Upgrading from a D40x on a budget

I currently have a D40X and a D300. In the past I had a D40 and a D80.

I am not at all certain that changing to a D200 is actually upgrading. I have several old Nikkor lens too, but I find that in practice I always use the newer DX lenses, even on the D300/

I am in the same situation as you, I have a D40x but I have quite a few manual lenses and a couple of AF lenses. Now I have been tossing with the idea to buy a D200. But, opposite to you, I don't like the controls layout. I would like it had a second control wheel and I wish the body would be bigger.

I think the D40x doesn't cut it for me anymore. Is the same for you?

A D300 is the next worthwile upgrade. A D200 is made a whole lot better, but image quality improvement is marginal at best. Rumors of a D300S exist so perhaps plain 300`s will become cheaper.
D300 will be better, but mostly at higher ISO setting. If you shoot landscape at ISO 100 and 5.6, I would hold out for a D700.
Old Nikkors will work on on your D40, but do not put them on a D200 or better unless they are Ai lenses.

My first DSLR was a D70. I upgraded to a used D200 and now a D700. I use old AIS primes and was very happy with the viewfinder, control set and other features of the D200. I purchased a D700 for the high ISO preformance. IMHO a new D200 for $700 is quite a deal and I would go for it.

Buy a used D2H instead. Way better features (except wireless flash), and in my opinion, better image quality and the same high iso performance (subpar).

I just went through this. I too had non- AF-S/I lens. I nearly bought a d200, but the high ISO performance above ISO 800 is no better than a 40x (maye a bit less), and if you look at the Nikon comparision charts, both cameras perform about the same. Also, you will get a better CMOS sensor with the d90 as opposed to what you've now got in your 40x, or the 200 - CCD. After going back and forth, I went with a d90. I don't think you have to go to the d300, but if you can - great. The d90 performs beautifully in low-light situations with a much higher ISO setting and image fidelity. I just bought my nikon factory-refurbished d90 at Adorama in NYC for 769.99 - body only.

I don't think that you can upgrade on a budget and do what you what. The price of a d200 look attractive, but your d40 probally gives you better image quality. The d200 and the D2X are older generation cameras which are ancient as digital cameras go.
Right now the D300 is the ticket for what you want. Is about 1500 new or 1200 used your budget? Its widely rumored that the D300 is about to be discontinued and be replaced by something . You may be able to find one cheaper then.

My justification to buy the D200 comparing to my D40x is that picture quality will remain the same, but the body will give me access to new photografic features: AIS mettering, AF with AF lenses, Mirror Lock-up, DOF preview... etc.

Of course, If I had the money I would buy a D700, but is a matter of compromises. The D300 is 500$ more than D200 which is lot of money for me to justify in this "cheap" hobby.

I think the D200 would be a nice upgrade for you.

Too many people, when they give advice, seem to forget a lot of folks are on budgets and simply cannot justify getting the the latetest greatest ewuipment. Life is a series of compromises.