Cameras forum

General discussion

Best DSLR for the money Nikon 200D/EOS30D

by Mark Nadzieja / February 28, 2007 9:00 AM PST

I would invite any on to respond to wich would be the better camera, Canon EOS 30D or Nikon 200D?

Post a reply
Discussion is locked
You are posting a reply to: Best DSLR for the money Nikon 200D/EOS30D
The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. Please refer to our CNET Forums policies for details. All submitted content is subject to our Terms of Use.
Track this discussion and email me when there are updates

If you're asking for technical help, please be sure to include all your system info, including operating system, model number, and any other specifics related to the problem. Also please exercise your best judgment when posting in the forums--revealing personal information such as your e-mail address, telephone number, and address is not recommended.

You are reporting the following post: Best DSLR for the money Nikon 200D/EOS30D
This post has been flagged and will be reviewed by our staff. Thank you for helping us maintain CNET's great community.
Sorry, there was a problem flagging this post. Please try again now or at a later time.
If you believe this post is offensive or violates the CNET Forums' Usage policies, you can report it below (this will not automatically remove the post). Once reported, our moderators will be notified and the post will be reviewed.
Collapse -
They are both basically the same...
by whizkid454 / February 28, 2007 9:50 AM PST

Except the D200 is 10MP vs. the 30D 8MP.
The D200 also has faster continuous shooting: D200's 5fps vs. 30D's 3fps
The D200 also has a customizable button which the 30D does not have. Memories for the D200 can also be set which cannot be done in the 30D.

Collapse -
The 30D shoots at 5 frames per second just as its
by Kiddpeat / February 28, 2007 2:58 PM PST

predecessor, the 20D, does. Please do not spread erroneous information.

Canon generally has a better lense system than Nikon and a better low light capability. Nikon, in turn, has its advantages.

Collapse -
Nikon 200D
by blaine100 / February 28, 2007 11:43 AM PST

Even though I have a Canon 20D and love it, from all the reviews I've read, the Nikon D200 sounds better. Since I have Canon lenses now, I'd probably stick with another Canon (although I'm not getting the 30D since it's barely a minor upgrade). If you don't already have lenses, I'd probably go with the Nikon D200...especially because it's getter slightly better overall reviews than the 30D. I'd try both out because some people do not like the button and menu configuration of the Nikon.

All the reviews on the internet for both cameras can be found here:
Nikon D200 (Score = 92) -
Canon 30D (Score = 89) -

Still, both cameras are fantastic purchases and I don't think you'd be disappointed with either.

Collapse -
Frankly speaking,
by jump1127 / March 1, 2007 1:33 PM PST

I'd choose Nikon D200 instead of Canon EOS 30D, provided that I've got no Canon lense. Nikon has the better ergonomic design, better light metering system, and more image details though not a gread deal significance. Actually, I thought about having one as my EOS 5D back-up. I did start shooting some pictures using my friend's Nikon D200 and D80 lately. And I really like Nikon's image quality, beside portrait. Skin-tone is something Nikon can't simply beat Canon any way. So, you be the judge.

Collapse -
Color reproduction
by Mark Nadzieja / March 2, 2007 6:51 AM PST

If any of you have used both cameras, which one has best color? Also I went to a couple of sites and the D200 pics just didn't seem as sharp. But I did not know if I was comparing similar ISO settings Aperature and other camera settings.

Collapse -
Nikon shows more
by jump1127 / March 2, 2007 10:43 PM PST
In reply to: Color reproduction

blue and green. Canon seems to be more red. Sharpness isn't so significant when shooting RAW, but slightly different when shooting JPEG. For landscape and macro type of picture, Nikon is more preferable. But, portrait, Canon is more preferable.

Collapse -
D200 Versus Canon EOS30D- How About the D80?
by ranadeau / March 2, 2007 11:36 AM PST

Until last week I thought that I would be upgrading from a Nikon D70 to a Nikon D200 but after attending a recent Nikon class, I am now leanimng in the direction of a Nikon D80. This DSLR costs approximately $400 less than a D200 but hasthe same number of megapixels, same sensor size and retains some of the automated modes of operation. These modes are totally eliminated from the D200. The Auto (green mode) is gone. I hardly ever use Auto but some of the other modes have come in handy.

The D200 is built like a tank but the D80 is also well built. It is not gasket equipped and sealed like the D200 but it seems to be well built. Steve's digicams actually implies that it does a better job in some respects than the D200 does.

The D80 delivers more bang-for-the-buck than the D200.

Let's wait and see if any of these companies announce any new product after their huge photo show in Las Vegas this month.

Collapse -
by Mark Nadzieja / March 3, 2007 12:02 AM PST

I should have thrown that D80 into the mix. I've heard good things about the D80.

Collapse -
1/4000 vs 1/8000th
by Mark Nadzieja / March 3, 2007 12:37 AM PST
In reply to: D80

Does ant body really use anything higher that a 1/4000th shutter speed?

Collapse -
Fast Shutter Speed
by snapshot2 Forum moderator / March 3, 2007 5:28 AM PST
In reply to: 1/4000 vs 1/8000th

Very few people have need for such shutter speeds.

Normal action can usually be captured at 1/250th of a second.

You will seldom encounter a need for anything faster than 1/1000th of a second.

The faster the shutter speed....the more light is needed.

Even in bright sun you will have to set the camera to about ISO 400 and have a f2.8 lens (or brighter) to shoot at 1/4000th of a second.

Shooting action at a nighttime football game (under lights) will not be possible at 1/4000th of a second.'s possible....if you want very dark photos.


Collapse -
I Went Through The Same Situation!
by SuijinZ / May 24, 2007 9:00 PM PDT

D200 and 30D are both great cameras. Im not a pro Nikon or pro Canon so i try to be as fair as possible when making the decision. After intensive reading and a period of time deciding on which of these SLR im going to get, I decided that the 30D is some what better.

D200 has more megapixel and a heavy built. It also have a bit more manual options to play with that i dont think would be much significant comparing to what the 30D already has. Ive played with the 30D and it produce some real nice and sharp images on sceneries and detail images. However, in people the D200 cant seem to surpass the 30D. Considering nikon lens are popular by most pro shooters, i think that the lens that comes with the 30D is not so bad either. The lens differences are not that bad.
As for the 30D, it have awesome colors. Best body ever i would say. Nikon has the lens but Canon has the Body (you decide which is more important). To me i prefer the better body. Canon processor and body unit are better and it produce better colors than the D200. The portraits are more colorful and vivid. The camera is simple to use with options that will be more than enough to satisfy you. Body is not that heavy and pack about the same punch as the D200.
Considering they both have 5fps, same class of semi-pro, a Take One Leaving One rule (Nikon Lens or Canon Body, also Nikon Scenery/ Macro or Canon People/Common Shooting). I personally like the 30D because with about the same specs (beside MP), the 30D go for a price that is about 400$ cheaper than the D200. With that money you can actually buy a lense converter and start shooting Nikon lens on the Canon body =D. Would that be more satisfying? get good lens onto a good body? =) But if you dont want all that trouble then just pick one that you feel would fit you and your shooting style better and enjoy it because they both deliver jaw dropping images.

Collapse -
D200 vs Canon 30D
by hjfok / May 25, 2007 1:18 PM PDT

Both are great cameras. D200 is meant for more advanced users who like to customize their settings. There is no preset program modes (like landscape, portrait, etc). It only has program, aperture priority, shutter priority and manual modes. It has more features than Canon 30D. It also has a weather-sealed body that the 30D lacks.
But the Canon 30D has a better high ISO performance with cleaner image than the D200, and to me this is more important since I take a lot of low light photos.
The D80 is good and is aimed at the consumer level customers, with preset modes and customizable modes. But it has a plastic body and not weather-sealed. And it only goes up to 3fps with continuous burst. High ISO performance is no better than D200. I won't consider the D80 as equivalent to the 30D or D200 in performance.
Well, enough is said of the specs comparison. The bottom line is that it doesn't matter which one you choose. The performance difference is not going to affect the photos as much as the difference in skills of the persons holding the camera. So stop worrying about which camera is the best, and focus more on improving the skills.
This is just like asking the question, whether Mercedes is better than Lexus. Which one has more safety features and better performance? These depend more on who drives the vehicle.

Collapse -
D200 vs Canon 30D
by Mark Nadzieja / June 14, 2007 10:04 PM PDT
In reply to: D200 vs Canon 30D

I ended up choosing the EOS30D after handling both, and my past experience with a 10D I went with the Canon. Both are good companies.

Popular Forums
Computer Help 49,613 discussions
Computer Newbies 10,349 discussions
Laptops 19,436 discussions
Security 30,426 discussions
TVs & Home Theaters 20,308 discussions
Windows 10 360 discussions
Phones 15,802 discussions
Windows 7 7,351 discussions
Networking & Wireless 14,641 discussions

CNET Holiday Gift Guide

Looking for great gifts under $100?

Trendy tech gifts don't require a hefty price tag. Choose from these CNET-recommended useful and high-quality gadgets.