Nikon D200 Digital SLR from a D100 user's perspective

I've recently had a chance to use the Nikon D200, the latest-generation digital SLR (single-lens reflex) camera from Nikon. As the title suggests, I've been a long-time user of the Nikon D100, the predecessor of the D200. Both cameras are aimed at the pro and "serious amateur" photographer, although they are very different beasts.

I've used the D100 since 2003, and have created almost 10,000 exposures (latest sequential frame number as of this writing is 9,688). In the process, I've learned a lot about this camera and have come to love it and respect it. In fact, if I hadn't gotten my hands on a D200 recently, I would have thought that the D100 was close to the perfect camera. Some of my favorite pictures were taken with it, and the combination of RAW format images and Nikon Capture application for editing the RAW files was almost unbeatable for producing great images.

However, as I mentioned above, I recently got to play with the D200 (while attending a friend's wedding, which I ended up shooting pretty much myself since they didn't get a real photographer), and I fell in love with the camera almost immediately.

Advantages of the D200

Controls First off, the controls on the D200 are much more logical. One thing that always bothered me about the D100 is that common tasks, like switching program modes, or switching the ISO value, were cumbersome. You had to rotate the top left dial to the setting you wanted to change, then rotate the right dials to get it set, and then rotate the top left dial back to Program shoting mode. On the D200, the rotating dial on the left became 3 pushbuttons: Qual (for picture size or quality), ISO, and WB (for white balance). To change either, just press one of the pushbuttons, then use the thumb dials on the left to set. For example, changing the ISO equivalent on the fly is as easy as pressing the ISO button, while simultaneously rotating one of the dials on the right to the right value. Much simpler than before!

The screen: Definite improvement in resolution, brightness, and viewing angle compared to the D100. I cringe now whenever I use the D100 at how bad that tiny screen is in comparison.

Flash: exposures are now much more accurate, thanks to the pre-flash that's fired just before the exposure is taken, which is used to fine-tune the flash duration. Also, Nikon went to wireless off-camera flash with the new SB-800 flash, which I haven't played with very much, but which promises to be very handy.

Color balance: the default color balance setting is much more accurate than on the D100. You could achieve the same result by manually tweaking the D100's color balance settings, and manipulating the RAW/NEF images, but that took more time.

Auto ISO function: for some reason, this never worked well for me on the D100. The idea is that if the shutter speed falls below a certain level, the ISO would be adjusted up automatically to keep the shutter speed high enough for hand-holding. You might get grainier, but still sharp hand-held images. On the D200, it works like a charm, and you can control the shutter speed threshold, which is very nice.

Customizability: The D100 has a lot of options to customize, but the D200 surpasses it by a lot. For example, there's a button on the front lower right of the camera (it falls right under your right pinky when holding the camera normally) that can be assigned multiple functions, from auto exposure lock, to focus lock (as in the old 8008), to flash value lock (it does a preflash on command then stores the value), to turning off flash altogether for that exposure. There are tons of other customizations as well. As a gadget head, I like that :-)

Where the cameras are about the same

Exposure: Nikon's matrix metering is right on most of the time. On the D100 it tends to underexpose by 1/3 - 1/2 stop, but that's OK for digital--it's a lot harder to recover detail from overexposed areas than those that are underexposed.

Shutter lag: there's no perceptible difference between the two. The preflash that the D200 sends out before a flash exposure doesn't add any noticeable lag IMHO.

Drawbacks of the D200

There aren't very many:

Batteries: One area where the D100 still wins is battery life. The D200 sucks batteries like crazy! It's only good for about 300 exposures in my experience, less with on-board flash usage. You can see the battery level going down as you're taking pictures. On the other hand, the D200 has a bigger CCD (10MP) which sucks much more power, and has a much bigger, much brigher, and more viewable LCD display which also I'm sure hurts power usage, but with the tradeoff of being much more useful for assessing exposure and focus. I'll just have to get a second battery or perhaps a battery pack for the D200 and suck it up :-)

Also, the flash fires a preflash before every exposure, thus draining batteries even more, especially if you use the built-in flash a lot.

Hummingbird

Hummingbird,
originally uploaded by grogo.

The hummingbirds are back on our deck again! Here's a cool photo of a hummer coming in for a landing on our feeder. The kids love to watch them.

iRobot Roomba robotic vacuum review

We recently bought the Roomba robotic vacuum from iRobot, a company started by Rodney Brooks from the MIT Robot labs. I have to admit that it was an impulse purchase from woot.com. If you have problems with impulse buying, stay away from this site!!!

The idea behind the Roomba is that you have an autonomous machine which periodically vacuums your house, with a minimum of intervention on your part. Sounds simple, but reality is still very far from even this simple goal. The real reason to get one is that it's an adult (read: for grownup men) toy which is disguised as a household item! You're really getting a cool remote-controlled, semi-autonomous toy, which you can pass off to your partner as a "vacuum"! :-) Genius!

I've compiled some "Rules of Robot Vacuums" that I think would make the Roomba and similar machines most useful (with apologies to Isaac Asimov!):

1. A robot vacuum must act independently. The whole idea is that I no longer have to think about vacuuming at all, but it doesn't work that way. For starters, the standard Roomba package that I got doesn't include a scheduler which would automatically start the vacuum at preset intervals. It's available as an add-on, but for more dough, of course. You have to manually tell the robot to start vacuuming. In truth, this is not a big deal, since it comes with an infrared remote with a button to start cleaning.
   
   
2. The robot should be able to get around the house on its own. Here too the Roomba falls somewhat short. It does scoot around and navigate some obstacles, and even avoid stairs, but it's not perfect. For example, I had to get rid of all the throw rugs we had in the house for it to work, since the frills on the carpets get sucked in, and stall the vacuum. In truth, this is a problem for regular vacs as well, but a human can at least avoid the trouble spots. Secondly, it tends to get jammed underneath some furniture, like bookshelves and beds, with low clearance. It often manages to wiggle out, but not always. We also have a play-mat on top of carpet in the kids' playroom, which causes perennial problems. Once it gets off the mat, it can't climb back on. As a result, we have to block off all areas where it could climb off. The package came with an infrared "virtual wall" which allows you to block off a straight line, and it's useful, but still not perfect.
   
   In practice, even after I rearranged the house, removed throw rugs, blocked off obvious pitfalls, set up a virtual wall to keep it out of trouble, it still gets stuck about 1/2 the time before completing a run. That's not a huge deal, because it'll usually manage to clean up somewhat before it gets stuck.
   
   
3. The vacuum robot should vacuum well. Here again, there are some problems. It's just not a very powerful vacuum! Of course, since it's battery-powered, it can't rival a plug-in vacuum for power. But the roomba does a pretty good job here, for two reasons. One, it has a lot more patience than I do when vacuuming. It can take 1-2 hours per room, or at least until the battery runs out, which is a lot longer than I'd ever spend. Therefore, even though its extraction efficiency is less per sweep, it can make many sweeps of the same area, making it fairly equivalent. Also, the Roomba has a complex array of brushes and filters which does a pretty good job on hard flooring surfaces and low-pile carpet. I haven't tried it on very plush carpet yet.
   
   Another issue is coverage. The Roomba moves somewhat randomly around a room -- it richochets off walls and furniture with sometimes random movements. It actually does follow the walls and borders pretty well, which is a good idea since most dust and dirt accumulates around the margins. But the vast empty space in between is hard for it to cover. I haven't tried it systematically, but I think the coverage is less than 100% per run.
   
   Here's a point in favor of the Roomba: it's pretty short and tetherless, so it's able to get into areas that are otherwise hard to clean, such as under some couches and beds. There are some areas under our bed that haven't seen a vacuum for years until we got a Roomba! That's a definite advantage.
   
   
4. It should be unobtrusive. Here the Roomba is pretty good. It's much quieter than a regular plug-in vacuum, so it's possible that it could run at night while its owner is sleeping. However, it would have to run in a different room--if it came into my bedroom at night it would definitely wake me up.
   
   
5. The robot should take care of its own energy needs. Ideally, it would generate energy off the stuff it vacuums up! :-) Here, iRobot did a pretty good job. My model came with a charging base, which the Roomba can theoretically dock with automatically. It does work most of the time, but sometimes, the Roomba gets hopelessly confused and gives up. The design goal was to have the Roomba dock automatically at the end of the cleaning cycle to recharge and get ready for the next session. Again, it's somewhat spotty.
   

What's my overall impression? I'm still glad I bought it, even given all the caveats above. The bottom line is that our house, with 2 kids under 4 and one dog, plus two sloppy adults, is noticeably cleaner than it used to be, with minimal effort on my part. I do spend some time arranging the house to make it safe for the vacuum, but it's less than I would if I had to do the vacuuming--get out the vacuum, put in a new bag, find an outlet, plug it in, vacuum, move to a different plug in another room, vacuum, unplug, put away, etc. The cleaning is not perfect, but definitely better than what we used to do before--which is just let the dirt sit around for a while!

Plus, it's actually fun to watch the Roomba make its way aroudn the room, watch how it navigates obstacles. My kids actually enjoy staring at it for a while. They never had that kind of reaction with a regular vacuum.

Another unexpected bonus is that my dog, who's normally very scared of upright vacuums, is completely unphased by this one, even if it bumps into her.