New pricing on D200, 18-200 VRII

[Glen]

Chris, I have one of Heather Angels books, yes she is a Nikon fan but also a big techno geek, as well as being a fan of the 200-400 Nikon she also recommends to use.... lithium batteries in your cameras as they last longer in the cold (gives you an idea of the age of her gear). Also her 200-400 is manual, not VR! Funny though, the shots look pretty good

[birddog114]

Well that's comforting, the camera that costs almost 3 times as much performs better...

You pay what you get or you get what you pay, am I correct here?

I don't understand the comparison with the D2H(s), they're very different cameras aimed at different markets! The D2H(s) is aimed at action photography, for people who need fast AF and FPS above all else, including MP count. The D200 is around the same price bracket, but that's where the similarities end. If the D2H(s) is fine for your needs, that's great, it doesn't make the D200 a crap camera, it makes it one unsuitable for your needs. What happens if you have the need for speed but need more MP? Then you need the D2X. Does this make the D2H(s) a crap camera?

No, the D200 is not the same price bracket of the D2h(s), it's 1/2 price of the D2h(s), no it's not a crap camera and I didn't say that.
The AF on the D2h(s) and the D2x are most the same, the difference is the MP and more features on the D2x. I still have my D2h and it's not crap also, I use both of them.

I personally think the D200 is going to be a great camera for my needs.

Yes, agree, if you're upgrading yourself from a D70 or D100.
But if you're downgrading from the D2 series to the D200 then please take my commennts.

More on the D200 AF: hope all of you, do not expect anything like the D2 series, it's better than the D70 in both FPS and AF as said, but not much, it's the truth, or perhaps, it's just me, need more study for myself.

[gstark]

Glen how do you prefocus on a target that is flying directly towards you at speeds between 100-200kmh? Oh that's right, you can't or it'd be a very low success rate.

Actually, you can.

You select a point that the subject will be going past, and prefocus on that point. When the subject reaches that point (or just before - you anticipate its arrival) you release the shutter.

That technique seems to have served many photographers for many years.

[sirhc55]

She sure is a techno geek - she has the D2X now but prior to digital she made her name as a wildlife photographer and writer. She is the first wildlife photographer to be made a professor

[kipper]

Gary, like I said you can but the success rate would have to be pretty low considering the DOF and the speed of the subject.

Plus that's fine if the subject will repeatedly fly along a set flightpath. However a lot of the time they're pretty eratic and won't, so prefocusing doesn't necessarily work.

[MCWB]

Sorry for the confusion Birdy, I wasn't specifically referring to your posts in the rest of my reply above, I've edited it to avoid confusion. And with respect to the 'same price bracket' thing, I was referring to the used D2H vs new D200 pricing discussion a bit earlier, as I said I don't really see the point in such a comparison.

You're exactly right too, you get what you pay for. It's clear that a 2.5K camera isn't going to beat the D2X in, well, anything really. As you say, people have got to be realistic about that.

[kipper]

Gary, also the last I looked wasn't Ansel Adams primarily a landscape photographer? AF isn't really required for such photography anyway.

[DaveB]

We seem to have at least two camps here, arguing about nothing.

An older fully-manual camera can indeed capture a lot of things. Usually a more-modern camera can automate a lot of that and make it easier for the photographer.
But at the same time there are many things that (many) people simply didn't try to photograph with older gear, because it was too hard. For example having a good lens and body combo with AF capable of locking onto a bird's head as it flies towards you and across your "field of fire" can let you explore many more options with different wing positions, etc.

In the end, with new technology there are new photographic options made available to us (and there are new options for us to screw it up ). End of story. Where's the argument?

[Glen]

Gary, like I said you can but the success rate would have to be pretty low considering the DOF and the speed of the subject.

Plus that's fine if the subject will repeatedly fly along a set flightpath. However a lot of the time they're pretty eratic and won't, so prefocusing doesn't necessarily work.

Kipper, I think you are making a rod for your own back here. If those guys with all that old gear could get any keepers, we would assume someone with a Gitzo, Wimberly head, AFS 500, DSLR, RRS plates, etc, etc, would get 100% keepers by the same logic.

Just taking the piss out of your theory, I just don't think we can write off past masters and the gear they used. Not too serious here.

[kipper]

Glen while I'm saying it's not impossible, the success ratio is fairly low and would leave you coming back empty handed or frustrated on many occassions imho. Btw, it's not only my opinion it's others to too who are established nature photographers.

Btw as for ghillie suits, I think things in the style of kwikcamo are the way to go now. Ghillie suits to me look awkward and uncomfortable to wear especially when you're lugging around enough gear anyway. Plus you have to be wearing them, and you don't necessarily always need the camoflauge on. Most birds, especially raptors would notice you moving towards them. Even if you were dressed in a ghillie....I would guess seeing as their vision is so acute.

[Andoru]

Let's hope the Aussie dollar fairs well in the coming months.

[birddog114]

Let's hope the Aussie dollar fairs well in the coming months.

You're just surfaced!!!!!!!

[Glen]

Kipper, what is Kwikcamo?

[DaveB]

what is Kwikcamo?

http://www.michigannature.com/kwikcamo.html

It's a type of "bag blind". It's not quite the same as a Gillie suit, but good enough for most uses and a little easier to use.

[kipper]

Yep it's not the same as a Ghillie but as for portability it's good.

Haven't used one, just going on the recommendations from another forum.

[Glen]

Thanks Dave and Kipper

[sirhc55]

Although the site I am about to direct you too is fairly old, I do believe that it still holds true today - auto focus vs manual focus:

http://medfmt.8k.com/third/af.html

[kipper]

Anyway Glen, I'm not giving up on the D70 just yet. Will try a few tips and lessons learnt over the past few weeks and give it another go soon.
Just largely disappointed at my trip out to see Peregrines and found that a good deal of them were blurred but I think it was largely to do with my shutter speed then anything.