Review D7100 vs D7200 Low to High ISO
- Thread starter Woodyg3
- Start date
The other thing that left me with a lack of information was his comment "no noticeable difference in AF" how did he look for a difference,if he sat in his office pointing a 50mm 1.8 at different things he wouldn't,ime more interested in how it works @f6.3 in less than perfect conditions.
More sample pics trickling in. I found this more informative than the first link. Still awaiting real world data, though. 
Nikon D7200 First Shots posted: A peek under the hood at our initial lab test sample images
Nikon D7200 First Shots posted: A peek under the hood at our initial lab test sample images
Ime still waiting to find out which sensor it has,too many conflicting answers at the moment,the annoying thing is the money is there and the stock is in the shop and ime eager .
For what i do the old answer lens first doesn't apply,i already have the two best lenses for me and what my interests are,cant afford any thing better for birding and dont need anything better for close up,i would need to not buy 3 or 4 new bodies at least maybe more before i had enough cash for a better birding lens.
.For what i do the old answer lens first doesn't apply,i already have the two best lenses for me and what my interests are,cant afford any thing better for birding and dont need anything better for close up,i would need to not buy 3 or 4 new bodies at least maybe more before i had enough cash for a better birding lens.
I encountered this blog of someone that recently got the D7200 and is writing down his experiences with it. He only started some days ago but it's interesting to read.
Natural Art Images: Voice: Brad Hill Blog
Natural Art Images: Voice: Brad Hill Blog
As you say interesting but the cameras he is comparing it with make it a bit pointless to most potential owners,if those Nikon FX cameras didn't out perform it something would be wrong,i liked his Tamron 150-550
comment although it will produce @ 600mm if the person holding it is performing well.It comes back to what i said,the sigma sport is too heavy and the Nikons too expensive,it does though keep me interested in a D7200 to go with my Tamron.
He's still mentioning the D7200 does a good job even in comparison to his D4s when taking certain shots which is impressive at the least.
I'm curious about the test reviews but since the pixel pitch is identical to the rest, any low light gain will be because of limiting, or better processing, of in camera noise. Combined with good noise reduction in post, that might be worthwhile the upgrade.
HIGH ISO TEST ? Nikon D7200 vs. Nikon D7100 | Camera Comparison Review
There's only some partial testing here and there atm.
I'm reading some more tests (of other cams) and it's interesting how easily you get the wrong impression when reading descriptions like "class leading dynamic range". It makes you think it's phenomenally different from all the previous cams but when you check the numbers, you notice that just 1 point more could make it "class leading" too. This sort of hyping results in cams like the D610 to be almost non-existing these days, as if they no longer matter. But when checking the numbers, it really isn't much different from the newer FX.
There's a lot of cheap trickery going on and not just in post processing.
I'm curious about the test reviews but since the pixel pitch is identical to the rest, any low light gain will be because of limiting, or better processing, of in camera noise. Combined with good noise reduction in post, that might be worthwhile the upgrade.
HIGH ISO TEST ? Nikon D7200 vs. Nikon D7100 | Camera Comparison Review
There's only some partial testing here and there atm.
I'm reading some more tests (of other cams) and it's interesting how easily you get the wrong impression when reading descriptions like "class leading dynamic range". It makes you think it's phenomenally different from all the previous cams but when you check the numbers, you notice that just 1 point more could make it "class leading" too. This sort of hyping results in cams like the D610 to be almost non-existing these days, as if they no longer matter. But when checking the numbers, it really isn't much different from the newer FX.
There's a lot of cheap trickery going on and not just in post processing.
Last edited:
Yes. Go to Auto-ISO settings, select the max ISO and when you see 25600 press the multi-selector down.
Canadia-Nikon
Senior Member
Don't feel bad, tripod123. It took me days to figure out. Lol.
I think one would need both cameras shooting at the same scene at the same time of day to really determine that.
I could do 1600 without much of a problem with my 7100 if the light is bright enough and not have to do much cropping, where as a 7200 would look worse at the same ISO shotting in low light with a dark subject.
I'm sure all things being equal the 7200 beats the 7100, but by how much? I dunno.
@mikew I have no scientific answer to your question. I've had the D7200 long enough to say that the biggest difference I've seen in practical terms is the buffer size. I have gotten bird in flight shots that would have been more difficult or impossible with the D7100s limited buffer. Also, I really do think the dynamic range is better. I seem to be able to pull a little more out of the shadows and blown out brights.
The Tamzooka is not as fast as I'd really like on either the D7100 or 7200. I'm not putting down the lens, I think it's pretty darn good for a 150-600 that costs only a tad over $1000, but I think the limiting factor with that lens is the lens itself. I was shooting birds with my Nikon 300mm f/4 with 1.4 TC yesterday and I realized how much faster and more accurate this lens is than the Tamron. And, the Nikon lens does seem to perform even better on the D7200 than the D7100.
As far as low light, though, I was able to focus on a baby owl in a very dark tree hallow with no problems using the D7200 and Tamzooka.
PLEASE remember that I've only had the D7200 a short while, and these comments are based on only a few outings.
The Tamzooka is not as fast as I'd really like on either the D7100 or 7200. I'm not putting down the lens, I think it's pretty darn good for a 150-600 that costs only a tad over $1000, but I think the limiting factor with that lens is the lens itself. I was shooting birds with my Nikon 300mm f/4 with 1.4 TC yesterday and I realized how much faster and more accurate this lens is than the Tamron. And, the Nikon lens does seem to perform even better on the D7200 than the D7100.
As far as low light, though, I was able to focus on a baby owl in a very dark tree hallow with no problems using the D7200 and Tamzooka.
PLEASE remember that I've only had the D7200 a short while, and these comments are based on only a few outings.
Thanks,its all info thats going into the melting pot i call a brain,i may add the 300mm f4 and 1.4,all things are up for thought at the moment.