Christian,
byrt_001 wrote:gstark: may i ask what resonds do you have to choose the d2x from the d200?
I was wondering if you'd notice that I'd not mentioned those points.
Please bear in mind that these are points that I'd be thinking about, and that I might be inclined to give more weight to than some of the earlier issues that have been raised.
For instance, I'd be looking at the reduced crop
mode that the D2X provides. This still provides a 6MP image wlong with a 2x crop factor and faster shooting speed. For some of the shooting that I do, that could be an important issue.
A side benefit of this is that you also gain a form of sports finder when you're using the camera in this
mode. The view of the subject is .... what? 133%? I don't know the exact number, but that's not really important.
What is important though is the fact that you can see moving subjects both within and without the image capture area, and that could be helpful in many action situations.
The CCD that the D2X uses is, quite simply, sweet. In the shots I've seen, and the limited testing I've done, it's displayed an ability to handle an incredible range of contrasts across an image. Where most DSLRs seem to handle images similarly to perhaps colour reversal films, the D2X seems to go well beyond those boundaries, perhaps even surpassing many CN films.
I've not yet seen enough work from the D200 to see how it stacks up in that realm, but that may be a very significant issue to be considered.
Having said all of that, one then needs to consider the cost benefit of the various pros and cons of each camera, and then make a value judgement as to which camera they will be buying.
And of course, a major part of that also is how the thing feels in your hand.
For me, as much as I love the D2X, I don't see it as being a viable value purchase, for me, when compared with the D200.
And remember, that's just my opinion: both are great cameras, but I'm the guy you blame for the shit that some people mistake for images.
i still have not touch or play with any of the two.
That is something your eally do need to address. Based upon the paper specs, I was singularly unimpressed with the concept of the D200. Seriously.
On paper it seemed to have some rather nice features, but as a D70 user, I really couldn't see why I might want to own one.
Then I had a chance to play with one, and to say I was impressed really doesn't do the camera justice.
But of course Leigh, my son, really felt very strongly about this, and insisted to me there was no reason why I needed to, or should, consider a D200.
Until he too had a play with one, and we're both wanting to upgrade now. Go figure.
im way too far to go to a pro shop to test the two.
Perhaps, but perhaps we have other members in close proximity to you who may be able to help in some way.
i will concentrate in portraits and landscapes for that resond i want more pixel.
What you're shooting is basically irrelevantas regards pixel count. What's more important is the maximum enlargement you're expecting to produce, and any constraints that your target market might impose upon you. For instance, some publishing houses won't accept images smaller than 12MP.
If that's an issue that you face, then you need to look at the D2X.
But if that's not an issue for you, then know that we regularly print images using our Epson R1800 to A3+ size from a 6MP D70, and we're very satisfied with the quality that we see. we also have another member using a D2H - yep, all 4MP of it - for all of his commercial work.
The point is that your outcomes are what need to be considered here, and it's only going to be at extremely high degrees of enlargement that you can expect to see any differences that the pixel count might make.
So don't become overawed by the numbers - they're more of a marketing bullshit thing, and the reality is that you won't be likely to see any practical difference between the results from either of these cameras.
Posted: Thu Apr 06, 2006 12:24 am
