Nikon D2Hs or Nikon D200 ?

Discussion in 'Nikon DX DSLR' started by pcpearce, Jun 11, 2007.

  1. Hi Guys,

    At the monent I am using a Nikon D2H and sometimes my old Nikon D1. I am thinking about getting rid of the D1 and getting either a D2Hs or the D200.


    What do you think...the Nikon D2Hs or the Nikon D200 ??? :confused:

    I shoot alot of sport so I am thinking about the D2Hs but I have heard good reports about the D200 too...:rolleyes:

    HELP !!!

    Thanks,

    Paul
     
  2. Hi Paul

    I'll probably get some flack over this but I found the D200 to be just 'so so' for "sports" use. The FPS and focus speed are worlds different between the D2H/S and the D200. If "sports" is the primary use for the camera I'd stick with the D2H/S.

    What is it about the D2H that you want to "improve"?

    Regards
    JohnG
     
  3. I won't give you any flack! I have found the same thing. I will use the D200 for some sports and then only outside. But the focus speed of the D200 doesn't compare to the D2H. The fps is nice, but the focus speed is what makes the difference for me.
     
  4. Nikhe

    Nikhe

    175
    Oct 8, 2006
    Sweden
    I´ve got a D2Hs and a D200 and I shoot a lot of motorsports, and I have to say that I prefer the D200 in most situations.

    The auto white balance is better on the D200 ( the D2Hs is 300-800K to warm in most situations ).
    The D2Hs blows the highlights even though it is exposing on the low side ( at least in JPG-mode ).

    Those 2 thing makes me have to use NEF-files to get good photos and that is just way to much work when I return home with 500-4000 files to process.
    The D200 is producing very, very good JPG´s which can be used with very little PP.

    On the other hand, the focus speed of the D2Hs is a bit faster, but not by that much in good lighting ( I´ve not tried it enough in bad lighting to say how much better it is then ).
    It has a little less noise at high ISO, but the difference is not that big when you print at the same size.
    The viewfinder is better if you use glasses, and the battery lasts a lot longer, even though the D200 is´nt bad, I get at least 1300 photos from a battery when shooting sports.

    Besides that, the D2Hs produces some lovely photos, but if you want to crop and still be able to print big, the D200 is the better choice.

    So to conclude, I use the D200 as my main camera and use the D2Hs as 2nd/back-up camera since I do´nt have the time to process all the NEF-files individually.
     
  5. GBRandy

    GBRandy

    Feb 28, 2006
    Green Bay, WI
    The D200 was so-so for sports for me as well. If you are married to Nikon, the D2Hs is the better solution IMHO.....a D2Xs would give you a little more cropping latitude.
     
  6. fyrbolt

    fyrbolt

    102
    Feb 2, 2007
    Las Vegas
    If you already have the D2H, why not just keep it and get the D200.

    I just went down that road and for me it was the D200. I bought a used D2Hs and the store owner let me trade it back for a D200 if I wasn't happy with it. After two weeks I took it back.

    The D200 is my only body right now so I wanted something that was more for general use. If I had a second body like the D70, I would have kept the D2Hs.
     
  7. Paul, Wait a little...rumor has it that Nikon will announce new D3 or D300 soon. That price will drop on the older models.

    Anthony
     
  8. Hi Paul.

    I used both a D200 and a D2H. Both cameras have their pros and cons, but mixing them in the same job will lead to a lot of colour editing afterwards.

    This - and only this - was my reason to trade the D2H in for another D200. The colors are slightly different, and I don't have the time to color correct hunderts of shots.

    May be the D2Hs is not so different, compared to the D2H I had.

    I have some full-size JPEGs at my Pbase-Gallery from both cameras. I took this pictures for comparison, so all settings are identical (as far as you can influence them). May be it helps you with your decision, so if you like to check yourself, you are welcome: http://www.pbase.com/mattes/d2h_d200

    Regards,

    Mattes
     
  9. D3 is likely, D300 is very unlikely since Nikon's product cycle so far seems to have the Dx00 come out about 1-2 years after the first Dx camera is out (look at how long after the D2H/X before we had the D200, and even how long it took from D100 to D200).

    I think the D2H + D200 combo is great unless you're shooting sports exclusively. D200 will give you similar MP count for cropping and landscape/fine detail shots while your D2H will keep up with the speed.
     
  10. I have both D200 and D2Hs bodies, they complement each other very nicely. D2Hs has much better noise than the D200, focusing is faster. A big step up from the D2H in noise performance.

    I don't do any sports shooting but do weddings and the combo of the 2 cameras has me covered.
     
  11. fks

    fks

    Apr 30, 2005
    sf bay area
    hi paul-

    i have a D200 and a D2H, and for anything that requires quick and accurate AF, it's the D2H. if i need resolution, then it's the D200.

    when the D3H comes out, i'll sell my D200 and keep my D2H. the AF of the D200 just doesn't cut it for me after a year and a half of using it.

    ricky
     
  12. I have had both as well and both serve a specific purpose and function which at times overlaps. The overlap leads to confusion as to which camera is better.

    In the end, it is the final image that will make the decision for you. If you intend to print large and or crop significantly, the D200 is the camera for you. 5 fps is still pretty impressive and it takes a great picture.

    If printing large or cropping is a minor consideration, the D2hs is the camera for you. 8 fps is perfect for sports or fast moving subjects and it is the high ISO winner hands down for lower light shots. Also the 4mp image size is a pleasure to store and work with on the computer.

    I really loved my D2hs, but had to choose because I just could not carry both. In the end, I am not competent enough to frame action shots exactly right and I found that I had to crop significantly and repeatedly and though I preferred the D2hs over the D200, I needed the extra mp's to get the printed image with a tight crop.

    If you are more skilled than I am, (and almost everyone is), the D2hs is a wonderful camera and clearly the winner if you are printing 11x17 or less.

    I agree with the comment made above regarding a new release and D2hs price reduction coming soon. Although if you need it now, you might as well get what you need, since there is always something new coming down the pike. Even if they announce today, it will be several months before it is available and then a period of adjustment as people go from elation over the new camera to the critical stage where they find all the little flaws and put the new camera down or compare it to someone elses's new camera and complain that it isn't perfect.

    When you look at what we have now, it is truly amazing. I don't know how a picture can be any better than what we can make with today's equipment and post processing tools.

    I think the only way to make a camera better is to make it smaller, cheaper or lighter at this point and some will complain that it is too small or complain that you only get what you pay for when that happens.
     
  13. Sandro Bravo

    Sandro Bravo

    Nov 18, 2005
    Portugal
    Same here....since i got the D2Hs and not a single shot out-of-focus i wish the D200 had CAM 2000....i'll be going the same way, selling the D200, but probaly not before the D2H or D2X replacement has been out for a couple of years....
     
Loading...
Similar Threads Forum Date
Scored a mint Nikon D300 body....I have only one question... Nikon DX DSLR Dec 2, 2017
Question About D500 (or Nikon in general) Auto ISO Implementation Nikon DX DSLR Aug 19, 2017
LONG POST: Talk me back into shooting Nikon(D2Hs ?'s) Nikon DX DSLR Aug 16, 2008
Nikon D2Hs or Canon 1d Mk II Nikon DX DSLR May 24, 2007
Help: "New" Nikon D2Hs "err" message Nikon DX DSLR Oct 22, 2006