londonfire Loc: NY to NC

I've looked at lots of my pics taken with the 7000 and the 7100 and on a 27 inch monitor I really can't tell much difference. On a few occasions I think the 24mp has helped me crop some shots. Unless you need the faster burst shooting, as mentioned, I would look at a 7100 at the price they're selling at now.

JennT Loc: South Central PA

Think about the D500 for your upgrade!

NJphotodoc Loc: Now in the First State

Thanks all for your input. My trusty 7000 has always been a solid camera so I would probably keep it as a backup and/or give it to my granddaughter as her first "real camera". From all that you've shared, seriously looking at going to a D750 refurb for all the reasons you mentioned. Since I do like playing with DoF, Bokeh, and lighting and having a full frame would be so much nicer, will just stop stop agonizing and order the 750.

ole sarg Loc: south florida

Its not the camera its the guy/gal behind the camera!

orrie smith Loc: Kansas

If most of your lenses are primes, I assume they are FX and not DX. If that is the case, why not look into the D750. For what you are photographing, a full frame body would be a great upgrade, just my opinion.

SusanFromVermont Loc: Southwest corner of Vermont

I have the 7000, and have been quite satisfied with it. However, upgrading is something I have been considering for a long time. But getting another DX camera seems redundant, especially since I have been purchasing better (FX) lenses! Last night I finally took the plunge - ordered the D810... I love the qualities it has, and look forward to enjoying it. My photographic wishes include better resolution, which this camera will provide. Yes, it is heavier (+1/2 lb), and a lot of people are going for lighter cameras. But I use a tripod 75% of the time anyway, and do not walk miles and miles to get to a site (bad knee!), so lugging it around is the only disadvantage.

The D750 has had a lot of great reviews, so I am sure you will enjoy it. The tilt screen is also a handy thing to have if you cannot get both you and your camera into a tight spot. Use the screen and a remote shutter release and get the picture!

Nikon's current camera discount was too good to pass up. Plus I had some money put aside for this day! My credit card is still taking a hit, but it is not as much as it could have been... Will also keep the D7000 as a backup camera so I won't have to switch lenses so often.

Impressionist

The good news here is you will appreciate the additional capability of the D7200. All things concidered you earned it.

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

My take on this is that if the D7000 is satisfying your present needs there is no reason to go for the 7200. I have in the past recommended updating when the new camera has features not present in the old one which will benefit the photographer's style of shooting.
For portraits, landscape, vacations and family shots the D7000 is all you need.

mas24 Loc: Southern CA

You can buy a refurbished Nikon D7200 at B&H for $789. If you really want one, here's your chance.

NJphotodoc Loc: Now in the First State

Thanks for the info. I did see this along with Adorama and Cameta. All are around the same price (=/- $10) but just have to do the math to see which one has the best price inclusive of a warranty.

blackest Loc: Ireland

So the D750 then :)

NJphotodoc Loc: Now in the First State

Yeah, probably will go that path. Just have to convince "the boss" that it's worth it

Kuzano

For me, the biggest improvement, which actually took place in the 7100 was the removal of the low pass filtering system or the AA filter. Results, sharper images. In fact for me, the price differential just to go to a refurb 7100 or a low shutter count used 7100, would be more reasonable.

The only real addition for the 7200 that I have heard referred to is the increased memory buffer, which is not pertinent in my style of photography. I am more old school on taking time for each shot to get it right, than being "spray and pray"

However, the real money savings for me would the the D3300, in spite of the loss of the lens focus motor. It's specs for the photo capture is the same as the D7100.

I must buy capable camera's and I must eat!!!

Geegee Loc: Peterborough, Ont.

I recently went through the agony of upgrading my d7000 to either a d7200 or a d750. I came to the realization that most of my pictures were telephoto and the 1.5 crop factor was a significant advantage. I do not expect to have any of my photos blown up to poster size so I decided against going full frame. Also, the FX lenses are much more expensive.

I bought the d7200 and kept the d7000. It is great having a different lens on each camera and being 'ready' for an unexpected shot without having to change lenses. I recently had occasion to shoot very low light and took my d7200 up to ISO 25,600. I was pleasantly surprised. There was minimal noise which PP easily took care of. I also do some BIF with my 150-500 and the large buffer is so much better.

The d7000 doesn't owe men anything so it is a good second camera and a back-up in case I am ever without my d7200. My advice - get the d7200 and keep the d7000.

portcragin Loc: Kirkland, WA

I traded my D7000, which I liked a lot, for a D7100. I bought a refurb from B&H. Turned out the click count was 8 pictures. I scored big. I bought it looking for better low light capabilities. My 7000 was very good and the D7100 is even better. I'm sure the D7200 would be equal or better then the D7100. I can now shoot indoors, without a flash, at ISO of 1600 and not even consider noise. I loved my D7000 and even love my D7100 more. Low light capabilities was my goal and I nailed it..... Both photos have been post processed. The picture of the house was at 7:00PM. I also like to print large photos 11X14 and 16X20. Noise can become a big consideration at larger sizes.

Good shooting