D90 or D200

[hollandg]

ok well I have a D40. I am looking to upgrade here soon and I can spend $899 on a new Nikon D90, or get a D200 for $499... What should I do? what would you do? I take family session photos, weddings ... ext all on site.. any help will work.. thanks!!

Holland

[revjvegas]

There are rumors that the D95 is on the way.

I'd wait a spell if you can.

Course while you're waiting, you could always upgrade your glass.
:-)

[Tom]

I would buy lenses and sell your kit lenses.

[Flea77]

If you are not shooting sports or need the weathersealing/metal chassis of the D200, the D90 is a superior camera. Unfortunately from your sig it seems you don't really have the glass for the jobs you specified so although the D90 would be a nice upgrade, Thomas was right in that you need new lenses first.

Allan

[hollandg]

Originally Posted by Thomas Campbell

I would buy lenses and sell your kit lenses.

What lens should I be looking for then? I am very open to all ideas!

[revjvegas]

70-200 2.8
17-50 2.8

[Bob_S]

D90 after the D95 or whatever it will be called is released. It is a far better camera than the D200 I think. Lose all of the glass you have except the 50 1.8 and add a 70-200 2.8 later on. JMO

[tukaniray]

I agree with John's suggestions of glass.

The 17-50 2.8 will cover your family sessions.

And the 70-200 2.8 will cover your long range in a low-light wedding ceremony.

If the 2 together is a bit over budget for you ... I would buy the 70-200 2.8 first. Then rent the 17-50 2.8. After a few gigs you can buy the 17-50 easily.

-Ray-

[Zack Davis]

I'm all for the good glass, if you don't find your in many low light situations or fighting with any digital noise at the ISO's you use most often.

That said I'd skip the D200, the sensor on the D90 is much better. But like has been said it's almost that fall release time so you might be better to hold off and wait for them to refresh their lineup.

[hollandg]

what about the Tamron, Sigma brand for the 70-200? I just dont have the $1600 off hand right now for the Nikon. =/

[Tom]

Buy used.

If you sold your two Nikon zooms for $100 each, you would have $1100.

It would be pretty easy to find a Tamron 28-75mm 2.8 for $350 used and a used Sigma 70-200mm 2.8 for $750. Then you are set. That is a very good couple lenses that will help you improve your photography a lot.

[Nikonfan]

Thomas, I was in the same situation as you a little over a year ago. I started with the same lenses you have and the D40. I shoot portrait sessions and weddings now. I agree with everyone about the glass. However, I also understand what a tight budget is like. JMO but I would deffinately keep the 50mm 1.8 as suggested above. Since your 50mm most likely doesn't have a motor it will not AF on your D40. Neither will any FX lenses. So you may consider "for now" getting a used D80 which is almost identicle to the D200 without the weatherproof body and rubber grips. You can pick one up used for about $300. I have a D80 and it is an excellent camera. This would leave you money to upgrade your glass.

As far as glass, I would look at the Tamron 70-200 f2.8. If you don't shoot sports it is actually a better lens than the Sigma and much cheaper. I saw one posted the other day in Craigs list for $550. It's only downside is that it is a bit slow at focusing, so it's not as good as Sigma/Nikkor for sports.

[hollandg]

Originally Posted by Nikonfan

Thomas, I was in the same situation as you a little over a year ago. I started with the same lenses you have and the D40. I shoot portrait sessions and weddings now. I agree with everyone about the glass. However, I also understand what a tight budget is like. JMO but I would deffinately keep the 50mm 1.8 as suggested above. Since your 50mm most likely doesn't have a motor it will not AF on your D40. Neither will any FX lenses. So you may consider "for now" getting a used D80 which is almost identicle to the D200 without the weatherproof body and rubber grips. You can pick one up used for about $300. I have a D80 and it is an excellent camera. This would leave you money to upgrade your glass.

As far as glass, I would look at the Tamron 70-200 f2.8. If you don't shoot sports it is actually a better lens than the Sigma and much cheaper. I saw one posted the other day in Craigs list for $550. It's only downside is that it is a bit slow at focusing, so it's not as good as Sigma/Nikkor for sports.

Hey David,

I was just looking into the D80 option as I got the email about what you posted. I was looking into a D80 and the Tamron 28-75mm 2.8 to start with, then save for the Sigma 70-200mm 2.8. I don't want to lose my 50mm. I like the feel of the shots when I use it. I will also look into the Tamron 70-200 f2.8. I am not one for sports and most of my shots are people sitting or still. no real action so that might be a good move for me.

I want to thank everyone here that have posted. It was allot of help!!!

Thanks again!!!!!
Holland

[Nikonfan]

You're welcome. Keep us posted on what you end up getting!

[Tom]

I would not get a D80. The D90 was a huge upgrade. At least get the Tamron 28-75 and hold off on a new body until the D90 replacement comes by.

Then decide between the D95, used D90 or used D300.