Are there any users that have upgraded from a D7200 to a D500? A d7200 here in Canada is going for about $1250 vs a D500 for $2500. Is a D500 really twice as good? I know it is a better camera but it that much better? Was thinking of a second body but now thinking of upgrading. If I could get a good trade in maybe.. Wanna hear from some who have looked into It as well.. Thanks
D7200 upgrade to D500
- Thread starter bandit993
- Start date
salukfan111
Senior Member
If you get the D500 you shouldn't ever need a FF (most would be a step down for average people) as even the inferior FFs are D500 dollars. It will focus in the dark. It has insane AF. The difference between this and a D7100 are night and day. There a lot of D750s gathering dust since this camera came out.
Don Kuykendall_RIP
RIP :(
I could not disagree with you more about the D750 and FF. The D750 and D500 are different cameras that have different functions. The D750 will focus in the dark and the AF is outstanding. It all depends on what you want in a camera.
Bikerbrent_RIP
Senior Member
The only real advantage to the D500 is if you need the higher frame-rate and larger buffer, for say sports shooting. For Landscapes and portraits, the higher resolution of the D7200 trumps the D500. The only advantage the D500 has for this kind of shooting is about 1/2 f-stop better noise control. Since I don't shoot much sports, IMHO I would not pay twice the price for a D500 vs. the D7200.
I've looked at getting the D500 to replace the D7200. I like the reports about its AF, i yearn for the pro controls, viewfinder, and its ability to gain more fps. Not so impressed with the results on the high ISO images i've seen though. But as someone who likes to photograph small birds at a distance, its ability for aggressive cropping vs a D7200 appears disadvantaged and has (so far) put me off, and as i cant find any 'real life' side by side shots of a D500 vs D7200 aggressive crop images to convince me otherwise, i'll stick with the D7200
Really?
I would love to get a D500 for the focusing ability to lock on small birds in flight faster , but not if it means selling my D750.
If I had no camera to shoot, and you put a D500 next to a D750 on the table, I'd pickup the D750 without hesitation.
Please provide a link or some proof that a lot of D750s are gathering dust because of this new camera or for any other reason.
Besides, the OP asked about a D7200 vs a D500. Why are you even bringing up the D750?
Last edited:
captain birdseye
Senior Member
I am considering selling my spare body (d7100) and getting the d500 while keeping my d7200 as a back up body at the end of this year and have been summing up the pros and cons of the d7200 vs d500.
For image quality the general feeling is that the d7200 has the edge over the d500 but if you compare AF performance and frame rate the d500 wins by a country mile ( the d7200 is no slouch though)!
If you are in to fast action in low light the d500 is the way to go apparently but, in my opinion is currently overpriced.
I shall see where my photography takes me over the next 6 months and if I actually get out and use the camera this winter and get around to some BIF stuff I just may be able to justify it.
If conditions in the UK are as bad as the last few winters (last year I left the camera in the cupboard for 6 months due to crap weather) then I may not bother.
For image quality the general feeling is that the d7200 has the edge over the d500 but if you compare AF performance and frame rate the d500 wins by a country mile ( the d7200 is no slouch though)!
If you are in to fast action in low light the d500 is the way to go apparently but, in my opinion is currently overpriced.
I shall see where my photography takes me over the next 6 months and if I actually get out and use the camera this winter and get around to some BIF stuff I just may be able to justify it.
If conditions in the UK are as bad as the last few winters (last year I left the camera in the cupboard for 6 months due to crap weather) then I may not bother.
BackdoorArts
Senior Member
It's amazing how some people with no practical experience will not only form but share an opinion based on nothing. For the record, I shoot with my D750 just as much now as I did before the D500. They're different tools. But apparently some folks only see things as a hammer.
As I always ask when I see a "Should I upgrade...?" question, what is the D7200 not doing for you? If you can't answer that question you don't need to change bodies ... to anything else ... period.
I've not shot with a D7200, but the D500 is a step up in high ISO performance over the D7100 I had. Trusted sources will tell you that ISO performance is about equivalent between the two cameras. I know I can get away with shooting at 12800 with the D500, cleaning it up in post with either Nik Dfine or Topaz Denoise.
As stated above, the advantages over the D7200 are primarily frame rate and buffer capacity, and focus system. For me, as an avid wildlife shooter, this made the camera worth twice the price. The camera lives on CH and I've captured moments at 10fps that I never would have gotten at half that (a lot can happen in 1/10 sec). If you don't do a lot of shooting like that, and I mean a lot, then the D7200 will likely be all you need. Focus system is awesome, going side to side and grabbing focus like a champ, but if I'm honest while it's an upgrade I can say that I never felt like I was short changed with the D7100's focusing ability, so it's more of a "really, really nice to have" than something that would have made me upgrade. I can use my Sigma 150-600mm f5-6.3 with a 1.4x TC and it will still grab focus in the shadows on the edges. The pro body and controls are nice, but if you've never used them before then they're not so much an "upgrade" as something else to learn (albeit powerful once you do).
So tell us, what isn't the D7200 doing for you?
As I always ask when I see a "Should I upgrade...?" question, what is the D7200 not doing for you? If you can't answer that question you don't need to change bodies ... to anything else ... period.
I've not shot with a D7200, but the D500 is a step up in high ISO performance over the D7100 I had. Trusted sources will tell you that ISO performance is about equivalent between the two cameras. I know I can get away with shooting at 12800 with the D500, cleaning it up in post with either Nik Dfine or Topaz Denoise.
As stated above, the advantages over the D7200 are primarily frame rate and buffer capacity, and focus system. For me, as an avid wildlife shooter, this made the camera worth twice the price. The camera lives on CH and I've captured moments at 10fps that I never would have gotten at half that (a lot can happen in 1/10 sec). If you don't do a lot of shooting like that, and I mean a lot, then the D7200 will likely be all you need. Focus system is awesome, going side to side and grabbing focus like a champ, but if I'm honest while it's an upgrade I can say that I never felt like I was short changed with the D7100's focusing ability, so it's more of a "really, really nice to have" than something that would have made me upgrade. I can use my Sigma 150-600mm f5-6.3 with a 1.4x TC and it will still grab focus in the shadows on the edges. The pro body and controls are nice, but if you've never used them before then they're not so much an "upgrade" as something else to learn (albeit powerful once you do).
So tell us, what isn't the D7200 doing for you?
Danno_RIP
Senior Member
I have a D7200 as well. I do like the 500 and I have seen some amazing results taken by folks that have them. The AF and Shutter are amazing and the examples of shots taken are excellent. I have thought about the D500 vs the D7200 and I have decided for me it would be better to focus on glass at this point rather than the body upgrade. I have a couple good lenses: Nikon 200-500 f5.6 and a Sigma 10-20 f3.5 but I would like to fill the gap with better glass than I currently own.
I am saving for a top level 24-70 f2.8 and a 70-200 f 2.8 and honestly I have not decided which will come first. I have lenses that work in this gap, but I would like to have better glass. For me this is more important. For me the D7200 focuses with my 200-500 faster than I can find the bird. Would the D500 be nice? Yes, but for me I think I would have greater benefit from an addition 2-3 lenses. So, for me, new lenses first... who knows, once I build up on the foundation the D500 may be more reasonably priced or there may be something better.
I am saving for a top level 24-70 f2.8 and a 70-200 f 2.8 and honestly I have not decided which will come first. I have lenses that work in this gap, but I would like to have better glass. For me this is more important. For me the D7200 focuses with my 200-500 faster than I can find the bird. Would the D500 be nice? Yes, but for me I think I would have greater benefit from an addition 2-3 lenses. So, for me, new lenses first... who knows, once I build up on the foundation the D500 may be more reasonably priced or there may be something better.
Thank you all for your input. The faster frame rate is what is attracting me. But the smaller megapixels has me wondering about image quality if I do crop. BackdoorHippie I too do mainly wildlife. Humming birds and backyard animals, deer, squirrels, etc. If I can get a good trade in allowance for my D7200 I may look at upgrading. Do you have an XQD card or the SD.. XQD cards are very pricey and hard to find.. Thanks again for all your help. Keep the comments coming..
Danno_RIP
Senior Member
I am just curious @bandit993. What lenses are you using for wildlife shots?
Whiskeyman
Senior Member
Just what is it that you need from a camera that the D7200 isn't giving you? It isn't the price that makes the D500 better than the D7200, even though it is twice the price, or close to it. If the D500 gives something that you want or need that the D7200 cannot, then it might be twice as good, or 1.2 times as good, or three times as good. Just how much better the D500 is than the D7200 is based upon each photographer's needs, wants and perceptions. Are you using the D7200 and enjoying it?
As far as trading the D7200 in, all I can do is offer up that I owned a D7100 at one point, and just never got comfortable with the camera and the images I got from it. I recently traded it in for a D750, and I've come to the conclusion that I'm more of a full frame kind of guy, and I'd make the trade over again if I had the choice. That has more to do with me, than the cameras, though!
WM
I wouldn't overestimate the resolution. Yes, it is 20 MP vs 24 MP, but linear resolution is only 7% lower in D500 vs D7200 (5568 vs 6000). This isn't really much of a difference. Unless you use top quality prime lenses, you will never see any difference, as the lens quality will affect resolution before you start seeing pixels. The upside is slightly better high ISO performance.
I have D7100 and D500 and the main difference is the 10 fps and the seemingly infinite buffer. I have yet to hit its limits. Usually the bird I'm following is gone before I fill the buffer, even at 10 fps.
The autofocus is good, but it has its limitations. When you have a moving bird against messy background, the AF system will first focus on where you point your focus point. If you don't aim right at the bird it will focus on the background and then keep it in focus, leaving a blur of the bird. I still need to learn the quirks of AF in D500.
canuck257
Senior Member
I went from a D7200 to the D500 and I am delighted. I can't give you specifics in terms of better/worse than than the D7200 but, in my hands, the D500 feels so much more comfortable and capable. I love the high frame rate, huge, fast buffer (using XQD cards) and the fast focusing. To me it is a whole lot more camera that boosts my confidence and pushes me to take shots I otherwise would not attempt and at which I frequently succeed. Coupled with the 200-500 Nikkor it is a BIF machine that currently, imho, cannot be bettered.
The other advantage to me is that my wife now has the D7200 and loves it so all is well in my world.
The other advantage to me is that my wife now has the D7200 and loves it so all is well in my world.
Just out of interest, have you done a side by side aggressive crop comparison between them, and if so what did you think?
singlerosa_RIP
Senior Member
I bought my 7200 as an upgrade to my trusty ole 7000 after I purchased the 200-500 lens, thinking the 7200 would provide better results than adding an extender to my 750 or cropping its pics. A month later, Nikon announced the D500. I've played with it and it's awesome. Tilty, touch screen, joystick focus point stick and other new features. Plus, fast FPS and big buffer (as mentioned by Marek). Even though I like spending money on gear, it has to make sense and I couldn't justify a D500 for the rare times I need an extra 4 frames per second. If I need a big buffer, I'll shoot jpg.
Like the others, I like both formats and really like my 750. Plus, I have all FX lenses and some would suck on DX compared to a DX lens.
You mentioned that you were considering getting a second body. One consideration is the controls. The D500 uses the Pro layout while the D7xxx series, D6xx and D750 all use the "ProSumer" layout. Mixing controls on two bodies makes shooting a bit more challenging, especially if you run with two rigs.
If I only shot DX and wanted the best, I'd be saving my pennies for the D500. Good luck.
Like the others, I like both formats and really like my 750. Plus, I have all FX lenses and some would suck on DX compared to a DX lens.
You mentioned that you were considering getting a second body. One consideration is the controls. The D500 uses the Pro layout while the D7xxx series, D6xx and D750 all use the "ProSumer" layout. Mixing controls on two bodies makes shooting a bit more challenging, especially if you run with two rigs.
If I only shot DX and wanted the best, I'd be saving my pennies for the D500. Good luck.
Last edited:
No, I haven't. I might do one day, but I don't expect much difference.
I have both the D7200 and D500. For me, the D500 is worth the money. Don't worry about a slightly lower resolution, the IQ is equal to or slightly better than the D7200 for me. The autofocus is noticeably faster and more accurate. Of course, you still have to do your job and put the focus point where it belongs.
XQD cards are a little more expensive, but once you see how they are built, you'll understand part of the reason for the higher cost. SD cards are always a little on the flimsy side, and the XQD is very sturdy, and the contacts aren't exposed and possibly bent or broken as on SD cards. Also, of course, they are faster than an SD card.
The frame rate is great for things like birds in flight. I get twice as many shots to pick from, and probably twice as many keepers, as with the D7200.
I know many people feel that the buffer size and frame rate are not something they need or want. But, I'm willing to bet that a fair amount of people would not only find it useful, but would not want to give it up once they had it. Recently I was shooting a moose out in the water. I had the 70-300 on my D7200, and the 300 with teleconverter (420mm equivalent) on the D500. I was close enough that I needed to use the shorter lens. And, not knowing how long Bullwinkle would stick around, I wasn't about to take the time to change lenses. You might think that there is no reason for fast frame rate or a large buffer for a moose in the water. The fact is, though, when trying to get just the right pose and take advantage of the limited possibilities due to the lighting, I was letting the shutter fly as the moose changed positions. I filled the buffer more than once with the D7200, and the fps slowed down as a result. I got some great shots, but certainly would have preferred the D500's buffer and more shots to pick from.
If you do decide to grab a D500, I would sell your D7200 privately, as you will likely make out much better than a trade in.
Also, rest assured, if you stick with the D7200, you've got a very capable camera.
Thank you all for your help. I have decided that I will stick with the D7200 for a while. The only thing I guess I really liked was the 10 fps. But you need the XQD card to do that and they are expensive. My D7200 has great IQ so don't think the D500 would improve much on that. And 10 fps isn't worth $1500 more, to me anyway. Thanks again