D200 vs 30D

Apparently dPreview prefers the D200 over the 20D/30D, except for the high ISO noise and banding issues.

http://www.dpreview.co​m/reviews/nikond200/

They really don't compare based on price point. But I can see the temptation for the camparison.

The most recent edition of Practical Photography ( UK ) rated the D200 better than the 5D.

lomond wrote:
The most recent edition of Practical Photography ( UK ) rated the D200 better than the 5D.

Edit: I hasten to add the shoot out was for lanscape shots only.

lomond wrote:
The most recent edition of Practical Photography ( UK ) rated the D200 better than the 5D.

I saw that. Comparing two different camera's is not a good move at the best of times.

Although the review said the price gap was the significant decidnig factor, but the total cost including lenses used was almost the same.
Then again, i've notices more of the PP staff are nionk shooters...

Good review for the D200. For it's price, it seems to be a superb value. Here's to hoping that it sells like hotcakes and gives Canon a reason to step it up, pronto!

I think that's a fair point.

30D is going to start around $1300 for the body? The D200 is around $1499. I'd wait for a real comparison, when reviewers can test both models. Right now the 30D is way too new for an adequate review, IMO. But as a 20D user, I'm pretty happy with the performance of my camera. But if I was new to the market, it would be hard to pass up on either.

You know what the big selling point for me is on the 30D?

The biggest is the EOS lens mount, i've got a good amount of money invested in EOS lenses, so that nikon, no matter how pretty it is, is of little use to me.

*there is a moral here, lets see if anyone can figure it out *

Specialhawk wrote:
You know what the big selling point for me is on the 30D?

The biggest is the EOS lens mount, i've got a good amount of money invested in EOS lenses, so that nikon, no matter how pretty it is, is of little use to me.

*there is a moral here, lets see if anyone can figure it out *

Um, he who is practical, saves money?

I imagine that the image performance would be near identical to the 20D. The 30D article at DPR said as much. That being said, although I like the pro features of the D200, the image quality of the 20D/30D would win me over. I find myself using higher ISO's more and more often to take advantage of avail light and the D200 seems to be just plain noisy and fuzzy there.

Even Canons cheapest DSLR have better IQ than the best pro Nikon, so until Nikon steps up, there really isn't any competition - unfortunatly.

B&H has the D200 body at $1699.

Yep, the IQ of 20d/30d is better than that of d200, although I have to admit that the d200 is a great camera for the price (and it's weather sealed too.....wish my 5d has that ).

If I had no investment in glass...... I would probably be leaning toward the Nikon. My Canon stuff has served me well for a lot of years - but I am let down by the 30d announcement. Neither of these cameras will make the difference enough to make you or break you as a photographer though.