24 or 21 MP's (Page 2): The simple answer is NO.

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

The simple answer is NO.

PeterDragon Loc: Harlan, KY - Kona, HI - Phoenix, AZ

I like that. That's finer than a frogs hair.lol.
Jim

Rab-Eye wrote:

That's OK; even a stopped clock is right twice a day.

russelray Loc: La Mesa CA

Riverrune wrote:

I'm considering getting a Nikon D7200 or the new D7500. The D7200 has greater resolution, but does the difference between 24 mp and 21 mp matter that much? I do mostly nature, rivers and landscape photos.

I had that same problem except with Canon. The camera I was using, a Canon 550D gave me 5184x3456 pixels whereas the camera I was looking at getting, a Canon 760D, gave 6000x4000 pixels. Since I sell my work at Fine Art America, I set all my work at 100 pixels per inch. So the two cameras could give me 51.84 inches x 34.56 inches and 60 inches x 40 inches. Those extra inches are worth extra money so I got the 760D.

Jim Bob

Riverrune wrote:

I'm considering getting a Nikon D7200 or the new D7500. The D7200 has greater resolution, but does the difference between 24 mp and 21 mp matter that much? I do mostly nature, rivers and landscape photos.

I would say that it is not possible to determine what you will or will not see. However, I would say that in general the difference would be difficult to spot. However, if the D7500 incorporates the D500 sensor, that camera seems to perform better than the D7200 at ISOs above 1600. My 2 cents.

Rab-Eye Loc: Indiana

Jim Bob wrote:

I would say that it is not possible to determine what you will or will not see. However, I would say that in general the difference would be difficult to spot. However, if the D7500 incorporates the D500 sensor, that camera seems to perform better than the D7200 at ISOs above 1600. My 2 cents.

Same sensor and same processor.

Reinaldokool Loc: San Rafael, CA

MtnMan wrote:

No on the MP but you might like the extra card slot in the D7200 for back up when on critical missions.

Yes. The second slot has save my butt on at least one occasion. In fact that is my one major complaint about my Sonys.

HarryBinNC Loc: Blue Ridge Mtns, No.Carolina, USA

russelray wrote:

I had that same problem except with Canon. The camera I was using, a Canon 550D gave me 5184x3456 pixels whereas the camera I was looking at getting, a Canon 760D, gave 6000x4000 pixels. Since I sell my work at Fine Art America, I set all my work at 100 pixels per inch. So the two cameras could give me 51.84 inches x 34.56 inches and 60 inches x 40 inches. Those extra inches are worth extra money so I got the 760D.

Your 550D is an 18Mpxl camera - a 24Mpxl camera would have 56+inches the long way - would the 4" extra still be enough for you to upgrade?

ggttc Loc: TN

The answer would be no...and I am a pixel peeper. Go from 20 MP to 36 MP on the D810 and the answer is YES!

russelray Loc: La Mesa CA

HarryBinNC wrote:

Your 550D is an 18Mpxl camera - a 24Mpxl camera would have 56+inches the long way - would the 4" extra still be enough for you to upgrade?

Yes. My Clients really are enjoying the extra inches, and that means more money for me! However, my 760D takes pictures at 6000 pixels the long way, a nice even 6000x4000, so at 100 pixels per inch, I get 60 inches x 40 inches. I like that. A lot. As do my Clients.

mas24 Loc: Southern CA

The Nikon D5 has 20.8 megapixels, the D500 has 20.9 megapixels, and the upcoming D7500 has 20.9 megapixels. Same as the D500. Why not 24 megapixels? All of the above mentioned cameras are more expensive than the D7200, which has 24 megapixels. The D5 is Nikon's best pro camera, with a body only price tag of $6500.

whitewolfowner

Riverrune wrote:

I'm considering getting a Nikon D7200 or the new D7500. The D7200 has greater resolution, but does the difference between 24 mp and 21 mp matter that much? I do mostly nature, rivers and landscape photos.

The 20MP will be better in low light but will not have the resolution of the 24MP; all depends what you are looking for. I'd consider either the D7200 or the D500 and skip the dud, D7500.

IBM

Riverrune wrote:

I'm considering getting a Nikon D7200 or the new D7500. The D7200 has greater resolution, but does the difference between 24 mp and 21 mp matter that much? I do mostly nature, rivers and landscape photos.

I guess there not many here that don't remember the 3 megapix point and shoot Canons, I turned out a lot of 8×10 prints, just as good as
A 8× 10 point and shoot today with 15 megs .

whitewolfowner

IBM wrote:

I guess there not many here that don't remember the 3 megapix point and shoot Canons, I turned out a lot of 8×10 prints, just as good as
A 8× 10 point and shoot today with 15 megs .

You are very right. Everyone gets caught up in the megapixel count and they are not everything. I remember being in Dury's camera store in Nashville, Tn around the turn of the century and they were printing 30 X 40 prints that were taken at a Titan game that were taken with a Nikon D1 (I believe that was a 6MP camera) and they were absolutely gorgeous prints.

IBM

whitewolfowner wrote:

You are very right. Everyone gets caught up in the megapixel count and they are not everything. I remember being in Dury's camera store in Nashville, Tn around the turn of the century and they were printing 30 X 40 prints that were taken at a Titan game that were taken with a Nikon D1 (I believe that was a 6MP camera) and they were absolutely gorgeous prints.

ALL they do is make smaller pixels there's large ones and small ones , but the more that they can get on a chip the more they can
Peddle the hype , they will need a microscope to see them pretty soon , how many germs would fit on a chip ?? A couple millions I would say , the nanotechnology megapixel