The Nikon D200 hit the stores today. My local dealer got in 5 and I was #3 on their list. Very sweet camera. Haven't had a chance to formally test it yet, but my preliminary first 10 shots (about half with the Nikkor 10.5mm/2.8 DX fish-eye I couldn't resist picking up) look darn nice. It's also nice that this camera has/does 99% of what I want for a solid $3000 less than the D2x.
I am new to the whole DSLR thing, got a Canon Digital Rebel XT for (early) christmas gift, and a couple of lenses. Never had an SLR, and am upgrading from el-cheapo 3.1 megapixel kodak. I am totally blown away however. I'm sure the Nikon is a great camera too, but Canon has some good rebates and I got about $1500 worth of gear for about $1000, kind of the right price point for where I'm at on the photography food chain. I am going to get one more lens, so I'll have more invested in Glass than body, so I guess that means I'm locked into Canon for the foreseeable future.... What did you use to shoot your avatar?
I got Canon 20D and I must say it's awesome, but would really like to have 5D now. Well maybe 1Ds Mark II would be even nicer just can't justify the price for just a hobby I've been buying lenses playing with them and when I figure out that I don't use one too often I sell it for almost the same price I bought it. Not bad. It's fun to try them out
Feature wise and build wise the D200 is a much better body. It's better sealed, has a much larger LCD, alloy body, the available vertical grip will be a huge plus for my shooting. It has more AF zones, a better AF module (ie faster). Higher megapixel count is nice too. Image quality I can't say I've actually compared, though I have little doubt the D200 will offer visible improvement. Is this a "true Pro body"--Probably not by the standards of a 50k frame per year PJ or sports shooter, but I can guarantee there are plenty of pros out there that will use this body as it makes good financial sense, takes high quality images, is feature loaded and versatile. It's way more camera than a novice needs (a whole new subject--I go way out of my way to talk people out of a DSLR), but great for an advanced amature and some pro use.
I was sort of hoping that there was an adapter ring or something. Even if such a device cost hundreds of dollars, it seems that it would immediately make a lens collection much more valuable.
We're getting way off topic now, but in older bodies there were some adapter rings for some brands that could be interchanged and made usable, but even so you lost almost all control over exposure and such. There are just too many electronics and connections that have to be made and it just wouldn't be worth it. For instance, even if one could make the Canon lens project the proper size image on the film/sensor of a Nikon camera you probably couldn't do the same with a Nikon lens has a smaller image size and it probably wouldn't be possible to project the proper size image on the film/sensor while keeping it in focus. Optix is complicated, electronics are proprietary and complicated, then the controls for the aperture and auto-focus are also in totally different places. Realize also that some Canon lenses aren't even usable on some Canon bodies! (likewise Nikon, but to a much less significant degree and most just b/c of the advanced technology of the digitals).
There are some "off" or "generic" brands like Vivatar that fit many SLRs with adapter rings. Cheeper. Ok optics, and you loose features.
but if you already spend so much money on that DSLR to get better pics, why would you degrade it be putting inferior lenses on it?
Some 3rd party lenses are quite good and as good as or superior to some manufacture branded lenses...in particular the standard "kit" lenses from both Nikon and Canon tend to be very low end. That said, I stick to Nikkor lenses whenever possible and currently have only one old manual focus Tamron zoom buried in the closet that isn't a Nikkor.
then you shouldn't even bother with the manufacture branded low end lenses. That's if you are looking for the ultimate image quality. I know the price goes way up for the better lenses, but in the end you get what you paid for.
No question about it....but most amatures who think they want a DSLR so they'll "take better pictures" don't know that and tend to balk at paying $1400 for a 17-55mm zoom lens for their $900 camera when they can get a 18-55mm zoom in a "kit" for only $100 more. Thus, my previous comment about talking people OUT of buying a DSLR whenever possible b/c it's a rather small group of people who really need or want one and are willing to learn to use it well enough to actually take better pictures with it.
I absolutely agree. There are a lot of people out there with DSLRs who take crappy pictures no matter what lens they have on.
some also think that getting pics out of digital camera is such a time/money saver. Not, if you process your own images as opposed to shooting just jpgs on automatic setting. You also tend to shoot more pictures with digital and sorting through them afterwards can be quite a hassle. Funny, I am working on my pics as we speak
As for adapter rings, a quick google makes it appear that you can find rings to take Nikon mount lenses over to Canon, but not vice-versa. (e.g., Novoflex at around $200-250 is the most oft cited. http://www.camerahacker.com/Novoflex/EOSNIK.shtml and http://www.novoflex.de/english/html/products.htm ). You lose autofocus ability in the translation, and lenses that sit back a little into the camera have a little trouble. But, if Evan ever wants to jump ship from Nikon to Canon, there is a little bit of a path open here....
No way, you lose way more than just AF. A switch to Canon isn't an impossiblility for me, but it isn't going to happen any time soon. Nikon's going to have to fall even farther behind than they already have. Then I'd go all out.
Hijacking the thread just a tad. MaggieDDD, I bought the Canon body only, a 50mm f/1.4 prime lens, and the EF 100 2.8 Macro U cause of the reviews/rebates, but I'm picking out a zoom lens and am currently looking at the 17-85mm f/5.6 EF-S IS. Demonstrating Evans point, I am not going to pay $1400 for a lens this early in the game, $500-600 will have to do. Good lens for the money? Are there better zoom lens that I can afford?
