Re: Nikon D200

I would have to agree that the D200 seems to be a much, much better
camera than the Fuji S3. First of all, let me state that I do like the
Fuji S2. Great skin tones, great white balance, great
straight-out-of-the-camera-with-minimal-post-production pix. A fine and
worthy camera. However, the S3 was not much an improvement over the S2.
I was very much disappointed in the S3. It has extended highlight
dynamic range, sure, but it really doesn't do that much more than the
S2 did and, at its price, it's very overpriced.

And, yes, in many ways I actually prefer the D70, of all cameras. First
of all, the slow frame rate and horrendous buffer of the S3 drives me
up a wall. Although at 2.5 fps it's only slightly slower than the D70's
3 fps, once you fill up that butter (12 images, IIRC) it slows down to
a snail's pace. The D70, when shooting in JPEG mode, delivers 2 fps to
the end of the end after you fill up its buffer.

Secondly, the D70 flash sync is at 1/500. The S3 only syncs at 1/180.
The D200 is only slightly better at 1/250.

Thirdly, why would I want to waste my money on 2 year old technology? I
personally don't understand why people are still gobbling up old D1Xs
and D100s when, to be honest, the D70 spits out a better file at a
better price. The only justification I see for those old bodies are
their ruggedness and the vertical grip support. Otherwise, it's just
silly.

Like I said, I currently shoot S2s, but I've already got my order in
for the D200, because it just seems, on paper, to be a much, much
better camera than the S3, at least for my needs. The 5 fps seals it
for me, along with support for Nikon's spectacular iTTL technology.

.