Worth upgrading to the D200?

[Lovesong]

17th street are pretty good... OK, they're up there with B&H and Adorama.
http://www.resellerratings.com/store/17th_Street_Photo

In terms of dealing with 2 resellers through amazon, I've done it on a number of occasions. I ordered my 24-70L through amazon, and it was fullfilled by adorama. I think that all the stores that sell through amazon are pretty legit.

 

[djbahdow01]

Looks as though you are looking at def getting the D200. The vertical grip is great. Works just like the regular shutter. Occasionally you get a misfire, either it takes one you don't or it doesn't take one you need. but that has only happened to me maybe 25 times out of the 52000 shots I have used it for. All in all its a perfect compliment to the camera fit wise, the only thing I've heard gripes on were that it sometimes unscrews a little. I've had it happen a few times but you get used to it. Just re-tighten it.

If you are looking for decent prices look at Cameta Camera on EBAY, they seel brand new, and are an authorized Nikon dealer. They sell pretty good packages with the Camera, grip, extra batteries, memory, etc. Some of the stuff is useless for some, but the majority of the stuff they offer with it is great. They have many different options to choose from and if you don't find what you are looking for you can call them up as they are an actual Brick and Mortar store and will work with you to get the package you want.

I've gotten many items from them and have been really happy with them.

 

[milozauckerman]

(to clarify, Tri-X in 35mm, color neg in larger formats, my first post wasn't clear)

If you're underexposing, switching brands isn't going to take care of that, like shooting positives, digital needs you to be as far right as possible, fortunately we get histograms for checking exposure.

Thing is, I'm not going to continually check histograms when I'm shooting. I expect the 109827-pixel metering they advertise to actually work. I don't stop between every shot with my Leica to get a light reading, and Nikon certainly doesn't tell dSLR owners that they should.

Underexposure is a commonly reported issue (or 'feature' as some might say) with the Nikon dSLRs of that generation and even into the D200s. Nikon wants to 'protect' the user from blown-out highlights.

What experience I have had with Canon digital bodies points to it being less of a problem - maybe Canon's more willing to let you blow out highlights if you're not careful.

I wouldn't say focus speed "pales," but price-wise Canon wins hands-down in the long glass. I've shot Canons in the same category from the same time period as the D70, and they're pretty equivalent.

Nikon doesn't offer the same speed and the same features as Canon does in decently-priced prime lenses. In high-end and constant zooms, I'm sure they're pretty much equal.

But my 50/1.4USM has no Nikon analog at its price point, Nikon offers little in the way of fast and wide glass (you have to go to Sigma's 30/1.4 - Canon gives you options in the 24-35 range). The Nikon primes often feature cheaper construction and terrible focus rings (similar to the design of the $65 Canon 50/1.8 - that thin strip of hard plastic perfect for slipping the edge of your finger in the shot).

[qutoe]Why wait? You're obviously unhappy- and you're missing pictures now.[/quote]
Waiting for some kind of dust protection feature, and I'm quite happy shooting more film now.

 

[compuwar]

(to clarify, Tri-X in 35mm, color neg in larger formats, my first post wasn't clear)



Thing is, I'm not going to continually check histograms when I'm shooting. I expect the 109827-pixel metering they advertise to actually work. I don't stop between every shot with my Leica to get a light reading, and Nikon certainly doesn't tell dSLR owners that they should.

When you're shooting film, you have the same issue when the light changes, histograms are a lot easier to deal with than spot meters. But really- you normally don't need to change out the exposure compensation until you get a shift in light that's not linear. Even though the Canon meters bias more toward the high end, the situation is the same- so just dial in some positive exposure compensation. All camera (and off-camera) light meters work essentially the same way- while you get some interesting "database" things going on with 3D Matrix metering, if you're wanting the best exposures, you're going to have to work within the system. It's certainly easier than trying to catch a sunset picture with a 5x7 and a Sekonic.

Underexposure is a commonly reported issue (or 'feature' as some might say) with the Nikon dSLRs of that generation and even into the D200s. Nikon wants to 'protect' the user from blown-out highlights.

Just like setting up for a new film, you need to calibrate the equipment to how you shoot. Changing film types always meant re-calibrating- the sensor is your film- you only have to do it once for the most part, and it's *really* easy to validate with the histogram once you do it.

Shooting for ~2.5 hours outside today in changing light, it took two shots to dial in exposure comp. on the histogram, and all my shots were where I wanted them for the day, despite the ever-changing lighting.

Once again, if you're not doing the right things shooting digital, you're not going to get the best shots from *any* manufacturer's system.

What experience I have had with Canon digital bodies points to it being less of a problem - maybe Canon's more willing to let you blow out highlights if you're not careful.

There are tons of threads on Canon's metering bias, every time I've shot with a Canon, I've used the histogram to adjust exposure compensation- it's generally been lesser number-wise, but it hasn't been negated.

Nikon doesn't offer the same speed and the same features as Canon does in decently-priced prime lenses. In high-end and constant zooms, I'm sure they're pretty much equal.

But my 50/1.4USM has no Nikon analog at its price point, Nikon offers little in the way of fast and wide glass (you have to go to Sigma's 30/1.4 - Canon gives you options in the 24-35 range). The Nikon primes often feature cheaper construction and terrible focus rings (similar to the design of the $65 Canon 50/1.8 - that thin strip of hard plastic perfect for slipping the edge of your finger in the shot).

I've never had a focus problem, or problem from build-quality with any Nikkor I've shot, but then I can say the same for my Mamiya 645 and Pentax 67 lenses- I think the last time I had a lens issue, it was an early-eighties Soligar zoom. If you have a 50/1.4, I don't know why you didn't just stay Canon, but the Nikkor 50/1.4 looks like it's in the same price range.

Less than 1/10000th of 1% of what I shoot would ever need to be both fast and wide, so that's not somewhere I have done a lot of research, but the sales of lenses faster than f/2 has never been a large market.

[qutoe]Why wait? You're obviously unhappy- and you're missing pictures now.

Waiting for some kind of dust protection feature, and I'm quite happy shooting more film now.[/QUOTE]

You may want to read how poorly Canon's anti-dust feature actually performs before "waiting." There's a thread in this board with a link- but the long and short of it is that it actually made things worse.

Personally, if I already owned a D70, I'd be trying to get the most out of it I could. I know I can make perfectly saleable images with a D70, just as I could with a 5D or a 1DSmkII or Rebel 350.

Using sensor swabs really isn't that difficult, and produces much, much better results than any "anti-dust" feature, but Canon's is about the worst out there.