40D Versus D200

On Dec 2, 5:47 pm, "Yvon Travailler" wrote:
"RBrickston" a écrit dans le message ...

I'm planning to buy a dslr and was looking at the new 40D body for around
11-1200. However, I've seen low actuation D200 bodies available for around
800-1000 which seems a better value. Will I suffer without a sensor dust
removal system if I go with the Nikon? I have no lenses for either camera.

D200 = noise !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Go with the 40D

Um, no, that's not true. Plus, the D200 is without a doubt one of the
most feature rich, robust cameras on the market, it's yet another
"pound nails with it" Nikon gem. Period.
http://www.mattclara.com/misc/D200/dirtyfork/index.html

--
www.mattclara.com

"Matt Clara" wrote in message
...
On Dec 2, 5:47 pm, "Yvon Travailler" wrote:
"RBrickston" a écrit dans le message
...

I'm planning to buy a dslr and was looking at the new 40D body for
around
11-1200. However, I've seen low actuation D200 bodies available for
around
800-1000 which seems a better value. Will I suffer without a sensor dust
removal system if I go with the Nikon? I have no lenses for either
camera.

D200 = noise !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Go with the 40D

Um, no, that's not true. Plus, the D200 is without a doubt one of the
most feature rich, robust cameras on the market, it's yet another
"pound nails with it" Nikon gem. Period.
http://www.mattclara.com/misc/D200/dirtyfork/index.html

---

You'd have to be careful where you hit those nails, some parts of the D200
are plastic and flimsy. Try to avoid striking in area of the card door, for
instance

It's one of those cameras that are fairly good (except for the terrible
image noise at anything over 400 iso) - but which fanboys have turned into
an icon through their non-stop chanting of 'The D200 is the most wonderful
thing in the world'

Like most mantras it's mostly complete toss - but if enough people sing it
loudly enough for long enough, it gains a curious sort of authenticity.

Why not accept it for what it is?, which a fairly good body that was born
before there was a worthy enough sensor to put inside it. It's day came,
it's day went - try to move on.


www.mattclara.com

On Dec 2, 9:16 pm, "national treasure" wrote:
"Matt Clara" wrote in message

...
On Dec 2, 5:47 pm, "Yvon Travailler" wrote:

"RBrickston" a écrit dans le message
...

I'm planning to buy a dslr and was looking at the new 40D body for
around
11-1200. However, I've seen low actuation D200 bodies available for
around
800-1000 which seems a better value. Will I suffer without a sensor dust
removal system if I go with the Nikon? I have no lenses for either
camera.

D200 = noise !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Go with the 40D

Um, no, that's not true. Plus, the D200 is without a doubt one of the
most feature rich, robust cameras on the market, it's yet another
"pound nails with it" Nikon gem. Period.http://www.mattclara.com/misc/D200/dirtyfork/index.html

---

You'd have to be careful where you hit those nails, some parts of the D200
are plastic and flimsy. Try to avoid striking in area of the card door, for
instance

It's one of those cameras that are fairly good (except for the terrible
image noise at anything over 400 iso) - but which fanboys have turned into
an icon through their non-stop chanting of 'The D200 is the most wonderful
thing in the world'

Like most mantras it's mostly complete toss - but if enough people sing it
loudly enough for long enough, it gains a curious sort of authenticity.

Why not accept it for what it is?, which a fairly good body that was born
before there was a worthy enough sensor to put inside it. It's day came,
it's day went - try to move on.

www.mattclara.com

I've owned (and still own, for the most part) a Nikon F, Nikon
Nikkormat, Nikon F3HP, Nikon 8008s, Canon Elan II, Nikon F100, Nikon
D70 and a Nikon D200, and the D200 is far and away the most feature
rich; and while it hasn't gone through the abuse the F and the F3HP
have, it appears to me to be as robust as either of those, which are,
arguably, two of the most robust slr cameras on the planet.

And as for noise, I'd put the D200 up against the 40D any day.
Besides, every dslr beats the film we were using just five years ago
in terms of high iso noise--those film images sold, thus there's no
problem with the dslr images except in the minds of those worried
about the size of their dicks.

PS "It's" means "it is,"...every time.

--
www.mattclara.com

On Sun, 2 Dec 2007 17:38:43 -0800 (PST), Matt Clara
wrote:

On Dec 2, 5:50 pm, "Yvon Travailler" wrote:
"Not Disclosed" a écrit dans le message s.com...

RBrickston wrote:
I'm planning to buy a dslr and was looking at the new 40D body for
around
11-1200. However, I've seen low actuation D200 bodies available for
around
800-1000 which seems a better value. Will I suffer without a sensor dust
removal system if I go with the Nikon? I have no lenses for either
camera.

Buy a Pentax K10D (new $650 CAD), vibration reduction, sensor cleaning
(generally most seem to think all in camera dust removal doesn't really
work) 10mp, same as the Canon 40D and a D200 (new down to $1300 CAD)
weather sealed.

you forgot the crappy auto focus, lack of lenses, terrible QC on the new
"made in Vietnam lens", the useless SR and sensor cleaning, noise at ISO
800, worst jpg engine on the market, you have to shoot raw, etc.

Avoid Pentax !!!

I believe the K10D will accept most all of Pentax's lenses, all the
way back to the early 70's. They've made some of the best in the
business, so I would not sell them short in the lens option
department.

Today's Canon DSLRs will also accept all those Pentax lenses, with a
simple adapter that I have. Those lenses were legendary in their day,
but my legendary Takumar 100 mm macro is not as sharp as my Canon
70-300mm outfitted with the 500D close-up lens.

Ed

On Dec 2, 1:17 pm, "flambe" wrote:
Dust is a real issue but sensor cleaning is very simple and does not need to
be performed very often. I recently slogged a D70 and D80 through Africa and
while dust was visible in some sky areas it is a minor issue. It takes
seconds to clean with a dry sensor cleaning pad (I have never had to use
liquid).

You can just about guarantee you will scratch the sensor this way. No
optical cleaning instructions (from reputable sources) ever advocates
touch cleaning with a dry pad of any kind.
The standard protocol for all lens and delicate surface cleaning is:
Blower (no contact) first.
Brush (minimal contact) second.
Wet cleaning last.

"Matt Clara" wrote in message
...
On Dec 2, 9:16 pm, "national treasure" wrote:
"Matt Clara" wrote in message

...
On Dec 2, 5:47 pm, "Yvon Travailler" wrote:

"RBrickston" a écrit dans le message
...

I'm planning to buy a dslr and was looking at the new 40D body for
around
11-1200. However, I've seen low actuation D200 bodies available for
around
800-1000 which seems a better value. Will I suffer without a sensor
dust
removal system if I go with the Nikon? I have no lenses for either
camera.

D200 = noise !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Go with the 40D

Um, no, that's not true. Plus, the D200 is without a doubt one of the
most feature rich, robust cameras on the market, it's yet another
"pound nails with it" Nikon gem.
Period.http://www.mattclara.com/misc/D200/dirtyfork/index.html

---

You'd have to be careful where you hit those nails, some parts of the D200
are plastic and flimsy. Try to avoid striking in area of the card door,
for
instance

It's one of those cameras that are fairly good (except for the terrible
image noise at anything over 400 iso) - but which fanboys have turned into
an icon through their non-stop chanting of 'The D200 is the most wonderful
thing in the world'

Like most mantras it's mostly complete toss - but if enough people sing it
loudly enough for long enough, it gains a curious sort of authenticity.

Why not accept it for what it is?, which a fairly good body that was born
before there was a worthy enough sensor to put inside it. It's day came,
it's day went - try to move on.

www.mattclara.com

I've owned (and still own, for the most part) a Nikon F, Nikon
Nikkormat, Nikon F3HP, Nikon 8008s, Canon Elan II, Nikon F100, Nikon
D70 and a Nikon D200, and the D200 is far and away the most feature
rich; and while it hasn't gone through the abuse the F and the F3HP
have, it appears to me to be as robust as either of those, which are,
arguably, two of the most robust slr cameras on the planet.

And as for noise, I'd put the D200 up against the 40D any day.
Besides, every dslr beats the film we were using just five years ago
in terms of high iso noise--those film images sold, thus there's no
problem with the dslr images except in the minds of those worried
about the size of their dicks.

PS "It's" means "it is,"...every time.




LOL!!! - yes, I noticed the flawed grammar after I'd submitted the post. It
happens now and then and I can only put attribute it to the IE spell-check
plug-in that I use (not having Word installed). As it utilises a US
dictionary one is constantly on the look out for *******ised spelling
(particularly the substitution of 'z' for 's') which makes the process
rather clumsy and allows the odd aberrant apostrophe to slip through.

As I said, I was aware of the error - and, actually, wondered whether you
would comment on it - which, of course you did

I can't help feeling that you did so precisely because you are a Nikon
owner. A Canon aficionado would probably be considerably less anal.

Your comment about the respective noise levels of the D200 and 4OD is a
superb example of absurd fanboy braying, btw - I had to read your statement
twice to ensure I hadn't misread it

"national treasure" wrote in message
...


I can't help feeling that you did so precisely because you are a Nikon
owner. A Canon aficionado would probably be considerably less anal.

Your comment about the respective noise levels of the D200 and 4OD is a
superb example of absurd fanboy braying, btw - I had to read your
statement twice to ensure I hadn't misread it




Maybe you are a Canon fanboi then?
Here's a news flash for you. I own s5 Fujifilm Pro cameras (which is a D200
in drag) and a Canon 20D/5D combo.

Six weeks ago the s5 (with a 70 -200 F2.8 lens) hit the concrete - lens
first when the strap came detached from it's retaining buckle. Repair was
replacement of the lens mounting flange while I waited ( with Nikon part)
and junking of the lens.

Last Saturday the 20D (with a 24 -70 F2.8 lens) bit the concrete after it's
strap slipped off my shoulder. It almost got "placed" on the ground but
maybe went into free fall for about the last 6 inches. Not much more than a
heavy handed dump on the ground.

Repairs to the 20D? Nope! Quote to replace the mirror/shutter assembly and a
new sensor exceed the cameras value. I realize now, the s5 would probably
have kept shooting were it not for the precaution of using the backup
camera. Not so with the 20D... It's pure garbage and so too will be the
40Ds.

And BTW... I'll second Matt's call on the D200 and it's grain. Nothing like
the horrible mess Canon makes of it. It also has environmental sealing.
Something Canon can't even get right on the $10,000 nightmare.

Douglas

"Douglas" wrote in message
...

"national treasure" wrote in message
...


I can't help feeling that you did so precisely because you are a Nikon
owner. A Canon aficionado would probably be considerably less anal.

Your comment about the respective noise levels of the D200 and 4OD is a
superb example of absurd fanboy braying, btw - I had to read your
statement twice to ensure I hadn't misread it




Maybe you are a Canon fanboi then?
Here's a news flash for you. I own s5 Fujifilm Pro cameras (which is a
D200 in drag) and a Canon 20D/5D combo.

Six weeks ago the s5 (with a 70 -200 F2.8 lens) hit the concrete - lens
first when the strap came detached from it's retaining buckle. Repair was
replacement of the lens mounting flange while I waited ( with Nikon part)
and junking of the lens.


Two thoughts spring immediately to mind - [1] Fuji need to supply a decent
strap and [2] most sane people would have not have found any reason to be
joyful in 'junking' an £1100 lens (that's BBP, btw] while salvaging a
ridiculously over-priced 6 MP body.



Last Saturday the 20D (with a 24 -70 F2.8 lens) bit the concrete after
it's strap slipped off my shoulder. It almost got "placed" on the ground
but maybe went into free fall for about the last 6 inches. Not much more
than a heavy handed dump on the ground.

Repairs to the 20D? Nope! Quote to replace the mirror/shutter assembly and
a new sensor exceed the cameras value. I realize now, the s5 would
probably have kept shooting were it not for the precaution of using the
backup camera. Not so with the 20D... It's pure garbage and so too will be
the 40Ds.


Are Canon (or any other brand, for that matter) to be castigated for failing
to make products that are able to stand up to your clumsiness!? - perhaps
you need something with a military spec?

I've owned several dslr's - and found them all to be boringly reliable - but
I did manage to resist any temptation to use them as hammers, or hurl them
at concrete floors.




And BTW... I'll second Matt's call on the D200 and it's grain. Nothing
like the horrible mess Canon makes of it. It also has environmental
sealing. Something Canon can't even get right on the $10,000 nightmare.

I've no experience of the high-end Canon products - but I can say that my
40D is wonderfully clean and detailed at 1600 iso.

It's kind of you to call Nikon's snow-storm of noise, 'grain', - but you
really shouldn't encourage them. Nikon are beginning to realise that their
only hope lies in a CMOS sensor - and the last thing that the dslr world
needs is a chorus of fanboys telling Nikon that noisy CCD's are acceptable.

"RBrickston" wrote in message
.. .
In article , =?iso-8859-1?Q?Rita_=C4
_Berkowitz?= ritaberk2O04 @aol.com says...
Sosumi wrote:

Unless you live in the desert and tend to change lenses in a storm,
you have no problem. I have the D40x and have never had to remove
dust. Go with the Nikon unless you want Livewview in which case
you're much, much better of with the D300.
I ordered mine ;-))

I agree, go with the Nikon. I turned the automatic sensor cleaner off on
the old Mk III a couple days after I got it. And I wouldn't use LiveView
as
a deciding factor in selecting a dSLR either. Canon's LiveView on the Mk
III is pretty lame and I can't comment on Nikon's version. I suspect
Nikon's version might not be that much better. Clean the sensor
manually.


The D300 is substantially more $ than a used D200 or new 40D; live view
capability is not a factor.

In that case: you have your answer: go with the D200.
Rita has experience with Canon also, so you should value her opinion even
more...
--
"I don?t need a camera,
I have a photographic memory..."
Sosumi

In article ,
says...
"RBrickston" wrote in message
.. .
In article , =?iso-8859-1?Q?Rita_=C4
_Berkowitz?= ritaberk2O04 @aol.com says...
Sosumi wrote:

Unless you live in the desert and tend to change lenses in a storm,
you have no problem. I have the D40x and have never had to remove
dust. Go with the Nikon unless you want Livewview in which case
you're much, much better of with the D300.
I ordered mine ;-))

I agree, go with the Nikon. I turned the automatic sensor cleaner off on
the old Mk III a couple days after I got it. And I wouldn't use LiveView
as
a deciding factor in selecting a dSLR either. Canon's LiveView on the Mk
III is pretty lame and I can't comment on Nikon's version. I suspect
Nikon's version might not be that much better. Clean the sensor
manually.


The D300 is substantially more $ than a used D200 or new 40D; live view
capability is not a factor.

In that case: you have your answer: go with the D200.
Rita has experience with Canon also, so you should value her opinion even
more...


Yeah, with the sensor dust issue not a big deal, I think the pre-owned
D200 is the much better value. Thanks to all for your comments.