D200/ D300 Upgrade?

I was in the same spot when I bought my D300 (after I decided that I liked the Nikon feel better than Canon - just fit my hands better and I was able to get to the controls easier). I ended up making the decision based on lower noise at higher ISO in the D300. I haven't regretted my choice.

Good luck!

--Wade

Having owned both the D200 and D300, I would have to say the D300 is very well worth the extra money. It is simply a brilliant camera in every way, I really have no complaints about it at all.

Definitely the D300. The 100% viewfinder, the higher speed of the LCD, the better AF, the better quality of the LCD, the better high-ISO quality, there is no doubt the D300 is the much better camera.

The D200 has no sensor-cleaning in the menu selections.

The D300 has the in-camera sensor cleaning option. The D300 has much better *noise* control at the higher ISO settings.

One vote for the D300.

I do not enlarge beyond 8X10, daylight photography with quite a bit of macro.

The d300 is a better camera but the d200 is fine for what the OP asked. Sure, the D300 has better AF, VF and high ISO noise...

From the topic start, I'm not sure whether the D200 and D300 are the only cameras to be considered. Point 2 (preference for CF) is the only thing pointing towards these cameras, but frankly the price difference between a D90 (or D80) and D300 buys you a lot of SD cards. So, it depends on how serious this point 2 is, and whether there are other reasons to only consider the 2 cameras mentioned; the D80/D90 aren't bad build quality either, work with all AF lenses and luckily none of the cameras so far has a non-metal mount.

I agree with Leslie but wish to add that the D300's monitor is night and day better than the D200's, being significantly larger, offering sharper, better detail and improved color and color accuracy. If an improved monitor is very important to you, the choice is obvious. The D300 also has live view which is great for macro work.

Here is an interesting article on the D300:

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/D300/D300A.HTM

If you are concerned solely with IQ, the D200 will be perfect. If the difference in cost is not an issue for you, go for the D300. You won't be disappointed either way.

I've owned a D200 for over three years. I skipped the D300 because I didn't think the 'upgrade' was worth it. I skipped the D300s because I don't need (or want) video, although the sensor, high ISO/low light noise handling on that model is better than the other two. You want a good camera that doesn't have all the whistles and bells, can use your AF lenses, delivers really great IQ, and you're on a budget? IMO, get a D90 and live with the SD card - you won't beat the IQ for the money. Have a look at this.

I had a D200 for about 14 months. Loved it, but had to go with a slightly better low light capability due to shooting indoor volleyball in sometime attrocious lighting situations.
I actually like the "feel" of the D200 better but I think you will be more than happy with either in your case.

Good luck!