Did you go from the D7200 to the D7500?

F

floyd

Senior Member
I currently have a D7200, and I'm pretty happy with it. But I've been reading some online comparisons between the 7200 and the 7500, and it seems, depending on the article, the 7500 is better to significantly better in many ways, the most important being picture quality. I'm wondering if it's time to upgrade to the 7500. But I wanted to hear from folks who had the 7200 and now have the 7500. Are you happy you made the switch? Or do you have regrets/buyers remorse?

I mostly do landscape and street photography. I read one of the advantages of the 7500 over the 7200 is the frames-per-second rate. But I don't photograph sports or any fast-motion subject matter, so that feature isn't that important to me. I do like the swivel viewfinder on the 7500 A LOT! But have you noticed a vastly improved picture quality? If I remember correctly, isn't the 7200 a larger mega-pixel camera than the 7500? If so, why does it (according to the reviews) have better picture quality? The increased low-light sensitivity of the 7500 also is of little importance to me. Why would you need such a high ISO?
 
L

lokatz

Senior Member
Hi Floyd,

Unlike some of my fellow Nikonians, I happen to be pretty positive about the D7500. I think it's a good camera and worth having. Yet, if you already own a D7200, unless you see a specific feature you absolutely want to have, I would not recommend making this step. Bite the bullet and buy a D500 if you want that next major step. The D7500 IMHO is not enough of an upgrade to make it worthwhile.

Unless you shoot subjects where the advantages of the D500 (low-light performance, super-fast AF, to name the two most important ones) really matter, I also happen to think that sticking with your current camera and, if you have an itch in your wallet, investing in better glass is the right way to go. After all, the D7200 is no slouch, either. :)
 
R

RocketCowboy

Senior Member
floyd said:
Thanks for the link!

I think I'm sticking with the 7200. While I would love to have the tilt screen, it's just not worth $700+ more. I'll either wait until their are more used 7500 on the market or start saving for a used full screen Nikon.
Click to expand...

That’s basically been my philosophy. With the D7100, it wasn’t worth it to upgrade to the D7200. With the D810, I don’t find it worth it to upgrade to the D850. All are great cameras, but the price delta to upgrade doesn’t net out for the little bit “more” whatever you get from the next newest release. Buying net new, different story, but the upgrade release cycle is an expensive route to maintain once you go that way.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
S

spb_stan

Senior Member
A lot of people subscribe to the skip-a-step view of there being not enough improvement to warrant replacing the predecessor of any of these great cameras. If one just feels their wallet calling a new camera's name, spend it on glass or lighting until there is a significant change for the type of shooting one does. The D500 was a substantial upgrade for those who need its design features...sports and moving wildlife but not needed for those doing other general shooting. The D7200 or 7500 would probably never be outgrown as a tool for great images in general photography, so upgrading is more a matter of wanting a new toy than it is a matter of image improvement. For most scenes, there has not been that big of difference between any of the cameras dating to about the time of the D90 which was a very competent general purpose camera that had 90% of the features and functions that anyone would need if they did not have some specialty that demanded other qualities such as those of the D500 related to speed and AF performance.
I am asked frequently whether someone should upgrade and my first reply is usually not unless they can point to some specific camera related shortcoming that would be corrected. Instead of getting better images, upgrading often slows down the learning process by derailing the progress made with a current camera.
Show me an image that it is assumed would have been better if done with a newer camera and I can usually find the real problem was technique or concept, not capture related. Some people just like the idea of features on a camera so are more camera hobbyists than image hobbyists. So figure out your goal ad whether keeper rate change is worth the price. A lower than desired capture rate usually is due to technique problems rather than camera problems.
 
C

Chile7236

Senior Member
i am very happy with the D7500...having a some sort of vertical grip would be nice but not necessary for me...neither is the 2nd SD slot. for me, this is a very capable jack of all trades camera.
 
Patrick M

Patrick M

Senior Member
I skipped the D7200 as I had the D7100.
i had the ‘71 since they were announced and I’ve always been pleased with it. I was hoping for a D760 , but I doubt that I’d really want to go FX just because the lenses are so much more expensive, and DX gives me enough picture quality.
So I just upgraded to the D7500. There’s a very negative thread in this section, but I’m 100% pleased. It’s given me more control, better FPS and better focussing. I’m also pretty sure that the x5 processor is actually giving me better pictures with a 20megapixel than I had with the D7100’s 24mpx.
 
M

Mark F

Senior Member
I went the other way. A while back I sold all my gear. Recently, I decided to come back to Nikon. I bought a d7500 /w 16-80, 70-300 af-p, and the nikon 10-20 af-p lens. I had them for about 3 weeks.
I liked the shots that the camera produced. But, in the end, I sent it all back and got the Nikon d7200 /w 18-140 lens. I bought the sigma 10-20 3.5 and found a used 16-80 lens. All I need to complete my zoom lenses is the newest af-p 70-300 for FX. Reason? it wasn't for IQ or ISO. I just didn't like the way the thing felt in my hands.
 
Top