D7100 or d7200: Looking for opinions. I have been using a D5000 and I'm looking at an upgrade. For the most part I'm primarily interested in a Nikon that will perform better in low...

Phg Loc: Canada

Looking for opinions. I have been using a D5000 and I'm looking at an upgrade. For the most part I'm primarily interested in a Nikon that will perform better in low light. That being said I can get the 7100 presently for 400 less than the 7200 but because I plan on keeping the camera for several years, if there are considerably more benefits to the 7200 it may be worth the extra bucks! Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated!

Kuzano

Considering same.

According to DPreview and reading both full reviews in full detail, and the comment in the D7200 review, if you owned the D7100, the D7200 was not a significant enough upgrade to buy the D7200. Pretty much summed it up for me.

"Watch for member flames!!!"

I'm seeing used D7100's as low as $450 on eBay. Might check KEH, but I've had great success on eBay fifteen years or more.

Phg Loc: Canada

Great tip. I may check out ebay as well. Thanks very much!

Wingpilot Loc: Wasilla. Ak

Phg wrote:

Looking for opinions. I have been using a D5000 and I'm looking at an upgrade. For the most part I'm primarily interested in a Nikon that will perform better in low light. That being said I can get the 7100 presently for 400 less than the 7200 but because I plan on keeping the camera for several years, if there are considerably more benefits to the 7200 it may be worth the extra bucks! Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated!

I, too, have been camera shopping for a new camera and have decided on the D7200 if I go for a DSLR. Based on what I've managed to glean from reading many online reviews as well as what I've gotten from the members here, I would say that if you already had the D7100, it's not worth getting the 7200. But it appears that you have neither, so I'd recommend going for the D7200 because it is newer and has some features that make it a better purchase, assuming you can afford it. Not that the D7100 isn't a good camera, but I think the D7200 is enough better that it's worth going for it, with its newer technology. Just my $.02.

Drala2k Loc: Vermont

I have the D7100 and I have the Nikkor DX 35/1.8 mm on it and I highly recommend this lens for it. If I were to buy it today I would go for the D7200.

oldtigger Loc: Roanoke Virginia-USA

i would go for a refurb 7100 now and start saving my lunch money for a full frame mirrorless in the future.

dannac Loc: 60 miles SW of New Orleans

Wingpilot wrote:

I would say that if you already had the D7100, it's not worth getting the 7200. But it appears that you have neither, so I'd recommend going for the D7200 because it is newer and has some features that make it a better purchase, assuming you can afford it. .

:thumbup: :thumbup:

orrie smith Loc: Kansas

I own both d7100 and d7200 and the main reason I purchased the d7200 was for the larger buffer. I sometimes shoot action and the buffer on the d7100 was too slow. as for the low light, both are close to the same, the d7200 is advertised to shoot higher ISO, but I have not found a need to go higher that the d7100 offers.

Jim Bob

Phg wrote:

Looking for opinions. I have been using a D5000 and I'm looking at an upgrade. For the most part I'm primarily interested in a Nikon that will perform better in low light. That being said I can get the 7100 presently for 400 less than the 7200 but because I plan on keeping the camera for several years, if there are considerably more benefits to the 7200 it may be worth the extra bucks! Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated!

"For the most part I'm primarily interested in a Nikon that will perform better in low light."

D7200. Simple.

Kuzano

Well, what I see here confirms a choice for the D7100

1) No Action shooting
2) Rarely shoot High ISO... lucky if I get out of native ISO for image quality
3) Budget, not just not wanting to spend the money, also not wanting to take the first year depreciation hit on any merchandise. I am a "sweet spot" buyer when it comes to price. I don't buy low to save for anything. I buy low, buy low and buy low the next time.

The new stuff always comes down and since it's not my living I don't need or want to pay for "cutting edge".

Now, if photography was my only hobby, or if I made money with it, I might choose to spend more money on it.

SuitcaseAl

Why people come on UHH and pose a question like this one instead of going to Google or DPReview is a mystery to me!

leftyD500 Loc: Ocala, Florida

SuitcaseAl wrote:

Why people come on UHH and pose a question like this one instead of going to Google or DPReview is a mystery to me!

I personally would rely on "actual users" than some company in the business of doing reviews! Big companies with big bucks can have an influence on reviews or ratings. I have found the "Hogs" on here to be fair in their assessment of equipment they own, and will give you an honest opinion. I will take that anytime!

Bear2 Loc: Southeast,, MI

I went from a D5000, to a D7000, and now to a D7200. I still have the 5K, and the 7K. The upgrade to the 7200 is amazing, using the same lenses, and l do not care what any of the reviewers say to the contrary. I keep a mid range zoom on the 7200, and a longer tele on the 7000. Kept the 5000 in the car so l always had one within reach, but now with the cold weather it is in my office.
Duane

quote=Phg]Looking for opinions. I have been using a D5000 and I'm looking at an upgrade. For the most part I'm primarily interested in a Nikon that will perform better in low light. That being said I can get the 7100 presently for 400 less than the 7200 but because I plan on keeping the camera for several years, if there are considerably more benefits to the 7200 it may be worth the extra bucks! Any thoughts would be greatly appreciated![/quote]

Phg Loc: Canada

jradose wrote:

I personally would rely on "actual users" than some company in the business of doing reviews! Big companies with big bucks can have an influence on reviews or ratings. I have found the "Hogs" on here to be fair in their assessment of equipment they own, and will give you an honest opinion. I will take that anytime!

Thanks for all the great comments everyone. I really appreciate those who took the time to offer advice. The comment above really describes why I value and go to this group for photography related questions

lazyjt1 Loc: Potter Valley, CA

orrie smith wrote:

I own both d7100 and d7200 and the main reason I purchased the d7200 was for the larger buffer. I sometimes shoot action and the buffer on the d7100 was too slow. as for the low light, both are close to the same, the d7200 is advertised to shoot higher ISO, but I have not found a need to go higher that the d7100 offers.

:thumbup:
Larger buffer