My impressions 30D vs 5D vs Nik D200

[MrChad]

Now that the fall rebate season is upon us I have finally decided to upgrade. Unfortunately a made the mistake of using a good friends D200 this past week. What a gem of a Camera, mind you I currently have a 300D.

But I was immensly impressed with the Nikon viewfinder. The ability to turn the AF grid lines on and off plus the size of it for a crop factor body was impressive. The grip was also very nice indeed. I wasn't to keen on the rear dial being the shutter however vs. the aperture. But perhaps that is one of the many cf'n in the Nikon? In addition, the LCD was likely one of the nicest I have seen on a DSLR to date.

Immediately after using his D200 I went to my local shop to try out the 30D and the 5D. Ah, the 5D so nice, perfect in nearly everyway except for the price. That said, I would have to agree with other 3rd party reviews the Nikon just had a fantastic feeling grip in hand.

The 30D left me a bit disappointed, it wasn't too far off from the 5D, but the shutter noise. It sounded much clackier then the 5D it almost sounded cheap by comparison. But the penta-prism was so very nice, much nicer then my Drebel's mirror type.

Given that even with the rebates you could still afford (2) 30Ds vs. a 5D I likely will have to keep waiting for that digital equal to my Canon Elan 7. However, I really hope the 40D has some massive upgrades come next year because I was way too tempted by the performance and feel of the D200 in hand and up to the eye.

The construction and feel in hand of the D200 was mighty impressive. If I didn't already have a nice set of lenses I may have just switched systems. What a nice rig for the price.

I think Canon needs to step up and deliever a body that feels and interfaces this good in hand, and eye.

[incendy]

The d200 is nice isn't it! I really love that camera and if it was full frame I would be very tempted as well!

[Hellashot]

But if only the grip of a camera actually took and made the pictures. :) Image quality is what matters most. How it feels in your hand is low on the list.

[Tee Why]

I concur, the Nikons do feel better in the hand than comparable Canons. I particularly like th D200 myself.

[Sterling30D]

Ah, the Nikon Canon debate. A buddy of mine has a D200 and I was able to snap a few shots with it this weekend. I liked it but that probably isn't a surprise. It's a very well built camera. As for it feeling better in hand than the Canon 30D, I personally didn't think so. It doesn't feel bad in hand but I like the feel of my 30D better. It's all a matter of personal preference so I thought I'd throw my 2 cents in. As far as image quality those, my 30D was way better with noise than his D200. Considering I bought this camera to shoot in low light I have to say that after using the D200 I'm sure I made the right choice going with the 30D.

[Keiffer]

But if only the grip of a camera actually took and made the pictures. :) Image quality is what matters most. How it feels in your hand is low on the list.
Exactly what I was thinking. Try taking some low light shots and tell us what you think. I do think that the color and sharpness of pics right from the cam go to Nikon, But the freakin noise killed it for me. I swore when I gave up on my panasonic FZ15 that I would never put up with that again.

[MrChad]

But if only the grip of a camera actually took and made the pictures. :) Image quality is what matters most. How it feels in your hand is low on the list.

But if you enjoy picking it up that much more, wouldn't you likely use it more? The best kitchen knife is the one you use right?

My buddy did conceed the Canon's have better high end noise. I'm sure his D200 isn't any worse then my Drebel though. He may be upgrading soon however, the new Fuji S5 pro has him tempted. Fuji sensor in a D200 shell, even I'm curious about that one.

As for me, I think I'll be ordering a 30D come Monday. Something to hold me over until the next great Canon vs. Nikon war. I'm hoping for huge feature gains on the 40D next year. I can't take not having metering control on my Drebel any longer.

I was also a bit shocked by his Nikkor 80-200mm AF f/2.8 lens. You know this is a very well made lens (and an oldy) and darn fast to AF even without a USM system or silent wave as Nikon calls it. If the 3rd parties ever made non-USM this good I might not even care Canon had USM. I actually thought in hand feel of the Nikkor was better then my Canon 70-200mm f/2.8L. I know pictures are the goal at the end of the day and my L has proven great for me in use. But that 80-200mm feel was so nice. Nikon's pro gear feels every bit as good in hand as Canon gear to me, if I had to start all over again today--boy picking a system would be a tough call.

Glad all my other buddies have Canon so I can swap lenses :)

My buddy that shoots Nikon use to be a Canon shooter, but in hand feel of the D200 swayed him to switch kits. He still has a bunch of Canon gear, but he shoots his Nikon rig the most now.

[timmciglobal]

I had the D200 (went from 20D) back to 30D now and let me tell you, the D200's issue is, and it's been in many reviews, it's really blown red saturation. Did a lot of shots on the D200 and just image quality, especially red channel, is just off.

It's a shame too. It's a fantastic body.

Tim

[Dante King]

The d200 is nice isn't it! I really love that camera and if it was full frame I would be very tempted as well!

I am tempted too, until I look at the noise it creates at moderate ISO.

[incendy]

I am tempted too, until I look at the noise it creates at moderate ISO.

I agree there! although I have to admit to shooting at iso 50 probably 80% or more of the time and up to 250 the rest:). I think I have used ISO 800 and higher about maybe 5 times since I got the 5d, but I do feel safer knowing that if I ever need it it will be useable!

[luant16]

looking by the spec in dpreview, its way better than 30D spec, but havent personally see it in person (although many said, including phil dpreview that the aerodynamic is much better than 30D and 5D)

[grego]

I actually prefer the grip of the 30D to the D200. Although i do like the build quality of the D200 more.

Oh well, i love my primary camera.

[whchan]

But if you enjoy picking it up that much more, wouldn't you likely use it more? The best kitchen knife is the one you use right?


I will pick up a camera if I want/need to take pictures, not becasue the camera feels good in hand. Would I eat more often if the fork & spoon feel better in my hands? Probably not. However, I do agree that even the Canon is excel in some areas (high ISO noise..etc.), Nikon is better in some other areas (Flash, metering...etc.).

[MrChad]

I am tempted too, until I look at the noise it creates at moderate ISO.

Well, I purchased my 300D after shooting film for years. When I shot film we didn't have the luxury of high ISO noise, it was called switch to ISO 1600 film. To be honest I find my Drebel better at 400-1600 then any film I had previously used in the past. So again I doubt I would find the D200 worse on it's own merits either.

I shoot ISO100 75% of the time, so high iso isn't really a big deal.

What I really liked about the D200 is the vast amount of cf'n to tailer the body to the user. Sure would be nice if the 30D replacement had some 1D-esk custom functions to tailor the body to the users tastes, more so then now. That "C" mode on the 5D dial would be very nice. A C1 and C2 would be even better.

...Would I eat more often if the fork & spoon feel better in my hands? Probably not.
The D200 definately felt better then a fork or spoon. j/k

[JulianL]

I am tempted too, until I look at the noise it creates at moderate ISO.

I've been tempted too...until I look at my bank account and realize what I'd have to spend on Nikon glass to replace my Canon glass.

[RichNY]

I am wrestling with this right now. I called in an order to B&H today and had them hold off shipping it while I reconsidered. I had been waiting for the rebates and a return phone call away from pulling the trigger on the 30D, 10-20, 17-55IS, 70-200IS, 1.4x, 580EX.

I've been researching this for quite a while, but this is my first DSLR and I'm second guessing two things:

1.) Would it be smarter to start with only a 17-55 lens and 580EX

2.) Since I have no investment in glass yet, would I be better off going with a weathersealed D200 and Nikon glass. In August I had planned the D80 path, then read quite a bit about the noise with hight ISO.

What makes the most sense?

[Roy Hernandez]

here we go again.... ok, for people who loves the ergonomics of any nikon DSLR's well... its up to ya'll but to tell you this... what do you prefer? a better image quality or for features, ergonomics, and built? yes its nice to have all of those in one DSLR but not in this time... probably in a near feature.

[RichNY]

what do you prefer? a better image quality or for features, ergonomics, and built?

Is the better IQ strictly at higher ISOs or even at lower ISOs?

Any suggestions on whether to start out with all three lenses or just one and add from there?

[tuan209]

Is the better IQ strictly at higher ISOs or even at lower ISOs?

Any suggestions on whether to start out with all three lenses or just one and add from there?


I went through the same problem as you, and in the end I chose to stay with Canon, I chose the 30D. I really wanted to try the pentax k10d as it had ALL the features I could ever want. I decided to stay with Canon on the assumption that they had a better system (lenses and accessories), I wasnt to clear with the path of pentax, even though their new lenses look pretty kick ass (weather sealed and USM). IMHO, I wouldnt look too much into the body as to which system I would choose. Right now Nikon's and Pentax's newer bodies IMO are ahead of Canons, but Im sure future Canon bodies will catch up and outperform their competition. Bodies come and go but lenses and accessories you would probably keep for along long time. Hope this helps!

[sando]

*snore*

Wake me up when the endless debate finishes...

Oh, that's right... it wont!

Thanks to the OP for offering his insights, but c'mon everyone... drop it already?! :D

[sando]

I am wrestling with this right now. I called in an order to B&H today and had them hold off shipping it while I reconsidered. I had been waiting for the rebates and a return phone call away from pulling the trigger on the 30D, 10-20, 17-55IS, 70-200IS, 1.4x, 580EX.

I've been researching this for quite a while, but this is my first DSLR and I'm second guessing two things:

1.) Would it be smarter to start with only a 17-55 lens and 580EX

2.) Since I have no investment in glass yet, would I be better off going with a weathersealed D200 and Nikon glass. In August I had planned the D80 path, then read quite a bit about the noise with hight ISO.

What makes the most sense?5D and a 50 for awhile. :)

[samsen]

Just in after escalating a PC Mac battle so my adrenaline is running high and ready to fight or flight, but I need to save my energy for one battle at a time. :) So just try the 30D with a $150 battery grip (Still total price tag is cheaper than Nikon D200 even with adding 2 OEM batteries to fill the grip power) then be the judge. Its good to compare apple with apple sorry my anger again flared, ORANGE WITH ORANGE.
If I would think of only one positive feature on D200, it would be ability to use optional GPS, soon to become a must for every traveler and bird shooter (Remember my words, wait and see). BTW don't forget that Nikon's sensor is lower than that of Canon especially in rendering colors correctly such a Violet color and in dealing and handling of higher ISO.

[RichNY]

OK- feeling more reassured about my Canon 30D choice...

[Roy Hernandez]

Is the better IQ strictly at higher ISOs or even at lower ISOs?

Any suggestions on whether to start out with all three lenses or just one and add from there?


Both...

If you have the money why not grab all three :D then add from there...;)

One of the things I hate on the d200 is there battery life, 3 hours and its drained... :rolleyes:

[RichNY]

I'm bad. I decided to hold off a few weeks on the 10-22 & 70-200 f/2.8IS. 15 minutes after placing the order with B&H I called back and added the 85 f/1.8 to the order (since I had been so frugal 15 minutes earlier).

I'll be doing some landscape shooting this weekend so I'm expecting I'll justify buying the 10-22mm on Monday;). Realistically I don't 'Need' the 70-200 & 1.4x until my nephew starts winter track.

[Keith R]

I'm right with (ex!) Nikonuser here.

I've had two D200s, and my experience with them will probably stop me from ever picking up another Nikon as long as I live!

It's not just the dismal noise in iffy light, it's what the noise (and the in-camera NR) does to the detail - basically turns everything into a watercolour... It's on all the time from 800 ISO upwards too - you can't turn the NR off.

I actually think it's on at lower ISO values too, but Nikon won't admit to that.

The battery life is appalling; the AF is questionable (depends what you're shooting of course, but "biggest in class" AF sensors will readily overlap the target if it's not very big, and focus on something else instead); I fervently believe that the metering is off - using Auto ISO (which is cool, I admit) I would regularly get 800 ISO on scenes which my D70 - using the same lens - would give me say 400 ISO.

Incidentally, there are good "high" ISO shots from D200s out there. I've even taken some myself. Here's the thing though: in every one I've seen, what light there was, was reaching the subject (I shoot birds, so I'm thinking specifically about that): so as long as the "target" of the shot is getting some light on it, the D200's sensor will usually provide something half-decent.

But as soon as the subject is part of the shadows - which is a common occurence shooting birds, espcially in woodland; or if there's just no incident light on the subject in the first place - cloudy days and what have you, you might as well go home.

It actually got to the stage where I literally would not step out of the door with my D200 if there was anything less than brilliant light out there.


The best knife is the one that gets used because it does the job you want of it. That ain't the D200 if you're not in good light...

I now use a 30D and I've never looked back: handling is on a par with the D200 IMHO (they're both fine) but I actually use the 30D, and hardly worry about what the light looks like before I set off.

[MrChad]

Just in after escalating a PC Mac battle so my adrenaline is running high and ready to fight or flight, but I need to save my energy for one battle at a time. :) So just try the 30D with a $150 battery grip (Still total price tag is cheaper than Nikon D200 even with adding 2 OEM batteries to fill the grip power) then be the judge. Its good to compare apple with apple sorry my anger again flared, ORANGE WITH ORANGE.
If I would think of only one positive feature on D200, it would be ability to use optional GPS, soon to become a must for every traveler and bird shooter (Remember my words, wait and see). BTW don't forget that Nikon's sensor is lower than that of Canon especially in rendering colors correctly such a Violet color and in dealing and handling of higher ISO.

I did purchase the BG-E2 for my 30D, my grip appears to fit OK--but the grip doesn't seem to be as solid as the BG-E1 from the 300D, but the shape of the over all grip is still not as nice as the D200's. I think this is an area Canon could try to improve in the future.

I really like the 30D it will be a nice improvement to my kit, but a body with a few more custom functions for tweaking like the D200 would be very welcome.

My buddy does say the 30D appears to have better high ISO, but he shoots mainly in RAW I'm not sure that NR is a big issue for him, he corrects most of that in post.

[SeanH]

*snore*

Wake me up when the endless debate finishes...

Oh, that's right... it wont!

Thanks to the OP for offering his insights, but c'mon everyone... drop it already?! :D

.....in addition to that, why would you compare a 300d ($900) to a over $1500 D200........yea ya think the 600 bucks gets you a little more..........duh. God I love these posts (insert rolling eyes here)

........oh and not to mention the "I tired it in the camera store tests", because doesn't everyone buy a camera by how it sounds and feels......LOL

[MrChad]

.....in addition to that, why would you compare a 300d ($900) to a over $1500 D200........yea ya think the 600 bucks gets you a little more..........duh. God I love these posts (insert rolling eyes here)

........oh and not to mention the "I tired it in the camera store tests", because doesn't everyone buy a camera by how it sounds and feels......LOL

I definately think playing with gear in your hands should be as valuable if not more so then reading reviews of spec list online? I've never purchased a single camera item without first using the gear in hand somewhere.

The $2800 5D was a nice camera too, but in terms of user features the $1600 D200 was a better camera IMO, but that was just me.

[grego]

The $2800 5D was a nice camera too, but in terms of user features the $1600 D200 was a better camera IMO, but that was just me.

They are completely different cameras though. The 30D will have the features that fit the D200 and likewise.

The 5D is a dumbed down full frame 1Ds series camera. Best high ISO camera and of course you get the true full frame. Previously if you wanted FF, you needed to do film or spend a whole lot. Even now, the 1Ds MKI is still 3k+.

So i'd say for what it does, and it does it well, its a good price considering the other full frame options.

The D200 makes up a little bit for some of the mishaps with the D2H, and a nicely affordable lower end version of the D2X.

[pparker]

In the end, image quality trumps everything in my book. I'm sure the D 200 is a fine camera, but optics are just as important as well.

Nikon does not make Supertelephotos like the 400 2.8., the 500f4 or 600 f4 with VR (vibration reduction, similar to Canon's IS)

When Nikon starts to make their own sensors,(they're currently made by Sony), and a full frame one to boot, then they may start to become a viable consideration to me.

[MrChad]

In the end, image quality trumps everything in my book. I'm sure the D 200 is a fine camera, but optics are just as important as well.

Nikon does not make Supertelephotos like the 400 2.8., the 500f4 or 600 f4 with VR (vibration reduction, similar to Canon's IS)

When Nikon starts to make their own sensors,(they're currently made by Sony), and a full frame one to boot, then they may start to become a viable consideration to me.

I'm not totally aware that Sony's 1.5 sensor is inferior to the Canon made CMOS. I'm also not sure who makes the CMOS in the Nikon D2X either. With Fuji mfg. a new sensor for the D200 shell come next year I wouldn't be surprised to see that as a very good DSLR for the money. It may even have better latitude or faithfulness then some Canon sensors.

I'm also not sure that Canon makes all their own glass elements for all their lenses in house either, I believe Nikon does--I recall reading once they are one of few lenses makers that manufacture their own glass in house. Having read my copy of Canon lens works III quickly once I don't recall it specifing that their "production lines" are inhouse either.

I'm sure all lens makers out source something, just as all DSLR makers likely also outsource something. I'd wager the onboard processor is just as important as the chip itself...

...some of the best sports cars in the world have outsourced engines and drivelines, the day may come when all camera's are this way too. After all making film in the old days was not a must for premium camera's, just ask Kodak.

[red hot sheep]

Aren't canon's exotic tele lenses (400mm f2.8 IS) much cheaper than nikon equivilent (400mm f2.8 VR)?

EDIT: I had a look at BandH, and it seems nikon doesn't have a 400m VR, so I'll compare 300mm instead:

Nikon Telephoto AF-S Nikkor 300mm f/2.8G AF-S ED-IF VR: $ 4,499.00

Canon Telephoto EF 300mm f/2.8L IS Image Stabilizer: $ 3,899.95

Quite a difference!

Granted, not everyone wants/needs these lenses, but for those that do, and are starting out from scratch, that could be a major deciding factor.

(I don't need these lenses for example!)

[grego]

Aren't canon's exotic tele lenses (400mm f2.8 IS) much cheaper than nikon equivilent (400mm f2.8 VR)?

EDIT: I had a look at BandH, and it seems nikon doesn't have a 400m VR, so I'll compare 300mm instead:

Nikon Telephoto AF-S Nikkor 300mm f/2.8G AF-S ED-IF VR: $ 4,499.00

Canon Telephoto EF 300mm f/2.8L IS Image Stabilizer: $ 3,899.95

Quite a difference!

Granted, not everyone wants/needs these lenses, but for those that do, and are starting out from scratch, that could be a major deciding factor.

(I don't need these lenses for example!)

Canon's own brand lens are less expensive than Nikon's Nikkor lens. However, 3rd party, like Sigma favor the Nikon mounts in terms of price.

[MrChad]

Aren't canon's exotic tele lenses (400mm f2.8 IS) much cheaper than nikon equivilent (400mm f2.8 VR)?

EDIT: I had a look at BandH, and it seems nikon doesn't have a 400m VR, so I'll compare 300mm instead:

Nikon Telephoto AF-S Nikkor 300mm f/2.8G AF-S ED-IF VR: $ 4,499.00

Canon Telephoto EF 300mm f/2.8L IS Image Stabilizer: $ 3,899.95

Quite a difference!

Granted, not everyone wants/needs these lenses, but for those that do, and are starting out from scratch, that could be a major deciding factor.

(I don't need these lenses for example!)

In some ways the construction of some Nikkor lenses are better then Canon's in build terms, maybe that helps the price. Grey Nikkor glass usually is significantly less however.

Also I'm willing to bet that anyone using a $4g lens is also using a pro-body. And the Nikon D2X is no slouch, and given it's 1.5x factor it may have the same reach with the Nikkor 200mm VR as the 1Ds with a 300mm IS and resolution for either camera will not be bad, and in this example you saved alot if you include the camera price.

That said a Canon 1D helps lower the cost again, but I must admit I love the modern Li-ion battery, and I do wonder when the canon's will finally give up the NiMH brick?

The Nikon flash system also impresses me a tad, I'm not so sure our Speedlites really give them a run. I'd be happy if we could use TTL at will and fire a slave optically via the pop up flash on our pro-sumer SLR's, sheesh.

[MrChad]

Canon's own brand lens are less expensive than Nikon's Nikkor lens. However, 3rd party, like Sigma favor the Nikon mounts in terms of price.

Macro lenses are a good example of this, Canon glass isn't that far off from 3rd party in street MSRP, however...3rd party would be a big savings over some Nikkors.