dandi Loc: near Seattle, WA

Sometimes upgrades are not upgrades at all: d5600 vs d5500, d3400 vs d3300. Not even minor upgrades.

MtnMan Loc: ID

Well the D3400 certainly appears to be downgrade. They took out the sensor cleaner.

Likewise the D5xxxs after the D5300 were a partial downgrade. They took out the GPS.

Oh, and Nikon is now offering non-VR versions of their latest AF-P lenses for $50 less.

Is there a trend here?

Grnway Loc: Manchester, NH

billnikon Loc: Pennsylvania/Ohio/Florida/Maui/Oregon/Vermont

Buy a quality lens instead. There is NO clear advantage to switching on a limited budget.

dcampbell52 Loc: Clearwater Fl

One reason that Nikon took out the GPS was that they found that their customers complained that it was constantly using batter power that they would rather have for shooting. Most of the time, they already knew where they were. With this, I have to agree. I have the GPS add on for my D7100. It is still in the plastic case on my camera strap. I think I've had it plugged into the camera twice since I bought the camera. Generally, when I'm shooting, I know where I am. After I've shot my pics, I can pretty well tell the differences between Disney World, Universal Studios and Sea World. Also, I keep a note pad and pen in my pocket when shooting and I write down the locations (2017-01-16 shots 1- 182 Botanical Gardens Largo Florida. 2017-01-16 shots 183-250 Largo Nature center around the lake, 2017-01-16 shots 251-300 Largo Nature Center Walk around the park.) If I need or want to be more specific, then I can. I can generally map these individual locations in Lightroom's Map too. Yes, I have the GPS but I almost never use it, even out of state or out of the country. Heck, I don't even use it when on a boat or ship, my cell phone has a mapping application that gives me my precise GPS location and if I was really anal, I could write the coordinates in my notepad.

steve_stoneblossom Loc: Rhode Island, USA

I cannot verify firsthand, but your local dealer is probably correct, the build quality of the 7000 is better than the 7200. But there are many more differences between the two, and only you can determine which of these many differences matters to you. Break out the pencil and paper, draw the line down the middle of the page, and list the advantages/disadvantages of each (including the budget hit), then prioritize them based on your shooting style and habits. I'm sure consigning the 7000 won't cover the cost of the 7200, but maybe it will offset it enough for you. Do you have a lens that's collecting dust that could make up the difference? Conversely, is there a lens you've been wishing you had that would be more useful than the upgrade?

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

I haven't heard about D7100, D7200 bodies falling apart. I sell everything on ebay. Here's what they've sold for lately. You'd be better off keeping the D7000 and getting a refurb D7200.

http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_from=R40&_sacat=0&_nkw=nikon%20d7000&LH_Complete=1&LH_Sold=1&rt=nc&_trksid=p2045573.m1684

Impressionist

The market is saturated with good cameras. They bring different advantages to the table. Having a variety to chose from can be terrific. You found an honest salesperson which is probably better then any camera you can own. Appreciate your treasures and have fun. Some one is looking out for you, be at peace.

machia Loc: NJ

Upgrade obsession .
The idea that you must have the best and newest sensor is like changing to a new film constantly . Sure you might see incremental differences if you're into studying your photographs with extreme scrutiny .
Knowing your camera , using the right lens , that's the most important thing . Chasing every upgrade is for the guy who thinks it will make him a better photographer.
I shot with the same film SLR for 37 years . Knowing my camera , finding film I liked , choosing the right lenses and taking photographs made me a better photographer .

aflundi Loc: Albuquerque, NM

I found that a surprising claim, but he might be right. There's more to a camera than just the shutter, but take a look at http://www.olegkikin.com/shutterlife/sitemap.php and compare the d7000 with the d7200. To be fair, I think there'll be a bias toward older units because of the way data is gathered, but I still find it interesting and surprising.

wolfd Loc: Vancouver, Canada

My D7000 has dual slots too.

Djedi

Hee hee... My guess is that he just took a look at the "going price" for a D7000 and knew that he could not give you what it is worth (in capable hands). So, rather than insult you by offering you way too little for your camera, or admitting that he has to take far too much commission for taking on the risk that he does selling a used camera, he would rather have you hold on to the old camera (perhaps you didn't buy the D7200 from him?).
I am playing devil's advocate here, but if you were to purchase an old D1, you would be amazed at the build quality of the camera. You could drop it off a two story building and it would still come out taking pictures. My D800 feels pretty strong, but nothing like that D1, but the D800 will shoot circles around the D1 as far as dynamic range, high ISO capabilities, fine detail, etc etc are concerned. If you just like to hold your camera and see how it "feels", he might be right, but it appears that you use your camera, so I think you made the right decision. Take a look at these two test samples:
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/D7000/FULLRES/D7000INBI01600.HTM
http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/nikon-d7200/FULLRES/D7200INBI01600.HTM
Download them and resample them so they are the same size. Then look at the difference in luminance noise and color noise. Look at the mannequin's hands, look at her eyes, look at the detail in her jacket. And the situation only gets worse as as you increase the ISO.
If those differences mean nothing to you, then keep the old version. It will be just as good.

Steve Perry Loc: Sylvania, Ohio

Sorry, that dealer sounds like he's full of it.

First off, I wouldn't worry about durability. I've owned the D7000 and the D7200 and put the D7200 through a LOT tougher use, including soaking it on numerous occasions in rainstorms and even chipping ice / snow of it a time or two when doing Snowy Owls. It's taken a beating in the back of my car while it road around attached to my 600mm. Unless you're using it for a hammer, I don't think you have anything to worry about. Besides, I truly doubt the D7000 is, in reality, any more durable.

On the other hand, the D7200 has far superior AF, a huge buffer, higher resolution, better ISO performance, and a myriad of other improvements that make it a real upgrade.

Also, dealers often have no clue what they are talking about. I was in a local shop listening to my dealer explain how a 1.4X teleconverter eats up two stops of light (it's one stop, but he said it incorrectly several time). This was the freakin' OWNER. So, just because they are selling it doesn't mean they have a clue.

Tomcat5133 Loc: Gladwyne PA

I had the D7000 and loved it. Used it for my first video project! And stills and their was something about the visuals and the way it felt in the hand.
I have picked up some of the Nikons in stores like Best Buy and dont feel the same as I did with the D7000. I have sinced moved on to Sony's and still miss the 7000.

duck72 Loc: Laurel Ridge, PA

I'd be interested in "what" your repair facility has been repairing on D7200s in order to form their opinion on construction/build of D7200?
Nikon has thus far not authorized *ANY* 3rd-parties to service D7200s, and will not provide parts/technical support/service specs, etc. outside of their in-house National Service Centers.
The D7000 *does* have a limited number of "Authorized Service Centers" designated/sanctioned by NikonUSA. I've seen no credible evidence of alleged "differences" in quality of build among the 7000 series- all have magnesium case, etc. I own both D7000 and D7200. The D7200 is a markedly *better*, more capable camera than the D7000 for many of the reasons already addressed.