Nice.  Would be interesting to have a comparison with the M8.   Both CCD’s one with AA filter.DA

da7329 wrote:Nice. Would be interesting to have a comparison with the M8. Both CCD’s one with AA filter.DAGuys, thank you so much for the support!For those in this part of the world, there's a life threat coming closer and closer on the horizon (can't say too much to not derail it as off topic), so my mood has been all over the place for almost 2 months now.I wasn't even aware this thread was still goingVery good suggestion, I've never made a direct M8 vs D200 comparison, as I have both.But I can compare very subjectively, for what I recall.M8 has a superior sensor, IMO.No AA filter means it's very sharp, compared to the admitedly soft (due to aggressive AA filter) D200.M8 has a 1.3 crop APS-H sensor, made by Kodak.DR and high ISO are equal on both cameras.  One is not better than the other.Now regarding colors, I can't say the M8 wins, but if I said that, it wouldn't be far from the truth.M8 has jaw dropping, gorgeous colors.Samples below are without the IR cut filter (which affects color) and 12 bit mode (there is a hack enabling 14 bit Raws, which does improve the files).And a cheaper Voigtlander lens.All that said, the render is gorgeous.Oh, found some 14 bit filesI'd say the M8 is ahead, but ever so slightly.The D200 is a must have classic on its own.I'd love to try those AA filter removing mods though. Maybe a super sharp D200 would be a dream!One way or another, you can't go wrong with CCD !Best regards,

Thanks for posting these.  If you get chance sometime shoot both side by side.  Would be interesting.DA

da7329 wrote:Nice. Would be interesting to have a comparison with the M8. Both CCD’s one with AA filter.DAagreed - would be interestingWhat about the M9 FF ? - another Kodak CCD ?? with no AA. I had mused over getting one for a long time but interim sold my M3 and M glass so no point now.Just out of interest - picked up a D200 in "excellent" condition from MPB UK for £67 - just to see what it is like. That together with a D300s low clicks also from MPB ( that I need not just want ) - both of which seem to have been lost in the Xmas post in UK.Maybe i'll do a comparison and post .....Interesting to see what AI NR can do with the images at higher ISO ( I use Deepprime ).No doubt my D500 is streets ahead but I decided not to wait till the used prices for the D500 fell further before getting a ( second ) fastish ( fps ) crop body with adequate performance at 200-400 ISO i.e. D300s + griprichard

Thanks for sharing Marcio; I love the CCD look, I am lucky to own a Leica M8 and an M9P both capable of beautiful results and I been looking for a mint example of either a D80 or a D200 to add to my collection.I agree. The 5D Classic is also special, it produces files with a sharpness of clarity superior to the ones of my much newer RP.I would never get rid of mine!

marcio_napoli wrote:TheFiend wrote:I can afford to buy a Z9 and z-lenses, but I don't want to, or need to, as I am more than happy shooting with what I have.Yeah, I feel the need to clarify this too.If my arguments were like "the D200 (5D etc) is greatfor the money, good optionon a budget, if you can't afford the latest", that would be a disclaimer right at the start.I own 3 digital backs and lenses, for Hassy and Phase One system, plus Nikon stuff and now adding Canon.I defend vintage gear not because they're great for little money.They're just great, period, not related to budget.The fact you can also abuse less the wallet is just a welcomed extra.Best regards,I've just picked up yet another D200. This one has a shutter count of 1372 and it's in truly mint condition. As soon as I saw it for sale I decided I was buying it and it only cost me £75 and it even came with an unused BM-6 screen protector and 2 batteries!!!

Marcio! Of course this thread is still going! I'm still enjoying my D200 so much!Attached are three recent attempts. 1600 ISO for grain...