Nikon D200 or Canon 40D - DPChallenge Forums

Leica 18-56mm f/3.5-5.6 Vario Elmar-T ASPH

10/26/2007 07:12:25 AM · #1

Yes yes I know, I'm bugging everyone again! Time is getting close to order.

Which one would be best for outdoor work? I have my thoughts but I want to see if I'm right.

I've looked long and hard at my goals as of late, trying to decide where I want to go wtih photography. And a studio is not it. I enjoy doing outdoor portraits though and that's all I want to do- apart from scenery, wildlife, ect.

Or should I just go all out and get the Canon 5D now that I'm not so limited with not having to buy all the other stuff for a studio?

MAK

Leica CL

10/26/2007 07:16:33 AM · #2

5D is just about to be upgraded but is a very fine camera as is the D200 and the 40D. The 40D is latest technology so I would say go for that one.

Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L II USM

10/26/2007 07:21:54 AM · #3

I have 2400 to spend and since I'm not "setting up shop" so to speak all I'm going to for the time being is an external flash, camera body and lens or two- depending on which camera body I go with.

I haven't seen the 5D for less then 2k so I should just leave it at the 40D and D200.

NstiG8tr

Canon EOS-5D Mark IV

10/26/2007 07:25:21 AM · #4

Originally posted by MAK:

5D is just about to be upgraded....

and so is the price of it lol.

Dirt_Diver

Nikon D3s

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED

10/26/2007 07:27:18 AM · #5

I was holding the 40D yesterday and let me tell you that if you had to sit there and hold that thing for longer than 5 minutes you would cramp up from the weight of it. That sucker is heavy.

Delta_6

Canon EOS-7D

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

10/26/2007 07:40:50 AM · #6

Originally posted by Lowcivicman99:

I was holding the 40D yesterday and let me tell you that if you had to sit there and hold that thing for longer than 5 minutes you would cramp up from the weight of it. That sucker is heavy.

It's not that bad. I even have the battery grip and 2 batteries and it's still not that bad.

Miss, if you have the money, go full frame. Otherwise, the 40D will serve you well.

PHOTOKID

10/26/2007 07:45:18 AM · #7

I have a 40d and let me tell you, I am so happy with this camera. The sharpness and cleanliness of the RAW images it produces is fantastic. And the weights not any worse than a 20d. Actually IMO its either less than a 20d or better laied out to have the weight better distrubuted.

It is a remarkable camera, I would say go for this one and get a nice lens to boot.

My 2 cents.
Rich

breadfan35

Nikon D3

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.4G

10/26/2007 07:46:35 AM · #8

Originally posted by Lowcivicman99:

I was holding the 40D yesterday and let me tell you that if you had to sit there and hold that thing for longer than 5 minutes you would cramp up from the weight of it. That sucker is heavy.

Coming from a D40x, you would say that. In comparison, the 40D is a tank.

I'd say you will be good with either. The D300 comes out next month. I don't know what your price range is, but it'd be worth considering. Plus the D200 might drop even more when it does.

kawesttex

Apple iPhone 11 Pro

Canon EF 17-40mm f/4.0L USM

10/26/2007 07:49:22 AM · #9

Originally posted by Lowcivicman99:

I was holding the 40D yesterday and let me tell you that if you had to sit there and hold that thing for longer than 5 minutes you would cramp up from the weight of it. That sucker is heavy.

I have the 40D, I am 5'8", weigh 150 lbs, 55 yrs old, used to use the 20D, and I just carried the 40D w/28-135 IS USM for a week shooting a Navy Reunion and it didn't bother me. Occasionally I would put the neck strap around my neck because I was changing venues, but it wasn't bad at all.

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.4G

10/26/2007 07:52:29 AM · #10

I'm waiting to see how much the D300 comes out as. I want to be able to buy a body, external flash and 2 lenses- I could live with only one lens because I only shoot with one now. But would like 2. External flash is a must.

And the 40D and D200 weigh more than my Olympus so that doesn't bother me any.

Message edited by author 2007-10-26 07:53:09.

breadfan35

Nikon D3

10/26/2007 08:02:31 AM · #11

Originally posted by missinseattle:

I'm waiting to see how much the D300 comes out as.

the D300 will be $1800. It's already being pre-ordered at Ritz for that price.

Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.4G

10/26/2007 08:05:21 AM · #12

Ah well that's good to know! Well I think I will stick with the D200 then.

Now back to finding lenses since my goals have changed. Still going to buy the 60mm. Wondering if I should just go with the SB-600 flash since I probably won't need more than that.

I'm looking at BH Photo, but their shipping prices are expensive!

breadfan35

Nikon D3

10/26/2007 08:10:59 AM · #13

Originally posted by missinseattle:

The SB-600 will probably be fine. I do portrait work and shoot weddings and I only have an SB-600. I plan to get the SB-800 once I get a second body, but I have had no problem with the SB-600 not being enough for me.

Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM

10/26/2007 08:20:46 AM · #14

Well apparently I need to buy the D200 lol, I've been leaning towards it for a year now. Not to mention I know 2 people here who shoot with it and if I need any help I can have a tutorial for free hahaha.

I think I'm going to order from Amazon. Prices and shipping are lower through Cameta. I've had a couple people tell Cameta is a reputable source to order from.

So for now

D200
SB-600 flash
60mm- buying used from someone

I need one more lens, a nice telephoto that isn't going to put me over 2400 lol.

eschelar

Canon EOS-7D

10/26/2007 08:27:14 AM · #15

One thing to think about - The canon system uses IR for wireless flash, so you need an extra controller or an extra flash as a controller if you want off-body flash.

Nikon can do off-body flash via Radio Frequency wireless, so you are probably just fine with one... Definitely a major point if you want to keep your kit small.

If you want to keep it simple, the Sigma 70-300 isn't a bad choice for very cheap. Might allow you to take some time to get used to that range and see if you want a different range for when you fork out tha big bux.

I might have gone for a 120-300 f/2.8 if I had the choice. On the other hand, sometimes I find myself wishing for the range of a 50-150...

Jedusi

10/26/2007 08:28:59 AM · #16

Originally posted by Lowcivicman99:

I was holding the 40D yesterday and let me tell you that if you had to sit there and hold that thing for longer than 5 minutes you would cramp up from the weight of it. That sucker is heavy.

Yet- it is lighter than the D200 (810g against 830g) - both great cameras but neither is a featherweight.

Gatorguy

Nikon D700

Nikon AF Zoom-Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8 VR DG IF-ED

10/26/2007 08:31:43 AM · #17

I think you should decide which lens system you like better and let that determine the body you buy. The body will go obsolete in a year or two, and you will eventually replace it. The lenses will continue producing for years and years.

Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM

10/26/2007 08:35:19 AM · #18

funny you mention that Gator, that's exactly what I've been looking at lol. But I'm not a tech head so I'm not sure which I like better or IS better. But I like what I see from a Nikon, and I like what I see from a Canon.

eschelar

Canon EOS-7D

10/26/2007 08:44:09 AM · #19

There really is so little difference between the Canon glass and Nikon glass...

yeah, there are differences, and I've got lenses I prefer from the nikon system (the photography club at my school is almsot 80% nikonians) and lenses that I really, really, really like in Canon. In america, where most places have some sort of access to quality used glass, there really isn't much of a difference even for serious users...

Plenty has been said that could allow people to argue that Nikon's optical quality is slightly superior to Canon's too. Lots of birders from Taipei with the mega-huge, mega-expensive arm-length 500mm lenses are pretty happy with Nikon.

I think you'll be fine.

Spork99

OM System OM-1

Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro

10/26/2007 08:57:51 AM · #20

I'm waiting for a D300...

DjFenzl

10/26/2007 10:37:23 AM · #21

Originally posted by eschelar:

...Nikon can do off-body flash via Radio Frequency wireless...

If you are referring to Nikon's Creative Lighting System, it uses a visual triggering system (pre-flashes and/or IR) not RF but you are correct in that the onboard flash can send out those pre-flashes so only 1 external flash would be needed for wireless.

Also note that on for example the D70 the onboard flash does not contribute to the image's exposure when used as a remote trigger (but the D200 does)

10/26/2007 11:13:57 AM · #22

thank you all for the help!

I think it's decided- I think. Till the time comes week after next when I actually go to order and I'm second guessing myself again LOL.