ksmmike

Either will work, however since you stated that you shoot mostly portraits and landscapes, then the D 750 is better option. If you said wildlife or sports then I would have said the D500. The D750 is a great all around camera and for portraits and landscape, I prefer full frame. Also, in my opinion, it's almost always better to put your money into better lenses. Since you're shooting travel and landscape, you can search out some older Nikon lenses, which are manual focus and save money there too.

There are some great older 35 and 50mm lenses as well as the 105mm 2.5, the 135mm 2.8 or 3.5 which can be used for landscape or portraits or travel. I have the 105 and the 135. The 135 mm is one of the best over all lenses I own. I paid less than $150 for it. It competes with about any new Nikon lens on the market for color, sharpness, contrast, ect.

I have the latest Nikon 85mm 1.8 G lens and I prefer it to the 105mm 2.5, but mostly because I use it photograph my grandson and the autofocus is needed. However, if your subject will sit still, it's a closer choice and again the price difference is several hundred dollars. So there are ways to save money, get quality lenses, and get the camera body you want between the D750 and D500. I too struggled between those 2 cameras and went with the D750. I don't regret my choice, but I'm saving up for a used D500 since I shoot wildlife too.

Mike

dpfoto Loc: Cape Coral, FL

I recently purchased a D750, and am very pleased with it. All of my Nikons are FX (Except a Coolpix P7100, which I am about to put up for sale). I would NOT purchase a D500. While it is a good camera, it is NOT full frame. The D750 is excellent, both with stills, and video. Why woud you go with a DX camera when all of your glass, except 1, are FX?

InfiniteISO Loc: The Carolinas, USA

My best camara is also a D7000 so I'm trying to put myself in your shoes. My back-up is my Old D90. You gain a lot of great features with both camera upgrades but a D500 places your existing D7000 in a better back-up category. I would have to go with it.

Or... drive the D7000 for a few more years and increase your gear nest egg and go mirrorless in the future, maybe forsaking Nikon for Sony or Fuji. If the D7000 dies you can get a used D7xxx relatively cheaply. Personally, I like to live about 8 to 10 years behind the cutting edge of photographic technology to make my hobby affordable.

duck72 Loc: Laurel Ridge, PA

Nice try.

jakraig

______________________________________________________________________________

First I gotta say, these are all very nice cameras you can get some very good shots with any of them. I, few years ago I got rid of my older cameras after shooting with several other newer Nikon cameras and purchased a D800. I was in heaven, I had no idea a camera could be so good. I have since added a D810.

Full frame cameras really do a nice job at higher ISO's that I could have never shot with on the others cameras. The high resolution of Nikon's newer cameras is amazing and give you tremendous flexibility in cropping. You would't think the difference between 24 and 36 megapixel would matter but it really does. I thought the D5600 was the cats meow after the D300 until I shot with an 800.

So after all that above it seems like I have dissed your other options, and perhaps I have. Because the D810 and D850 have come out many 800 owners have sold their 800 to get the 850. I haven't, the 850 has no built in flash and I really like CLS in the studio or even on location. I know, I could just go buy some wireless but. . . . .

Anyway, again all the cameras on your list are pretty good, if you are doing sports go ahead and get the 500 for the rapid fire but if you do portraiture or landscape by all means go find a used D800 or even perhaps 810, both are cheap on the used market right now. Both take indescribably wonderful photos, both do it well in fairly low light. When I had a D700 I thought it the best low light camera that could ever have been made, the 800 runs right with it but has all that resolution to boot.

When making a decision on Full Frame or Cropped sensor people will say the cropped will give you a longer reach with the same lens, it isn't really true. The cropped sensor just takes the middle of the lens for a picture. The FF takes the exact same image but also gives you a wider view. If you want your FF to have the same range of the cropped sensor just crop the image. It will be the same ending resolution. there simply is no advantage to Cropped sensor except for price. Now price is a big word and FF accessories and lenses are pricey compared to Cropped accessories and lenses. The shock of changing to FF was pretty hard but what I get is simply wonderful.

FF is not for the faint of heart. The body and lenses are much heavier and larger than cropped. The 24mp sensors are very good, good enough that you will throw rocks at your old 7000. There is no way to describe how wonderful the Nikon 36mp sensor is, borrow one and see for yourself, you will never go back.

I highly recommend one of the Nikon D8--'s if you are into sports the D500 is pretty good but the D850 although not perhaps quite as fast is pretty fast and a wonderful camera. Good Luck.

IDguy Loc: Idaho

Actually the D500 (1.9 lb.) is heavier than the D750 (1.7 lb.). Maybe because they forgot the flash?

SusanFromVermont Loc: Southwest corner of Vermont

All things considered, the D750 would be my choice. And the price fits your budget. Nikon has it at $1200, but if you wait a bit they have sales on refurbished gear which would bring it down. Factory refurbished is a lot better than dealer refurbished, and the camera should be at least as good as new.

I also started with the D7000 as my first DSLR. Over time I replaced DX lenses with FX lenses. My budget was a bit higher, and I bought the D810, which I love.

Here is one way to help with the decision: Go to Nikon's website and do a compare of refurbished cameras. I did that just now, putting the D810 in just for comparison. This will let you know most of the factors that differentiate them from each other. As a point of interest, the D750 and the D810 share a lot of characteristics. The D500 has features that do make it better if you are capturing fast action, but it also has a smaller sensor size and less effective pixels. There are some D500 specifications that do offer greater numbers than both the D750 and the D810, which are part of what make it great for capturing fast action. But if that is not important to you, not something that needs to affect your decision. It is a question of which features will make a difference in YOUR photography.

Also, if you do want to go to a fast-moving competition, you can adjust the settings to fit the situation. I have used my D810 to successfully capture action shots of football, baseball, and horse jumping competitions with no problem.

My D7000 is now my backup camera.

larryepage Loc: North Texas area

I'm finding that the D500 handles and shoots like a much smaller and lighter camera. Haven't figured out exactly why yet. But I've been reading in several conversations that a lot of folks are irrationally discounting the D500 as a sports camera only. I used to think exactly the same thing, but am finding by experience that is a very uninformed and one dimensional opinion that is not true at all. I've lost a lot of time that I could have been shooting a very good multipurpose camera that is essentially as good as my D850.

Ron 717 Loc: Pennsylvania

Not knowing what type of photography you like to shoot, if it’s wildlife and Birds in flight then I would recommend the D500. If you are more into landscape and flowers then the D750 might be the better choice. But that’s just my opinion.

Barndog Loc: Tacoma

Have you thought about a used D810 or D800E in addition to FX already suggested? Can get some very good ones for the price range you are looking at from a reputable dealer such as MPB, KEH, B&H or Adorama.

sandiegosteve Loc: San Diego, CA

Both are great cameras. Are you going to keep the 7000? I like having a crop around for what I do.

I had a D7200 which was a decent step up from the D7000. I then got a D750 and was really impressed with it. I've now swapped out the D7200 for a D500. The D500 is slightly better than the D7200 in image quality. It is a lot better in AF, speed and buffer. I shoot mainly sports. Assignments vary from team pictures to games (both indoor and out in both good and bad light).

If I am doing landscapes (personal fun) or low light; I go with the D750. Above ISO 6400, the 750 literally means more money for me. The D500 isn't bad, but there is a real difference for me.

Portraits - D750. I like everything the FF brings for this. Could I use the D500? Yes.

Outdoor/good light sports - D500.

Menu system and controls - D500.

The D750 will be easier to learn coming from a D7000, but they both have the same controls for the most part with buttons in different places. There are D500 things (back lit buttons) that I wish the D750 had, but both are great cameras. You will enjoy either of them.

larryepage Loc: North Texas area

One thing to remember is that a 50mm 'normal' lens is a portrait lens when used on a crop frame camera.

IDguy Loc: Idaho

I was just commenting on the assertion that all FX cameras are much heavier than DX cameras.

I could have added my FX Z6 weighs the same as a D7200.

larryepage Loc: North Texas area

Understood. And your post just happened to trigger my reply, which was really intended more generally. I've just been very pleasantly surprised by my D500. I bought it because its controls and menus mirror the D850. But I'm finding a whole host of other benefits. It's really a great all around camera, not the niche camera I've been reading about for two years or so.

My experience just seems cautionary for those who might be making decisions based on the comments of others. My conclusion is that the D500 has been actively misrepresented by a huge group of people...mmany of whom should know better.

ChristianHJensen

With the 850 in play, Nikon cannot sell a (rumored) 760 for north of $2K