What a wonderful website!
I am trying to decide on my Christmas gift.:confused: I have not taken the time to use, nor research what is available, in a SLR in a long time. I am looking to jump into the digital end of the spectrum and want the most bang for the buck, who doesn’t, right.

Quality and versatility are important, love gadgets and am mechanically minded.
I want the camera for family shooting, including sports, portrait, etc, not to exclude nature, art, architecture, etc. I need telephoto and love to play with macro also.
I do realize the lens are monumentally important and a major investment.

The Nikon D200, Canon EOS 30D and Sony Alpha 100, interests me. I would love to hear pros and cons on these cameras, are there others I should consider with-in this same price range?

Obviously, time is of the essence with Christmas so close….sorry for the rush and thanks for any help anyone can offer.

No pentax k10d? Tons of lenses you can choose from, film/digital......

IMHO the A100 really might not be a good choice for this group. not on the same level as the 30D and D200.

My vote will always be for the D200. Today is the one year anniversary of its official release, and in that time ( I picked mine up the first day of general availability at the stores, the 16th) it has proven to be a formidable camera that can take almost anything you throw at it.

What a wonderful website!
I am trying to decide on my Christmas gift.:confused: I have not taken the time to use, nor research what is available, in a SLR in a long time. I am looking to jump into the digital end of the spectrum and want the most bang for the buck, who doesn’t, right.

Quality and versatility are important, love gadgets and am mechanically minded.
I want the camera for family shooting, including sports, portrait, etc, not to exclude nature, art, architecture, etc. I need telephoto and love to play with macro also.
I do realize the lens are monumentally important and a major investment.

The Nikon D200, Canon EOS 30D and Sony Alpha 100, interests me. I would love to hear pros and cons on these cameras, are there others I should consider with-in this same price range?

Obviously, time is of the essence with Christmas so close….sorry for the rush and thanks for any help anyone can offer.

The D200 is the obvious winner among the three you mention. The Canon 30D has a terrible viewfinder and the Sony is a minor player.

The D200 and 30D are both low-end professional cameras. Of course you can use them for family shooting but the D80 is almost as good as the D200 for a fraction of the cost and weight.

Charles

The D200 is the obvious winner among the three you mention.

WHY? Some reasoning here would be nice. I will put my 30D up againt a D200 any day at ISO 1600 with long glass shooting any fast moving sport. I will be printing my photos while the D200 user is still PSing theirs to get the noise down. The only thing worse than blanket statments of choice for no reason is wanting to buy a DSLR without doing some research.

parweber: Don't get into a DSLR system with out doing your own research. I have been a Nikon film shooter for 30+ years and for film you can't pry my F2 and the glass I have for it away from me. When I switched to digital It took me a couple of months to make my decision. I went with Canon. For ME it was the right choice. I shoot a wide range of subjects as this is my hobby. I shoot sports for a local collage and IMHO Canon has better image quality at high ISO, with less noise.

I also help a very prominent wedding photographer here in my area. He uses a D2. He only does weddings and a few portrait shoots. If that was all I did, I would be probably be shooting a D200 right now.

Decide what YOU want to shoot, and what YOUR needs are. Go to a good camera store and try both of them out, with some of the lenses and accessories you are interested in. Then make your choice. Remember a DSLR is not a camera, but a system. If you buy good glass and take care of it, you will be putting it on several bodies down the road as you upgrade.

IMHO the A100 really might not be a good choice for this group. not on the same level as the 30D and D200..

Popular Photography would disagree with you, considering it chose the A100 as the camera of the year for 2006.

The Canon 30D costs hundreds of dollars more than the A100, lacks built-in image stabilization and has a lower resolution sensor.

The Nikon D200 is $800 more than the A100 and also lacks built-in image stabilization.

So, if you want to spend less and get more, then the A100 certainly does belong in the group.

Ronnoco

WHY? Some reasoning here would be nice. I will put my 30D up againt a D200 any day at ISO 1600 with long glass shooting any fast moving sport. I will be printing my photos while the D200 user is still PSing theirs to get the noise down. The only thing worse than blanket statments of choice for no reason is wanting to buy a DSLR without doing some research.



I've never done any noise reduction post-processing on my D200 at 1600 ISO. I don't have an issue with noise, but then I don't use mine often for fast-moving sport, theatre, etc. I don't think the original poster would either.

Compared with the D200, the 30D has just two advantages:

- price (doesn't seem to be an issue for our poster)
- noise at high ISO

Can you think of anything else? I can't.

Charles

I've never done any noise reduction post-processing on my D200 at 1600 ISO. I don't have an issue with noise, but then I don't use mine often for fast-moving sport, theatre, etc. I don't think the original poster would either.

Compared with the D200, the 30D has just two advantages:

- price (doesn't seem to be an issue for our poster)
- noise at high ISO

Can you think of anything else? I can't.

Charles

Comparing the D200, the Sony A100 has these advantages:

PRICE- $800 less

Built in Image Stabilization: The result is lenses cost less (no need for IS in the lens)
More variety in lenses: Minolta, Sony and Zeiss...pick your
quality

Dynamic Range Optimization: Controls contrast so that you do NOT lose detail in either
bright or dark areas.

Automatic sensor cleaning technology: no more dust on the sensor when you exchange
lenses

Ronnoco

The D200 is now only $1349, has even shown up for $1299 and Nikon just sent me an email saying there's $100 instant savings.

The Alpha is a decent camera, but the image quality I've seen is lackluster to say the least. Compared to Nikon, Sony is clueless as to how to take advantage of the same versions of their own sensor.
Built in AS is debatable for its value. Especially if you're using telephotos, it can slightly influence framing and you can't see what it's doing until the shot is done.
I saw the tests of the DR optimization and saw little real value in that feature, but it may just be me.
The D200 has an incredible body, fantastic ergonomics, and a huge, widely available system. Sony's great lenses are significantly more expensive at the moment, especially compared with Nikon and Canon's IS version offerings for certain lenses.

I find the lack of a top control panel LCD to be a usability concern as well.

Meanwhile, I've used almost every canon out at the moment, and I'll say this- they're nice cameras, but I'll keep my Nikons, thank you.

Versus the 30D at high ISO, the 30D has typical canon noise- blotchy color noise and a result that some people call the 'plastic look'. The D200 has grainlike luminance noise almost exclusively until you put it up to ISO 3200. I rarely have to do NR unless I personally botch the shot. You can also select the level of NR in your photos in 4 steps. I shot our school play with the D200 at ISO 1000-1600 almost exclusively, and didn't need to run NR beyond what I shot at (NR Low) on a single image that I exposed properly.
The D200 is not a noise machine, contrary to what some naysayers might tell you.

Popular Photography would disagree with you, considering it chose the A100 as the camera of the year for 2006.

The Canon 30D costs hundreds of dollars more than the A100, lacks built-in image stabilization and has a lower resolution sensor.

The Nikon D200 is $800 more than the A100 and also lacks built-in image stabilization.

So, if you want to spend less and get more, then the A100 certainly does belong in the group.

Ronnoco

So when Motor Trend named the Toyota Camry the 2007 car of the year, you are saying that it is a better car than a Lamborgini Gallardo Spyder or a BMW M6? Read the Popular Photography article carefully. Not once did the editors state that the A100 was the best camera. It was in their opinion the most inovative camera of 2006. I will conceede that it is inovative. The Beta Max was inovative. It is also gone.

As for in camera image stabilization, put long glass on it and see how it performs. It can't compete with a IS that is built into a long lens. The engineering and mechanics are not capable of doing so. If you can afford Sony's long glass or any of their glass.

Sony's SAL70200G 70-200mm F2.8 = $2,599.99
Canon Zoom Telephoto EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS = $1,659.95
Nikon Zoom Telephoto AF VR Zoom Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8D G-AFS = $1,569.95

Sony's SAL135F28 135mm F2.8 = $1,699.99
Canon Telephoto EF 135mm f/2.0L USM = $899.95
Nikon Telephoto AF DC Nikkor 135mm f/2.0D = $1,079.95


As for the A100 belonging in this group, why is it always tested against the D80 and the xti(400D). That seems to be the group that Popular Photography, Camera Labs, Hardware Zone, Digital Photo Journal, Digital Review, Digital Camera Info, etc...etc...etc...all put it in. Apples and oranges are both fruit, but they don't compare.

[QUOTE=deckcadet]The D200 is now only $1349, has even shown up for $1299 and Nikon just sent me an email saying there's $100 instant savings.

The Alpha is a decent camera, but the image quality I've seen is lackluster to say the least. Compared to Nikon, Sony is clueless as to how to take advantage of the same versions of their own sensor.
Built in AS is debatable for its value. Especially if you're using telephotos, it can slightly influence framing and you can't see what it's doing until the shot is done.
I saw the tests of the DR optimization and saw little real value in that feature, but it may just be me. QUOTE]

In Canada the D200 is $1700 and the Sony Alpha is $950. I notice that in the US the
D200 is $1349 as you mention and the Sony Alpha is $650

In camera reviews by either pros or amateurs, I have never seen the word "lackluster" used since it does NOT really mean anything in terms of resolution, colour, or any other technical quality.

I have used AS and not found any framing problem at all. As to DR optimization, you would need to look at web sites that compare dynamic range shots to ordinary shots side by side to see the difference.

Ronnoco

The D200 has grainlike luminance noise almost exclusively until you put it up to ISO 3200. I rarely have to do NR unless I personally botch the shot. You can also select the level of NR in your photos in 4 steps. I shot our school play with the D200 at ISO 1000-1600 almost exclusively, and didn't need to run NR beyond what I shot at (NR Low) on a single image that I exposed properly.
The D200 is not a noise machine, contrary to what some naysayers might tell you.

The D200 reduces noise in a linear fashion beyon ISO 400. The downside is that the levels of noise reduction coincide with a related reduction in resolution. All that really means is that Sony and Nikon take different approaches to noise.

Ronnoco

Not to get too far off topic, but does anyone know if there's any significant difference between the way the Nikon D80 and D200 handle noise, etc? The price of the D200 just dropped here in the US, but the thing's still freakin' heavy.. I wonder if even if the prices are close whether the D80 is the way to go.

GB

As to lens price, in Canada where prices are higher there are 6 Nikon VR lenses at probably one of the largest camera stores in Canada. The price range is from $1700 to $7,000.

Even a Zeiss Sonnar 135mm at f 1.8, extremely fast for the Sony A100 was at $1,399 and I would suspect that the quality was probably better than some, if not most, of the Nikon VR lenses.

Ronnoco

Not to get too far off topic, but does anyone know if there's any significant difference between the way the Nikon D80 and D200 handle noise, etc? The price of the D200 just dropped here in the US, but the thing's still freakin' heavy.. I wonder if even if the prices are close whether the D80 is the way to go.

GB

Out of those choices, from what I have seen and read, I would probably lean in the same direction.

Ronnoco

Not to get too far off topic, but does anyone know if there's any significant difference between the way the Nikon D80 and D200 handle noise, etc? The price of the D200 just dropped here in the US, but the thing's still freakin' heavy.. I wonder if even if the prices are close whether the D80 is the way to go.

GB

I'm pretty certain that the D200 and the D80 have the same image processor. The sensor is almost the same - the D200 version has 4 output channels (instead of 2?) to speed up data transfer.

I believe there is a difference in the look of the pictures. The D200 is very neutral with little enhancement whereas Nikon's non-pro line is optimised to look good for the amateur shooter. I know I have to work at D200 images (contrast, saturation) to make them look as good as the standard output from a friends D50.

Charles

Hmmm. Tough choice then... go with the 200 and modify the pix from there, or go with the 80 and let it save you time but at the exp of using some else's equations.

Maybe I'll wait to the D 5000.

Wow! You really started someting here didn't you?

I like Sony cameras within thier limitations. I have had a couple for pocket P&S and that is thier forte. My W100 is a great little camera. But the A100 is just not in the Nikon or Canon league.

I am another Nikon snob, but in all honesty either one would make a great choice. I have always felt that Nikon's exposure, flash and construction is the best in the industry. But what really sells me is Nikon glass. They seem to currently have a company project to make the best lenses possible and sell them for the lowest possible prices. Some of thier low cost zooms are better than some of the primes I bought a couple decades ago.

But the bottom line is that it's you who will make a greater differance in your photos than whether you choose a Nikon or a Canon.

Good luck.

Bill

The D80 has fantastic High ISO performance. The exposure settings are critical to make the most of any high ISO situation.
I'm sold on my D80, have no regrets... Thank You NIKON !!!
Rick