Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="daveminnich" data-source="post: 622795" data-attributes="member: 43413">I currently shoot a D7000 with a D90 as a backup/second body. I'd like to upgrade to either a D7200 or D500 as my main body, move my D7000 to backup, and give my D90 to my sister-in-law.I'm wondering if there's any good reason for me to spend the pretty significant difference on the D500 over the D7200. I shoot primarily portraits and events (mostly weddings). Low light/high ISO performance is VERY important to me, but I don't want to go full frame because I have a significant amount of money invested in DX lenses. Also, I have zero interest in the new D7500 because it only has one card slot (WHY NIKON?!?!).The D500 is superior in regards to FPS and AF speed, but I'm not a sports shooter, so those things aren't overly important to me.&nbsp; I guess the question is this.&nbsp; Is the high ISO performance of the D500 a big enough improvement over the D7200 to justify the cost difference?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="daveminnich, post: 622795, member: 43413"] I currently shoot a D7000 with a D90 as a backup/second body. I'd like to upgrade to either a D7200 or D500 as my main body, move my D7000 to backup, and give my D90 to my sister-in-law. I'm wondering if there's any good reason for me to spend the pretty significant difference on the D500 over the D7200. I shoot primarily portraits and events (mostly weddings). Low light/high ISO performance is VERY important to me, but I don't want to go full frame because I have a significant amount of money invested in DX lenses. Also, I have zero interest in the new D7500 because it only has one card slot (WHY NIKON?!?!). The D500 is superior in regards to FPS and AF speed, but I'm not a sports shooter, so those things aren't overly important to me. I guess the question is this. Is the high ISO performance of the D500 a big enough improvement over the D7200 to justify the cost difference? [/QUOTE]

Verification