Pro-level at consumer price

I've been jonsin' for the D200 for about a year, and finally got one. At $600, the price was right.

This won't be a technical review; it's a user review, because I'm no technician. You want specs, go to dpreview.com.

This is my fourth Nikon DSLR, currently owning the D40, D80, and having just recently sold my D1x. Image quality (so far) is pretty well equal among all of these. You cannot differentiate an image taken with the D40 from one taken with the D200 (I'm currently still using the 18-200mmG ED VR), unless you start blowing up hard copies at poster-sized prints. So much for the megapixel myth. You won't get crappy images unless you have a crappy lens or crappy technique.

I chose the D200 for the magnesium body (I love a metal chassis), and for the superior meter (over the overexpose-prone D80 & D40), which means less time fiddlin' with exposure compensation. It feels comfortable, like the D80 does, being close to the same size. I've got smallish hands; even the D40 feels small. The D1x was a monster. The controls on both the D200 and D80 are easily within reach. The magnesium body doesn't feel much heavier than the 80's plastic body and feels well-balanced with the 18-200 VR mounted.

Sure, this isn't a beginner's camera; start off with the D40, and work your way up. But having dedicated controls for WB, ISO, Image Quality, and the like is actually much simpler and quicker than having to dig through the menu system to make those adjustments. And with a 4gb Microdrive CF card, I get about 450 images set on the highest quality JPEG setting. Battery life isn't quite as good as the D80, but they share the same battery, so I'll always have a fully-charged spare (I've yet to run a Nikon battery completely down). The D200 feels a bit "stickier" and has a slightly larger top LCD than the D80, and also has a rubber foot as opposed the the D80's plastic base. Less chance of twisting on a quick-release plate. And it has that same great diopter in the large, bright viewfinder. I just wish it had an IR sensor so I could use my ML-L3 wireless remote (I'm debating whether or not to try a third-party wireless setup). But it's got features the D80 wish it had, like an PC socket, and interval timer and multiple exposure settings.

When all's said and done, cameras are no different than cars or barbeque grills or pencil sharpeners. It all comes down to personal preferences. If it's got the features you want and/or need, then it's up to you to make it work properly. All those fancy buttons don't make the picture; it's the ten inches behind the viewfinder.

UPDATE: "Soft" image issue

There's been lots of talk about the D200 taking "soft" images. If left at the default settings, yes, images are soft. I found that out today while on a trip out in the woods. I was initially disappointed, compared to the quality of images I'd gotten out of my D80. So, I did a little test when I got home.

Four exact images, at the same exposure settings, at four different sharpness settings (under Shooting Menu>Optimize Image>Custom): Auto, Normal, Medium High (+1), and High (+2). Now...my good buddy Ken Rockwell had some artifacts show up with in-camera sharpening (our settings differed a bit...he shot Basic Small, I shoot Fine Large). That was a major concern with me. However, as sharpness increased, I found no artifacts, even at the High setting. Granted, there's a big difference in (his) shooting a sun-lit house and (my) shooting a computer speaker off a desktop under a fluorescent ring light. And I'll find out how much difference if the bloody sun ever comes out again.