40D

I'm reading lots of good stuff about the 40D.
Does the image quality really match D200 now?

Side by side comparision of stats these 2 cameras are very much the same:
http://www.dpreview.co​m …40d%2Cnikon_d20​0&show=all

but the D200 is a bit more expensive.

They are about the same price now too.
I guess the canon will have more up to date features though.

Having owned both (previously the D200 for 6 months, currently the 40D for 5-6 weeks), I found the image quality (IQ) comparable up to ISO 400. At ISOs higher than 400, the 40D produces better IQ.

The latter is the reason I switched to the 40D, because I started shooting high school basketball the beginning of this year and I needed a decent ISO 1600, something that I couldn't get wth the D200.

I ask this because I want a 40D but, there appear to be a number of teething problems with them.
That said, I guess roaming this forum I am likely to encounter a fair bit of that.

fordmondeo wrote in post #4877062
I ask this because I want a 40D but, there appear to be a number of teething problems with them.
That said, I guess roaming this forum I am likely to encounter a fair bit of that.

I guess it depends on what you last shot with. You will read about the 40D being "out of focus" or "soft". Many of these comments will come from those who have shot the Rebel series cameras previously, which have a higher sharpening set by default than does the 40D.

I initially was caught by this "issue" until I realized that the D200 did the exact same thing - soft images out of box. Once I figured that out, I knew that my 40D was operating properly.

fordmondeo wrote in post #4876035
Does the image quality really match D200 now?

The 30D walked all over the D200 in IQ terms (and in every other respect too) - the 40D is simply in another league compared with the Noink.

Just for "context", as a Nikon user I had two D200s before I gave up on the bloody thing as a bad joke and bought a 30D - a smart move.

Don't forget that the D200 also had plenty of "teething troubles": the problem was that they were designed in to the camera...

Keith R wrote in post #4877154
The 30D walked all over the D200 in IQ terms (and in every other respect too) - the 40D is simply in another league compared with the Noink.

Just for "context", as a Nikon user I had two D200s before I gave up on the bloody thing as a bad joke and bought a 30D - a smart move.

Don't forget that the D200 also had plenty of "teething troubles": the problem was that they were designed in to the camera...

Well that's fairly harsh but I suppose if you've had a bad experience the that's it for you and Nikon.