D2X or D200...?

VanhireBoys

Hi Guys
New to the photography scene and looking for a DSLR so please excuse my ignorance...! I am for getting a second hand camera. A photog friend of mine told me to get a rough useable second hand camera to learn off.. He said that a D200 would be ideal as its been superceeded and its for sale everywhere for cheap. While trawling about I found a D2X which is well used....! And its going cheap as well - not much more than a D200..

Which one should I go for considering I am no expert....? Thanks ...!

clive_odonohoe

both of these cameras are really great to use. I had the same issue with the same cameras last year but I found a great D300 instead. If I was to choose between both of these cameras, I would go for the D2x or try to even find a D2xs. The D2x is a bigger camera + it has its speed grip built as part of the body compared to the D200 which may or may not come with it if you buy second hand. The D2x also has 12.4 cmos sensor whereas the D200 has a 10.2 ccd sensor. The D2x will also have a better resale value. There are other factors when choosing between these two cameras, but you dont have to buy one over the other just because of the differences I have listed, its down to your budget at the end of the day.

chanc3

quality wise they are similar
D2x will be much better at resisting misuse

but "sadly", today's D60 will give you better image quality

melekalikimaka

the d60 may give better quality...at higher iso, but the d2x is an excellent camera, hard as nails, and feature rich, that coupled with the internal motor would lean me towards one over the d60, just check the actuations on it, they do get their share of use

chanc3

sure, you can't compare the bodies of a d2x (pro), a d200 (prosumer) and a d60 (consumer)

that's why I said "sadly"
it's sad to see a consumer camera outperforming (in some aspects, I agree with you, weather sealing, allow body, lens compatibility, af speed, fps, etc) in a single picture comparasion what used to be a top of the range camera not that long ago

smelltheglove

i have 2 d200's now and love them! Cant say the d2x is any different as I dont know but sure as heck would like one, even just to say i have a d2x!

Cosmo K

But would a beginner really need a weather sealed pro body? They are great cameras no question, but there are not exactly user friendly, I would recomend a beginner DSLR like a D40 or so, they can be bought really cheap new. Just my 2 cents....

smelltheglove

Cosmo K wrote: »

But would a beginner really need a weather sealed pro body? They are great cameras no question, but there are not exactly user friendly, I would recomend a beginner DSLR like a D40 or so, they can be bought really cheap new. Just my 2 cents....

I have a d40x, its on adverts now, but I would be much more inclined to recommend a d200 to be honest, you can move above the standards of a d40 so quickly and need the extras the larger camera has.

melekalikimaka

Cosmo K wrote: »

But would a beginner really need a weather sealed pro body? They are great cameras no question, but there are not exactly user friendly, I would recomend a beginner DSLR like a D40 or so, they can be bought really cheap new. Just my 2 cents....

well if its close to the price, why not... the only reason not to get a pro body is price... a d40 will restrain you quite quickly if you get into photography in a big way... and if you dont, your initial cost is same... so its win win

Cosmo K

melekalikimaka wrote: »

well if its close to the price, why not... the only reason not to get a pro body is price... a d40 will restrain you quite quickly if you get into photography in a big way... and if you dont, your initial cost is same... so its win win

And what about repair costs? Why buy a run down 4-5 year old camera, when for the same money, you can buy a brand new one, with a better sensor, a D5000 for example?

Ricky91t

When I put my hands on my 1D MKII after moving for a 20D(Same camera line an the d200)I noticed the huge difference in feeling,build and just general features,I recently used a 450D with it's bigger screen,Live view higher MP but I just laughed at it's "cheap" feel small shape and uncomfortable design(for my big hand) and just knew when I moved to the 1D MKII I made the right choice.

You really should consider the d2x as it is by far the best camera there,even if the others are better specifications you can never beat the build quality of a pro camera.

melekalikimaka

Cosmo K wrote: »

And what about repair costs? Why buy a run down 4-5 year old camera, when for the same money, you can buy a brand new one, with a better sensor, a D5000 for example?

i did mention in a previous post... check the actuations...

Cosmo K

I'm not saying there is anything wrong with buying a used pro body, its just, I don't think, it would make a great beginners camera. And, I just checked prices for second hand D2X bodies, there are not exactly cheap......still selling for 800-1000€, and for that kind of money, you might as well buy a new camera with a more modern sensor......

KarmaGarda

Cosmo K wrote: »

But would a beginner really need a weather sealed pro body? They are great cameras no question, but there are not exactly user friendly, I would recomend a beginner DSLR like a D40 or so, they can be bought really cheap new. Just my 2 cents....

If I recall correctly the D40s have been discontinued as a new camera? So unless you find a store with it in stock you'll find it hard to get one. For a secondhand I highly recommend this though because you can pick them up really cheap and they are equally as good as the D60 (if not better).

It has the advantage that if you get really serious about photography you'll want to upgrade to a D300 or maybe D700 or something. And this will become your "day to day" camera for normal snaps when you don't want to lug around the bigger ones with 20 lenses! I know photographers that still use the D40 for this purpose.

chanc3

KarmaGarda wrote: »

they are equally as good as the D60 (if not better)

a d2x will be better for:
weatherproofing
shock resistance
lens compatibility
af speed
FPS

a D60 will be better:
weight (less than half of a d2x)
size (tiny compared to a d2x)
sensor and image quality (D-Lighting alone wins hands down)
price (a third of a d2x)
resale options (there is a market for it)

if I'm missing something please post it here

smelltheglove

http://www.digitaldarrell.com/Review-D2xVsD200.asp

This may help you, I always use a battery grip with mine to enhance the comfort, this brings the d200 close to the size of a d2x if you are talking abour wanting a large camera, after reading this I dont think there is too much of a difference.

However as I buy most of my equipment second hand I have never in the last 2 years come across a second hand d2x. Believe me if I did I most likely owuld have grabbed, I've looked for a d300 second hand but since they are so new there were none on the go, I just didnt have the money to buy new. Both my d200's came with battery grips, one with a lens one with a bag, one cost 650 the other cost 550, both came with memory cards also. I think I got value fo money, I have noticed one going on gumtree for similar although without a battery grip, still a good price though so have a look.

Nforce

I'd suggest getting a good secondhand D80. I started out with a D70s a year ago, bought a new D80 a week after and have recently changed to a D300. Only reason that I made the change was because I wanted more fps and better high iso performance.
Another option would be the D90........but even secondhand these can be rather pricey.

Borderfox

Nothing wrong with a D2x, I find the Pro bodies meter far better than any of the pro-sumer and consumer bodies. They feel far better in the hand too

soccerc

As a D200 owner and user I'd go with the D2x.

It's a pro body, balanced and very sturdy.

Regardless of it's age it is infinitely better than the D200 which IMHO is very limited, though I wouldn;t aprt with mine as I have a secondary use for it.

Many pro's held onto their D2x's when upgrading to the D3 and it will always give you a return on the investement unlike the D200

Such was the admiration it was held in Nikon relented and offer three D2x picture controls for the D3.

smelltheglove

soccerc wrote: »

As a D200 owner and user I'd go with the D2x.

It's a pro body, balanced and very sturdy.

Regardless of it's age it is infinitely better than the D200 which IMHO is very limited, though I wouldn;t aprt with mine as I have a secondary use for it.

Many pro's held onto their D2x's when upgrading to the D3 and it will always give you a return on the investement unlike the D200

Such was the admiration it was held in Nikon relented and offer three D2x picture controls for the D3.

You make me want it, damn my worthless d200's

AnCatDubh

smelltheglove wrote: »

You make me want it, damn my worthless d200's

Yeah, but i'd put money that you wouldn't part with your D200 if you had a D2x also in your mits? I'm like that with my trusty *ist DL - it's not a patch on the K20D - not within as ass's roar of it, but for love nor money would I part with it. Aint it funny how we become emotionally attached to our gear.

OP - I think socercc's advice is very sound indeed.

smelltheglove

AnCatDubh wrote: »

Yeah, but i'd put money that you wouldn't part with your D200 if you had a D2x also in your mits? I'm like that with my trusty *ist DL - it's not a patch on the K20D - not within as ass's roar of it, but for love nor money would I part with it. Aint it funny how we become emotionally attached to our gear.

OP - I think socercc's advice is very sound indeed.

Oh I love it. I had a nice poloaroid when I was a kid and i picked up the exact same one on adverts a few weeks ago, i always missed it, just waiting on the film and I'll be all set to be 17 again!