> (except for the price!)

Shh... I'm trying hard to convince myself that I will save money in the long run by buying a camera that I will be satisfied with for a long time.

Wow, that's really cool!

It looks like a toy you get out of the little plastic balls in a supermarket or something.

@ moderntimes : LOL .. good one! it definitely meets your requirement !! (except for the price!)

Talking about small slrs .. any one remember the old Pentax 110 slr? Pentax should have revived that range when DSLR were starting out 6 years ago.. I seemed obvious to me and I was expecting them to announce it any day but I guess they didn't think it was viable.. oh well.

http://www.cameraquest.com/pentx110.htm

I would love to see a Nikon with a small point and shoot with a DX sensor, forget about a FX. FX is possibly too large.

Add a modest FAST prime, and price it accordingly.

Add manual controls for shutter speed, etc.

I would buy it in a heartbeat.

OK, I admit that it is neither the smallest nor the lightest P&S you can find. But the ergonomics are fine so I think I will get used to the weight.

Of course it would have been nice to see something in the size of a Nikon F75/N75 with a full frame sensor. But as I won't invest in another D-SLR anytime soon let's hope that it will take a few years until it appears...

even bulkier P&S :) - good that You didn't end up with d3 as a P&S replacement :) - anyway good choice

Wow moderntimes... so much for cheap LOL. If you've got the money, that's definitely the way to go. I'd just set auto-ISO to go as high as you are happy with (which on the D700 is going to be pretty high). Paired with the 1.8 you probably won't have to worry about motion blur ever again unless you are shooting in near darkness. By all means... when you get the money, go for the 1.4 it seems like a waste not to go the distance with a camera like the D700.

To your original question, I've never had a problem with the meter of any camera other than the D80. The rest of my cameras (D40, D90, and now the D200) are all pretty consistent. I will say that my D40 and D90 are consistantly overexposed, but that's no biggy. I just keep it dialed down a notch.

EDIT: I just now realized that you opted for the 1.4... good choice.

Far from the cheapest option - but I actually ended up buying a used D700 + AF 50mm f1.4D yesterday. I must say that I'm very happy with the first few shots I've taken with it.

One additional consideration is that currently Best Buy has the D200 on sale for $599.99. It has been at this price for a while now so I do not know how many more they have left.

You have to add it to the shopping cart to see this price.

@ Moderntimes99 : If CA concerns you, then maybe consider the older 35mm F2.0. alternately also consider the new D5000, it has the built in in-camera CA correction and good and smart auto-focus capability.

All the best for your "mission". All children are special.. I should take more pictures of mine... Thanks for the reminder.

[heartyfisher] - According to both reviews and sample images, the new Nikkor 35mm AF-S f1.8G is optically of a very decent quality except for more CA than average. Therefore a raw converter that automatically corrects for CA seems like a good match for this lens.

I'm under the impression that NX2 will correct for CA also for files coming from the D200. Can anybody confirm this?

[Art] - Your approach sounds very much like what I'm looking for. My personal "mission" is to make a picture diary for my 5 year old son who is diagnosed with autism. In this case, picture opportunities come and disappear very quickly(!). So I need a setup where I can just press the button and get the picture taken. I even consider a single prime lens a way to shoot a little bit faster than with a zoom lens. Otherwise I just start zooming in and out instead of taking the picture (oops! opportunity gone...). Another reason why I prefer a prime lens is of course that I like to shoot wide open in order to blur the background. When I shoot film I often use the FM3A with only a 50mm normal lens, so I think I wouldn't feel too limited with only the 35mm attached.

I use a D200, I have a -3 ( one third of a stop ) exposure compensation set as I found I was having slight problems with blown highlights but generally the camera is very accurate with its exposure setting.
For most general use I use aperture priority mode with the 17 - 55 set on f8 and even using base ISO of 200 I find I can always get a ' banker ' shot of something happening quickly and then make any necessary adjustments for subsequent shots. I shoot RAW as a default because I prefer to have all my options open for post processing work, coming from a wet darkroom background I am used to working up an image, the improvements achieved may be very subtle but the finished image has to satisfy me as its 1st priority.
I always expect the next shot I take to be a lifetime best and as such I am prepared to bear the higher overheads of larger file sizes etc. to allow me to capture my images at the best quality the camera can achieve, I am a keen amateur so I am not making these decisions based on potential financial returns.

I have an s5pro.. There is no CA correction. But the D200 does not have CA correction neither, does NX 2 have CA correction? CA can be corrected via most PP software(with mixed results). The 50mm is pretty CA free anyway.

The JPG from the S5pro has much more latitude than the D200. I believe that the S5pro JPG has DR at least as good as the D200 Raw.

I don't know if the metering is as good as the D200. I don't have a D200.

I also have a D70 and I always shoot RAW with the D70. With The S5pro I hardly ever use the S5pro RAW.

Also, almost forgot. Will the Fuji raw converter adjust for CA? If not, that speaks in favour of the D200 + NX2.

I think I can live with the size/weight. More important is to be able to just aim and shoot quickly. I've been shooting film a lot recently and have been spoilt by the wide latitude of film (e.g. Kodak Ektar). Maybe I should take a look at the S5Pro as well, but I'm not so fond of the enormous raw files for what is essentially a 6-8mp camera.

Does anyone know - is the metering of the S5Pro as good as the D200?

Nikon d200 as a P&S - it's going to be a rather big P&S camera, as for the exposure I can confirm what heartyfisher wrote, d200 has a decent auto exposure, although it's not perfect.

as for Europe You can try local auction websites

I dont think there is any camera that will be able to handle ALL exposure conditions... maybe try the S5pro set at 400% DR and maybe you will be able to recover badly exposed images. Of those you mentioned The D200 has good auto exposure also the D70 is good. the others tend to over expose a bit esp the D80. Maybe try the D40/D60 and dial in a -0.7ev or -0.5ev. the picture will be darker but you have a better chance of recovering highlight detail.

Hi!

I'm looking for a (relatively speaking) cheap Nikon D-SLR to use with the 35mm AF-S f1.8G as a point and shoot camera. However, for me, a good point and shoot should have accurate exposure (without having to dial in different exposure compensations all the time).

Is the D200 the cheapest Nikon D-SLR that can be relied upon for this?

How about the D40, D50, D60, D70 - can you shoot with image review off on any of these models and still trust the camera to do the job for you? I have owned and sold a Nikon D80, and from my own experience I would say that on a D80 that is not possible.

Also - is there anywhere in Europe where the D200 can be bought new for as low as the $599 which it is currently selling for in the US?

BR,
moderntimes99