Nikon D7100 vs D7200
Mar 23, 2016 09:54:30 #
ChiefEW wrote:
Is the D7200 worth the extra money for the casual photographer?
Thanks.
ChiefEW
Thanks.
ChiefEW
Just how casual are you?
Do you know and value the difference more than the cost differential?
No can answer this better than you.
Mar 23, 2016 10:04:12 #
Hacksaw wrote:
I agree it's a simple question. The most simple an... (show quote)
:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:
Mar 23, 2016 10:57:05 #
I upgraded our D300 to the D7200 not so much for the upgraded buffer, but because it is better in low light situations and desire for a light weight camera. If we didn't have a good supply of quality DX lenses and wanting to try some birding, I would have stayed with our FX format. So for us, the 7200 wasn't that much extra for the upgrades when purchased as a refurb. Just to add, the quality of pics coming out of the D7200 are really good compared to our FX equipment. Leon
Mar 23, 2016 10:58:40 #
On re-reading the OP's post, it seems that he probably has a camera, but not a higher end APS-C DSLR, and he is asking if going straight to a D7200 is worth the money. I'd have to say that it might be, if the cost isn't an issue, but if he already has a D7100, then the answer is "no," and the cost difference can be applied toward a new lens, flash, whatever. I don't see a world of difference between the D7100 and D7200. I hope we have been of some help to the OP.
Mar 23, 2016 10:59:07 #
Mar 23, 2016 11:05:36 #
dcampbell52 wrote:
As most have said, in a word, NO! Check the older posts. However, the only real upgrade is an increased buffer size. So if you want to take lots of photos in RAW on continuous then maybe.
The D7200 has more dynamic range than the D7100. I think it has a different sensor. It might have upgraded software. It does not have the low pass filter.
Mar 23, 2016 11:11:06 #
RKL349 wrote:
No, and I guess I must have missed the part where the D5300 entered into the conversation as a consideration.
You reponded to the note where I introduced it. For the reasons in my post.
Sometimes a question is ill posed and the answer lies elsewhere. This is most often thw case when a question is posed as yes/no or just two alternatives. There are almost always better choices.
Have you stopped beating your wife yet?
Mar 23, 2016 11:23:50 #
ChiefEW wrote:
Yes, and I upgraded from the D7100. Better buffer, low light ability, dynamic range, newer sensor and Expeed4 processor. You don't say how casual. The D3xxx and D5xxx line have many good alternatives for casual photographers and may be worth considering if budget is a concern.Is the D7200 worth the extra money for the casual photographer?
Thanks.
ChiefEW
Thanks.
ChiefEW
Mar 23, 2016 11:24:25 #
Personally, I never use the LCD screen except for reviewing photos, and hate the idea of a floppy hinged screen, thou I understand it has its uses especially in crowds. It really just depends on what you want to shoot, as usual.
Mar 23, 2016 11:25:56 #
Mar 23, 2016 11:27:04 #
MtnMan wrote:
The D7200 has more dynamic range than the D7100. I think it has a different sensor. It might have upgraded software. It does not have the low pass filter.
I believe you are correct here. The sensor is a slight upgrade, as is the processor, and it has better low light capability. And yes to improved dynamic range. The software also includes the ability to correct things like vignetting and distortion, that can be turned off or on in the menu. I can't say if the D7100 has this. Again, if cost isn't an issue, these things along may justify the cost of the upgrade from something less than the D7100, or from nothing at all. It all depends on what the individual wants or needs from a camera. If the OP is fairly serious about photography, then yes, go for it, but if it's just for family pictures and snapshots, then no, a decent point and shoot camera might be more appropriate. He doesn't say what he intends to do or what his experience is.
Mar 23, 2016 11:31:56 #
rustfarmer wrote:
Oh, and doesn't the 5300 require motors in the lens which costs way more for lenses?
The D7100 and D7200 have the ability to use any autofocus lens from the late '70's or early 80's, whereas the D3xxx and D5xxx can only use the AF-S lenses. That's not a bad thing, but there are so many older lenses out there that are very good and can be had fairly cheaply, too. If one has a D3xxx or D5xxx, he/she can't take advantage of those excellent older AF lenses.
Mar 23, 2016 11:43:44 #
Actually the d3xxx and 5xxx can use the older lenses but will not auto focus. You will also have to shoot either full manual or aperture priority.
Mar 23, 2016 11:49:35 #
Leon S wrote:
Actually the d3xxx and 5xxx can use the older lenses but will not auto focus. You will also have to shoot either full manual or aperture priority.
Ah yes, I should have mentioned that.
I remember when all lenses were manual focus and everyone was leery when auto focus was introduced. There are still situations in which I prefer to manually focus.
Mar 23, 2016 11:50:22 #
Leon S wrote:
Actually the d3xxx and 5xxx can use the older lenses but will not auto focus. You will also have to shoot either full manual or aperture priority.
so basically for most, the older lenses are unusable, lol
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.