What body next?

Allen

Senior Member
I am in need of a camera...I just gave my adult son my D7000 with the 18-200. It was just the right thing to do. So now need to decide what to replace it with. I do have a sigma 150-500 and a nikon 60 macro,..so it is probably dx....maybe.
Been photographing stuff for close to 50 years...seems that I enjoy textures, colors, birds, nature in general, not too much into portraits, sunsets, some HDRI, Panos, enjoy some post processing with LR.
The D7100 or 7200 or maybe the new D500....I know I need to do some research on my own, but if any of you have been though this recently, I would appreciate your thoughts.
This should be fun....
 
The D7100 and D7200 are both good steps up over the D7000. I used to shoot the D7000 and moved up to the D7100.

The D7200 is a fantastic camera but you can get some great deals on the D7100 right now.
 

nickt

Senior Member
I can't speak for the d500, but:

Refurbished d7100 $560
Refurbished d7200 $770
New D500 $1997

I picked up a d7200 refurb a few months back. Great camera as well as the d7100. The d7100 now stays on my 150-600 lens.
 

singlerosa_RIP

Senior Member
My vote goes toward getting at least the 7200. I shot a 7000 for 5 years before getting a 7200 last November to go with my 200-500 lens. As you know, the 7000, by today's standards, has lousy high ISO capabilities. The 7200 has better high ISO than the 7100 and also has a better auto focus system. Had I know the D500 was coming, I would have waited. Good luck.
 

Whiskeyman

Senior Member
From your posted interests, I believe that you should seriously consider an FX camera. It may mean more of a cash outlay for lenses, too. If not FX, see what is said about the D500 when it is in wider circulation. As of this moment, were I in the marketfor a DX camera, the D500 would be the camera for me, but that is because of what I use it for. I just purchased a D750, so that tells you where my FX choice would be...

WM
 

Jerry_

Senior Member
As I am planning to replace my DX body (as first on the list) I was about to buy a D7200, until I was getting hands on a D500 during a Nikon roadshow. Now I am rather planning to go for the D500.

However, take into account that a D500 costs twice a much as a D7200, while having some technical features to consider.

So the question for you to ask yourself is: do you want/need these extra capabilities right now? If so, your choice is easy (provided the cash is there), if not I'd suggest to go for a D7200 right now and a D7300/7400 in about three years (at that moment those bodies will likely be very close to what the D500 is today, while their pricerange will be next to a current D7200)
 
Any of the 24mp Nikons will make your 7000 look terrible ...If you do birds then the 7200 is the most economic option having much more memory than the 7100.....If you shoot JPEG then don't forget to set it at sharp +9 and do the fine focus adjust or you will be disappointed.
 

Danno

Senior Member
I like my D7200. I made the jump from my first dslr, a D3200 to the D7200 one year into photography. I think you would find it a nice improvement over the D7000. However you can get some good deals on D7100s as well. But all things being equal I would still buy the D7200.
 

Allen

Senior Member
Thanks for the replies, guys. It seems that for the extra $100 the 7200 is the way to go for DX. I have not ever handled one, so I probably head over to a brick and mortar shop to see if it feels as good as the 7000. Beyond that, mirrorless sounds interesting, but given their price points.....perhaps not yet.

Also, while I think of it...I've read that as a walk around lens the 18-300 sounds heavy as compared to the 18-200. Not sure if the extra reach is worth it....thoughts?
 

Camera Fun

Senior Member
I have also been wondering about what to do in the future whenever I replace my D7000. I had thought about going to a D750 but was also wondering about the D7200. By the time I'm ready to take the plunge, there may be a D7300 or a D760.
 

Fortkentdad

Senior Member
I am in need of a camera...I just gave my adult son my D7000 with the 18-200. It was just the right thing to do. So now need to decide what to replace it with. I do have a sigma 150-500 and a nikon 60 macro,..so it is probably dx....maybe.
Been photographing stuff for close to 50 years...seems that I enjoy textures, colors, birds, nature in general, not too much into portraits, sunsets, some HDRI, Panos, enjoy some post processing with LR.
The D7100 or 7200 or maybe the new D500....I know I need to do some research on my own, but if any of you have been though this recently, I would appreciate your thoughts.
This should be fun....

I think both of those lenses are FX lenses? I have the Nikkor 60mm 2.8 micro, it is FX and that long Siggy is "DG'" siggy speak for FX. Not seeing the connection between having two FX lenses and then saying "so probably DX"

Nothing wrong with DX and I have lusted many a day over the D7100, have you considered crossing over the the FX side?

Yes FX is more costly for bodies and for almost all lenses with very few exceptions. But your already have FX lenses. The D610 is the least expensive FX (unless you are looking a D700 used) and that is significantly more than a D7100.
 

hark

Administrator
Staff member
Super Mod
Contributor
If you shoot JPEG then don't forget to set it at sharp +9...

I don't set the jpeg sharpening that high in camera because over sharpening can create its own problems. Better to keep it around 6 and do any sharpening in post.
 
Last edited:

aroy

Senior Member
Get a D750. Both your lenses are FX, and you would benefit a lot shooting wide with FX. Then there is better high ISO in the FX.
 

Allen

Senior Member
750? interesting option...hadn't thought of that (the two lenses I own are FX). I must admit that I don't know much about them..other than they are pricey. Not sure if FX would fit the kind of photography I do as well......

This also begs the question: what walk around lens best fits a D7200? From what I have read it is not necessarily the 18-200 0r 300.....thoughts?
 

Fred Kingston

Senior Member
Without getting into too deep a technical discussion, Full Frame FX sensors typically have better (less) noise performance... They also closely replicate the original 35mm film format focal length... which, if you've never shot film, might not mean a lot... it also frees your brain from continually doing a focal length calculation every time you put a lens on the camera or talk to somebody... A 50mm lens is a 50mm lens... ;)
 

Allen

Senior Member
Thanks Fred....actually, I am quite familiar with film...my comment was directed more at the functional advantages of FX....since my post, I have decided that DX is where I should be and most probably the 7200.

Now the question of walk around lens....it seems that the Tamron 16-300 has been getting fair amount of praise as compared to the Nikons...especially given the cost difference.
 
HARK..+9 sharp will give you no problems at all.............. my 810/800/7100/3200 are and always have been at +9 and I have tens of thousands of wedding photos shot that way.

With a wedding generating 1500 shots you cannot mess about sharpening each individually. Nikon put a computer in your camera to do it for you .

Leave that clarity control at Zero ..now that slider WILL wreck your photos.
ALLEN ......

Look at the DXO for the tamron 16-300 ..horrible ... then look at the Nikon 18-300 far superior. or better still an 18-140 and crop.
 
Top