D810(800) in DX versus D7200(D7100)
- Thread starter jay_dean
- Start date
I did a comparison in a 7200 post. The D810 in normal mode cropped to 100% in post compared to the D7200 down-sampled. Post-crop or DX mode is identical for the D810.
They're both pretty equal.
I found it:
http://nikonites.com/d7200/30415-d7200-review-3.html#post450966
They're both pretty equal.
I found it:
http://nikonites.com/d7200/30415-d7200-review-3.html#post450966
Last edited:
I find the D7200 handy as a second cam with the Tam equipped but see little difference when it comes to detail. The increased Mpix of the D810 makes the crop advantage of the D7200 have less effect than compared to a 24Mpix FX. When shooting at max reach they're very similar but the D7200 loses that edge when you don't have to crop the D810 to the max.
What I find most interesting about the D7200 is that it no longer has gain in the shadows when using ISO which implies I can shoot it any way I like without having the loss I have with the other cams. The image quality is a bit lower compared to the max the D810 can deliver but all in all it's not that much of an issue when birding.
I've just sold my D4, as i hardly used it really and its too expensive for the little use it got. I find the D810 much more a camera for my taste tbh. I'm also using the sale to fund a new lens. But i do like owning 2 bodies. If the D810 can perform as well as the D7200 in cropping etc, then i'll get a second hand D700
You can check the four shots I took to see the differences. I personally see too little difference to declare one of both the winner, at least at that level.
An advantage of the D7200 is that you can crop even more compared to the D810.
Last edited:
Hum, yeah, not alot in it at all. Truth be told i prefer to get the D700 as a back up general purpose body. But i'd not rule out a D7200 or the aps-c medium. Maybe when the fabled D400 comes out!............
I don't think anyone disagrees the D7100/7200 has more pixels than the D800/810 when cropped to match the crop factor of the first but the question is if it makes enough difference in quality/detail.
For the D800/D7100 I would not know but for the D810/D7200 I don't see that much difference. I shot highest quality however so it is no guarantee it is identical through the ISO range. It's only a 1 vs 1.25 difference which I doubt will be much of a factor even there.
Once the 42Mpix sensors hit the market, it's the end of DX for birding anyways. Unless they too start increasing their Mpix above 24. Which has a limit anyways since they're at a disadvantage when it comes to pixel size.
For the D800/D7100 I would not know but for the D810/D7200 I don't see that much difference. I shot highest quality however so it is no guarantee it is identical through the ISO range. It's only a 1 vs 1.25 difference which I doubt will be much of a factor even there.
Once the 42Mpix sensors hit the market, it's the end of DX for birding anyways. Unless they too start increasing their Mpix above 24. Which has a limit anyways since they're at a disadvantage when it comes to pixel size.
Last edited:
That's indeed correct, the D750 performs better and focuses faster in low light. I suppose the fact that its focal points are grouped closer together than the D810 has something to do with it. If there's plenty of light, I find the D810 better at grabbing and holding focus.
I know the D750 isnt what he wants but i just thought if the D8xx are not good in poor light for focus grabbing they could be not what he wants.
Yeah it certainly does, 24 megapixels as opposed to 15 for the D810 in crop in shear resolution terms. I guess you'd need a 58 megapixel FX sensor to produce a 24 megapixel DX crop - D900 or D1000 perhaps. The 7 fps of the D810 in crop is a nice feature, worth mentioning too that the 1.3 crop of DX available on the D7100 and D7200 is useful, effectively gives you a micro 4/3 reach at around 16 megapixels I think - I have a D700 and D7100 and like the D7100 for more sports reach with my 80-200 2.8.
Love Nikon
Banned
I have recently taken up birding and thought that the D7100 would be best due to the higher pixel density . But testing out my D800 I have been supprised to find IMHO the D800 is better with the same lens. I have never been a fan of using FX glass on DX and the Sig 150-500 and Tok 80-400 give a better image on the D800 even after cropping to the same view.
I do hope they dont make a 42MP and go straight for 56MP to give a 24mp DX crop
I do hope they dont make a 42MP and go straight for 56MP to give a 24mp DX crop
Any decent lens will perform better on an FX vs a DX.
Here's the 85mm f/1.8 on the D810 vs the D7100:
The 42Mpix will outcrop any DX which would make a 56Mpix overkill. Not that I'd mind 56Mpix. Even with the current generation of 36Mpix, there is very little difference and only at max crop distance.
And they can make those pixels on a BSI sensor a whole lot smaller. The smaller they get, the higher the efficiency of the sensor. It only might become a problem for macro since small pixels hit diffraction much faster.
Here's the 85mm f/1.8 on the D810 vs the D7100:
The 42Mpix will outcrop any DX which would make a 56Mpix overkill. Not that I'd mind 56Mpix. Even with the current generation of 36Mpix, there is very little difference and only at max crop distance.
And they can make those pixels on a BSI sensor a whole lot smaller. The smaller they get, the higher the efficiency of the sensor. It only might become a problem for macro since small pixels hit diffraction much faster.
Last edited:
Right then. I've been using a D7200 for a couple of weeks or so now. I'm not giving a personal DxO score or anything (i don't live and die by them anyway, as some do). My general thoughts are that the D7200 gives slightly better IQ performance cropped than my D810. But not by much. Now, if they put this in a D810 body, which i find much better to handle....maybe they're saving it for the D400 eh?