DSLRUsers.com

I've got 16 shots for comparison. Same subject, lens, on tripod, etc. 8 of the shots are 100% crops. Half were shot with flash at base ISO and half were shot at ISO1600, using both NEF and JPG.

I goofed some of the in-camera parameters, like having aRGB selected in the d70 and a couple other settings, which will account for some of the color differences in the images.

I did not resize the crops to make them equal. They're simply 100% crops of the original photo.

As a side note, you can see the difference that the extra MPs make for cropping.

The rest of the images are on pages 8 and 9 of this gallery. You're welcome to download them for your own use, or to embed them here, but please do not embed any of them in other message forums. If someone is going to badmouth the images or my poor testing skills, I want to see it.
http://www.pbase.com/kerrypierce/ztest&page=8

Here are some of the 100% crops for sharpness comparisons.

Nikon D200 ,Nikkor 85mm f/1.8D AF
1/60s f/4.0 at 85.0mm iso100 with Flash
D200 JPG original


D200 NEF original


Nikon D70s ,Nikkor 85mm f/1.8D AF
1/60s f/4.0 at 85.0mm with Flash
D70 JPG original

D70 NEF original

Kerry,

I can feel your excitement and and curiosity with your new camera. But if you are going to test in a way that is of benefit to both yourself and others then really you need to test just one thing at a time in isolation. And to keep a check-list of procedures and actions for the sake of memory and consistency.

I am keen to see more of your findings, although I would suggest perhapos a subject with finer detail to resolve might prove more meaningful.

A range of subject matter that also displays the dynamic range could be a good idea also.

Cheers,

Hi Kerry, thanks for the comparison.
It appear to my eyes that the D200 has a slightly warmer cast in colour.

just a few things to test, How does it feel? are you happy using it? does it do what you want?

those are the important things a camera need to do.

Sheetshooter wrote:Kerry,

I can feel your excitement and and curiosity with your new camera. But if you are going to test in a way that is of benefit to both yourself and others then really you need to test just one thing at a time in isolation. And to keep a check-list of procedures and actions for the sake of memory and consistency.

Walter, I am generally not inclined to do such tests and don't see a ton of value in the pixel peeping. I did these tests partly because of requests for comparison to the d70 and partly for reasons I'll outline below.

I know that they could/should be more isolated and controlled, but I'm already at my limit of patience for "brick wall" type tests. I admire and appreciate the guys that can do that, but I'm just a loser for this kind of stuff.

I am keen to see more of your findings, although I would suggest perhapos a subject with finer detail to resolve might prove more meaningful.

I don't have any suitable test targets, other than perhaps newspapers.

FWIW, I don't believe that there is a significant difference in the sharpness that can be attained by either camera. The d200, like the d70, produces sharper photos from NEFs, rather than using the internal JPG engines on the cameras.

A range of subject matter that also displays the dynamic range could be a good idea also.

Yes, I know that a lot of folks would like to see this as well, but I don't know if I've got the talent for that either. My impression is that the cameras are very similar, in that respect. The d20 *might* have slightly more DR, but at this point, I've seen nothing that jumped out at me.

IMO, the general image quality of both cameras is pretty much identical, when you remove the MP advantage of the d200. Yes, I'm sure that someone will prove one better than the other by some small percentage point, but that's trivial stuff to me.

Noise is slightly better on the d200, but also not a big deal, IMO.

My main purpose in posting these test shots was to give a basis for my opinions, that folks could use as a check point.

IMO, anyone that has a d70 or d50, will not see a significant ( to me ) change in image quality if they buy the d200. I don't think that it would be wise to buy a d200 on those grounds. Both the d70 and d50 produce excellent images, certainly as good as the d200, in most respects.

The real reasons for buying the d200 are the increase in MPs, better AF and all of the other features that the d200 has to offer. From my limited experience, I don't believe that the d200 is a mini d2x, but it does offer clear advantages for AF and resolution, plus a ton of user options that are very nice touches.

I'm happy with the d200 so far and think the differences, in total, are worth the money, but I don't think it will make a huge difference in my photography, excepting for the benefits of more MPs.

YMMV.

nito wrote:Hi Kerry, thanks for the comparison.
It appear to my eyes that the D200 has a slightly warmer cast in colour.

That is probably due to the way I have the d70 set up, which includes aRGB and different values for WB presets on the cameras. FWIW, the d200 shot is closer to reality than the d70, in these shots.

Dug wrote:just a few things to test, How does it feel? are you happy using it? does it do what you want?

those are the important things a camera need to do.

It feels good, a little heavier than the d70, especially with the MB-D200 grip. There are quite a few "little things" that make the camera easier and more pleasant to use, than the d70. I really like the additional controls, the rear LCD and the shutter release. The shutter release is softer than the d70, which I believe helps reduce camera shake. The viewfinder is nice. Overall, it's a very nice camera to operate. The little things that I often find getting in the way, with the d70, are made easier with the d200.

KerryPierce wrote:

IMO, anyone that has a d70 or d50, will not see a significant ( to me ) change in image quality if they buy the d200. I don't think that it would be wise to buy a d200 on those grounds. Both the d70 and d50 produce excellent images, certainly as good as the d200, in most respects.

Kerry,
Yes, it's and those of your comments and opinions had been poosted here by me at the launch of the D200 same as 1/2 day shooting with it. Generally the D200 is a good DSLR but it does not have much advantage of the D70 apart from the optional vertical grip and more MPand just little bit fast focus.

The real reasons for buying the d200 are the increase in MPs, better AF and all of the other features that the d200 has to offer. From my limited experience, I don't believe that the d200 is a mini d2x, but it does offer clear advantages for AF and resolution, plus a ton of user options that are very nice touches

.

More MP for you to crop, it's the advantage of the D200 same as the D2x, more buffer in shooting with continuous fps (not much).
And surely it's not the mini D2x as some folks overated it, coz they only shot with the D70 or D100 and when the handle the D200, their dream: it's the mini D2x. The D200 is still miles behind the D2x.

Kerry,

I can see your point and I think that it is a good assessment just to know that there are no great anomalies. Initially I had the impression that perhaps you might have been aiming at a 'pixel-peeper' showdown between the two - fortunately you were not.

It was the added menu items that gave the D200 some appeal for me and we are clearly thinking in the same direction there.

I wish you every success with the new camera.

Besides the HSC, how else is it miles behind the D2X?

Just out of curiosity.

Sheetshooter wrote:Kerry,

I can see your point and I think that it is a good assessment just to know that there are no great anomalies. Initially I had the impression that perhaps you might have been aiming at a 'pixel-peeper' showdown between the two - fortunately you were not.

Walter,

No pixel peeping here, if I can avoid it. I simply can't tolerate too much of it. This is the first time I've ever done anything like this, but felt it was necessary to substantiate/validate the impressions that I had.

It was the added menu items that gave the D200 some appeal for me and we are clearly thinking in the same direction there.

I really like the way it handles and the added menu controls as well as the added controls on the body exterior. Unfortunately, it also makes it more difficult to switch back and forth with the d70.

I already mentioned liking the latitude that you get with working with the larger files, but didn't mention that I don't see any huge difference in time consumption, on my machine, for processing them. I've played with both Bibble 4.5 and Capture 4.4, with NEFs from both cameras and don't notice much difference. This is rather a surprise, considering the complaints about the d2x files being hard to handle. My machine is a 3+gig AMD with 2 gigs ram.

I wish you every success with the new camera.

Thanks. The extra resolution will force me to use better technique, if nothing else, or my wish for the higher rez will be wasted.

dooda wrote:Besides the HSC, how else is it miles behind the D2X?

Just out of curiosity.

I'm not sure what he means, having never used a d2x, but I tend to believe that the AF capability is still well ahead of the d200. The outer points on my d200 aren't as good as I'd hoped. They're better than the d70, how much I am not yet certain, but the lack of more than 1 + point is telling at times. The d200 center + point is fast and sure. IIRC, the d2x has several + points, so if they all work as well as the d200 center, that would be quite an improvement.

Kerry
I've heard rumours that the dynamic range is slightly improved. Be glad to hear any comments you might have on that.

Thanks for posting kerry those of us getting a D200 are keen to hear from experienced photogs l;ike yourself with hands on opinion.
Wonder if you have yet encountered this battery problem D200 users are reporting?
http://www.nikonians.org/cgi-bin/dcforum/dcboard.cgi?az=read_count&om=15398&forum=DCForumID202&viewmode=all#1
cheers
marco

Matt. K wrote:Kerry
I've heard rumours that the dynamic range is slightly improved. Be glad to hear any comments you might have on that.

My impression from working the files is that there is a slight improvement in DR, but I don't know if that's due to the camera or the new version of Capture.

I'm not sure how I'd do a test like that, where I could give objective results. I'll think on it and try to come up with something tomorrow.

marcotrov wrote:Thanks for posting kerry those of us getting a D200 are keen to hear from experienced photogs l;ike yourself with hands on opinion.
Wonder if you have yet encountered this battery problem D200 users are reporting?
marco

Thanks for the kind comment, Marco.

I haven't had a problem with the battery, but I have the mb-d200 grip, which was used for the first 2 or 3 days with AA ni-mh batteries. The camera has an internal battery that has to be charged by the en-el3e or the batteries in the grip. That apparently caused a lot of confusion for the first users, who were seeing what they thought was very poor battery performance. Those folks comprise the majority of battery issue posts.

Apparently, a few folks have encountered defective batteries. That problem is compounded by the fact that spare batteries can't be found anywhere. The stock of spare batteries was depleted by the recall/replacement of the older defective en-el3 units.

The AA's in the grip finally died early today and I put in the en-el3e. I've been playing with it off and on all day. It's still showing a full charge on the top LCD.

I have also ordered the MB-200 grip. Hopefully the supplied EN-EL3e will combine with the one they replaced for me as part of the recall and that should give me sufficient power. Look forward to more samples from you especially of the macro variety with that Sigma 150.
cheers
marco