30D vs 5D vs D200

[ScottE]

According to Popular Photography, not only is the 30D not a 200D killer, the 200D more than rivals the 5D. A quote from the Popular Photography web site:

"Now that we've run the actual D200 through a host of Pop Photo Lab and field tests, we've discovered the answers to the first two questions. Images from the D200 rival those from the D2x in resolution, color accuracy, and overall image quality. The D200 averages 2,075 lines of resolution (see test results). That's the same as the D2x—and 300 lines higher than the Canon EOS 20D or new 30D (see our review of the 30D on page 62). It also delivers excellent color accuracy, on par with the D2x and nearly as good as the EOS 20D. But the real surprise is that the D200 captures images with slightly higher resolution and color accuracy than Canon's full-frame 12.8MP EOS 5D ($3,000, body only)."

http://www.popphoto.com/article.asp?section_id=2&article_id=1844

I sometimes take the commentary in Popular Photography articles with a grain of salt, but their objective measurements are usually correct.

I expect that the 30D will be a short lived model before it is replaced with one that is competitive with the D200 and that the 5D is due for a tune up (5DN?) that will enable it to get the resolution that its sensor should be capable of. A 12 mp pixel sensor should not be out resolved by a 10 mp sensor in any test. Come on Canon. It's time to roll up your sleeves and get to work.

[Tsmith]

There's no doubt that Nikon has a very good camera in the 200D but for now the 30D will have what I've been longing for in a DSLR. There have been several reviews showing the 20D besting the D200 in image quality at higher ISO ranges. I'm happy with Canon's product line so if the 30D is short lived I'll still have a plenty of powerful camera for the time being that'll supply by needs.

[A.Ulleri]

Well that's been my problem this past month. I've been swinging back and forth between the 30D and the D200. Im buying all new equipment so I've been trying to figure out which company to go with. It's been tough to decide, but I'm heavily leaning towards the 30D these past few days.

[Diminished29]

There's no doubt that Nikon has a very good camera in the 200D but for now the 30D will have what I've been longing for in a DSLR. There have been several reviews showing the 20D besting the D200 in image quality at higher ISO ranges. I'm happy with Canon's product line so if the 30D is short lived I'll still have a plenty of powerful camera for the time being that'll supply by needs.

I'm surprised your getting a 30D when you already have a Rebel XT, which in my opinion is practically the same camera unless your a sports shooter and need the extra frames, ISO, 2 pts of focus or 1/8000 shutter, but your lenses don't show that. So, just curious. Not trying to step on your toes or anything, since the 30D is a fine camera and its also a metal body instead of plastic and probably a bit nicer feeling, but again just curious.

[prime80]

If you look at the sensor only, yes the XT is very similar to the 20D/30D. However, for me at least, the handling, control layout, better focusing ability, etc are big enough improvements that I will be upgrading mine as well. I'm just waiting on the 30D to show up to decide whether I get a 20D (used or new) or a new 30D.

[ed rader]

I'm surprised your getting a 30D when you already have a Rebel XT, which in my opinion is practically the same camera unless your a sports shooter and need the extra frames, ISO, 2 pts of focus or 1/8000 shutter, but your lenses don't show that. So, just curious. Not trying to step on your toes or anything, since the 30D is a fine camera and its also a metal body instead of plastic and probably a bit nicer feeling, but again just curious.

could be he just wants a different camera...maybe one a bit bigger. a lot of what you read on these forums is folks rationalizing their "upgrades" anyways.

you know, bashing the equipment they used to rave about to justify buying the latest and greatest.

not that there's anything wrong with that :D .

ed rader

[Tsmith]

I'm surprised your getting a 30D when you already have a Rebel XT, which in my opinion is practically the same camera unless your a sports shooter and need the extra frames, ISO, 2 pts of focus or 1/8000 shutter, but your lenses don't show that. So, just curious. Not trying to step on your toes or anything, since the 30D is a fine camera and its also a metal body instead of plastic and probably a bit nicer feeling, but again just curious.

Well Ok _ first off as I've said before if the 30D would have been available when the XT had I'd never would have bought the XT. The 30D offers a lot more features that appeal to me in a camera: ISO adjustable via the viewfinder, 2.5" LCD (same as 5D), Spot Metering, 25% more battery capacity, way better build quality and that's just to name a few of the most important things.

Now let me ask you: wanna buy a slightly used XT in a few weeks? _ :lol:

[ghocking]

The D200 may have build and extras over the 5D, but what I have read and seen it cannot touch the 5D on IQ. There again if I was just starting out on the DSLR route and only had budget for D200/30D, I think I would go the D200 way.

[stjhie]

I think the biggest problem with 200D is that it has a very high noise above iso 400. That is not what you want form a dslr camera. 30D and 350D has surely a better management in noise.

[Tom W]

....
I sometimes take the commentary in Popular Photography articles with a grain of salt, but their objective measurements are usually correct.
....

I'd like to agree, but they do have that insistent habit of throwing out the unsupportable claim that the XT is "unuseable" at ISO 1600 from time to time. That's just plain untrue.

I do appreciate their more substantiated claims, but I always keep a grain or two of salt handy when reading since the other stuff gets thrown in from time to time.

[shiato storm]

Well that's been my problem this past month. I've been swinging back and forth between the 30D and the D200. Im buying all new equipment so I've been trying to figure out which company to go with. It's been tough to decide, but I'm heavily leaning towards the 30D these past few days.
what sort of nudge do you need to go over the edge?

[roanjohn]

The D200 is a great camera.........its only downfall is that you cannot attach the 85 f1.2, 35 f1.4, 24 f1.4 and all the other EF lenses on it. So I guess at this time, even the XT is higher up with the D200 for me :-)

Seriously though, the D200 is an AWESOME camera.....I got to play with one in B&H the other day.......IF anything, it is pushing the prices down on the new Canon offerings......which is a good thing. I think if you look at the specs, it will be D200 > 30D > 5D.........however, IQ and useable high ISO's, it will be 5D >30D > D200 (resolution does not count as you can have 35 mpx with really bad IQ).

Ro1

[kross]

I would have gotten the D200 if its noise performance is on par with canon.... Its features and price are simply irresistable!

[mdr]

Amateur Photographer carried out a thorough comparison test between the 5D and D200. They oncluded that the IQ of the 5D was visibly better than of the D200, even at low ISO's, the handling of the D200 was better, and the D200 was much better value for money, so the Nikon came out on top.

However, they forgot to take account of the fact that the test was carried out using the 5D fitted with, not digitally optimised Canon 28-135mm f3.5-4.5 IS USM lens released 8 years ago whereas the D200 was fitted with the just released top of the range, digitally optimised Nikkor 17-55mm f2.8 AFS lens. The IQ of the Canon combo turned out to be visibly better, so I wonder how the IQ would have compared if they had used the Canon 24-70mm f2.8 L lens which is optically in the same league as the Nikkor.

Regarding that value for money, the Canon combo is actually cheaper than the Nikon combo used in the test!

Test are always subjective, however 'objective' they are written.

[roanjohn]

I heard from a different forum that the extra resolution from the D200 are actually derived from its banding issues!!!

YIKES!!!

Ro1

[Tsmith]

the XT is "unusable" at ISO 1600 from time to time. That's just plain untrue.

Tom _ thats the reason I avoid their reviews anymore. I've gotten very nice results using ISO 1600 with my XT. Just think of the people that base their decision on false statements like that ... :rolleyes:

[Tom W]

Tom _ thats the reason I avoid their reviews anymore. I've gotten very nice results using ISO 1600 with my XT. Just think of the people that base their decision on false statements like that ... :rolleyes:

They've got a large readership, so I suspect that there are plenty of people basing their decisions on those kinds of statements. I wouldn't mind if they backed up such claims, but that "ISO 1600" one has been around for a while, and it's as false now as it was when first made. I had an XT - it was very useable at 1600.

That is why I increasingly turn to places like DPReview for equipment reviews. Not perfect, but the evidence and methodology is right there in front of you.

[prime80]

Did anyone else notice this paragraph in their reveiw?

Choices for noise reduction include a setting for long exposures or shooting at higher ISOs. In our tests, turning on the higher-ISO noise reduction allowed the D200 to reach Extremely Low noise levels at ISO 1600. That coincided with a 5-percent drop in resolution—a great tradeoff for anyone needing low-light, ISO 1600 shots without flash that rival those taken at ISO 100 by most other DSLRs in bright light.

That goes against every other review I've seen. Seems kind of strange that they are the only ones getting such good high-ISO results.

[ssim]

Without a doubt Nikon makes some very fine cameras. They would not have the following that they do if they didn't. For those that are just starting into the DSLR market, Nikon offers a very viable option in the D200.

As much as publications like to make that their testing is scientific, the test results are still somewhat subjective. It would be interesting to know what camera body the tester/s use in their personal lives. There have been too many reviews showing the 5D equal to or above the D200 to put alot of water in the validity of the PopPhoto review.

At the end of the day, both of these camera bodies are very good and will suit alot of photographers very well. Opinions will rely largely on which camp your allegiance lies in.

[A.Ulleri]

what sort of nudge do you need to go over the edge?

Actually holding a 30D and a D200 whould help. One can't be found and the other isn't released. That would help but really it's coming down to a few things for me. I'm going to be shooting motocross a lot in sand pits and dusty race tracks. So the sealing on the 200D is really important to me. The bigger buffer is also appealing. For the Canon it's lens quality. I need a range of atleast 300mm. So with my budget I can get a 200D with only the new 18-200mm. With Canon I can afford the 24-105mm f/4 and the 70-200mm f/4. Both L versions. For this reason alone I'm leaning to the Canon because of the lenses which will last me longer that the actual camera when I upgrade down the line. I know there has been high praise for the 18-200mm for nikon but it can't compair the the L lenses...can it?

[Krapo]

If only the 5D was able to shoot at 5fps, it would be the perfect match for my needs!

I'll wait for the 5Dn :)

[roanjohn]

If only the 5D was able to shoot at 5fps, it would be the perfect match for my needs!

I'll wait for the 5Dn :)

Don't......the 5Dn will just have a bigger LCD..........:lol: :lol: :lol:

Ro1

[MrChad]

Well Ok _ first off as I've said before if the 30D would have been available when the XT had I'd never would have bought the XT. The 30D offers a lot more features that appeal to me in a camera: ISO adjustable via the viewfinder, 2.5" LCD (same as 5D), Spot Metering, 25% more battery capacity, way better build quality and that's just to name a few of the most important things.

Now let me ask you: wanna buy a slightly used XT in a few weeks? _ :lol:

I say hold out the next Rebel XT-N (370D what ever, right?) it may have the 1/3 ISO and 2.5" LCD come this fall when Canon usually annouces the new toys before Xmas.

The rebel may never feature spot meter though, but the picture style, and 2.5"LCD clearly must be offered in the Rebel line too wouldn't you think?

[digitaljoe]

No ways can the D200 match the 5D on IQ. But the D200 is a great camera at its price point.

[MrChad]

Actually holding a 30D and a D200 whould help. One can't be found and the other isn't released. That would help but really it's coming down to a few things for me. I'm going to be shooting motocross a lot in sand pits and dusty race tracks. So the sealing on the 200D is really important to me. The bigger buffer is also appealing. For the Canon it's lens quality. I need a range of atleast 300mm. So with my budget I can get a 200D with only the new 18-200mm. With Canon I can afford the 24-105mm f/4 and the 70-200mm f/4. Both L versions. For this reason alone I'm leaning to the Canon because of the lenses which will last me longer that the actual camera when I upgrade down the line. I know there has been high praise for the 18-200mm for nikon but it can't compair the the L lenses...can it?

The new issues of PopPhoto rated the 18-200mm, it did very well on the shorter side but has IQ on par with most hyper-zooms like the Tamron / Sigma pair as you go more tele. The VR does add a huge boon though IMO.

I was entertaining selling all of my Canon gear just before I purchased my 24-70/70-200 L combo. (I wanted to look at every makes f2.8 pair since the $ sunk was a good bit) When I looked at both line-ups I always liked the Nikon bodies better, but Canon really had the larger lens choice. Now, for the pair of lenses I purchased Nikon had a good equivilant in the 28-70/80-200 combo.

But if you look at lenses like the budget friendly 17-40 and 70-200 f4L, they really don't have too many Nikkor equivs. In fact, the Canon really has a huge basket full of 70-xxx zooms to fit all budget, Nikon had a lot fewer choices in this area.

It just appeared Canon had alot more budget flexibility for me over all then Nikon for the glass. If I owned Nikkor glass I wouldn't switch up to Canon, but for me Canon had the glass so I didn't feel the need to switch systems.

The other problem was most of the Nikkor's I liked vs. the Canon glass were DX lenses, and I really wanted to invest in lenses that would work on film now and FF Digi down the road.

[rklepper]

3 very different cameras. I am not sure what the purpose is to trying to compare them.

[Tsmith]

I know there has been high praise for the 18-200mm for nikon but it can't compair the the L lenses...can it?

NO it can't and I've seen results with that lens and not that impressive IMO.

[Tsmith]

I say hold out the next Rebel XT-N (370D what ever, right?) it may have the 1/3 ISO and 2.5" LCD come this fall when Canon usually annouces the new toys before Xmas.

The rebel may never feature spot meter though, but the picture style, and 2.5"LCD clearly must be offered in the Rebel line too wouldn't you think?

You're probably right but I'm wanting the more solid built body too. Don't get me wrong as I like my XT immensely but compared to a 20D its almost night and day the build quality.

[hef]

I own both. And I can tell you that the Canon 5d is superior to the Nikon D200. The 2 points it blows it out of the water is IQ and ISO. I don't have a long time with the D200, but I will be putting it through some extra testing this weekend. I took pictures in a classroom setting last week using Priority mode, iso800 and RAW settings. The 5d was fitted with my 24-70 f/2.8, but the Nikon D200 was only fitted with the kit lens (not a real good comparison). However, I did notice a lot more noise in the pics generated from the d200. As soon as we have a sunny day here in WNY, i'll get some good tests. Hopefully this weekend.

[ACDCROCKS]

Do you think a company will bid on how much positive or tell the consumer about stuff such and such? I have a few Popular photography mag. and I think therye the not the best,. they did a review of 6 cameras or something and when they tried showing quality, they used a itty bitty square, I think the size of a quarter to show the quality

[Headcase650]

No one will despute that Canon has better high ISO, less noise results. But the Nikon isnt really that bad. If you look at the FM nikon board there are plenty of shots posted from the D200 at 1600 or 3200 that look pretty good, compairable to the 10D. (no matter what both Nikon and Canon blow away film, whens the last time you shot some 1600 or 3200 speed film, grain from hell I say) The 10D still gets recommended all the time on this board. Not every manufacturer will be the best in every feature. Right now high ISO image quality is the only thing Canon has over Nikon, yet the D200 blows away the 30D and 5D in features on paper. Imagine being a new purchaser with nothing vested in either company and compairing the specs of the 30D vs. the D200. Nikon 12mp/Canon 8mp, Nikon weather sealed/ Canon not, Nikon larger buffer/ Canon less, Nikon wireless master built in body/ Canon required an additional master over $300. Also from every thing I have read Nikons flash system blows away Canon's, with much more consistant and better exposed shots, without having to read a flash bible. Canon is loosing sales from new purchaser, no way around it. Im not slamming Canon, Ive made plenty of money from my gear and wouldnt have made any more had I been using Nikon. Nikon raised the bar with the D200 and Canon didnt 1up it with the 30D as they normaly do. Am I dissapointed? Actually, yes. I was hoping for more out of the 30D but will wait to see what Canon has to bring in the next year. All canon has to do is add weather sealing, wireless master built into the body, 5D's additional focus points, maybe a larger buffer and manual mode with meter selecting the ISO to the 30D and it would slaughter the D200. No doubt about it. Would anyone from the Canon camp complain about these features or not be willing to pay $1700 for it? I dont think so.

[ScottE]

It would be nice if Canon brought out an EF-S camera with weather sealing, 45 point AF and all the other features of the 1Dmk2. Maybe that is what is on the drawing board to outcompete both the D200 and D2X.

Considering that they have announced an f/2.8 17-55 EF-S lens at pro prices, it may not be too long until they announce a pro quality camera to use it on.

[A.Ulleri]

I agree there. If Canon had the sealing I would have no issues right now. I've just done research again on some Nikon lenses to see if I could put a package within my budget and it doesn't even come close. For my money I get way better glass buying Canon. I think I'm decided. Even if the 30D isn't as good as the D200 I'll have better glass when Canon wakes up and builds a real competitor and I want a new body down the line. The 30D is replacable, not the lenses.

So next week I should have a,

30D
24-105mm f/4L 0r 24-70mm 2.8L (undesided)
and a 70-200mm f/4L

Not bad I say for my first digital camera. Goodbye film...I'll miss you.

[ScottE]

Not bad I say for my first digital camera. Goodbye film...I'll miss you.
I doubt it. I shot film for 25 years, but have only used one roll since I got my first DSLR in 2002.

I miss the camera capabilities of my EOS 3, but I sure don't miss getting only 36 exposures before changing film, paying for film and processing, waiting for developed film to be ready before I can see my results, having to scan slides before I can print at home, not being able to change ISO part way through a roll, etc.

[JMHPhotography]

When a review says the D200 had better resolution and color accuracy than the 5D, I have to wonder a few things. One, what lenses were mounted to each body? Two, what steps were used to ensure color accuracy on each body? By that I mean, was each camera set up with a custom white balance profile made with a GretagMcBeth color checker? Or are they going by auto WB? I mean if I go sticking a Phoenix lens on my 20D I would expect the D200 to have better IQ... but I would be willing to be my 20D could hold it's own with a 85mm F/1.2L mounted to it.

[TH!EN]

i dont know what to do guys. Im new to this forum but definitely in the same boat as some of the members on here. I am currently an xt user, i've had my use out of it but am sick and tired of a small viewfinder, the way the body works and feels, missed autofocus. I dont know whats wrong with my camera, center focus seems to always be off. When manually focussed in non demanding conditions i can get great photos i dont doubt the image quality but its not consistant. i dont feel safe shooting with it sometimes.
Now im not a noob to photography i have been doing quite some many jobs off my camera from weddings, to studio, to fashion, to portraits, to dog shows the list continues.
But the xt doesnt cut it, my lenses are 12-24mm tokina, 28-75 tamon, 50mm 1.8, 75-300mm III. I basically am ready to scrap everything and go L and better camera, but dont know where to start. I basically want the viewfinder and feel of a 5d, and some good portrait lenses. Guess my idea generally is a 5d and a 70-200mm 2.8IS has good portrait and versatility, possible an 85mm L 1.2 instead of the zoom but that seems to limit it's uses and also bring up around the same cost. seems too expensive seeing how altogether even these combinations will generate her ein canada around $6000+ and thats with good discounts and deals.
Does anyone think a 30d could even come close to handling like a 5d? would its slightly larger viewfinder from an xt to 30d be significant? and autofocus? because with a 30d i could get that with any of the lenses just spoken about easily being around $4000.

i love canon dont get me wrong, but budget and lenses d200 does sound decent right now.
help?

[DocFrankenstein]

According to Popular Photography
Stop reading that ****

Better "color accuracy"? Lines of resolution? WTH does that even mean?