linuxuser
Member
I am in a very difficult moment: to buy a new Olympus E-620 or a used Nikon d90 (around 18000-25000 shots). The price is almost the same. What would You do? Reasons? I'd also consider an Ep-2 but is much too expensive.
I mention also that I own several manual lenses on OM mount.
I mention also that I own several manual lenses on OM mount.
stompyq
Well-known
I've been a nikon guy all my life never tried Olympus. If you are considering the D90 wait till the D90 replacement is announced sometime this month. The used prices should then go down a bit more. Not to confuse you more but i would choose a D200 over the D90 in your situation since it's cheaper used.
Andy Kibber
Well-known
What do you want to use the camera for? What lenses do you want to use? Is flash important to you?
Andy Kibber
Well-known
Depends on what your priority is. The D200 is better built and has some professional features but the sensor in the D90 is probably better and the D90 shoots video (if that's a concern).
I agree, wait until the D90's replacement is announced and you'll get a better deal.
alien8
Established
Really? That seems very bad advice to me. The image quality of the D90, particularly in low light situations, is light years ahead of the D200. The D90 functions very well in most situations; I think it would be a shame to put up with the greatly inferior image quality of the D200 despite the fact that it's a more professional package. YMMV of course.
stompyq
Well-known
Ever shot a D90 and a D200? Sure if we were comparing just high ISO the D90 is a stop better. But not everyone shoots inside a cave. In terms of ergonamics the D90 feels like toy. But YMMV
linuxuser
Member
I travel a lot, and shoot various, but not studio, strictly sportive activities, etc.
I would really use the video, but the difficulty against the e-620 is olympus has tons of options (IS, mobile screen, etc). And this should be the transfer from my film gear (and the Fuji very best bridge s9100) to DSLR.
I would really use the video, but the difficulty against the e-620 is olympus has tons of options (IS, mobile screen, etc). And this should be the transfer from my film gear (and the Fuji very best bridge s9100) to DSLR.
gavinlg
Veteran
e-620 if you want high quality cheap compact zooms like 14-54mm and 9-18mm, and don't shoot low light a lot. The mid range Olympus zooms are brilliant and affordable, and compact. The camera is not as good as the d90 at high ISOs or continuous AF.
d90 if you want prime lenses or expensive high quality zooms and hope to upgrade to a Full frame nikon later on. The cheaper nikkors for DX aren't as good as the olympus 4/3 zooms. The d90 is very good in low light, and it's AF is pretty decent too.
d90 if you want prime lenses or expensive high quality zooms and hope to upgrade to a Full frame nikon later on. The cheaper nikkors for DX aren't as good as the olympus 4/3 zooms. The d90 is very good in low light, and it's AF is pretty decent too.
alien8
Established
Ever shot a D90 and a D200? Sure if we were comparing just high ISO the D90 is a stop better. But not everyone shoots inside a cave. In terms of ergonamics the D90 feels like toy. But YMMV
Yes, I've used both. I own the D90 and I've used the D200 a couple of times. You won't get any arguments from me about the far superior handling of the D200. On the other hand, in some situations the smaller size of the d90 might be a bonus (e.g. travel). If I was doing solely studio work I might choose the D200. Anything else and it's the D90 hands down for me. But at this point I would probably do as another poster suggested and wait a couple of weeks for the D90 upgrade, or go for a used D300 which can be had for about $1000 now it seems.
cidereye
Film Freak
Try them both out whatever you do first, you might not like either of them once you handle them ... you never know. Never, ever buy a camera without first handling it and having a play around.
Some good advice in this thread, as an ex D200 user I view that camera very highly but the D90 will produce better photos straight from the camera even though it's not a Pro build mag body and may feel a bit plasticy. I certainly wouldn't buy a D200 these day's unless it was very cheap as good as they were in their day. If you were not too bothered about the video aspect I would certainly recommend looking at a used D300 as it will be the same image processor in the camera but a weather sealed Pro mag alloy body and far sturdier.
The Oly's are great cameras too mind, when I went the Leica way I sold my D200 and replaced it with an Oly E-410 for a DSLR and I'm ecstatic with it for what it is. They are a bit plasticy but well built, light & very small compared to most other DSLR's. The standard zoom lens is also superb, I do find the viewfinders on the E's a wee bit tiny though as a downside. You might find that if you have large hands it may not be the camera for you which is why trying them all out first for yourself before even considering parting with your money is essential.
Some good advice in this thread, as an ex D200 user I view that camera very highly but the D90 will produce better photos straight from the camera even though it's not a Pro build mag body and may feel a bit plasticy. I certainly wouldn't buy a D200 these day's unless it was very cheap as good as they were in their day. If you were not too bothered about the video aspect I would certainly recommend looking at a used D300 as it will be the same image processor in the camera but a weather sealed Pro mag alloy body and far sturdier.
The Oly's are great cameras too mind, when I went the Leica way I sold my D200 and replaced it with an Oly E-410 for a DSLR and I'm ecstatic with it for what it is. They are a bit plasticy but well built, light & very small compared to most other DSLR's. The standard zoom lens is also superb, I do find the viewfinders on the E's a wee bit tiny though as a downside. You might find that if you have large hands it may not be the camera for you which is why trying them all out first for yourself before even considering parting with your money is essential.
jarski
Veteran
D200 was made when Nikons had poor high ISO noise control. I'd avoid that model.
D90 should have succeeding model pretty soon. used prices probably drop then.
D90 should have succeeding model pretty soon. used prices probably drop then.
jky
Well-known
Having played with a e620 (a friend's), I thought the camera had nice handling - that plus I liked the camera's size & profile as it's not the usual bulbuous body of cameras such as the D3000, etc...
But that was about all I liked with it.
VF was too small & high ISO, which I use often, was not as good as the D90's.
The D90 is a fantastic camera - speedy in pretty much every way, nice & large VF, IQ was in my opinion better than my old D300 @ iso 1600 & up.
A love-child of the two cameras above (D90 in a compact e620 body) would be a nice set up!
But that was about all I liked with it.
VF was too small & high ISO, which I use often, was not as good as the D90's.
The D90 is a fantastic camera - speedy in pretty much every way, nice & large VF, IQ was in my opinion better than my old D300 @ iso 1600 & up.
A love-child of the two cameras above (D90 in a compact e620 body) would be a nice set up!
Pablito
coco frío
D90 hands down.
D200 is a great camera but poor in low light as others have said. In my opinion, the disadvantage is greater than one f stop compared to the D90. And it uses battery power at about twice the rate of the later models.
I would not give the Olympus a 2nd thought even tho it is capable of perfectly nice photos.
All the above based on experience.
D200 is a great camera but poor in low light as others have said. In my opinion, the disadvantage is greater than one f stop compared to the D90. And it uses battery power at about twice the rate of the later models.
I would not give the Olympus a 2nd thought even tho it is capable of perfectly nice photos.
All the above based on experience.
user237428934
User deletion pending
Olympus has an aspect ration of 4:3, the nikon has 3:2. What's you favorite print format? I started digital with an olympus dslr but I couldn't get used to 4:3 and I ended that I tried to crop every photo to 3:2. That was much work and didn't work with every photo. It was one reason to go away from olympus. The other reason was the rather bad low light behavior. The size and quality of the zoom lenses (14-54, 9-18) is very good.
If it's for travel and mostly daylight and you like 4:3 then I would go with the olympus and those already mentioned zoom lenses.
If it's for travel and mostly daylight and you like 4:3 then I would go with the olympus and those already mentioned zoom lenses.
LStRomain
chaos watcher
the low light performance was why I traded my D200 in on a D300 ... another choice would be the Fuji S5, much better in low-light than the D200 (and shares the same body) with a really nice DR.
stompyq
Well-known
This might interest you
http://nikonrumors.com/2010/08/13/first-pictures-of-the-nikon-d3100-and-the-four-new-lenses.aspx
at the very least be patient for another week to see what the new camera is really supposed to have.
http://nikonrumors.com/2010/08/13/first-pictures-of-the-nikon-d3100-and-the-four-new-lenses.aspx
at the very least be patient for another week to see what the new camera is really supposed to have.
Matus
Well-known
I would say - if you need a full size DSLR for sports or high quality large prints go with the D90. If you want something that comes closer to EP-1 (size arguments) take the E-620 - especially given the good comments on the zooms. Or have a look at the new Sony NEX cameras. Seem to deliver very good image quality.
tstermitz
Well-known
I'm happy with my D90. Every time I wish I had more robust build (D300 or D700), I think of the weight, and then make myself remember that these cameras usually depreciate faster than they wear out. Sport or Autofocus are the only real reasons to move up to the semi-pro build. I have used the video once or twice, but if you do video, you really want a video camera.
D90 is "2nd gen", meaning that some lens aberrations are corrected in the JPG images. I'm not sure if that applies to the D200.
Yes, wait to see what the D90 replacement is like.
D90 is "2nd gen", meaning that some lens aberrations are corrected in the JPG images. I'm not sure if that applies to the D200.
Yes, wait to see what the D90 replacement is like.
Last edited:
Rico
Well-known
I have a pair of recent models, D300 and D3000, and they are complementary in use. The D3000 serves perfectly as a lightweight carry-all-the-time shooter, and the plastic build is reassuringly solid (no creaking), with an excellent 18-55 VR kit zoom. The D300 with 17-55/2.8 zoom offers great control, but is big and twice the weight.
cidereye
Film Freak
You are correct, D200 is "1st gen" and has the older & inferior image processor.