Like most people here I wrote a a glowing review when I had first purchased the D200. This can be a poor time to write because people can be hypnotized by an expensive new toy.

Over a period of six months I have changed my opinion about this camera.There are problems with this camera and Nikon is trying to keep it hush-hush.

There are recalls due to faulty components. I took mine back to Nikon because my autofocus was not working properly, and because I was getting blue fringing on my images. I will say more about that later. They did not even blink when I explained the problems. They asked no questions because they already knew that these things were happening to other Nikon owners.

But there are other reasons that I would not shell out the money for this camera aside from its malfunctions.

Nikon really cheaped out in the autofocus department. Instead of the chipset and autofocus motor that drives the D2X, Nikon has installed a slower motor and chip. This is better than the D70, but it is not at all suitable for a camera in this price range.

The D200 has a schizophrenic personality. One hand it is speedy in organizing itself and is ready to shoot much faster than the D70. On the other, I have run into numerous situations where the D200 becomes confused and does not fire when you need it to. All of this done in reasonable light levels with pro level "D" series lenses.I suspect that this is a software problem that may be addressed with the new firmware release. But if it is remedied, that won't help me with the missed images in Egypt, Israel, Warsaw, and Vienna. You only get one go around, and the D200 was not always up to the task.

That the camera organizes itself and focuses fast is absolutely vital to anything apart from landscape photography. It seems absurd to me that Nikon would make an expensive "pro-sumer" camera with sub-par autofocus.

Image quality is an improvement over the D70. This is due to more megapixels and an even more intelligent matrix metering system. No quarrels with Nikon here. I was shooting Bedouin Arabs in their tents in the Sinai desert. Imagine black robed figures in low light surrounded by intense light. The D200's light meter was a reliable instrument for this.

And the camera' ergonomics are far superior to the D70. This is very useful when you are shooting. As well, the D200 is a pleasure to hold while shooting.

The camera's performance and features do not justify the cost. This one is going to end up like the D100 and become absolutely worthless on the used market in a few years. The D70(s) in comparison, is holding its value very well.

Let's go back a few years, and compare the D200 and the F100 in terms of value for the money. The F100 was a $1000.00 camera that basically embarrassed the top of the line F4, and made it obsolete. It's autofocus was every bit as good as the F4, the light metering also.

In close comparison, no one who owns a D200 has the right to tease D2X owners. The D2x looks like good value. Which begs the question: Why does Nikon make you spend $6000 for a functional pro camera?

A partial answer may be that the "pro-sumer" is not a demanding photographer. It is only in intense photographic situations that the true nature of the camera is revealed and problems arise.
Even Nikon does not rate the D200 as a pro camera, and that means that you can wait up to three weeks for warranty service!!!

We photographers both pro, and amateur have one weapon in the fight against stupid prices and poor value. That is, keep your hands in your pockets and don't buy something that is poor value. I know, it is hard, camera equipment is so seductive.

After 6 months with this camera I have come to the conclusion that Nikon must work much harder for my money than the D200.

Nikon knows that the D200 is a canard. It is time that the public knew too.

This is not a photographer's camera.This is a camera that fights the photographer. Mind you it looks good and you will get a lot of compliments.

Stick with your D70, it is much better value. You will probably find that the D70 will get you about as many images as the D200.

Sorry if I ruffle feathers here, but that is the unvarnished truth about the D200.