Advice on Nikon D200 needed « Nikon Rumors Forum

Nikon Rumors Forum » Nikon DSLR

Advice on Nikon D200 needed

(39 posts) (6 voices)

Tags:

D200

12 Next »

poster

preferred member
Joined: Mar '09
Posts: 779
offline

Hi guys,

I have the opportunity to buy Nikon D200 with less than 10k acutations and in a very good condition. I get the Body and battery for $400. Good deal or not?

I am on D70s right now. The extra 4mega pixels would come in handy but than again, it's not much of a problem for me to have only 6. Anyway if any of you guys good enlighten me on the quality of this deal I would be very appriciative.

PS- I am still kicking myself for not biuying them new for $600 from Best buy couple of months ago. :[

Posted 3 years ago #
soap

preferred member
Joined: Jul '09
Posts: 606
offline

Short answer:
$400 is a very good price on a D200 in good condition. Despite the Best Buy closeout @$600, the going used rate is still >$500. If you don't like it I am confident you can resell it in the next 6 months (if not longer) for at least what you paid for it.

Longer answer:
Depends on what you want out of a body.

A 5000 or 3000 will have better IQ for the price. Even a 60 will. You'll also get the more megapixels you want.

But the x00 body series is much easier to use, IMHO, and has many features which are either absent on the lower bodies, or much harder to get to.

I'd eat ramen for a year if that is what it took to get a x00 over a x0 body, personally, for ergonomics alone. My pinky hangs in mid-air with most all the x0 and x000 bodies.

Posted 3 years ago #
jonnyapple

Goldfingers
Joined: May '09
Posts: 3,400
offline

I remember seeing that deal at best buy. If I was in the market for one I would have gotten one for sure. I think that's a great deal and the D200 is a big improvement over the D70s (I have a sister who made the same upgrade). You could also turn around and sell the D70s for $200-$300 on ebay.

Posted 3 years ago #
poster

preferred member
Joined: Mar '09
Posts: 779
offline

In work I use the D60. And I absolutely hate it. I love having two command dials of my d70s, which the lower end bodies lack, and replace with the crummy screen feature. I wouldn't even upgrade right now. I want to get FX asap, but I figured that if I could get at least $275 for my d70s, the cost of upgrade wouldn't be that high, and considering I would get a better weather sealed body with more controls and manual metering Plus a bigger LCD.

Plus when I upgrade to FX I can use D200 as a back up during wedding shoots, God forbid something happens to the D700 or its successor if it comes out soon.

Posted 3 years ago #
poster

preferred member
Joined: Mar '09
Posts: 779
offline

Lol soap, I know what you mean, I prefer better ergonomics and better build quality than the crummy lower end bodies.

Posted 3 years ago #
poster

preferred member
Joined: Mar '09
Posts: 779
offline

jonnyapple said:
I remember seeing that deal at best buy. If I was in the market for one I would have gotten one for sure. I think that's a great deal and the D200 is a big improvement over the D70s (I have a sister who made the same upgrade). You could also turn around and sell the D70s for $200-$300 on ebay.

I remember reading once that you are a wedding photog, would you say using a d200 as a main body would be doable for a wedding shoot? ( taking in consideration having Nikon 70-200 vr1 2.8 and 24-70mm 2.8 at disposal)

For the time being I would use the D200 as athe main until newer FX body comes out.

Posted 3 years ago #
jonnyapple

Goldfingers
Joined: May '09
Posts: 3,400
offline

The sister I mentioned is/was a wedding photographer and used a D200 and a D70s as backup for about two years (and before that it was a D100—she shot my wedding with that and I think the pictures are great). I did one wedding with my D100 and a couple while borrowing her D200, so I would have no problem using the D200 as my main body. And I didn't have lenses like you mentioned. Just a 50 1.8, 85 1.8, a 90mm 2.8 macro, an 18-70, and an old 70-210 f/4. I think you'd be fine.

Posted 3 years ago #
poster

preferred member
Joined: Mar '09
Posts: 779
offline

jonnyapple said:
The sister I mentioned is/was a wedding photographer and used a D200 and a D70s as backup for about two years (and before that it was a D100—she shot my wedding with that and I think the pictures are great). I did one wedding with my D100 and a couple while borrowing her D200, so I would have no problem using the D200 as my main body. And I didn't have lenses like you mentioned. Just a 50 1.8, 85 1.8, a 90mm 2.8 macro, an 18-70, and an old 70-210 f/4. I think you'd be fine.

Cool tanks for the info. Well I don't have these lenses yet. I have the money to buy them but I figure, why buy them new and see the price depreciate, if I don't need them yet.

I am trying to get a job as a second shooter for weddings for the sake of learning the ropes of the business. A lot of agencies require an FX body and these two aforementioned lenses, so I am just saving my money for gear. while slowly building a good system.

Posted 3 years ago #
soap

preferred member
Joined: Jul '09
Posts: 606
offline

poster said:
Cool tanks for the info. Well I don't have these lenses yet. I have the money to buy them but I figure, why buy them new and see the price depreciate, if I don't need them yet.

Because Nikon pro lenses have a strong history of going up in price faster than the prime rate, much less bank interest rates. Meaning if you put $X into the bank today and $X into a 70-200 f/2.8 today, in five years you'll be able to sell the 70-200 for more than you have in said bank account.

I just sold a SB-800 for $4 less than I paid for it 6 years ago. Mind you, a 2010 dollar isn't worth as much as a 2004 dollar, but the point stands: the high end gear loses little in value, far less than the cost of wasted opportunity.

Now, an 18-55? Yea - there's no point buying that new if you ever plan on selling it - as it loses 40-50% of its value the minute it leaves the showroom floor. ;)

Posted 3 years ago #
alphanikonrex

I'm under 18!
Joined: Apr '09
Posts: 1,999
offline

poster said:
I am trying to get a job as a second shooter for weddings for the sake of learning the ropes of the business. A lot of agencies require an FX body and these two aforementioned lenses, so I am just saving my money for gear. while slowly building a good system.

Really? I didn't know that—I'll have to keep that in mind for my future.

I'd go with the D200 poster—I don't see where you could go wrong with it. Like soap said, you could probably sell it later for just about what you payed for it. If you bought a D5000 or something new today it would (1) lose value and (2) you don't like "crummy lower end bodies", so D200 is definitely the better choice.

Posted 3 years ago #
poster

preferred member
Joined: Mar '09
Posts: 779
offline

Okay so I just got it. The guy threw in a CF Extreme III 4gb card with it. Awesome.

And he had Nikon 14-24mm 2.8 on it. Man that lens is fecking awesome. Anyway I took couple of shots with that lens and it's bloody unbelievably sharp. They guy shoots D3s and was just getting rid of "old" DX and "crummy" equipment.

Anyway I am very happy for the purchase. GREAT condition and quite cheap, since the cheapest I found used was in BH Photo for $550

@ Soap

Great point about PRO lenses. I am still thinking about pro consumer stuff. My bad.

I am very happy now. I can't believe how long I lasted killing my eyes on D70s LCD.

Thanks everybody for good info. I just needed a final nudge to go and buy it.

@ Alpha

Good point. Yeah while I really like the idea of articulating LCD, but the ergonomics just don't cut it for me.

here's his listing from craigslist

All lenses are Nikon mount and in extremely good condition:

Nikon 50mm f1.4 D with Hoya HMC Super 52mm UV filter $200.00

Nikon 85mm f1.8 D with Hoya 62mm UV filter $375.00

Nikon AF-S 18-70mm f3.5-4.5 G $225.00

Tokina AT-X Pro 12-24 f4 (IF) DX with B+W F Pro filter $375.00

Sigman70mm f2.8 DG Macro with Tiffen 62mm uv filter $335.00

I also have a Nikon D200 (body and battery only) for sale at $400.00

Posted 3 years ago #
soap

preferred member
Joined: Jul '09
Posts: 606
offline

Good prices there. The 50 f/1.4 is at a great price, the 85 f/1.8 is not. I don't see enough 18-70s to comment, ditto on the Tokina and Sigma.
If you could talk him down, the 18-70 @ $150 is what _I_ would consider a good price. It handles better than the 18-55, but is that and that alone worth $100?

What town?

If I were you I'd be very tempted to upgrade my 50 1.8 to the 50 1.4.
You can sell your 1.8 for $100, so you're only out $100.

That said, the 1.8 also tends to do a good job of holding its value, and the 1.4 will likely come down now that the AFS is out.

Posted 3 years ago #
poster

preferred member
Joined: Mar '09
Posts: 779
offline

soap said:
Good prices there. The 50 f/1.4 is at a great price, the 85 f/1.8 is not. I don't see enough 18-70s to comment, ditto on the Tokina and Sigma.
If you could talk him down, the 18-70 @ $150 is what _I_ would consider a good price. It handles better than the 18-55, but is that and that alone worth $100?

What town?

If I were you I'd be very tempted to upgrade my 50 1.8 to the 50 1.4.
You can sell your 1.8 for $100, so you're only out $100.

That said, the 1.8 also tends to do a good job of holding its value, and the 1.4 will likely come down now that the AFS is out.

It's in NYC.

I already have Nikon 50 1.8. I use it when I am on assignments for school paper. Much lighter than the Sigma 50mm. I also have a Sigma 1.4 HSM. I had the Nikon AF-D 50 1.4. Didn't really like it. Very soft. My copy of the new Sigma is a lot sharper even than the new 50mm G prime.

I had the 18-70mm. Never really used it. I sold mine for $190 6 months ago. They usually go around $180- $220 here, but I doubt anybody would get it for $220.

I mostly use primes.

I use zooms at work, and of course will get the aforementioned pro zooms some time soon. Will see how that will work out for me.

Posted 3 years ago #
alphanikonrex

I'm under 18!
Joined: Apr '09
Posts: 1,999
offline

Congrats on the D200! Glad you like it :^D

soap said:
the 85 f/1.8 is not

Why don't you think it's a good deal on the 85mm?

Posted 3 years ago #
soap

preferred member
Joined: Jul '09
Posts: 606
offline

alphanikonrex said:
Why don't you think it's a good deal on the 85mm?

Because $375 is a /fair/ price and that lens comes up very often at that price. I wouldn't jump on that.
The D200 for $400 and 50 f/1.4 @ $200 are both at prices below what I am used to seeing them at, and I feel confident if I bought either of those two I could sell them for more.

All that said, NYC is a craigslist market I haven't played at all.

Posted 3 years ago #
alphanikonrex

I'm under 18!
Joined: Apr '09
Posts: 1,999
offline

Ah, I understand now. Yes, you're right, it's not as big as discount as with the other lens. And the D200.

Posted 3 years ago #
poster

preferred member
Joined: Mar '09
Posts: 779
offline

soap said:
Because $375 is a /fair/ price and that lens comes up very often at that price. I wouldn't jump on that.
The D200 for $400 and 50 f/1.4 @ $200 are both at prices below what I am used to seeing them at, and I feel confident if I bought either of those two I could sell them for more.

All that said, NYC is a craigslist market I haven't played at all.

Usually I see the 85mm 1.8 at $375. That's pretty average like soap said.

NYC craigslist is full of crappy ads for old Nikon bodies for almost full new price. But every once in a while you will see a deal, like on this D200 that you just have to get.

Maybe 5 months ago I replied to an ad for Nikon 105mm DC lens. It was only 3 months old, with the box and even a receipt, the guy was selling it for $850. I would have gotten it but well add crop factor and the range is way out of mine. would be probably just laying around and collecting dust.

Posted 3 years ago #
alphanikonrex

I'm under 18!
Joined: Apr '09
Posts: 1,999
offline

poster said:
Maybe 5 months ago I replied to an ad for Nikon 105mm DC lens. It was only 3 months old, with the box and even a receipt, the guy was selling it for $850. I would have gotten it but well add crop factor and the range is way out of mine. would be probably just laying around and collecting dust.

I would have tried it at least.

Then again, maybe that guy was selling it for the exact reason you didn't buy it! ;^)

Posted 3 years ago #
poster

preferred member
Joined: Mar '09
Posts: 779
offline

alphanikonrex said:
I would have tried it at least.

Then again, maybe that guy was selling it for the exact reason you didn't buy it! ;^)

Lol yeah but I am a nice guy, why take away a chance for somebody to get it an use it for a good price. Deals come back eventually. Anyway,

I have a question will the original battery charger from Nikon d70s charge D200's battery?

edit:

It is. Cool.

So guys anybody wanna get a mint condition D70s? ;p

Posted 3 years ago #
alphanikonrex

I'm under 18!
Joined: Apr '09
Posts: 1,999
offline

poster said:
I have a question will the original battery charger from Nikon d70s charge D200's battery?

I think so. When I got my D300 I was so excited I didn't bother to set up the new charger, just put the EN-EL3e in my old one. Nothing's gone wrong to this day, so I suppose it's all right.

Posted 3 years ago #
poster

preferred member
Joined: Mar '09
Posts: 779
offline

alphanikonrex said:
I think so. When I got my D300 I was so excited I didn't bother to set up the new charger, just put the EN-EL3e in my old one. Nothing's gone wrong to this day, so I suppose it's all right.

Good to know. I was about to go and buy one tomorrow. They guy only sold the body plus battery. Kept the charger for himself. Makes this even a better deal now that I don't have to get a new one. ha, great start for this new year for me.

Posted 3 years ago #
adamz

The Predator
Joined: Mar '09
Posts: 3,461
offline

d60, d3000 doesn't have better IQ - it's same sensor -as for the price $400 is a bargain for this camera

Posted 3 years ago #
jonnyapple

Goldfingers
Joined: May '09
Posts: 3,400
offline

poster said:
I am very happy now. I can't believe how long I lasted killing my eyes on D70s LCD.

Poster, just wait until you get used to the LCD on a D90/D300/D700 etc. You'll wonder the same thing about that D200 screen. ;-)

I'm glad you got it and I'm glad you like it. I fell in love with the D200 the first time I picked up my sister's. I started saving up for one from that day and luckily right when I had enough money to buy one, the D300 was announced. I fell in love with the D300 more, but it's not worth four times the money for the D200 like the deal you just got.

Posted 3 years ago #
soap

preferred member
Joined: Jul '09
Posts: 606
offline

adamz said:
d60, d3000 doesn't have better IQ - it's same sensor -as for the price $400 is a bargain for this camera

60/3000 is same generation sensor with following generation processing engine.

Posted 3 years ago #
poster

preferred member
Joined: Mar '09
Posts: 779
offline

jonnyapple said:
Poster, just wait until you get used to the LCD on a D90/D300/D700 etc. You'll wonder the same thing about that D200 screen. ;-)

I'm glad you got it and I'm glad you like it. I fell in love with the D200 the first time I picked up my sister's. I started saving up for one from that day and luckily right when I had enough money to buy one, the D300 was announced. I fell in love with the D300 more, but it's not worth four times the money for the D200 like the deal you just got.

Ha I can only imagine.

Yup that was my reasoning as well. If I get sell my D70s for $300 the cost of upgrade is only $100. Pretty cheap considering what I got. Now I just gotta find a buyer for the old workhorse.

Posted 3 years ago #

RSS feed for this topic

12 Next »

Reply »

You must log in to post.

The new Nikon Rumors Forum is now live at http://forum.nikonrumors.com/discussions. This forum is now in "read only" mode until I figure a proper way to import all data over to the new platform. Please register over at the new forum.

Advice on Nikon D200 needed

Reply »