d200 or d90

[amdg79]

I have a D60 and one of the frustrations I have is that it will only auto focus glass that is designated AF-S. I have 2 lenses 50mm f/1.8 and 85mm f/1.8 that will not AF on this body. Hence, I am looking to upgrade the body.

My choices are a D2X, D200 or D90. I can't afford a D300 so I am limiting my choice to those three bodies.
Anyone have any suggestions?

[SNAPaPHOTO]

I assume your looking at used.
I personally don't care for the d90 video option and would never use it, however if you ever plan to move up from there it may be better to get the d90 as that will be marketable to more people than the d200. I just finished teaching a class on the d90 last night, and it isn't a bad little camera.
The d90 and the d200 use the same battery grip and batteries. The D90 is faster for focusing than the d200 as well.
Just my opinion though.

[amdg79]

I finally took the plunge and after much deliberation and consideration and digging into my pocket, I decided on the D200 over the D90. Yes, the D200 is 5 yr old technology but I wanted to get a camera that would first of all meet my need to AF my 50mm f/1.8 and 85mm f/1.8D lenses (which the D60 wouldn't do) and secondly, one that would get me a semi-pro model camera. The D90 is still geared towards the consumer/hobbyist market.

[SNAPaPHOTO]

Nothing wrong with the d200. I used to personally own one. You will enjoy it, however now you have some homework. Get out there take some pictures and post them!

[LuisV]

You already made the choice so I am really late in answering but, in any event, for the others that may read this in the future......

This is a common question/comment in many forums. "Should I buy used gear?" or some derivation of that. In many cases there is the question includes a comparisson between various "levels" (for lack of another way to put it) of a camera line. Here's my two cents......

First the question of used equipment.... It's typically less of a problem than most make it out to be. Of course, new gear is new gear. The tech is constantly advancing, systems get better, ect. ect. However, that does not mean the older camera stops working or loses its ablity to take great photos. Common areas of change are Autofocus Systems and sensors.

For example, recently Nikon took a leap in AF technology, their sensors have gotten higher MP counts (a bit) and have improved noise control. A D300s and/or D3s can both shoot at higher ISO's and still produce clean shots. ISO 3200 is not uncommon. However, if you shoot between ISO 100 and 400, it's pointless to you. Sure, nice to have but it's not going to be something you used everyday. For me, for example, neat, but I shoot 95% of my work is shot at ISO 100 to 400. In terms of 10MP vs. 12MP... you will really not notice it on quality photos. ie. Sharp, well exposed, subject filling the frame, etc.

In terms of AF system, I would say this is more of a learning curve than a true tangible difference in AF systems. What I mean is that the newest AF systems changes the camera's internal process, but in the end the goal is the same, a sharp image. For example, I picked up a D3X at the end of last year. The AF system changed drastically from the D2X. The D2X was quite good. I loved the layout of the AF sensors and the fact that they covered a large area of the frame. On the D3X I have the new 51 point system. Sure, it is great. It seems faster, but I had/have a bit more getting used to. Until I get used to it, I get a bit more hunting than I did on the D2X. The D3X is clearly faster and the AF lock and track is better, but the D2X's AF system still works great and still gives me wonderfully tack sharp images.

Like everything, there are some things you need to be aware of. First, it goes without saying that you need to be aware of what you are buying. You need to be sure the camera is in good shape and that it has a reasonable number of shots run through it. In addition to that, look at to what you plan to do with the camera. ie Choose the right body for your needs. Don't overkill it because, just as with a new camera, if you have left over funds, you can buy things like more glass. ie. Would you be better served buying a $1500 used D2X vs. a $700 used D200? For the $800 you could get a great lens, especially on the used market. Keep other things in mind about the new camera.... for example, is video a big need?

Specifically with this original question... D2X vs. D200 vs. D90.... I will give you some pros and cons of each.

D2X - Pros: Built like a tank. Fantastic color rendition. Fast AF system. CF Cards are fast. Good sized LCD screen. Pro quality shutter mechanism. This unit is built to last well into the 100's of thousdands. 8 FPS max frame rate in 6MP DX mode. Battery life is insanely long. I've shot 2000 shots on a charge with power to spare. Vertical shutter release. Great balance. All controls at your finger tips. No need to menu hunt. Cons: Weight. No built in flash for "emergency situations" and/or built in commander mode for Nikon's CLS. (all Nikon pro bodies suffer this problem)

D200 - Pros: Built very well. Not a D2X or D3X, but still excellent. CF Cards are fast. Fast AF system. Good sized LCD screen. Excellent quality shutter system. Very good 5 FPS speed. Battery life is very good with the single battery. Excellent when the MB-D200 is in place. Great color rendition. Most controls easily seen and very little need to hit the menus. Cons: No vertical shutter release unless you add the battery pack. With the battery pack, it becomes almost as heavy as a D2X.

D90 - Pros: Video. Good AF system. Good shutter. Very good 5 FPS speed. Battery life is good with the single battery. Color rendition is great as well. Sensor is an evolution of the D2X sensor. Light weight. Cons: Build is not at the quality of the two others. Not as sturdy. No vertical shutter release unless you add the battery pack.

One last comment. The D200 and D90 use different battery packs.........They are not the same. The D90 uses the same pack as the D80 did......