Nikon D200 is official

[Kasey 0]

Herb Ko recently made an excellent comparison and explanation of why a FF camera will have a brighter viewfinder and less noise.  I hope he posts it here.

 

Cheers

James

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Perhaps you should say - "A FF camera SHOULD have a brighter VF"

Clearly there are other factors. My F100 viewfinder was bigger but not brighter than the D2x.

Further, I think that bigger is more accurate than brighter - using the example of the F5 vs D1x, 2 cameras based on the same body, the VF in the D1x was just masked off from the F5. Hence, the size of the VF was affected, but not the brightness of objects in the frame. Obviously, the total amount of light would be less, but not the brightness of subject.

[brantkarow 0]

Well, from what I've been reading for the past month, this body seems like the next logical step for me from my D100.

 

When I figure the expense of a D2x body and Seacam housing, it's about $9,500. If I wait a few months for Seacam to offer the D200 housing, I bet I'll save about $4,000 on the body and housing combo, which is considerable in a rapidly changing technology.

[Rocha 0]

For those that can't get enough of the D200, here is a new 45 page Nikon PDF about it:

 

http://members.chello.se/joniz/D200.pdf

 

With interesting autofocus system diagrams. Slow connection warning ===> 3mb PDF file.

[Glasseye Snapper 47]

Something I've wondered about though is the issue of Depth of Field. I have not seen this mentioned. Would the cropped sensor in a D200 give a significant  advantage over a Canon 5D in macro photogaphy. I'm not sure what gain in DOF there is in the smaller sensor. Does anyone know?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

[Warning]The following is a mental exercise from an armchair underwater photographer, e.g. me trying to understand optics based on theory. It's what I do to entertain myself while preparing for the big purchase and actually getting my feet wet. I hope to also see some comments from those that speak from experience[/warning]

 

DOF is a property of the lens, not the sensor. You can get higher magnification by digital cropping which has the advantage of not decreasing your DOF. If you do so by simple cropping, blowing up a subsection of the image, you of course don't gain resolution. If you would do it by making the pixels smaller so you can cram more pixels in a small sensor then you may actually gain resolution and thus have a sensor that is potentially better for Macro. This may be what you were refering to. The drawback is that smaller pixels lead to more noise so you'll have to find the right balance. In addition, there is no point in making the pixels much smaller than the "optical resolution" (the smallest features in the image projected on the sensor by the lens). According to theory a pixel size half the resolution of the optical image is best. I have the feeling that for good lenses the optical resolution is typically higher than the sensor resolution so you could indeed gain something with smaller pixels. However, if camera optics works the same as microscopes, then closing the aperture should lower resolution while gaining DOF. In a recent wetpixel posting, don't remember on which topic, it was mentioned for a macro lens that image quality degraded when closing the macrolens down beyond a certain F-stop. I wonder if that is the F-stop where the optical resolution and sensor resolution are properly matched. If so, then you would have to keep your aperture further open to benefit from smaller pixels, which means you'll be loosing DOF again. It seems you can't win with macro. If you want the detail and magnification then you'll have to handle the shallow DOF.

[diveh2o 0]

As I will stay faithful to Nikon, I am curious about D200 vs. D2X. I can't seem to justify the extra $3000 (although that difference will be far less once the D200 is out for a while).

 

To my knowledge the main differences are (except for price)

 

Multi-Cam 1000 vs. 2000

-I guess we have to wait for results in a month or so? correct?

construction

-D200 is smaller, lighter

-D200 is more durable

megapixels

-probably not a huge difference in actual resolution of the pictures

 

what else?

 

 

All of these little notes are tentative statements...up for debate

[Rocha 0]

As I will stay faithful to Nikon, I am curious about D200 vs. D2X.  I can't seem to justify the extra $3000 (although that difference will be far less once the D200 is out for a while).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

You answered your own question. If you can't justify it, get a D200!

[ssra30 0]

Just heard from my Nikon distributor that D200 and 18-200VR will be officially released on Dec 15 worldwide. However, they don't expect to have the first delivery until Dec 19. I am not getting the D200 but has colleagues who are intereseted in it. However, I think I am going to get the 18-200VR for a smallish walk around end and retire my 18-70mm

[handlerphoto 2]

Aquatica will have D200 housing ready early '06 with a very attractive price.

It will be based on the very successful D70 / 20D model that have proven very popular for its compact

size and easy to access buttons. The AD200 will also feature some of the new ideas incorporated into the New D2X like removable saddle

and spring loaded internal contact point that have made the AD2x the success that it has been.

 

For previous Aquatica housing users all current ports, extenions and gears work flawlessly with the new D200.

Look out for progress reports on this most anticipated housing.

If you are interested in getting on, contact your Aquatica dealer who are already taking pre-order.

 

Mauricio Handler

[ssra30 0]

this weekend in Bangkok, there is a Photoshow exhibition and D200 was available for demonstration. It was a bit hard to judge AF performence as the lens on the camera again, is the 18-200VR AF-S. I am not sure how fast it would perform with 105mm +/- teleconverter but with AF-S lens, it is incredibly fast even under low light situation. The new macro ringflash also looks very nice. Wish I can house those

However most interesting thing I just found out is not related to D200 but it is something that has been mentioned here from time to time. Unfortunately again, I was told not to mention anything just yet but I expect by sometimes next year, an item on my wish list and on quite a few Nikon users' wish list will come true. Btw, I already am on the waiting list for it

[FrenchFrog 0]

Hi Boi,

 

Would you mind writing your nikon wish list down so I can take a guess on what is coming up next year. It would not be cheating this way, would'nt it ? LOL, .

What did you think of the 18-200VR ? Is that lens can be housed at all by any of the housing ?? (I'm about to buy the D200 ( I guess just ordering for right now), I'm still trying to decide on the lenses and when the housings start coming out on the housing and strobes.

 

Sylvie

[ssra30 0]

Sylvie, As far as 18-200VR goes, I don't think that it will be a good candidate for underwater use. For one thing, minimum focusing distance is 50 cm so it won't be all that useful for macro unless you use strong diopter.

Secondly, port will be very tricky. When fully extended at 200mm end, it is about twice the length of the lens at 18mm lens. If you use flat port, you can pretty much use only the telephoto end as you will see part of the ports at wide angle end. If you use a domeport, when properly position for wide angle end , there won't be enough clearance in the dome for the lens to fully extend. So I think this will be pretty much a land lens only.

 

As far as my wish list, I think it is not hard to figure from my sig, certain items that are missing Nuff said before I get into trouble and they won't tell me anymore inside scoop

[Rocha 0]

Do you know what I would really like from Nikon? Fast focusing long macros, something like AFS 105, 70-180 or 200 micros, these would be awesome, but I don't expect they will produce any.

 

Boi: I don't think you are missing anything in your sig! Come on, tell us the inside scoop :huh: Do you really think Nikon checks these forums? If they want an information to remain secret they won't tell anybody!

[UWPhotoTech 0]

Boi: I don't think you are missing anything in your sig! Come on, tell us the inside scoop :huh: Do you really think Nikon checks these forums? If they want an information to remain secret they won't tell anybody!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Careful Boi! They do check this forum!

[Rocha 0]

Actually, I will take that back (the part that I said I didn't expect Nikon would produce my dream lenses). Here is a link that I just found on DPReview:

 

http://www.club-nikon.org/links/AFS105.htm

 

It is in Russian (or something like that), but you get the idea.

 

Luiz

[Alex_Mustard 0]

I'd rather have an F2.8 AFS version of the 12-24mm. But that AFS macro lens would be nice too.

 

Alex

[FrenchFrog 0]

Luiz, luiz,

 

You might have win the guessing prize !!!!!

I don't see a 105 mm in Boi's list

If that is the case I might hold on a little while before I buy a 105 mm

 

Sylvie

[ssra30 0]

Well, over here D200 will be available for pick up next week. Both D200 and 18-200DX are now in stock but the distributer here are not allowed release them until the rest of SE Asia get their stash as well. So officially Dec 19 for D200 and Dec 23rd for 18-200DX over here.

 

Alex, I am curious about your comment on F2.8 12-24mm. Practically I am not sure that I see the advantage, especially for UW use. For underwater use, I imagine that most of the time, you would need to set the F stop at F 7.1-9 or around about that but certainly more than F5.6 to get the entire virtual image on the dome in focus. Also being stuck at 1/320s shutterspeed when using strobe, I am not sure how handy F2.8 would be underwater.

 

At F9, I am not sure how much better the image from the F2.8 12-24mm would be over the current 12-24mm.

 

I suppose for topside use, it is a different story!

[Alex_Mustard 0]

Hi Boi,

 

What I would really like is a top quality DX wide angle. The 12-24mm f4 is pretty much the equivalent of the AFD Nikon 18-35mm f3.5-f4.5. Although seemingly very similar to the 18-35 the Nikon 17-35mm AFS f2.8 is an amazing piece of glass, for many poeple Nikon's best ever lens. I would like the equivalent of this lens optically in a 12-24mm AFS.

 

So your right, it is not the aperture I want, but a 12-24mm with the same optical quality of the 17-35mm. Everytime I put that lens I my camera and see the results I am happy that I did. The sharpness and colours are astonishing.

 

Alex

[motionsync 0]

So Alex you dream is to have

The 10,5mm and a 12-24 mm AFS f2.8? Will you not use the 16mm ??

 

I think a AFS lens from 12-35 would be a killer lens

[Alex_Mustard 0]

I'd use the 16mm too. I'm just greedy. Optically the 16mm is very nice, and my favourite lens for filters. But I'd also like an optically superb zoom.

 

Alex

[james 0]

Alex,

 

All you need is a full frame Nikon camera and then you can use that fabulous lens! Ah, to dream, eh?

 

Cheers

James

[Alex_Mustard 0]

I know, James. Would be nice. But then all my macro lenses would be wrong!

 

Alex

[james 0]

Except for the Sigma 150mm. It's a great lens especially with the 500D.

 

Cheers

James

[ssra30 0]

Alex, I think your dream will break my bank account. F4 12-24mm is already expensive enough (considering price increase from F3.5-4.5D 18-35 to F2.8 17-35) and I wonder how big would the lens be.

 

Now I can see, a FF Nikon (hopefully with D2X body) to use for wide angle and keep the D2X for macro so you can still use the same housing and just switch otu the body/lens as needed! I think I like this dream but it might just cost one of my kidney!

[Alex_Mustard 0]

I think the only need for full frame would be for more resolution, say up to 20MP, as I think the DX format is limited to 15MP. I am not convinced that Nikon would solve the corner sharpness issues with wide angles any better than Canon. So I would only consider going full frame if I really needed ~20MP.

 

Also I think that the 10.5mm on DX is a better lens than the 16mm on FF. And as this is my main lens I would have to think very carefully about it. A wide angle rectilinear is a lens I would use less than 5% of the time anyway.

 

I would like to dream like Boi that Nikon might make a full frame camera in the D2 chassis. But I don't believe it. But I do think that when they go FF they will give the camera a DX crop mode.

 

Alex