Somewhere in the thread, you switch from "D7500" to "D7200". D7200 is 24MP. D7500 is 20.9MP.

Yes, I would prefer either the D750 or D610 to the D7200 or the D7500. For what I shoot. For the subjects you are talking about, I don't think it will make much of a difference to be honest. You mention wanting "high-res" and the D7200 may be the best bet there. It has the smallest pixel pitch. But I think all of the cameras will do fine, and frankly I think all of them are probably overkill.

For whatever it's worth: 10 years ago, I had to shoot a high volume of flat copy work. Like, 20000 (twenty thousand) frames. I didn't want to put that on my D3. And it was unnecessary. So I bought a $90 Canon point-and-shoot. I can't remember what it was, 8MP or something. But the key was not the camera. It was the lighting. I set up studio lighting and lit everything carefully and that little Canon P&S did great. You couldn't tell the shots were from a cheap camera. I didn't need the performance of a D3. And that's the secret. For what you are talking about, it's the lighting not the camera. With good lighting, any decent modern digital camera will get you a great shot. If you can control the lighting, I doubt you need a D810 or D7200 for what you are talking about. And with small objects, that is where you can and you should control the lighting. You could buy a $100 Canon PowerShot 20MP camera. It's not exciting, but it's probably all you need. And with crappy lighting, a D810 isn't going to magically make beautiful photos for you. You are just going to end up with more expensive photos in crappy lighting.

Now if you are going to shoot other things, architecture, events, portraits, then it's a different story.

Quote Originally Posted by anoble1 View Post
Thanks for the reply. Yeah, 7200 looks a little better in some aspects.
I see some prices for the D750 & D610 similar in range. Would you guys take the D750 or D610 over the D7200?

› See More: New camera question