I took a longer look at the spec list for the D7500 and came to the conclusion that many naysayers are not reading it or have vague ideas of some of the spec meanings. For sports, wildlife, street, post processor, and low light shooter, the D7500 will be a significant performance upgrade.
For example both the D7200 and D7500 use the same core AF system but one important component of AF is the RGB metering sensor that is used to track color and position. The D7200 has the same 2k pixel metering sensor that the D7000 and D7100 had. The D7500 has the D500 180,000 pixel rgb sensor which means it will track moving objects in dim light much better and speed AF noticeably. It is not going to track better than the D500 due to its separate dedicated AF processor but it will be better than any other Dx camera except the D500.
Its Group AF tracking mode is a big help also. BIF shooters or sports, action shooters on a budget will love it.
Someone remarked that the sensor and processor did not make much difference. Not sure they understand what the job of the processor is but without any argument, Expeed 5 is a significant improvement in IQ over previous models due to the processor, and accounts for the vast ISO range increase, to over 1.64 Million ISO for 6db snr, upping it 15x over D7200.
For those who process RAW, having 14 bit files is greater depth than the 12 bit of the D7200, and will allow more radical adjustment before falling apart. Greater pushing before banding is visible. As I mentioned before, when I shot with the D500, the color fidelity and noise obtrusiveness at high iso or low light was the most remarkable thing...to me even more impressive than speed or AF. Beginning with the D90, every Nikon camera has been the best in the industry for shadow recovery and freedom from artifacts. The D7100 was the one exception, its sensor did not provide files with the depth to them so a push of shadows of 3 stops usually was the limit before banding and color distortion ruined the image, but even that, was better than the competing Canon models, or even their 5Dmk2 at the time.
For IQ, low light and AF the D7500 will likely be the biggest step upgrade since the D7x00 series started. I could trade a hundred card slots for the improved file quality. As for the other major gripe, there will be cheap grips coming out soon that use Blue Tooth.
The other key argument against the D7500 that was called out as a deal breaker was the removal of the metering index arm, that is less a problem than suggested. All it means is aperture priority will be done manual control on non-cpu lenses. Heck most more experienced shooters always use manual mode. I doubt I have use an auto exposure mode in a year. It is just easier to get what you want in manual mode. Maybe some are confusing aperture indexing for metering indexing. One of the reasons people like old non-cpu manual lenses is they get better images. Why? It is not because they are better lenses(if one is used to kit zooms,than yes most have better glass and construction but they do not have the modern optical formulas and coatings so really are more limited and do not handle flare, CA etc as well as newer lenses). They get better images because the process of taking a photo is more deliberate. Often on a tripod or at least taking time so focus and frame well, and make the focus and exposure more seriously, because if not, the image is bad. Taking the same deliberate steps with a modern lens of similar quality level will be better. I notice a lot of people criticizing the D7500 for not being a big enough upgrade, are using a lot of marginal glass. Nothing wrong with marginal zooms except it is not a fair expectation for a camera to generate far superior images when the limiting factor is a slow zoom lens. There is also a habit of not using light effectively, I guess, thinking that a high spec camera will compensate. With effective use of light, camera body differences fade in significance. A D40 with good use of light beats a D810 in poor or flat light every time. Look at your kit realistically before deciding to spend over $1.2k on a body. What is holding you back from award winning shots? One thing for sure, it is not the camera body. Even the lowest end camera available in the D3xxx series is better than any pro camera less than $6000 10 years ago in IQ and DR. It is not your camera that makes an image good/interesting or bad/uninteresting.
The D7500 would be a great upgrade for those who have the rest of their kit sorted out. For everyone else, a better use of funds would be a decent prime, and some practice with lighting....lighting in this case is not just flash or strobes but good used of available light, or simple modifiers like using a nearby wall as a reflector filling shadows in an outdoor shot.
If they say wow you must have a really great camera just reply with a big old grin and nod your head yes.
