D7200 v D500 : Is it twice the camera?

BackdoorArts

Senior Member
I'm doing some mental gymnastics right now. I want the D500 for wildlife. I need something that will outperform my D7100 both in terms of high ISO (I can't shoot above ISO 3200 and would love a little less noise given that I prefer shooting at 1/1600sec & f8-f9 on the Sigma - though I can go to f6.3 with no significant loss of sharpness) and buffer size (I want to be able to shoot at least 3 seconds of raw at the Continuous High).

I can get a refurb D7200 for $899, and I can get the D500 for $1996. I know I'll love the D500, but I'm seriously playing with the question of whether or not it's worth jumping on now?

For serious wildlife shooters with the D7200, what will I regret if I go for the D7200 instead?
 

mikew_RIP

Senior Member
You know when you get a feeling,you cant quantify it,you cant come close to explaining it,you can only raise a question,is the sensor on the D7200 designed to handle higher ISOs at the expense of some sort of clarity that the D7100 has.
 

BackdoorArts

Senior Member
Here's the odd thing, I took a long, hard look at the review on Photography Life and the ISO comparisons are to a D7000, not the D7100, which has me both shaking my head and wondering if there's that much of an improvement? From what I can see it might buy me a stop. Then there's this video that's telling me that I'll get a significant improvement at high ISO's, but actually lose details at low ISO to the D7100, though this may be due to the way ACR processes the files - I don't know that it actually loses details as much as needs them pulled from the shadows. I don't think it's a sharpness thing, which it would seem you're saying, Mike.

Hmmmm
 

Blacktop

Senior Member
My thinking is, that if the D500 doesnt have the clean Iso capability of a D750 it's a no go for me at least. Rumors were that it will match it, but I doubted it from the begining. I may need to take a closer at the d7200 myself, as the D7100 is lacking in a few things that would justify putting my 200-500 on it full time.

ISO , buffer size is my main concern along with quick focus capability.

Sent from my VS985 4G using Tapatalk
 

olegeiser

Senior Member
Not to change the subject but I assume refurb is a better deal (for you) than new? (3 months warranty vs one year for $200 more. I am faced with the same decision. No idea how far $200 will go for service after the 3 months is out.
 

Danno

Senior Member
I love my D7200. I know I do not have the expertise you guys have and I am coming to terms with handling the lens etc. But man it snaps into focus. I wish I were more stable, but I am working on that, and trying to find ways to manage that. The Monopod is helping, but it is not always convenient with the cane. I am glad I have the D7200 and the Nikon 200-500 combo. When I don't screw up it makes a great shot :encouragement: and I have no complaints about the low light performance. I take a lot of photos in my church where I am at ISO 2000 to 3200 and I have no complaints.
 

hrstrat57

Senior Member
BDH I plan to demo in LSS as soon as one shows up.....and expect to clear other gear (mostly Sony/Minolta DSLR's and lenses) to fund the expected purchase.

My primary shooting focus is sports and I need high ISO capability (ISO 3200 is OK) for shooting NCAA hoops indoors with fast F 2.8 glass. I also need a lot of burst with a big buffer. The D500 crop sensor will extend my existing tele zooms to the focal length I want to get the surf shots I will be satisfied with shooting from shore. My down the road expectation is to get into birding and general wildlife photography as well.

Unless the early reliability reports are bad or I encounter some unexpected dislike/glitch re the camera I will own one soon. I am obviously familiar with the Nikon pro layout and have been waiting for the new prosumer crop camera to appear with great anticipation!

I'll be interested to see what you decide.
 

RocketCowboy

Senior Member
The D500 is supposed to have the low light performance that was previously only available in full frame bodies. That claim has caught my attention a time or two, but I'm still thinking that full frame is the direction I need to go in next.

You've already got a couple FF bodies, so I say that only from the perspective of the D7200 ... it *should* be better performing than the D7100, but it hasn't/wasn't claimed to be a pro-grade D5 with a crop sensor. Now, looking at the numbers like you have, I agree with the debate on whether it's twice the camera that the D7200 is. Personally, I think (hope?) it is, but don't know that there's been enough unbiased hands on tests to say at this point.

Seems like the D500 would make a nice companion to your D800, but the D7200 would line up better with the D750 ... at least as far as the location of the controls on the camera body. I've also been looking at going FF after the D7100 because of low light performance, but I just don't see the D7200 as being that big of an upgrade considering my other options.
 

Moab Man

Senior Member
I wouldn't do anything until we see some real world in the hands of real people photography to see what the ISO noise level will be. I'm dying for one, but I need proof of the speculated ISO capability.
 

Woodyg3

Senior Member
Contributor
I have both the D7100 and D7200, and The difference in IQ is small. The D7200 focuses a bit better in low light, for sure. The buffer is also larger, but I still get a slow down at times. Like yesterday I was shooting a Heron who grabbed a fish, carried it to shore, then swallowed it. The whole thing happened in less than a minute, and I got plenty of good shots, but I wish I could have shot at full speed for longer periods. That's one place that the D500 would really be a winner for me and my type of shooting. A huge buffer and 10/second leaves me drooling.

I wonder about the XQD card on the D500. I don't want a "Betamax" when the rest of the world is using "VHS" and these cards are kind of expensive. The speed of these cards is a part of the reason that the buffer can clear so quickly, though, so time will tell.

I suspect that the D500 is going to focus significantly better, faster, and at lower light levels than the D7200. The high ISO performance will certainly improve, but nobody knows how much yet. More focus points spread out over almost the whole frame are a big plus in my mind.

If I were in your position, and I didn't want to buy a D7200 just to "hold me over" until the D500 is available and well tested, I would wait and see just how good the D500 is when it comes out. I love my D7200, but it really is just a small jump up from the D7100.
 

BackdoorArts

Senior Member
Thanks, Woody. That sort of confirms all my thinking. Part of me wonders if any camera can truly justify being $1000 more than another, but then I wonder what price I put on the frustration of not having something I could have had when I decide to go cheap. I've got the D500 on order and I'm going to let it stand and keep my fingers crossed for no early adopter issues. I suspect that a good number of pros have been using pre-release versions of it and putting it through its paces so I hope they're kept to a minimum. The fact that Adobe raw support is already available tells me that they've been out and about for a while.

I talked to my brother, a Canon consultant, about the XQD card and he's skeptical like you. That said, I recall reading somewhere that cameras could be retrofitted with a CF card (maybe that was the D5). If the tech doesn't fly they're going to have to do something. My question is the reliability. I don't mind buying backups of SD cards, but at the price of these things, failure sucks!! Even if the manufacturer warranties them (Lexar replaced my SD card that split no questions asked) you can be a week or more waiting on a replacement.
 

Geoffc

Senior Member
Part of me wonders if any camera can truly justify being $1000 more than another

Jake, you surely have a $1000 differential between some of your gear now.

We will probably hold off until next year to get our D500 bodies as we will both be retired then and able to make good use of them. Also any early issues will be understood.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
 

singlerosa_RIP

Senior Member
I had a chance to shoot some D500s and D5s at a Nikon road show here in St. Louis a while back and the 500 was very cool (D5 was awesome). Coupled with the 200-500 lens, I rattled off some shots at ISO 50K and they looked OK on the LCD. Plus, it has the fps, buffer and flippy screen lacking in the 7200. But until I run into a wall with my 7200/200-500, I'm not upgrading. Especially since all my bodies have very similar layouts.
 

MaxBlake

Senior Member
The D7200 is a terrific camera, with more bells and whistles on it than I'm currently accustomed to and a sweet learning curve. I'd be hard-pressed to jump into something else right now, just because it carries the label of "newer." Newer doesn't always mean "better," and even if it does, the better might not serve your own personal needs and what you want the cameera to do for you. I generally always ask myself: How much of "newer" equals "need"? The answer, in my case, anyway, is seldom.
 

Elliot87

Senior Member
The D7200 is a terrific camera, with more bells and whistles on it than I'm currently accustomed to and a sweet learning curve. I'd be hard-pressed to jump into something else right now, just because it carries the label of "newer." Newer doesn't always mean "better," and even if it does, the better might not serve your own personal needs and what you want the cameera to do for you. I generally always ask myself: How much of "newer" equals "need"? The answer, in my case, anyway, is seldom.

I feel pretty much the same about my D7100. Would I like to have the advantages that a D7200 brings? Sure and I'd like the D500 even more. But right now glass is where I am going to be able to take the biggest step forward and I'm excited about the prospect of D750 high ISO performance being available in affordable DX bodies a few years down the line. Then I'll probably be ready to upgrade and hopefully for something that surpasses any of the current offerings.
 

BackdoorArts

Senior Member
The D7200 is a terrific camera, with more bells and whistles on it than I'm currently accustomed to and a sweet learning curve. I'd be hard-pressed to jump into something else right now, just because it carries the label of "newer." Newer doesn't always mean "better," and even if it does, the better might not serve your own personal needs and what you want the cameera to do for you. I generally always ask myself: How much of "newer" equals "need"? The answer, in my case, anyway, is seldom.

I feel pretty much the same about my D7100. Would I like to have the advantages that a D7200 brings? Sure and I'd like the D500 even more. But right now glass is where I am going to be able to take the biggest step forward and I'm excited about the prospect of D750 high ISO performance being available in affordable DX bodies a few years down the line. Then I'll probably be ready to upgrade and hopefully for something that surpasses any of the current offerings.

Both of these are valid points, and list out all the reasoning that exists around why bumping up from an existing DX body (D7200 or d7100) to the D500 might have better alternatives. If nothing else they clearly outline why my considering the D500 is absolutely valid because, a) I don't have the D7200 now so the gains from a D7100 are much more perceivable, and b) I am shooting a D750 and know that I need something closer to those ISO capabilities in a DX body now because the D7100 isn't cutting it for me. The fact that I also get the tools necessary for a great wildlife camera (4 more fps, huge buffer) has me balking at only one thing - buying a $2K body a month after a $2K lens. But when I do the math it either means $1K more now and then more $$ later when I realize I should have bought it, wait for the sake of waiting, or cough it up because you only live once. The fact that it's not hardship and I can unload some things from my music gear to cover it has me knowing that I'm just going to let the order stand. I'm on vacation now shooting with the D750 and the 150-600mm and I know I wish I had that extra 300mm on the long end, but I'm thankful for the IQ.
 

Danno

Senior Member
The fact that it's not hardship and I can unload some things from my music gear to cover it has me knowing that I'm just going to let the order stand. I'm on vacation now shooting with the D750 and the 150-600mm and I know I wish I had that extra 300mm on the long end, but I'm thankful for the IQ.

It is an easier decision to make when it does not present a hardship. No endeavor of this type should do that. The only risk is the first run glitches that seem to exist in every industry these days. Actually I am anxious to see how you like the camera. I am very pleased with my D7200 and know it is a sound platform for me to continue to grow and learn, but I like the thought of the D5 and D750 in my future. So until that day comes for me I will watch and learn.

Good luck with the purchase BDH.

Danno
 

hark

Administrator
Staff member
Super Mod
Contributor
I am shooting a D750 and know that I need something closer to those ISO capabilities in a DX body now because the D7100 isn't cutting it for me.

Lol--the D750 is a very impressive camera! The differences between their ISO is a huge factor. I hope the D500 will meet your expectations and am looking forward to hearing your critique of the body. Any idea when it is due to be released?
 

BackdoorArts

Senior Member
It is an easier decision to make when it does not present a hardship. No endeavor of this type should do that. The only risk is the first run glitches that seem to exist in every industry these days. Actually I am anxious to see how you like the camera. I am very pleased with my D7200 and know it is a sound platform for me to continue to grow and learn, but I like the thought of the D5 and D750 in my future. So until that day comes for me I will watch and learn.

Good luck with the purchase BDH.

Danno

Unless you're livelihood depends on it no one should be hitting hardship for any hobby purchases. After decades of making music as my vice I'm slowing trading in things that make sound for things that make pictures, so it's all good. I'm fortunate that I can consider gear like this as a hobbiest, but that's one of the upsides to the many downsides of not having kids for us. I likely would be shooting with the D7200 now had I not landed a D7100 refurb when I got tired of cropping huge D800 images. I completely understand Elliott's argument about moving up one notch and that's why I didn't when it came out - but after 18 months with the D750 the ISO on the D7100 is a noticeable distraction when I'm shooting birds in shadows.


Lol--the D750 is a very impressive camera! The differences between their ISO is a huge factor. I hope the D500 will meet your expectations and am looking forward to hearing your critique of the body. Any idea when it is due to be released?

Every website on the planet has said "End of April" for a couple months. A guy at B&H had mentioned the 21st at one point, but I haven't seen that date anywhere. I've also heard the Nikon pros will get priority on the initial batch and guys like me might be waiting on backorders. I also got in late so even among them I'm at the back of the line. We'll see.
 

hark

Administrator
Staff member
Super Mod
Contributor
A guy at B&H had mentioned the 21st at one point, but I haven't seen that date anywhere.

I just checked Adorama, and they have that date posted. Thanks. :)

Nikon D500 DX-format Digital SLR Body 1559


D500 date.jpg
 
Top