Nikon D200 or Fuji S5 Pro?

You know what I'm going to say... The biggest thing to me would be that there is no need to complicate your life with all those choices! (haha) If you were a wedding photographer or a studio photographer and you clientele was comprised of people of various ethnicities, I'd say to get the Fuji. (As opposed to the Fugi. Why do people who OWN the camera continue to spell the name wrong?) Otherwise, the compromises that make it suitable for such work seem to go counter to the features that you might appreciate the most.

I'm not sure who I'd rather call on technical issues, should this ever become necessary, either. I imagine that there are a handful of people who really understand the S5 and building full of people who really understand the D200.

D300??? Hmmmm. Nah, I can't imagine changing for the foreseeable future. I don't make my living this way.

I had a Fugi 602z that the company said was a 6mp camera but it was a 3. They were claiming that interpolation thing then but it was still just a three and all the experts, etc. also said it was a 3. I don't know if this is the same thing you mention here but if they are saying they combine pixels to double pixel count, I'd be wary.

Have you looked at the Nion 18-200 VR lens? It might eliminate the need for a few of the lenses you mentioned and make getting out in the field a little easier for you. If you could sell the lenses it would replace and put the money for a Fugi in the pot, you might come out even. Less lens swaps = less dust.

I saw some pictures of cameras that use interpolation vs regular cameras and in all of them the interpolation pictures look weird. Go with the Nikon D200. From all the reviews I've read, the only competition for the Nikon D200 is a Canon model. For landscape shots you may want to consider a Canon 5D.

Might want to wait a week. Plausable rumors suggest that the D300 (as well as the D3) will be announced this thursday afternoon japan time.

Of the D200 and S5 Pro, the only reason you should be considering the Fuji is if you are shooting portraits or weddings. Other than the better interpretation of skintones the S5 has little going for it. Its 1.5FPS and is slow at writing buffered shots to flash. (It's god's gift to wedding photogs though from all I've heard)

Nikon D200

Here's Ken Rockwell's take on the two cameras. I'd say that you'd be looking at the S5 if portraits were your main goal.

http://www.kenrockwell.com/fuji/s5.htm

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d200.htm/

Both are solid cameras and won't disappoint any user.

the Fuji is more meant for wedding photogs, i say do for the d200 for what you do... and spend the rest on new glass

slightly greater dr for 1 shot... but for landscapes you have graduated filters and hdr imaging to give you even better shots anyway

Go with the D200. You already have the lenses for it. Plus you can update your camera software from NikonUSA online. Fuji dones't let you do that.

if you mainly shoot landscapes

why dont you go and buy yourseld a nice film slr

and load it up with fuji velvia 100?

use a nd filter, push the exposure times and watch the beautiful colours you will get.

i dont think digitals are too good with landscape work

sometimes when i shoot landscapes i take my film slr and digital slr along with me.. results on the film are always more superior

i shoot digital 4 everything else though

about the fuji - nikon thing

why change?

i think you should stick with nikon

personally i wouldnt wanna start buying another brand of lenses when im already with one brand

the d200 is better

the s5 has some poor reviews