1. Welcome to NikonCafe.com—a friendly Nikon camera & photography discussion forum!

    If you are thinking of buying a camera or need help with your photos, you will find our forum members full of advice! Click here to join for free!

The D200 tizzy.....

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by cwilt, Sep 1, 2005.

  1. cwilt


    Apr 24, 2005
    Denver, CO
    Has anyone else been watching the D200 insanity on the "other" forum and the subsequent let down from todays lack of announcement.

    Insanity is a good word for it I believe.

    Sometimes I wonder if the other brand doesn't feed bad rumors just to watch the build up and let down of people on that forum.

    I had to laugh at the tizzy they stirred them selves into.
  2. fks


    Apr 30, 2005
    sf bay area
    hi cwilt-

    the frenzy is indicative of discontent with nikon's current offerings. i don't know how much is a case of "want" versus "need," but either way if nikon can't provide then the dissatisfied ones should move on to canon instead of the endless whining about their problems.

    i agree with you in that a lot of the fuss is amusing. being a gearhead, i do get excited by the possible announcement of a new camera, but i've learned to patiently wait for nikon's response. i'm glad i'm not a canon owner as i'd be tempted to upgrade every six months ;) 

    as to whether canon or a canon fanatic intentionally stirs trouble, i can't say, but it is possible.

  3. Wilk


    Jul 28, 2005
    All I can say is, the S/N ratio here is...

    VERY refreshing! :biggrin:

    While I do understand to SOME degree, the frustration of SOME users, it's gotten to the point where I can hardly bear that other forum. I waited quite impatiently for my D2x, but never even thought of venting the frustration in any forum. My view is, it's sophomoric at best... juvenile is prolly a more accurate term. :Headset:

    I just hope for their sake, they don't have to suffer through the 1/2/3 month waiting lists like those of us that jumped on the D2x early (at least the non-NPS folks such as me) :eek: 

    It's just SO nice to have a warm comfortable place like this that is Nikon centric in the midst of the tempest elsewhere. Makes me even more glad this place is around and that I joined.
  4. I try to stay away from the frenzy over the D200 as well as the other forum.
  5. cwilt


    Apr 24, 2005
    Denver, CO
    I consider myself a gear head as well.

    At one time today I looked at that other site in the D1/D2 area and the top 20 discussions were about the D200. While I agree that a D100 replacement is good news, I think people should wait to hear it from the horses mouth instead of the horses ---.

    I got excited about the D2x once it was out and I could see and touch it. Once I looked throught the viewfinder though, I had to have it. I nearly cried when I had to send it to Nikon for AF adjustment.
  6. I think the funniest D200 post was the link to some D200 circuit board with the same number. ROFLMAO!

  7. I just counted; twenty eight out of the first sixty posts "over there" are related to Nikon's announcement today. Snicker Snicker :rolleyes:  :tongue: :wink:
  8. I actually want and need a D200. With Canon announcing and releasing their cameras within a close timeframe, it's very lucrative and makes me want to switch. Though, I'm patient and will wait for the D200 to be released. I cannot afford to spend 5000 for a camera. I'm seriously considering buying a Rebel XT to give me an affordable 8mp camera. These long haul gaps in Nikon's product line-up is ******* me off.
  9. Nikon can do nothing right. Last year they pre-announced the D2x and stated it wouldn't be available for months and many members in "that forum" got all upset because Nikon took so long to deliver the goods (even tho they were only 1 month beyond their projected delivery when they pre-announced the D2x months earlier). Now they are a lot of members in "that forum" complaining that nikon should have announced it knowing full well that rumors have been that it won't be available until after Christmas. Nikon is simply damned if they do and damned if they don't by that bunch of immature and infantile cry babies. Now I realize that a lot of folks are waiting for this camera and some even need it today but it's just not ready or Nikon would be shipping it. And I think folks have to give Nikon some credit...they've delivered a D2x, D2Hs, D70s, and D50 this year. They've been busy.
  10. JB


    May 27, 2005
    Washington, DC
    Why I came over here...

    The insanity of dpreview is why I've come over here. I'd estimate that well over half of the frenzy is directly caused by trolls vs. a real dissatisfied Nikon user voicing an honest opinion.

    Having a moderated forum (like Nikon Café) is critical for maintaining reason. I think any of the regular dpreview posters can spot the trolls over there pretty quickly.
  11. Iliah


    Jan 29, 2005
    Now imagine how we, D2X owners, will start to cry when we will see that D200 noise levels are lower then those of D2X. Dmn, dmn :) 
  12. Isn't the reduction in noise levels a part of software and not necessarily part of the senor? If there is an advancement in noise reduction due to a program can't the D2x be upated fairly easily?
  13. Maybe, but I'm personally not going to cry. Technology marches forward. I have no regrets buying the D2x and I am hoping the D200 turns out to be the digital equivalent of the F100. If that is the case then it'll be my on my shopping list.
  14. Iliah


    Jan 29, 2005
    Noise levels are the matter of sensor, hardware, and software. Low noise levels of the sensor - less time for postprocessing, and better image. It is the same as less grainy film. Hardware / software solutions are more of crutches, and they are not easy by any means.
  15. Iliah


    Jan 29, 2005
    Same here :)  For me D2X was the point when I nearly stopped using 35mm colour film.
  16. If the D200 has the rumored 10MP sensor then its photosites will be larger than the 12.8MP D2x sensor which should give it somewhat better noise performance (all else being equal).
  17. cwilt


    Apr 24, 2005
    Denver, CO
    I see comments about noise a lot when it comes to the D2x.

    Is ISO 800 on the D2x noiser than ISO 800 on film? I have no experience with this so don't think I am trying to be a pain. If it is already as good or better than film, than are photographers looking for perfection? Shoot by candle light with zero noise.

    Just curious.
  18. Iliah


    Jan 29, 2005
    Of course no, and noise is agreeble by its texture. And sharpness/detail levels are better. That is why my colour film sees so little exposure now. I'm pretty much on 640/800 shooting D2X. I'm not looking for perfection, BTW; I'm looking for usable shots. And for many of my customers and their audience a "clean" shot in dark workshop looks absolutely unnatural.
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 2, 2005
  19. Ken-L

    Ken-L Guest

    Just an "observation"....excuse my long-winded analogy....

    I will use the "telecommunications" industry as my example.

    The telecom "wars" from 1973 to the late 1980's, had some major players viciously competing for business (Northern Telecom, Ericsson, AT&T, Rolm, and many more). During that time the change from analogue to digital was the major issue - how much analogue versus digital did one system have compared to another, was a system truly 100% "digital", was the system absolutely "non-blocking", could the telephone connect to a digital accessory, and handle high-speed data, could the system handle digital data over twisted pair wiring rather than coaxial cable, could the digital data be switched seemlessly with large bandwidth, etcetera...

    A system typically had some 120-180 "features". All sorts of gee-whiz, abilities, bells and whistles, etc. The fact was that the average user only used 3 or 4 features. So, instead of being market driven, the war became "technology driven"; a war of who had the most, best features.

    What this all came down to was that each manufacturer tried to come up with "A FEATURE" that only THEY could provide, and the "trick" was to find a buyer that could be convinced that "that feature" was the most important issue of all, he "had" to have it, only "it" could make all the difference. Of course none of these "proprietary features" were among the 4 that people would, or could actually use. Not to mention that the telephone sets had become so complicated, with special codes, etc., that it took at least 4 hours to train a user! Once the training was over, the user simply tried to remember how to use the 4 features that were actually used!

    My point is that as in my illustration, the camera wars have come to this type of "technology driven" rather than "market" driven products. So, each one is feverishly trying to offer that "feature" that you absolutely must have to take a good photo, and of course only their brand offers it. There are few users that any of this really makes a difference to. So few, that the whole issue is patently absurd. The vast majority of buyers only use a few features. There have been great photographers for many years (even before digital) who can use almost any "decent" camera to produce award winning (or at least money-making) photos. The camera companies need to sell thousands and thousands of cameras. Out of all those people there are a handfull that might possibly actually benefit from some esoteric feature or humongous megapixels.

    If I ever get "persuaded" to switch from my D70......shame on me.
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 2, 2005
  20. Another analogy is the MHz myth paralleling the MP myth.

    There's so much ado about MP and noise - if only it were that simple.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.