Drab said:
Gah! I hate that Rockwellian "2nd generation" BS.

IMHO the D5000, D90, D300, D3(s,x) are the 3rd generation. (D3000 and D60 being gen 2.5 (2nd gen sensor with 3rd gen processing))

To lump the D1 family and D2 family together as if to ignore the stop (stop and a half) of ISO improvement between them, despite similar underlying sensor technology) is to stick one's head in the sand.

But, yea, as said above any gen 3 camera will give you a stop of ISO noise improvement. As will Lightroom 3 over Lightroom 2. ;)
Some upgrades are cheaper than others. ;)

+1 about lightroom, drab. And shivas, you obviously never shot a D100. ;-)

Yes, for the next three hours it does.

shivaswrath said:
even the d3100 will be better. . .the D200, as I learned the hard way, was Nikon's ugliest sensor above 400.

?? Doesnt the D3100 have the best nikon DX sensor at the moment? (As the D7000 is still not official yet)

even the d3100 will be better. . .the D200, as I learned the hard way, was Nikon's ugliest sensor above 400.

Note, the characteristics of the noise are as important as the absolute quantity of it. This is where Dx0's objective measurements fall short.

Well, it seems that pretty much all agree that, keeping the DX format, the improvement is about 1,5 stops, from ISO 800 to somewhere between 1600 or 3200. Dxo puts the reference noise level of the D90 at ISO 977, while the D200 is at 583. Now, IMHO, it is quite a small improvement, compared to the time gap. I am more or less in the same boat, (I have a D80), but for now I don't plan to buy any other DX body for sure: the improvement would be minimal. I'd rather get a set of fast lenses, given also that DX format needs/allows faster apertures for the same DOF. Only if you already have all the f/2,8 zooms and the 1,4 primes you need, would I suggest you to search for higher ISO.

Big advantage of the D700 is its full frame
which seems to give a much better tonal range than say the D90
with a bit of help from LR3 with the D700 I get perfectly acceptable results up to ISO 3200

eg in a dark church I can shoot portraits of the Bride and groom
with tele lens @ 1/500 f2.8

Gah! I hate that Rockwellian "2nd generation" BS.

IMHO the D5000, D90, D300, D3(s,x) are the 3rd generation. (D3000 and D60 being gen 2.5 (2nd gen sensor with 3rd gen processing))

To lump the D1 family and D2 family together as if to ignore the stop (stop and a half) of ISO improvement between them, despite similar underlying sensor technology) is to stick one's head in the sand.

But, yea, as said above any gen 3 camera will give you a stop of ISO noise improvement. As will Lightroom 3 over Lightroom 2. ;)
Some upgrades are cheaper than others. ;)

worthwhile checking out the dxolabs site...some useful comparisons of sensors on there

I was reaplly hoping for the D7000 to be the replacment for the D300 and D90 but it doesn't seem like it.

I believe pretty much any camera from the 2nd generation has better ISO capabilities than D200. That includes, D500, D90 and D300/s.

I would suggest for you to wait for the D7000 to see what that puppy can do.

D300
D300s
D700
D700 replacement ( expected early next year ish. Who actually knows???)
D3 (get a cheap one for 3kish used )
D3s but you mentioned that was out of your price range

The step BELOW in autofocus and build quality would be like the
D90
D7000 (new D90 replacement coming out)
D5000 (big step down)

anything with cmos sensor will give You 1-2 stops more, d90 i.e. performs the same way @1600 as d200 is @400-800/depending on light

I shoot mainly available light. My D200 is fantastic until I get to about ISO 800. I know about the D3s, but can't afford it. I have my sites set on the D700, but what about any other models. Right now I'm only thinking about low-light capabilities, not FPS, auto focus, or build. There's a lot of cameras that came out since my D200, expensive ones and cheap ones. Could anyone list them including the rumored ones(I know this would be a guess) according to low-light, noise so I could see where my D200 falls.

Jon