< ! --Digital window verification 001 -->

Nikon D200 is back in Best Buy for $599 (US)

Best Buy again has the $599 deal on the Nikon D200 (add to cart to see reduced price).

This entry was posted in Nikon Deals. Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • Joe Boston

    Pretty sweet deal! Imagine a D200 as a first DSLR…

    • Anonymous

      D200 is overkill for a beginner who don’t have a photography background.

      but, for $600 for solid body and long lasting camera… it beats D40, D40X, D50, D60, D70, and D70s.

      • Tr3nce

        I missed this deal last time BB had it online – now I got it. Thanks. Those could be the last few pieces of the D200 and for this price it’s a steal!

  • http://nikonrumors.com/ [NR] admin

    yes, for less than the current entry level DSLR D5000 :)

    • http://www.joerodricks.com Joe R.

      D200 @ $599 + D200 @ $599 = D400 @ $1198 ! No ?

      • http://nikonrumors.com/ [NR] admin

        I like this math :)

      • http://www.stark-arts.com Stark-Arts

        more likely is d300 = 1700 plus d200 = 700 = d400 at around 2000…
        my math sucks…

  • Dean

    Wow! I thought they were no longer available. I have been looking into buying a used one. I just placed my order…sweet!

    • Anonymous

      haven’t you heard of http://www.KEH.com? they always have used D200’s in stock.

      • regular

        $789.00

        • http://nikonrumors.com/ [NR] admin

          add it to your cart for the reduced price

          • Brian

            I think he means thats the price of a used on at KEH.

          • regular

            Brian : indeed. Sorry, for the confusion.

            $599 : i would be pleased to find a similar offer in EU !

      • http://www.jpike.net Jay Pike

        Hrmm, $789.00 for used from KEH, or $599 for new from BB…. The choice for me wouldn’t be too hard.

        jp

  • http://www.flickr.com/photos/nieblung Brian

    Just a heads up:

    I just picked up one about a week ago. It is light-year’s beyond my D40 and I’m really liking this camera. The only downside that I can think of is that the D200’s eat batteries. So do yourself a favor and purchase an extra EN-EL3e battery if you don’t have one. The Sandisk Extreme III 30MB Edition CF cards work really well, too.

    • Anonymous

      D200 don’t eat batteries, it’s an user error, you left the camera LCD and meter on for too long.

      • Anonymous

        For out of the box settings D200 does eat batteries (when shooting NEF). It’s well documented.

        • http://www.jpike.net Jay Pike

          True, but the batteries are undersized as well. Fortunately, you can buy the handgrip pretty cheap and plug two batteries in there for fairly cheap.

          jp

        • Anonymous

          sounds like you got a faulty D200. i rented a D200 to shoot a wedding, i managed to work for 3.5 hours shooting in NEF on one same charge of battery, no problem.

          • Bonetti

            I have been using a D200 with a battery pack for the last 2 years and the D200 DOES EAT BATTERY, Average per battery is 250 Photos.

          • AZ

            I’m using it and I get around 700-800 shots on one battery. Just turn off image preview after each shoot.

      • http://www.flickr.com/photos/nieblung Brian

        No, it’s not a user error. :) I’m averaging about 300 or so shots with NEF, which is pretty standard from what I’ve read. Coming from a D40 or even playing around with a friend’s D300, I can shoot more than 300 photos with a single battery. But, you’re right, I should tweak some of the display settings and not use the LCD as much.

        With my D40, I had an extra battery, but never really used it that much. Now with my D200 and shooting RAW, I’m at 120-130 images with 40-50% battery life, which is average (and now expected.) So my extra battery isn’t so much of an after-thought like it is for my D40.

        • http://micahmedia.com Micah

          To the people who says it eats batteries: do you have image review turned on? (shows the last pic on the screen after you take a shot)

          Are you using VR lenses and running VR a lot without taking pictures? VR running eats batteries.

          The meters on all the Nikon cameras will eat batteries if you set them to stay on longer than the default times.

    • Trevor Nelmes

      Actually, the thing that makes the D200 eat the batteries is leaving the USB cable in. You can watch the charge going down (almost!).

    • Narna

      huh? I’ve never seen this problem. I’ve literally taken 1000 (jpeg’s) over 3 hours on one battery and usually get over 400 raw images.

      Admittedly one of my two batteries seems to do about half this – naturally I don’t use it much (both came with second hand 6 month old D200 about 18 months ago).

      Maybe its actualy a battery problem?

      • Ernst

        Those figures aren’t very good. You *are* seeing this problem.

        D200s definitely eat batteries. Compare to the D300 with all the same setup and it’s night-and-day. This has been observed by everybody.

        The camera to get for battery life is the D3. Those big 3-cells last forever.

  • http://digitalcameras.techfresh.net Diyan

    Sweet deal for that price

  • giz

    Wow, that would be just 460€. I would 100% buy one for this price if i could.

  • Flemming

    I’m one of those “poor” europeans that would like to order. But I cannot since I fall into the international order category :-/

    Does any one here have any experience using one of those parcel forwarding services that exist? I’m thinking of sites like: usa2me.com, oneusaaddress.com, shipito.com, shopusa.com etc etc. ? And what about the warranty if buying through one of those sites?

    • Kevin

      I’ve used ShipItAPO multiple times for shipments to Afghanistan and have never had a problem. My orders have averaged $14.00 for the ShipItAPO charge. Give it a shot.

  • David

    the battery shoe really helps with battery life some shops
    still have them but not in Nikons web store anymore

  • Dweeb

    So glad I paid over $2000 Canadian for mine. I should have invested my money in GM stock instead.

    • Joshh

      LMAO! that made me laugh

  • Kickmatic23

    Is this worth it.. should I make the jump from the d40 for this or just keep saving for the d90.. decisions decisions

    • Eli

      Keep saving… the D200 is built better but the D90, overall, has better performance. Nearly the same FPS, with the same AF system, but WAY BETTER high ISO performance, a better screen and more MP if that matters to you.

      The D200 is actually much worse than the D40 in low light.

    • http://micahmedia.com Micah

      The d90 is light years beyond the d200 for image quality and performance.

      The only thing the d200 has got is slightly better build. Do you need it? I dropped my d90 from shoulder height a couple days ago on a tile floor. No issues. I don’t see much of a difference on build in practice.

      Oh, and the d90 will clear it’s buffer way faster. It’s smaller, but it doesn’t see like it because of this.

      Oh, and the debatable video feature. I like it.

      • http://www.stark-arts.com Stark-Arts

        I would agree – The D90 for lots of people is better than the D300 never mind the D200. The wieght, the video, the wieght….lol
        That being said the D200 at that price is pretty good but if you guys didn’t run out to buy them then the price would come down further…

  • ryan

    hmm… cant figure out why they would do this, my guess is they had probably have over stock and are just trying to get rid of them, as d200 was a popular item at one time, probably still is today

  • ryan

    kickmatic, i think you may be better of with the d90, d300 chip in it, this to me is what you want, 4.5 frames a second i think thats either even or better than the d200(correct me if wrong).. i like the build of the d90 alot, though i have a d300, a nice backup for me would be a d90..the sensor is the difference in my decision

  • ebraun

    I was considering getting either a D200 or D90/D5000 and having it converted to infrared. I am definitely leaning to the D90/D5000 option because of the newer sensor w/ increased dynamic range and lower noise levels. Does anyone have experience with the D200 or the D300/D90/D5000 and IR photography? Pros and Cons? THANKS!

  • jvuu

    I know Bjorn uses a D200 for IR and UV. I haven’t heard of people converting a D300/D90/D5000 though.

    fyi, the AA filter on the D300/D90/D5000 is very strong, so you need to remove it for IR/UV (I haven’t tried that myself)

  • jvuu

    http://www.naturfotograf.com/UV_IR_rev07.html

    That’s his site.

    For me, I use an unmodfied D70s for UV-IR, it seems to work well enough

  • ebraun

    Yeah, i considered that but I can’t use front filters with my 14-24 otherwise that would be a good option. I don’t really want to spend $1000 on a used 17-35 just so that i can use a D70.

    LifePixel offers D90/D5000 conversion service so i would assume it works fine with those cameras.

  • OhSnap!

    I’d consider the D200 as a fine D40 upgrade, but the image processing power of the newer cameras is so much better. Saving a bunch of money for a small upgrade isn’t going to satisfy me. I shoot as a hobby, so the goal here, for me, is to get a camera with enough features on it that I will not “have to” (although I’ll probably want to) buy another camera for a while. I only had a D40 for a year before I really wanted something easier. I want a bigger sensor, significantly lower noise at higher ISOs, and halfway decent video for those moments that demand it. D200 doesn’t quite cut it if I know there’s better performance out there. Looking at a D90, or maybe a D5000. I’m debating on whether the key differences would justify paying an extra $270 for the body.

    • WoutK89

      the sensor of the D40 and D200 are both DX, so the same size, only difference is the amount of pixels on it. And I would wait on upgrading, D40 is still fine, D400 around the corner, good things come to those who wait. :-)

      • OhSnap!

        Yeah, I meant more pixels. Will certainly be waiting on D400 before making any final moves, but it is unlikely that I will invest as much money as I think that camera will cost. Unless it’s under $2000, which I doubt. I wish there was a D90 with a swivel screen for low angle photography, that would be perfect for me. Maybe Nikon will do a D90x or something with that option.

        • Eli

          It will be under $2000. Not by much but the D200 and D300 were both a little under $2K when they came out. If they made it $2000+ it would compete directly with the D700 which is selling from $2300-2500 right now.

  • Gary S.

    Just bought this, thanks for the Link!!

    Its right in my price range, has a big viewfinder, commander mode, meters with manual (AIS) lenses, ISO button, better high ISO and AF than my D70s. Wont part with my D70s though, its still a great camera when used within its limits.

  • WoutK89

    Where is the april 28 announcement? ;-)
    D400, Sb-700 and lenses? What do we think will come next?

  • Aaron

    I love the body of the D200 and the pro features it has compared to the new entry-level cameras but if my understanding is correct that this has a similar sensor to the D80 I would rather just get a D5000 or D90. I had a D80 and it was just unbearable in the picture quality compared to my D700 and D300. If the D200 doesn’t have the focus system of the D300 I wouldn’t even bother – the D5000 and D90 are going to get pictures that are so much better than this.

    • Phoggy

      I generally agree with Aaron. There isn’t much reason to get the D200, in light of the newer cameras, unless maybe you need a backup or something. Not a bad idea for a backup, actually.

  • VPT

    If you have a lot of manual focus lenses and you want to use them, then the D90 or D5000 isn’t the camera for you. You can only choose the D200, D300, or D700. the D300 is 2x price of the D200 and if you can afford $1400 for the D300, then the D200 becomes the only choice. That explains why many people still buy the D200 instead of the new D5000.

    • shivas

      this was my rationale.

      I’m a hobbyist turned semi-pro, and using a D40x on Aperture or Manual was retarded due to the menu driven interface.

      Since the sensors are exactly the same, and I was fine with noise control at 800 ISO, this upgrade made the most sense for me – $650 shipped+tax isn’t bad when the D90 is floating around $900+ and the D300 is floating around at $1600.

      I could’ve bought 2 D200’s for the pirce of 1 D300 – and agreeably, the noise control at higher iso’s and AF are FAR superior in the D300, BUT for a D40 user with DX lenses, a D200 has a better view finder, better matrix metering, more AF cross hairs, and all the controls I could ever need on the actual body. . .

      Thanks for the link NR admin, you are continuing to support my business with these advertised specials. . .

      Now I need to buy a neck strap and CF card to carry around this big lug. . .sigh. . .Nikon Acquisition Syndrome. . .

  • Bill himpler

    Why would anyone buy a generation 2 camera when generation 4/5 cameras with far superior sensors are available for not much more. Get a kit d90 from Amazon. It kills the d200 on every level. Low light etc etc.

    Dont be stupid. Compare even the night shots of a d5000 to the d200 they are far better. Buying old tech is just dumb.

    • Gary L

      Everyone is entitled to their opinion (still), however, calling “STUPID” and “DUMB” those who think differently than you is way over the top, and ignorant of you. After all, as best as we know, you did not pay for anyone’s purchase of the D200s, so why not get off your high horse, and keep your thoughts to yourself?

  • Miq

    Recently bought a Fujufilm S5 Pro for the same price. It´s nice! :)

  • rk

    actually it went up slightly, to 679 after adding to cart….

  • Back to top