Think of the price: I got a D200 with a super clean sensor and shutter count under 10K for $60 at the time of writing this. Much less than what I paid when it came out (just to resell it to get the D2Xs a few months later).
For 60 bucks, it IS a hell of a camera in 2019. Much better than any smartphone camera for sure. Actually, an entry level Nikon DSLRs like the D3500 still borrow the D200's AF engine.
The big obvious difference with modern cameras is resolution: 10MP vs 24MP for an entry level Nikon: that means you will not be much cropping. It also means you will have to ACTUALLY put some effort in framing...
Printing up to 11x14 is not an issue. Well, if you publish for the web only, you can actually crop a little bit or even a lot.
Recent cameras have obviously better dynamic range and ISO noise. I don't care. ISO noise nowadays is so easily fixed with DxO Prime and Topaz Denoise AI: not an issue anymore whatever the camera is. The maximum ISOs on the D200 is 1600 ( and 3200 Hi setting). The noise on this camera is very "film-like". It has a strange quality, reminding me of the high sensitivity Tmax film. I even shot the milky way at 3200isos with a D200. Not a problem.
Dynamic range? Most of the time, it only allows lazy photographers to shoot without paying attention to exposure, and fix it in post... The D200's DR was good in 2005 (actually even better than the D2X flagship of the time), it is still good enough today. If you want two more stops of DR, you'll have to spend a little more money than 60 bucks...
Anyway, even with an old dynamic range, the D200 can shoot HDR like/ish landscapes.
The D200 has environmental sealing (or at least used to... not sure if it is still reliable 14 years later), rugged body, lots of controls, the maximum shutter Speed is 1\/8000s, there is a top LCD, it communicates perfectly with any modern flash (unlike the D3400 as an exemple, that can't talk to my SB700), it has a nice bright pentaprism viewfinder and an AF motor to control screwdriver lenses. 
The battery life is good: I can shoot more than 2000 photos with a brand new aftermarket battery. The frame rate is 5fps, nothing to be ashamed of.
I just loved that camera, and I still do. It feels great in my hands, handles great, can take a beating without it being an issue since I can find a new one for dirt cheap. It's a perfect snapshot camera with the Nikkor 18-135, as long as you don't plan HUGE prints, insane crops, or very low light action photography. Is it perfect? far from it, but for the price you can buy it now? It's really hard to beat.
Oh, I almost forgot it: I didn't talk about the CCD sensor color rendition...Even if I shoot a lot of black and white, the CCD color rendition legend is definitely a fact. Simply shoot the same scene with the D200 and any other CMOS camera, with the exact same settings and same lens in raw: you'll notice a very obvious difference in the unedited raw in you image processor. I personally like it a lot. Some don't. Matter of taste. Some say it's in my head...
 Seriously, if you want a good rugged camera with a lot of controls, and have very little money to spend? Just get a D200.

You may also like

Tokina 12-24 DX adapted on Micro 4/3
2023
Some sample photos taken with the Tokina SD ATX pro 12-24 F/4 IF DX ASP Nikon F-Mount on the Olympus EM1.
Sigma 500mm F/7.2 AF APO
2022
How good can be a Sigma 500mm F/7.2 AF lens from 1990? Simple answer: definitely worth 89 bucks BUT there are lots of BUT...
Birding with a cheap Sigma 135-400?
2021
When it comes to birding, the common advice is to get a camera with low noise, fast AF, fast burst, big buffer and some long lens, preferably a super fast telephoto. It is indeed good advice, but you'll have to pay thousands of dollars to buy that gear, even on the used market. What if you want to shoot birds on a super tight budget? You'll still need some camera and lens. Maybe consider buying some older inexpensive gear?
Tamron SP AF 70-200mm F2.8 Di LD IF Macro
2022
It took me some time to write about that A-mount lens I got NOS for 250 bucks. At that price, you will unlikely find any better F/2.8 telezoom.
Shooting the Sony Alpha 77 mk II in 2022
2021
I wrote about the A77. But what about the noticeably more expensive used A77m2? You’ll have to pay $600 to $800 to buy a used one in good condition. Is it worth it? The A77m2 came a few years after the A77. in my opinion, the improvements are mostly marketing stunts. Despite a lot more AF sensors, a so-called new AF system, better video and a bigger buffer, I keep thinking the A77m2 used isn’t a very good deal.
Olympus OM-D E-M5
2018
August 2018 I bought that little camera for $150. Definitely a bargain considering it was sold boxed, in a not too bad condition, with less than 6.000 clicks, and included two batteries and charger, a 12-50mm F/3.5-6.3 zoom lens, a 45mm F/1.8 prime lens, the tiny Olympus flash, a couple filters (ND1000 and CPL) and a (slow) 64GB SD card that I just trew away and replaced with a Sandisk Extreme Pro.
Can you take any photo with an outdated crappy camera?
2019
A short essay I wrote back in 2019.
Shooting the Olympus OM-D E-M1 in 2023, 2024 and later.
2023
One month ago, I was fed up with travelling with camera gear. Air travel became a miserable experience: arguing with check-in people, Unpack all that expensive shit at security, having gear damaged in the plane when frantic fellow passengers trow their hard cases in the overhead bins. I want to travel light: then a classified caught my eye: EM1, grip, charger, 2 batteries and 45-150 for 300.
Fun with the DXO ONE in 2023
2023
In 2015, Dxo decided to sell a tiny camera that connected to the iPhone. They used the 1inch 20MP sensor from the Sony RX100 m3 that I really love a lot, 32mm equivalent lens that is pretty bright: F/1.8 and shoots RAW.
Shooting the Sony Alpha 700 in 2022
2021
I really never was really interested in Sony after they bought Minolta and started their "own" line of DSLRs. 15 years later, I buy a pristine Alpha A700 for peanuts and I quite like the Minolta DNA.
Back to Top