thinking of joining the dark side (nikon)

Nikon AF-S DX Zoom Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 ED

05/29/2006 02:57:38 PM · #1

I have the d200 bug. This is preliminary. just a thought for now. I have the money to buy one if I sell my rebel xt and lenses. I suppose the one thing holding me back is that most of my favorite images were taken with my canon 10-22mm. I love this lens. Does Nikon make something similar? What other lenses should I get? I currently have a sigma 18-200 that I abslutely hate. I love the idea of not switching lenses, and I could put up with a lens that was a little soft, but the focusing is so freaking slow it drives me crazy. So what is a good way to build a Nikon kit? I have about a total of $3200 after selling my other stuff. The d200 runs about $1700, so that leaves around $1500 for lenses. although I would have to buy extra batteries I suppose. Any suggestions?

drake

brizmama

Nikon D200

05/29/2006 03:03:26 PM · #2

yes nikon has one. When you make the switch get in contact with me or Wavelength we have one but we are thinking of selling it. It is a 10-20mm Sigma. We really love it but can't really justify the cost. We just bought a second dslr so it is time to do some selling.

Message edited by author 2006-05-29 15:05:27.

Bear_Music

Samsung Galaxy S24, S24+, S24 Ultra

Sony 24-70mm f/4 Vario-Tessar T* FE OSS

05/29/2006 03:07:26 PM · #3

Out of curiosity, why switch to the D200 instead of Canon's 30D?

R.

kosmikkreeper

Nikon D300s

Nikon AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR II

05/29/2006 03:10:49 PM · #4

Hi Drake

The D200 is a great camera as I'm sure you already know. As for lenses, I have the Sigma 10-20mm ($500) and find it good for the price. Of course the 12-24mm Nikkor ($920) rocks but was out of my price range.

I just got the 18-200mm VRII Nikkor ($750) and I just love it! It focusses a lot faster than the 18-200mm Sigma and with the VRII you can't go wrong on cloudy days and in low light. I also find the image quality very good througout the range. A tad softer at the 200mm range but easily fixed with USM.

So D200 + 18-200mm NIkkor + 10-20mm Sigma = $2950. Throw in a nice Sigma 105mm macro and you have $3350.00. :-)

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

05/29/2006 03:21:58 PM · #5

Bear... mostly megapixels. But since you asked the question, I'm doing the research now.

drake

Elvis_L

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

05/29/2006 03:24:15 PM · #6

The d200 is a great camera but don't get caught up in megapixels.

Qart

Canon EOS-30D

05/29/2006 03:27:37 PM · #7

For what it's worth, just bought the 30D yesterday and although I haven't had a chance to really play with it, I am really pleased with what I see so far. In fact, if I could marry it... I probably would. Best part of course is that I can use all the same lenses... :)

05/29/2006 03:28:48 PM · #8

well, the d200 is A LOT better than my XT. weather sealing, spot meter, bigger lcd, rgb histogram... some of those things can be said for the 30d as well, but I do like the idea of the extra mp. I do large fine art prints, and find the XT images ALMOST there. I was hoping that the extra 2mp would help.

drake

05/29/2006 03:30:09 PM · #9

Any suggestions if I stayed with canon to replace my sigma 18-200 that I hate? sounds like the Nikon version is pretty good.

drake

wavelength

Nikon D300

05/29/2006 03:32:15 PM · #10

Originally posted by kosmikkreeper:

oh man, I LOVE my 105 macro. There's no way I'd give that thing up, even if it hunts a bit in low light. I luuuurve it!!.

Yeah, if anyone wants a 10-20 for Nikon, PM me. I've been vacillating, but I have to give it away to a good home :-(

edit - by give, I mean sell.

Message edited by author 2006-05-29 15:32:34.

deapee

Kodak V803

05/29/2006 03:32:16 PM · #11

I'll second or third or whatever the vote for the sigma 10-20 being the way to go...it truly is a sick lens.

Samsung Galaxy S24, S24+, S24 Ultra

05/29/2006 03:39:39 PM · #12

why is everyone so quick to sell thier sigma 10-22?

drake

Bear_Music

Sony 24-70mm f/4 Vario-Tessar T* FE OSS

05/29/2006 03:40:58 PM · #13

Originally posted by fstopopen:

Any suggestions if I stayed with canon to replace my sigma 18-200 that I hate? sounds like the Nikon version is pretty good.

drake

Tamron 28-75mm and Canon 70-200mm do the job for me. Whether you want the f/4L or the f/2.8L is a personal choice, depending on finances and what/how you shoot. The 70-200mm f/4L is a hell of a sharp lens, world-class, and quite a bit lighter and less expensive than the f/2.8 version, which can be had, incidentally, IS or non-IS.

The megapixels are almost meaningless on this size of a sensor. I think you'd be really hard-pressed to see a difference. Spot meter, RGB histogram, larger LCD, all present and accounted for on the 30D. The Canon 10-22mm, which you own, is IMO by far the best of the ultra-wide zooms, so that's a plus for staying with Canon; you certainly have made good use of it.

R.

kosmikkreeper

Nikon D300s

Nikon AF-S DX NIKKOR 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR II

05/29/2006 03:41:02 PM · #14

Originally posted by fstopopen:

why is everyone so quick to sell thier sigma 10-22?

drake

I ain't selling mine baby!! :-)

David.C

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

05/29/2006 03:41:34 PM · #15

Originally posted by fstopopen:

why is everyone so quick to sell thier sigma 10-22?

drake

It's not everyone -- from Brizmama's post, the one Wavelength is offering is the same lens. For them it's a cost issue, not a quality one (per the post).

David

Elvis_L

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

05/29/2006 03:41:36 PM · #16

Originally posted by fstopopen:

why is everyone so quick to sell thier sigma 10-22?

drake

the two people here that mentioned selling it are married. it is the same lens. a few people said the love the lens.

awpollard

Canon EOS-5D Mark II

Canon EF 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6L IS

05/29/2006 03:44:16 PM · #17

Originally posted by Bear_Music:

Originally posted by fstopopen:
Any suggestions if I stayed with canon to replace my sigma 18-200 that I hate? sounds like the Nikon version is pretty good.

drake

Tamron 28-75mm and Canon 70-200mm do the job for me. Whether you want the f/4L or the f/2.8L is a personal choice, depending on finances and what/how you shoot. The 70-200mm f/4L is a hell of a sharp lens, world-class, and quite a bit lighter and less expensive than the f/2.8 version, which can be had, incidentally, IS or non-IS.

[snip...]

R.

I second this combo, I will use the two (I have the 4L flavor) until there is no more paint on them...

Nikon AF-S DX Zoom Nikkor 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 ED

05/29/2006 03:46:05 PM · #18

understood about people selling the sigma. it was kind of a flip comment.

does everybody agree about MP? 2MP would not make a difference?

Does anybody disagree that the 30D might be my better choice?

drake

brizmama

Nikon D200

05/29/2006 03:49:51 PM · #19

Wave- quit causing problems. LOL Sorry for the confusion.

wavelength

Nikon D300

05/29/2006 03:52:16 PM · #20

Originally posted by David.C:

Originally posted by fstopopen:
why is everyone so quick to sell thier sigma 10-22?

drake

It's not everyone -- from Brizmama's post, the one Wavelength is offering is the same lens. For them it's a cost issue, not a quality one (per the post).

David

Yep, sorry about that.

I LOVE that lens. :( as soon as I can justify it, i'd buy another.

David.C

Samsung Galaxy S24, S24+, S24 Ultra

05/29/2006 03:52:55 PM · #21

Originally posted by fstopopen:

The 30D may be the least expensive route to go, but if your selling one lens and another is so cheap (for both systems) I wouldn't count it. The question remains if you like the 10-22 well enough (or have other Canon lenses in mind) that you like or are more comfortable with than the Nikon equivalent. Both systems have excellent lens options, and the differences are easily filled in with quality 3rd party lens offerings.

The extra 2MP will not make much of a difference in everyday use, unless you crop a lot. But, as you mentioned making large prints, the extra 2MP will come in handy there, especially if you crop even a little.

D200 or 30D -- your decision seems to be hanging from one lens.

David

Bear_Music

Sony 24-70mm f/4 Vario-Tessar T* FE OSS

05/29/2006 03:58:04 PM · #22

Originally posted by fstopopen:

Since you hate your 18-200 and want to get something better, and since the only other lens you own is the 10-22, and since you can recover most of the cost of that if you sell it, it's not as clear-cut a decision as one might expect. If YOU feel, after comparing the cameras, that Nikon is better for YOU, then there's no compelling reason not to make the switch. It's entirely a personal choice. Just bear in mind that you'll have to learn another control layout with the D200, while the 30D is much more similar to your 350xt in that regard.

But megapixels alone is a bit of a red herring here. In my opinion, the 30D has better high ISO performance than the D200. Personally, I just like the Canon better. I started from scratch and could have gone either way, but at that time the D200 didn't exist, so my choice was between D70 and 20D, and Canon won hands-down for me. I'm not 100% sure I'd have made the same decision if the D200 were on the market at the time; D200 vs 20D, the spot metering and the larger LCD would have swayed me. If I were starting from scratch now, I'd still prefer the 30D I believe.

Robt.

dcano

Nikon D100

Nikon AF Micro-Nikkor 105mm f/2.8D

05/29/2006 03:59:51 PM · #23

Hi Drak, I have the nikor 12-24 and then a 28-200. The wide angle lense is fantastic but expensive. I have heard that the tokina wide lense for the nikon mount is every bit as good but I dont have any personal experience. I have no regrets on the 12-24. Now I have been a nikon guy all my life buyt If I were you I would consider the 30 D since you already have a Canon outfit. I know there are reviews out there that discuss the actual reality of a 2 mp difference. I cant remeber the math but It did not seem all that much. I think they are on the dpreview website. Good luck
dc

rex

Canon PowerShot SD780

05/29/2006 04:11:39 PM · #24

Originally posted by fstopopen:

Here is a side by side comparasion for you:

Side by Side

I believe once you get up to 6 MP then it doesn't really matter after that. How big to you ev er plan on printing?