D7200 upgrade to D500

[salukfan111]

At the risk of starting another war, I just read the D500 test in the latest Popular Photography Magazine. I found the test interesting in that they kept comparing the D500 to the D300s and not one mention of the D7200. So I dug out my old copy of the D7200 test and found the test results quite interesting. Below is a summary:

Pop Photo comparison



(Sorry can't get the program to display the table properly.)

D7200 D500

Image Quality Excellent Excellent

Resolution (ISO 100) 2825 2650

Color Accuracy 6.7 5.3

Highlight/Shadow Detail Very High Extremely High

Contrast High High

Noise
ISO 50 N/A Extremely Low 0.8

ISO 100 Extremely Low 1.0 Extremely Low 0.9

ISO 200 Extremely Low 1.0 Very Low 1.2

ISO 400 Extremely Low 1.1 Low 1.6

ISO 800 Very Low 1.3 Low 1.6

ISO 1600 Low 1.7 Very Low 1.2

ISO 3200 Moderately Low 2.2 Low 1.7

ISO 6400 Moderate 2.7 Moderately Low 2.3

ISO 12800 Moderate 2.7 Unacceptable 3.3

ISO 25600 Unacceptable 4.1 Unacceptable 4.4

These numbers must raise the question, is the D500 really worth twice the price of the D7200? Yes, I know the D500 allegedly has better auto-focusing, but I have heard no complaints about the D7200 focusing. And yes, it has a higher FPS and a much larger buffer, But, this is not really important except for high speed action such as sports. Also it must be remembered that the D7200 has built in flash which is not great for primary flash, but works great for quick snaps and daytime fill flash. In conclusion, for me to trade it my D7200 for a twice the price D500 is NOT in the cards for me either. Nikon is going to have to come up with a much better DX camera to entice me to upgrade.

You should rent one for a while. I'm guess once you shoot some wildlife with the D500 and get back to LR and come to the realization that a PP session is less about finding keepers and more about picking which keepers to save, then you'll place the order.

 

[Whiskeyman]

Anyway, I'm an idiot.

Absolutely not the case, but were it so, then we could use more such idiots here and elsewhere.

WM

 

[egosbar]

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.

imo id rather buy a 70-300 g ed vr , a 24-85 ed vr g , and a 105mm macro and you could also upgrade your 7200 to a d500 v getting a 24-70 and 70 - 200

at least this is what im doing with my d7100 , i own the 105mm , the 24-85 is supposed to be supberb i cant wait to try it out , watch the angry photographers utube videos on must have nikon lenses , you will be surprised , he has tons of experience and i trust him

600 dollars more to save and my nikon d7100 , 18-55 , 55-300 will turn into d500 with 70-300 24-85 along with the 11-16 and 105mm and 50mm 1.8 i already own , i think a nice upgrade , i love bird photography cant wait to test out the supposedly amazing autofocus

then the only lens ill be interested in will be the 200-500 whats your thoughts on that lens?

 

[Danno]

imo id rather buy a 70-300 g ed vr , a 24-85 ed vr g , and a 105mm macro and you could also upgrade your 7200 to a d500 v getting a 24-70 and 70 - 200

at least this is what im doing with my d7100 , i own the 105mm , the 24-85 is supposed to be supberb i cant wait to try it out , watch the angry photographers utube videos on must have nikon lenses , you will be surprised , he has tons of experience and i trust him

600 dollars more to save and my nikon d7100 , 18-55 , 55-300 will turn into d500 with 70-300 24-85 along with the 11-16 and 105mm and 50mm 1.8 i already own , i think a nice upgrade , i love bird photography cant wait to test out the supposedly amazing autofocus

then the only lens ill be interested in will be the 200-500 whats your thoughts on that lens?

I really enjoy the 200-500. I can hand hold the lens but I do better with a gimbal head on a tripod. It focuses quickly and it is shap lens. I enjoy using it for birds.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

 

[egosbar]

that lens will be a while off for me yet , cant wait to get a hold of a d500 i think a good upgrade from the d7100, not so sure about the upgrade from the d7200 but as i mentioned maybe you dont really need the holy trinity of lenses when others are very very good at a quarter the price , i think they are way to expensive , i just shot a wedding with the 7100 and godox flash , and it worked out better then a lot of so called pro weddings shots ive seen , given the conditions i was very happy , not sure how much better high iso will be on d500 v d7100 i dont like to go over 800 but will push 1600 tops so maybe only one stop or so i think


if you havent done so already do yourself a favor and some of the angry photographers utube vids on lenses , he repaired them and has worked in and around cameras , glasses etc for a long time , he owns about 200 lenses so he knows what hes on about im sure

i was going to purchase the 24-120 but he believes it sucks compared to the 24-85g vr , he also i thinks its a sharper lens then the 24-70 , havent used it yet though , any distortion is so easily fixed in lr , definitely the way im going

nikon d500 , 70-300g , 24-85g for australain 3600 , hopefully a little cheaper by the time im ready , probably around three more months or so

good luck with your decision its dam hard i know , nikon 105mm 2.8 i love that lens and glad i bought it

 

[singlerosa_RIP]

if you havent done so already do yourself a favor and some of the angry photographers utube vids on lenses , he repaired them and has worked in and around cameras , glasses etc for a long time , he owns about 200 lenses so he knows what hes on about im sure

i was going to purchase the 24-120 but he believes it sucks compared to the 24-85g vr , he also i thinks its a sharper lens then the 24-70 ,

My 24-70 runs circles around my 24-85. I'd be an angry photographer if the kit lens was better than the pro lens.

 

[Keoghan]

My input - resolution of 7200 higher yes, but noise level also higher when cropping due to smaller area of photosites. D500 has better light gathering ability with larger photosites therefore less noise, and in turn better cropping ability. I use a 5.6 200-500mm and I know immediately a d500 would be better for wildlife. D750 is amazing for outright IQ, D7200 is surprisingly good at landscapes with the right lens. Another thing that nobody has mentioned is the metering of the d500, it's much more advanced so you will have better tracking in overcast conditions and low light .. if you have the money and you enjoy quality photos the D500 is worth every penny. If you can't afford it, the D7200 is very very good and can take you a long way but using anything above an f4 will produce noise when shooting at high speed. Each camera has it's special areas. I have a Nikon 700 and 7200. Currently not in a rush to get a d500 but I want one - do I need one? No as I'm not working for a magazine. If you have the money buy a d500. If you don't, hone your skills. Then upgrdade. Outgrow the camera before you upgrade and you'll always produce great images.

 

[sutherland]

I've handled the D7200 and own the D500, I found the focus acquisition to be comparable. The D500 separates itself from the D7200 in FPS and AF Modes. Overall IQ, I prefer the D7200, especially at lower ISO. In terms of low-light performance, although some tout the higher ISO output of the D500, I refuse to shoot past 3200 and would rather fall-back on VR and dropping the shutter than deal with the result of high ISO for the sake of salvaging speed.

If you are interested in Sports, Action, or Wildlife, I would say that the D500 is a fantastic upgrade. IF you are looking for a great 'do all' APS-C camera that produces wonderful stills, I would keep the D7200 and invest in more glass.

In regards to the 200-500, make sure to check sharpness and focus upon arrival. I was lucky to receive a copy that was sharp at 500mm without any mis-focus. I spend way too much time in the field that I have that lens on a Monopod.

 

[williamlofton.com]

Had a 7200, LOVE my d500 . Shot a high school football game on 10000 iso, ( just out of curiosity) photos looked great in the paper the next day, just yesterday did a menu shoot. Very crisp. I also shoot high end residential with the d500, works great. So from a pro aspect awesome all around camera way ahead of 7200


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[DaveNewman]

so..... what votes do we have for the d7200 over the d500??? as im looking to upgrade from the d5600 to either the 7200/7500/500 im stuck on what

 

[mikew_RIP]

so..... what votes do we have for the d7200 over the d500??? as im looking to upgrade from the d5600 to either the 7200/7500/500 im stuck on what

If you can afford it get the D500, possibly the last great DX DSLR from Nikon.

 

[Bikerbrent]

See my previous posts in this thread.

Bottom line:

If you are heavy into sports and action photography, get the D500

If you are heavy into landscape, portrait or street photography, get the D7200

I would personally not even consider a D7500

 

[Woodyg3]

If I were you I'd get the D500 and don't look back. As Mike said, it's the best DX camera Nikon has ever made. While people are going mirrorless crazy, I look for ward to finding good deals on another D500 in the future so I have two bodies. That might set me up forever.

 

[Danno]

D500 is the right choice. I love my 7200, but if I were to upgrade with DX it would be the D500.

 

[nickt]

If I were you I'd get the D500 and don't look back. As Mike said, it's the best DX camera Nikon has ever made. While people are going mirrorless crazy, I look for ward to finding good deals on another D500 in the future so I have two bodies. That might set me up forever.

Woody, I've been meaning to ask you this for a long time... Considering heavily cropped images, how does the d7200 compare to the d500? When I shoot macro and wildlife, sometimes I find myself cropping to the max tolerable. Is the 20mp sensor any less capable for those extreme crops? I was hot for a d500 a few years back, but I got a second d7200 cheap that is keeping me happy. Some day that great d500 deal will come and I might have to get one. Thanks.

 

[hark]

Woody, I've been meaning to ask you this for a long time... Considering heavily cropped images, how does the d7200 compare to the d500? When I shoot macro and wildlife, sometimes I find myself cropping to the max tolerable. Is the 20mp sensor any less capable for those extreme crops? I was hot for a d500 a few years back, but I got a second d7200 cheap that is keeping me happy. Some day that great d500 deal will come and I might have to get one. Thanks.

I will be interested to hear Woody's thoughts on this, too. I've made some extreme crops with my D750 that cannot be rivaled on my D7200 (no surprise there though). But I'd like to know how the D500 holds up with similar types of heavy crops.

 

[Andy W]

Wev's hummingbirds shots show the D500's cropping capabilities.

 

[Woodyg3]

Woody, I've been meaning to ask you this for a long time... Considering heavily cropped images, how does the d7200 compare to the d500? When I shoot macro and wildlife, sometimes I find myself cropping to the max tolerable. Is the 20mp sensor any less capable for those extreme crops? I was hot for a d500 a few years back, but I got a second d7200 cheap that is keeping me happy. Some day that great d500 deal will come and I might have to get one. Thanks.

I see no noticeable difference in the crops I do on the D7200 vs D500.

 

[STM]

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.

Sorry, but I have to disagree on this one. Shoot the same scene with a 21MP FX and the D500 and compare the IQ at 100%. You WILL see a difference.

"There a lot of D750s gathering dust since this camera came out."...................how do you know this exactly? And to reiterate a previous post, the OP was asking about a D7200 not a D750. Answer the OP's question in your response, not go off on a tangent. It will give you more credibility. ​