D200 or D300?

[Tony_Reyes]

I think I'm about to take the plunge and upgrade my still photography equipment. I just bought 2 Alien Bee's B800's and now I'm thinking about a new body and lens. So for anyone who has experience with these two cameras can you please tell me which one you would choose if you could do it again?

The D200 is obviously going to be cheaper but is the newer sensor in the D300 worth it? Does anyone know if the 300 has a bigger dynamic range. That would be a deal breaker for me.

[smithy]

D300...D200 is pretty old in technology. I have a D200 right now and considering jumping to the D700 when i have enough saved.

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d300/moonlight/index.htm

[Tony_Reyes]

Thank you very much for that link man. Great comparison.

I just found out the 300 isn't a full frame sensor camera. For some reason I was under the impression that it was.

Right now, I'm thinking I may just stick with what I have (Rebel XT w/a Sigma 17-70 2.8) and give it another 6 months to a year before I take that plunge. The XT has been to Europe with me and back a couple times and it has worked great. I just have always felt inferior to the cameras in the class above it. Which I would consider the 200 and 300 significantly better.

[smithy]

I have both the D70s and D200. Even though you will find the workmanship a lot better in the D200 and the response time a lot faster. It is a lot more heavier than the D70s and more cumbersome at times. I got the D200 used from a local photo shop that gave me a real good deal. And since i already have AiS prime lenses, it was no brainer to take advantage of it. I particularly like the fact that I can add non-cpu data into the D200 so I can take advantage of using older lenses. But compared to D300 or even better the D700 at 12 mp..then i would rather saveup for the better. But since most digital slr goes out dated in a matter of just 2 years, I might consider getting the F6 film camera to mix it up.

[DivotDan]

Or an F5 if you want to go w/ film, which is VERY awesome and can be had pretty easily for $300-400 bucks.

I also have the D200. It is an awesome body and much better than an entry level like the XT just due to it's ease of use. They likely are able to take very similar pictures however.

No need to wait though. There will always be something bigger and better on the horizon. In the meantime you can't take advantage of the newer technology if you don't buy it. The D300 is great, and a significant improvement over the D200's noise in any ISO above 400. The D700 is a full frame, and is that much better than the D300. Just get what you can afford and don't worry about what you can't.

And if you want something awesome on the cheap, get an N90s or N80 or something and shoot film. I'm loving getting back into my Fuji and Kodak films again. I missed it. :)

[Tony_Reyes]

For a couple years I was shooting on an F2 with a 50mm 1.4 Nikon lens. It was sweet. I'm wanting to get to that with digital. I'd like a D200 but I think I'm gonna give it a little more time and play with these lights that i got.

Good point though about not waiting for technology since it is changing constantly.

[Adam Gonzalez]

Or you can Buy the cheaper body and spend all the money on the lenses you shoot. Trust me...lenses make the difference...its like a kia compared to a lexus when you shoot pro lenses!

Nikon 80-200 2.8 $400-600 for Push Pull (own) $800-$1000 for Two Ring

70-200 2.8 $1800 Much pricey but the VR is awesome!

24-70 2.8 $1700 Pricey but glass is amazing

17-55 2.8 $969 used B&H

18-70 3.5-4.5 (own) $289

50 1.4 $500 for New Version $310 for Older

50 1.8 $120 (own)

85 1.4 $1000

16 2.8 Fisheye (used)

So take some of this into consideration. Although most of the lenses that I posted are more expensive then most people want to spend, you can find most of them via eBay or your local craigslists or (name of city)4sale.com.

Good luck!

[WaveRiderXIX]

Dude, what kind of stuff do you shoot?
Hard to recommend unless we know what you will be primarily using it for.

I went from D70 to D200. Then the Fuji S5 became my main, D200 became backup. But for the type of work environment I am usually in, I needed something that could take a beating. Then D2X. Then D700.

Out of my 3 years shooting professionally, I've only been using the D700 since release.
I used the D70 the first year, then the D200 and S5 and D2X the 2nd year.

However, I did make supplemental income that paid those cameras off.
I know the D300 is not a full frame camera.
But don't make the mistake of realizing the extra costs. I went to your website.
I see you work with paintball. I produced my own Stock Class DVD once.

The D700 and D3 suck with zoom unless you have 300 or 400mm glass on the field.
That's when the 1.6x zoom will help with a non-full frame camera.

Also be prepared to dish out $500 more for full frame glass.
I got the D700 because I "need" minimal noise and I "need" to shoot with a high ISO.

But since you have alienbees coming.. I"m going to assume you don't need a high ISO.
One of the best photographers on this forum uses a D80 and his stuff is outstanding.