthew Saville Registered Users, Retired Mod Posts: 3,352 Major grins
    edited February 2, 2011
    Glad you got the D200! As a landscape photographer and random creative kinda guy, I loved the D200. It may not have the low light performance of the Canon, but it's got a built-in intervalometer for time lapses, and a pop-up flash commander for creative wireless flash. Oh, and spot metering follows the focus point around, it doesn't stay in the center. Those things make me really prefer the D200 for general outdoor photography... In fact at ISO 100, it's the best value on the market right now for nature photography. I've also shot plenty of portraits on it; again if you're shooting with decent lighting at ISO 100 or 200-400, it's an amazing camera and a good investment even in the long run because lemme tell you, the day you get into time lapse photography, you can never have too many D200's laying around. :-D

    =Matt=
    My first thought is always of light.” – Galen Rowell
    My SmugMug PortfolioMy Astro-Landscape Photo BlogDgrin Weddings Forum
Sign In or Register to comment.