Canon 40D or Nikon D200

[Xtreme Sheen]

I was asking previously about upgrading my gear. I have a Canon 400D at the moment (18-55mm lens, 55-200 mm lens & battery grip).

I have now decided against upgrading to different lenses to replace the ones I have with my 400D, and my current setup is for sale on ebay!! I have also decided against getting the Canon 450D.

So its either a new Canon 40D or a second hand Nikon D200.

So my question is which one is my best option?

A new Canon 40D with 17-85mm Lens

or

A second hand Nikon D200 (body only) + a new lens to suit?

Thanks

Richard

 

[PsiFox]

Go try and see what feels most natural.

 

[DinoS]

See which feels better, but either way,

A canon 30d is very nice

and so is a sigma 17-70mm to go with that d200 ,

you choice!

 

[Jamougha]

If you want a one-lens walkabout solution then I would go with the D200 since it seems nikon makes better walkabout lenses. It general I doubt it matters. 40D/D200 seem very evenly matched.

 

[Steve 7]

I've had a D200 and currently use the D300, I just sold the D200 as it is too noisy at ISO 400 - I had perfectly well exposed images rejected by Alamy because of noise. I'd get the Canon 40D unless you can afford the D300.

 

[StewartR]

If you want a one-lens walkabout solution then I would go with the D200 since it seems nikon makes better walkabout lenses. It general I doubt it matters. 40D/D200 seem very evenly matched.

Here's a slightly different take. If you want to take pictures of wildlife, birds, or aircraft, then go with the Canon. Canon offer you a number of lens options:
* 300mm f/4 L IS
* 400mm f/5.6 L
* 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS
and Nikon don't make anything comparable.

 

[fracster]

Nikon do a 300 F4 and the 80-400 F5.6.............:shrug:

 

[Chillimonster]

Here's a slightly different take. If you want to take pictures of wildlife, birds, or aircraft, then go with the Canon. Canon offer you a number of lens options:
* 300mm f/4 L IS
* 400mm f/5.6 L
* 100-400mm f/4.5-5.6 L IS
and Nikon don't make anything comparable.

Or even think "outside-the-box" and go for Olympus.

The 2x crop makes it particularly suitable for Birding, Wildlife and aircraft.

The E-3 combined with a 50-200mm (F2.8-F3.5) SWD and 1.4tc gives you 100-400mm At 2.8.3.5 and combined with the 1.4 gives up to 560mm at F4.9.

The inbody IS means had-holding at this length is not a major problem either.

Infact John (AKA theMusicMan) uses the Bigma on his E-3 giving 100-1000mm Equiv focal length

Chris

 

[Jamougha]

Nikon do a 300 F4 and the 80-400 F5.6.............:shrug:

No VR on the 300mm and it seems like the 100-400 has somewhat better IQ than the 80-400.

Generally I'd agree that Canon wins at the tele end, nikon at the standard range and it's about a tie for wide angle.

 

[theMusicMan]

Infact John (AKA theMusicMan) uses the Bigma on his E-3 giving 100-1000mm Equiv focal length

Chris

Indeed I do...

Have to say, that the E-3 with bigma is proving to be an excellent combination for birding. I was up with the larks at an unused section of a local reserve on Sunday morning for a few hours, and in low dull light I managed to bag a few Nuthatch keepers. I am sure there are better shots around here, but as an indication of what you can get with Oly gear and the Bigma, here's a few;

 

[fracster]

No VR on the 300mm and it seems like the 100-400 has somewhat better IQ than the 80-400.

Generally I'd agree that Canon wins at the tele end, nikon at the standard range and it's about a tie for wide angle.

No arguments from me. Use what you like, but VR is not the be all and end all of a lens.The better selection of the Canon longs lenses should be worth a lot of consideration, Nikon are limited in the range at the long end IMO.