Nikon D200 Review

Watch this item
Nikon D200
4.1 stars
Average rating for this product is: 4.1 out of 5

From 3 ratings and 6 reviews

Thumb up 100% of users recommend this product

Rate it Now:

Click on the stars above to rate this product:

Tweet This Item


peco412's Review of Nikon D200

1st May 2006

Overall Rating

4.5 stars
  • Value for money
    4.5 stars
  • Image Quality
    4.5 stars
  • Features
    4.5 stars
  • Time Digital Camera Owned
    1 - 4 Weeks
  • Battery Life
    4.5 stars
  • Ease of Use
    4.5 stars
Good Points

Nikon's 10MP sensor is decent enough, and it's wrapped in the highest quality body, with terrific ergonomics and a complete feature set.


Bad Points

Nikon's 10MP sensor is equivalent to Canon's 8MP sensor, and it can't touch Canon's 12MP sensor. And it's noisier at high ISO than both Canon sensors.


General Comments

I hadn't used an SLR camera in almost 20 years, and the Nikon D200 made me realize that I've missed out on a lot of fantastic photos. If the D200 had Canon's 12MP sensor, it would be today's perfect digital SLR. The D200's rugged, environmentally sealed body and feature set, that includes a 5fps burst mode and pop-up flash, make it the perfect camera for active photographers. Nikkor lenses and Nikon's AF system are first rate. AF is quick and accurate.

I bought my D200 in a kit with a 18-70mm Nikkor lens. I didn't have time to wait for the back-order on the kit with a 18-200mm lens to clear before leaving town on holiday, but the photos I've taken over the past month have convinced me to spring for a 70-300mm Nikkor lens.

Tweet This Review

On average, people found this review not helpful

How helpful did you find this review?


Members' Comments onpeco412's Review

  • EBROOKS Rank: Captain on 18th Jul 2006

    Bear in mind that the D 200 is a "prosumer" model when comparing it to Canon. Also, the "pixel race" needs to be understood, meaning when do more pixels reach a point of diminishing returns.

    There is more in resolution than the MP rating of the camera too, If you set the camera to raw you will get a HUGE file (some 20 mb), even though the mp rating of the camera is only 6.0 , say.

    My understanding is that a mp rating higher than 12.0 is wasted--thus the high end Nikon (last I heard) did not exceed 12. And, of course, unneeded mp's could affect the speed of successive shots in action photography.

  • peco412 Rank: Lance Corporal on 20th Jul 2006

    Remember that 12MP is NOT double the resolution of 6MP. Digital sensors are improving in only small increments right now. I think you'd see quite an improvement in image quality and versatility from a 48MP sensor. I'm sure the CIA would agree.

    Although I think the resolution of a 12MP digital sensor is now roughly equivalent to that of 100ASA film, there is definitely something to the idea of "per-pixel sharpness". I have a buddy who owns a Canon 5D, a 20D and a 1D Mark II N. The photos he takes with his 8MP cameras are just as clear and sharp as those I take with my 10MP D200. But the photos he takes with his 12MP 5D, especially the portraits, are visibly sharper than the D200 can produce. I love being able to see every strand of hair in a portrait.

    Regarding the D200, I still think that it has the best combination of design, build quality and image quality for the price. I've rethought the 70-300MM lens though, and have ordered the new 18-200MM lens. The versatility and performance it provides in one lens is more valuable to me than the range I would have gotten with the 18-70MM and 70-300MM lenses. I like to take photos while hiking or otherwise on the run and prefer to carry as little as possible. And it seems like I've gotten rained on while taking photographs more often than not this year.