D5000 to replace D200

FM Forum Rules
Nikon SLRs, primes, and zooms lenses reviews

FM Forums \| Nikon-mount SLRs \| Join Upload & Sell	Search Used
1 2 end

Archive 2009 · D5000 to replace D200

Osprey01
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #1 · D5000 to replace D200

I currently have a D200 and a D70 setup with the 17-55 2.8, 10-20 Sigma, 70-300VR and AFS 60mm Macro as my main lenses. I really like the idea of articulating viewfinders and am looking for better ISO performance. I do have an Sb-900 and Sb 600, so I might have to invest in another flash or SU unit to trigger the CLS if I moved to the D5000s. Is the articulating viewfinder usable? I've heard the AF is quite slow- in liveview? Anyone used the D5000 for travel type work and found it any good? Is it about a stop better in high ISO than the D200?

Thanks.

Nov 16, 2009 at 08:00 AM

ytwong
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #2 · D5000 to replace D200

the optical viewfinder of D5000 is like a tunnel compare to D200.
articulating LCD is probably less useful in practice, i do not find it very helpful in real world shooting. also, if you use LCD for framing, you need to use the extra-slow contrast detection AF.

Is it about a stop better in high ISO than the D200? Yes, high ISO is better on D5000, base ISO on D200 is actually unbeatable if one shoot RAW.

if weight and size is your piority, yes, D5000 is good for travel, but if you use flash.... D90 isn't that much bigger or heavier and you don't need bring/use other accessories to trigger CLS flash.

Nov 16, 2009 at 08:44 AM

loggerhead
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #3 · D5000 to replace D200

I've had a D70, and my main body is a D3. I bought a D5000 as a backup/travel camera. I don't particularly find the articulating view finder of any use.

The camera hasn't disappointed me in terms of focus speed or anything else for that matter. Seems to be a nice little camera.

My only complaint has been using the pop-up flash with my 14-24 lens, the lens is too big and alters the flash pattern.

Nov 16, 2009 at 11:50 AM

millsart
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #4 · D5000 to replace D200

I personally love the articulating screen, and while its not ideally implemented, its been ever so useful for low level and tripod shooting.

Its not perfect, but it sure beats either laying down in the dirt or messing with an angle finder to compose low level shots.

Its not going to replace my D3 for my normal work, but for travel and landscapes, its a great alternative in a lightweight and compact package with great IQ.

Nov 16, 2009 at 12:10 PM

Rodolfo Paiz
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #5 · D5000 to replace D200

What do you actually shoot? Nothing in your profile and no website linked. Hard to help that way, not enough information.

You have some extremely capable glass there, paired with an old body and an older body. They both still work and make very nice images, of course. But when considering a body upgrade, you need to consider a lot more than just the articulating viewfinder. And you haven't mentioned anything that would help me analyze whether or not the D5000 is a useful upgrade to you, either by replacing the D200 or the D70.

Nov 16, 2009 at 12:38 PM

jonshonda
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #6 · D5000 to replace D200

I played with the D5000 the other day, and compaired to my D200, it felt like a childs toy. Too cheap for me after the D200

Nov 16, 2009 at 03:01 PM

Two23
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #7 · D5000 to replace D200

The D5000 is a great travel camera because it's very compact and light. Image quality is the same as D300. To my eye it has about a stop & half ISO improvement over D200. The flip out screen is nice if you do macro type shots or ground level. It does open up a whole new way to take photos if you're creative. I would greatly prefer it over a heavier/bulkier camera for family outings and travel. Can't you use an SB-800 or 900 as CLS commander? I think that lenses Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 (new one with motor in lens) plus Nikon 70-300mm VR would be all you'd need for 90% of shots. Maybe add a Nikon 35mm f1.8G for low light. (I normally greatly prefer the Sigma 30mm f1.4, but for the sake of compactness the 35mm G lens would do.)

As with all photo gear, compromises have to made. In the plus column there's good image quality, compactness, fold out screen, video. In the minus column is CLS not fully supported, needs AFS lenses, and viewfinder is consumer grade.

Kent in SD

Nov 16, 2009 at 03:59 PM

Avi B
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #8 · D5000 to replace D200

He already has a 17-55, so why are you mentioning the Tamron??

OP: I think you need to go into a store and play with the D5000 to see if it will suit you. The IQ at higher ISOs may be better, but if you have trouble holding it, then you will have trouble shooting with it. Also, the SB900 can be CLS master, so if you are used to shooting with two off-camera flashes, then you will need another SB600 or a SB800 (cheaper options than another SB900).

Nov 16, 2009 at 04:10 PM

millsart
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #9 · D5000 to replace D200

jonshonda wrote:
I played with the D5000 the other day, and compaired to my D200, it felt like a childs toy. Too cheap for me after the D200

Thats the point though, is very light and quite cheap, $599 new these days.

I've got a D700 as an alternative to the D3 and while an awesome camera, its still a brick and I hate carrying it around on vacation/travel as its quite heavy for casual use.

Plus since its not a "childs toy" you've got to be a lot more careful about keeping your eye on it, not leaving it in the hotel room etc. Not that I'm saying its smart to leave anything of value in a hotel room, but an entry level compact DSLR I bought for $600 I'd worry for less about than a $2600 D700.

Nov 16, 2009 at 04:40 PM

Andre Labonte
Offline
Dedicated FM
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #10 · D5000 to replace D200

Go for a D90

Nov 16, 2009 at 05:16 PM

jonshonda
Offline
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #11 · D5000 to replace D200

millsart wrote:
jonshonda wrote:
I played with the D5000 the other day, and compaired to my D200, it felt like a childs toy. Too cheap for me after the D200

Thats the point though, is very light and quite cheap, $599 new these days.

The OP is thinking of replacing the D200 w/ the D5000. I would replace the D70 w/ the D5000 instead, and keep the D200.

Nov 16, 2009 at 05:18 PM

millsart
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #12 · D5000 to replace D200

jonshonda wrote:

The OP is thinking of replacing the D200 w/ the D5000. I would replace the D70 w/ the D5000 instead, and keep the D200.

Certainly a valid way to go, but the OP specifically said he was looking for something for travel type work, so I assumed the lightest weight, and best image quality in the most portable package would be the priority.

D70 might be worth holding onto just for its cool faster flash sync ability, though then thats a bit of a different requirement than travel lol

Nov 16, 2009 at 05:23 PM

phatnev
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #13 · D5000 to replace D200

Why no D300 option?

Nov 16, 2009 at 09:43 PM

StefanosL.
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #14 · D5000 to replace D200

I agree with phatnev.
Get a deal on a used D300. A proper Nikon camera. You cannot regret it.

Edited on Nov 16, 2009 at 09:54 PM · View previous versions

Nov 16, 2009 at 09:53 PM

millsart
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #15 · D5000 to replace D200

phatnev wrote:
Why no D300 option?

Cost over twice as much as a D5000 even if you buy the D300 used, doesn't have any better IQ as they basically share the same sensor, and the D300 isn't very light for travel either. Plus doesn't have the articulating viewfinder the OP listed.

So no real reason to consider it based upon what the OP's need are

Nov 16, 2009 at 09:53 PM

Two23
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #16 · D5000 to replace D200

Avi B wrote:
He already has a 17-55, so why are you mentioning the Tamron??

I have the 17-55mm f2.8 also, but if I were putting together a light/compact travel kit I would sell it and replace with new Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 VC (VC=VR.) It's a tremendous combination of compactness and performance. I think balance & handling would be improved. And, you add VR. The SB-800 is much more compact'lighter than SB-900 and that's the reason I've kept mine. (Less convenient menu though.) Think -system-, not pieces.

Kent in SD

Nov 16, 2009 at 11:13 PM

phatnev
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #17 · D5000 to replace D200

millsart wrote:
phatnev wrote:
Why no D300 option?

Cost over twice as much as a D5000 even if you buy the D300 used, doesn't have any better IQ as they basically share the same sensor, and the D300 isn't very light for travel either. Plus doesn't have the articulating viewfinder the OP listed.

So no real reason to consider it based upon what the OP's need are

No better IQ, but its actually better for travel since its a sturdy body that will hold up over time and being put in a bag over and over. That's not even factoring in that it's got an AF motor which is an unbelievably huge help with regard to lens options.

He's got a D200 which is a proper camera, when he goes to a D5000, which no doubt is capable of taking great photos, he will probably be sorely disappointed by its stature and durability, as well as the use of SD cards. The D40/60/5000 series feel like toys in comparison to a Dx00 series camera, even the D70 is a step above.

Nov 17, 2009 at 12:51 AM

Two23
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #18 · D5000 to replace D200

Leica M are small; so are the lenses. I'd rather have one of those + lenses than a "proper" Nikon.

Kent in SD

Nov 17, 2009 at 01:50 AM

phatnev
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #19 · D5000 to replace D200

Two23 wrote:
Leica M are small; so are the lenses. I'd rather have one of those + lenses than a "proper" Nikon.

Kent in SD

Me too, in fact I do. I have a M2 with a 35 2.5 and a 50mm 1.5, cost a mere $1500 and will last a life time(and probably 2 or 3 more). Unfortunately the M9 doesn't provide high ISO performance to match its $7,000 budget or I'd have one of those too. A student's budget sucks, but I'd be damned if they had a FF DRF that could shoot at 2500+ like a D700/D3s.

Nov 17, 2009 at 02:16 AM

millsart
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #20 · D5000 to replace D200

phatnev wrote:

No better IQ, but its actually better for travel since its a sturdy body that will hold up over time and being put in a bag over and over.

I guess it depends if your concept of travel is going down the Amazon in a canoe for a 3 month National Geographic assignment, or going to modern civilization and staying in hotels, taking the subway or taxi etc. I've had my D5k on a number of trips and certainly haven't had issues with taking it in and out of the bag causing it to wear out lol.

Again I guess to each his own but for me, the very fact its not a sturdy body, or a "toy" is the whole reason I reach for it in the first place. If I want something substantial and well made, a D700 or D3 (really not a huge weight difference between) is what I take, but thats exactly what I try to avoid when traveling light.

I actually just bought a G1 system to try to have an even lighter travel kit now, loving that so far. The camera body, 14-45 and 45-200 lens all total weight the same as just the D700 body by itself. I'll probably pick up a couple of M mount primes and adapter as well as the 7-14mm and I'll be able to have an equiv 14-400mm range in a kit that weights only 4lbs and can be carried in 2 jacket pockets. I've got a little folding tripod that folds down to about 12" as well that supports it just fine and I can fit that in my carry on as well. Thats so nice these days where they charge you to check a bag as I'd usually always check a duffle with my big CF tripod and accessories along with some clothes because there was no way to carry it on. Now I can carry a full kit in my carry on roller along with clothes and whatever else I need and even if I'm going for a short day or 2 day trip still take have the ability to make some nice images on my downtime. But I guess this is all reall something for another thread lol

Nov 17, 2009 at 02:53 PM

Osprey01
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #21 · D5000 to replace D200

Yeah- I primarily do travel; the older I get the more I'm moving into the Bob Krist school of using the lighter, cheaper bodies- I believe he uses D90s. The 17-55 and the D200 is quite the brick. I did play with the D5000 in store and it is unbelievably small and light. I didn't think to compare the viewfinder directly to a D300, but the D5000 seemed usable, which is what piqued my interest given the lightness. I'm getting tired of tip-toeing under ISO 800 with the D200- the consensus seems to be that at least ISO 1600 on the D5000 looks similar to 800 on the D200, which would be nice.

What do you gain by going to the D90- flash commander?

Ideally I'd love to go to a smaller full frame for the high ISO, 2+ extra stops of ISO would be amazing, but the D700 would be a real brick with a 2.8 zoom. This, however, might be a good time to sell the APS stuff, though that would leave me without a backup body.

Nov 17, 2009 at 03:06 PM

millsart
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #22 · D5000 to replace D200

Osprey01 wrote:

What do you gain by going to the D90- flash commander?

D90 has a lot of extra features that are nice, bigger 3" 920K LCD, AF motor for older screw drive lenses (this one really isn't an issue since there is so much AF-S stuff these days, and I doubt you'd want something like a 85mm f1.4 AF-D for travel anyways)

It also has the top LCD display, front and back dials (thats really handy if your used to a higher end camera) and I believe the frame rate is slightly faster.

It can work as a CLS commander as well, though personally I find a SU-800 works far better than the pop up flash, much nicer range, and quicker to dial in ratio's for multi flash work. Still is handy to have the pop up ability if you need it though, no doubt about that.

D90 is probably the best bang for the buck in the Nikon market right now overall. It wouldn't be my first choice for something like a wedding, but it would in fact work. D5000 would annoy me all day for that type of serious shooting, especially as I'm used to a D3.

Its really horses for courses though, because if your not going to be shooting weddings, PJ work etc, then its a moot point how well it may or may not work for those things.

If you want to travel light, mainly shoot landscapes, and use a tripod, the D5000 is one of the best bets out there. You can hike with it for miles and not get tired, and the flip out LCD is so handy in the field to compose your shots. Great images as well.

Its not perfect though and doesn't do everything well, but for a certain set of needs, and it sounds like ours are similar, its a fantastic option

Nov 17, 2009 at 03:18 PM

Two23
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #23 · D5000 to replace D200

Osprey01 wrote:
Yeah- I primarily do travel; the older I get the more I'm moving into the Bob Krist school of using the lighter, cheaper bodies- I believe he uses D90s. The 17-55 and the D200 is quite the brick.

What do you gain by going to the D90- flash commander?

This, however, might be a good time to sell the APS stuff, though that would leave me without a backup body.

I'm at a similar point in life. I used to haul around a 4x5 + lenses on family vacations, if you can believe that. Then, F5, D300, heavy lenses. I found I just didn't enjoy it as much. It sort of takes all the fun out of hiking up a 13,000 ft. volcanoe when you're carrying a bag full of "rocks",

. I think we sometimes go WAY overboard on the image quality deal. I mean honestly, shots from even a D40 are at least as good as what we used to rave about just a few years ago with slide film. Are we really going to make 30x40 prints from many (if any) of our travel/vacation shots? I never have. One other thing I'll mention is that strangers seem less threatened by a small size camera and lens than they do a big D300/700 with pro lens. Many times I've been confronted with "Hey! That looks like a professional camera. What are you taking my picture for?" Less conspicuous cameras have an advantage. The original street camera was a Leica. The fold out screen allows you take photos without even raising the camera to your eye, like the old waist level cameras! A true advantage in some crowds.

This year was the breaking point for me. We took a trip to Disney/Orlando, and I just really didn't want to lug around heavy stuff there. I would worry about damaging it, getting it stolen, and it's bulky! At some point camera gear becomes a fun-killer.

I left all the pro stuff at home and just took my old D80, lenses 18-55mm VR + 55-200mm VR, and three SB flash. (I do a lot of night shots.) Really, it did 95% of what I wanted and was easy to carry in a small waist pack. (I only brought the flash with me on a few nights.) I've come to think that if you are able to plan shots well and previsualize, you're going to get some great images no matter what gear you use. If I did more travel I would get the D5000 because it has a terrific sensor in a small body. You do give up CLS flash, but I use CyberSync triggers anyway. Also no AF motor, but the lens choices for AFS and now also third party lenses are really coming on strong. I don't like the old manual lenses on digital anyway--CA. About the only time to NOT sell photo gear is from mid January to mid March. That's when prices go lower.

All photo gear is a compromise. Sometimes the correct compromise is in favor of compactness and convenience. It's up to us to select the correct tool/system to fit the task.

Kent in SD

D80, Nikon 55-200mm VR
Taken on bouncing "Safari"
ride at Disney. 1/3500 sec.
I had fun!

] [/IMG]

Nov 17, 2009 at 04:22 PM

phatnev
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #24 · D5000 to replace D200

Osprey01 wrote:
Yeah- I primarily do travel; the older I get the more I'm moving into the Bob Krist school of using the lighter, cheaper bodies- I believe he uses D90s. The 17-55 and the D200 is quite the brick. I did play with the D5000 in store and it is unbelievably small and light. I didn't think to compare the viewfinder directly to a D300, but the D5000 seemed usable, which is what piqued my interest given the lightness. I'm getting tired of tip-toeing under ISO 800 with the D200- the consensus seems to be that at least ISO 1600 on the D5000 looks similar to 800 on the D200, which would be nice.

What do you gain by going to the D90- flash commander?

Ideally I'd love to go to a smaller full frame for the high ISO, 2+ extra stops of ISO would be amazing, but the D700 would be a real brick with a 2.8 zoom. This, however, might be a good time to sell the APS stuff, though that would leave me without a backup body.

Though the D700 with a few primes is the perfect travel kit. I use a 28mm 1.8 Sigma or the Nikkor 28mm 3.5 MF, a 50mm 1.8 AF-D, and a 105mm 2.5 MF Nikkor. Smallest travel kit I've ever had, best IQ too.

D90 is also a good option. I'd say regardless of what you buy, make sure you've got an AF motor in the body.

Nov 17, 2009 at 05:11 PM

millsart
Offline
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #25 · D5000 to replace D200

phatnev wrote:

Though the D700 with a few primes is the perfect travel kit. I use a 28mm 1.8 Sigma or the Nikkor 28mm 3.5 MF, a 50mm 1.8 AF-D, and a 105mm 2.5 MF Nikkor. Smallest travel kit I've ever had, best IQ too.

D90 is also a good option. I'd say regardless of what you buy, make sure you've got an AF motor in the body.

What if you want something wider though ? The "average" travel/tourist usually seems to prefer wide angle to capture beautiful beaches, Times Square, etc etc

What AF-D lenses are the must have travel glass that you need an AF motor for ? Tokina 11-16mm is about the only one I can think of where the lack of AF-S is an issue

I've got nothing against primes personally, and love my 85 f1.4, 105 f2.5 ai-s, 50mm etc, but I find them sort of a pain traveling. Who wants to be walking around with the family and trying to switch lens all the times ?

Your kids are doing something cute, or standing by some landmark, other people are waiting to take a photo, and you've got to switch lenses. Its sort of a pain when your out trying to enjoy yourself same with trying to mess with MF lens. When I'm in a crowd, I like to be able to just snap away and not try to critically focus.

Something like a 18-200 is so popular with so many users for the travel roll because it does let you take just one lens. No messing around changing lenses on a sandy beach, or not having the focal length you need. Just one lens that does it all so to speak.

Add in a 10-20 Sigma or something along those lines for wide angle depending on where your going and your set.

I just see a D700 and a bunch of primes as just apples and oranges compared to a D5000 and a couple of zooms. Totally different shooting styles for totally different photographers.

Nov 17, 2009 at 05:48 PM


FM Forums \| Nikon-mount SLRs \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 end