my god how time's have changed. . .

Depth of field is your issue not AF points.

You probably need to shoot at F8 - F11 depending on the lens you are using.

amir said:
helo alls
i am in greeeeeeeat problem of my photograpy life,actually i do PART TIME WEDDING PHOTOGRAPHY,i have D200,as u know that this camera have just 11 AREA FOCUSING so mostly situation when i want take GROUP PICTURES OF WEDDING there have 7 to 8 persons in sitting postion or 10 to 12(or so faar)in standing problem then i cant decide that where i focus,suppose when i focus at BRIDE WHO IS IN CENTRE,picture alway never balance,i mean FRAME LOOK VERY BAD/UNBALANCED instead then 3 Persons group where i just focus at BRIDE or left or right subjects look SOOOO GREAT,i hate large group pictures,pls advice me what can i do
CAN I GET D300S who have 51 area focus who can focus IMEDIATELY AT ANY GROUP....? pls help

research depth of field and how you control it.

helo alls
i am in greeeeeeeat problem of my photograpy life,actually i do PART TIME WEDDING PHOTOGRAPHY,i have D200,as u know that this camera have just 11 AREA FOCUSING so mostly situation when i want take GROUP PICTURES OF WEDDING there have 7 to 8 persons in sitting postion or 10 to 12(or so faar)in standing problem then i cant decide that where i focus,suppose when i focus at BRIDE WHO IS IN CENTRE,picture alway never balance,i mean FRAME LOOK VERY BAD/UNBALANCED instead then 3 Persons group where i just focus at BRIDE or left or right subjects look SOOOO GREAT,i hate large group pictures,pls advice me what can i do
CAN I GET D300S who have 51 area focus who can focus IMEDIATELY AT ANY GROUP....? pls help

"As for the rest of d90 I'm really surprised with the battery performance - almost twice more pictures as on d200"

CMOS sensors draw less power than CCD's

Nikon MB-D80 is really great add-on, not only the battery power but also the handling improves dramatically, at least for me it does.

gentoo - indeed I use 70-200 a lot (it's my longest lens :( ), but never needed to stop it down. I guess that the difference is between the sensors CCD vs CMOS, and once You learn that the difference exists is not a problem any more - just two tweaks more in postprocessing or like You suggested either -1 compensation on d90 or +1 on d200. As for the rest of d90 I'm really surprised with the battery performance - almost twice more pictures as on d200.
As for handling, with longer lenses battery grip is a must - once I've added it to d90 handling improved dramatically.

i was in the same boat awhile ago, and when Best Buy had a their fire sale on the D200 ($599 + shipping + tax), I dropped my gen 1 D40x for the D200. WHAT A WORLD OF A DIFFERENCE!!

I def tried the D90, because at the time, I could get it for $828 including shipping and tax. But the additional $200 didn't seem justified, since the control layout is vastly superior in the D200, the viewfinder and AF are virtually the same (the 3-D tracking is cool though in the D90), but the build in the D200 can't be compared.

Low ISo's the D200 is equal to the D90. Around 640 plus is where things get noitceably icky, but then again, ISO 100 shots are amazing with the D200. . . .

The build quality and durability of the D200 won me over. . .and I figured I'd wait for the D400 to get a DX with a CMOS sensor to handle higher noise. . . .

I must say that I prefer D200 meter to D90 so that fact must make me a conservative guy.
On D90 I use -0.3 by default or more if needed or spot metering with or without compensation depending on situation.
That does not mean that I prefer D200 to D90, on the contrary.

Check your exposure compensation fine tuning as well. Other than that, I'd say the D200's meter works well. The D90 is a bit aggressive. The D80's like the D40's is simply psychotic!

Also, adamz you tend to use your 70-200 a lot. I've noticed with this lens you typically have to stop the EC down a lot. Sometimes I shoot with it at -1.0 or even lower. I've set it all the way to -1.7 or -2.0 before. This is true on both my D300 and D90.

Strange... if anything, I'd expect the D200 to be slower on account of its lower native ISO. Provided the ISO, exposure comp, & Aperture were also the same, I'm curious if picture controls could have anything to do with it.

I have read numerous places that the meter on the D200 tends to be very conservative. In other words, when compared to the D80 (which had the same chip), the D80 would have a tendency to blow out the highlights, where the D200 set to the same exposure, would opt for a less aggressive approach (presumably by adjusting the aperture or shutter speed). The meter in the D90 is much more consistent than the meter in the D80, but still aggressive. I tend to shoot the D90 w/ about -2/3 stop of exposure compensation. Are the pictures from your D200 any darker than the D90?

yup, willis is right - I also have both of this cameras, and after using d90 for last couple days (bought it on friday) I can say that the IQ is similar up to iso 400 (with a little of favour on d200 side due to iso 100), above that d90 is the winner. AF speed is pretty much the same on both cameras (also d200 snaps a little bit faster), as for the build quality d200 is much better, if You have big hands than You need grip for d90 to hold it steady enough (add another $150) as there's not really a place to put the whole hand on the grip (very annoying when You have big lens like 70-200 with TC on it) - also I found out that d200 is a little bit brighter (+/- 1 stop), i.e. I was shooting today and in the same lightning conditions, same lens, same topic, time interval not more than 1 minute I was getting 1/250 on d90 and 1/500 on d200 - willis and art, can You please confirm as there may be some problem with one of my cameras.

Willis said it best. Get the D200 if money matters right now. If not the D90 would really please you.

Willis seems right on the money to me.

D90 is the better camera. D200 is the better value in my opinion. I own both and they both are great camera. In the D90's favor, you get the new CMOS chip which performs much better at high ISO's. You also get picture controls which allow you to crank your cameras colors into the all the way to 11. The D90 also handles those purple fringing you get when you take pictures of objects with the sun directly behind them (lateral chromatic aberation or some such non-sense). The D90 also has dummy modes which is nice if you are going to be handing your camera over to a family member or other non-photographer to take snap shots.

With the D200, you get slightly faster flash sync speed (250 vs. 200). A superior button layout if you are the sort of person that makes frequent adjustments to ISO and white balance. You also get native ISO 100, which can be helpful for toning down bright ambient light. The build quality is superior but also much heavier. The extra weight helps to balance out the camera when used with big heavy lenses like the 70-200.

The D300 of course, will combine the best of both of these cameras. Considering the D90 is a good $400 more than the D200, I'd only get one if absolute image quality is your goal. For low light, D90 is better, but a D200 with the 50mm 1.4 (which you could buy with the savings) will shoot three stops faster than a D90 with a kit zoom. That means that when shooting with the D200 at ISO 200, you'd have to shoot the D90 at ISO 1600 to get the same shutter speed. The D90 is good, but not that good. Of course if money doesn't matter, the D90 with fast glass will blow away just about anything south of a D700. If money does matter, I'd go with the 200 and use the savings to build out other aspects of your system which are just as important to image quality (lighting, lenses, lessons, etc.)

I love my D200, but the D90 may be a better buy. The IQ on the D90 is better, and the viewfinder and autofocus are the same on both. The D200 controls are vastly superior for someone used to a DSLR, and it has a nice 5fps machine gun, as well as the ability to meter with MF lenses, so if you want to use MF lenses or just save money overall, it's certainly a good buy right now. Adorama has used D200s for around 550, $600 with warrantee, it might be worth looking into.

I am looking at upgrading my D50 before my trip to Yellowstone in a month, and was thinking the D90. Last night I found the D200 on a website, new with warranty, for $629. Would the D200 be the better buy? Does the D90 have some features that are better than the D200? With the D300 gone, I am assuming there will be a new one out this summer, so I was thinking the D200 would be a good camera for now. I basically shoot landscapes and some outdoor concerts.