aflundi Loc: Albuquerque, NM

I'm somewhat perplexed by most of the advice you've gotten here. The D7100 is about as good as you're going to get for dynamic range with a DX camera. The D500 is a very good camera, but I doubt you'd see any improvement with it in high ISO, low light situations over your D7100. The dynamic range at high ISO is very close to identical.

I seems to me you have two avenues given that you can't add more light via flash or other source. Those are to get an additional stop of dynamic range by going to an FX body, and/or get faster lenses. The D750 would give you that additional FX stop. As for lenses, it's pretty hard to beat the 24-70/2.8 you already have, but a fast prime or one of Sigma's crazy fast zooms could pull in more light. For instance, an f/1.4 lens would give you a 2 stop advantage over your 24-70, and the Sigma 18-35/1.8 or 50-100/1.8 would get you almost 2 stops.

jackpi Loc: Southwest Ohio

The D500 and the D7000 perform about the same in low light. D750 has a one stop advantage over both the D500 and the D7000.
https://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Nikon-D500-versus-Nikon-D750-versus-Nikon-D7000___1061_975_680

You could get significantly more advantage in low light by using a lens with stabilization or switching to a camera with an in-body-stabilization (IBS) system, such as the Sony A7Rii or the Olympus O-MD E-M1ii, E-M5ii, or E-M10ii. The advantage of IBS or lens stabilization is that you can shoot at lower ISO because you can use a significantly lower shutter speed (or shoot at your maximum acceptable ISO with much less light.) And an Olympus system (camera + lenses) would be much less expensive than an than the D750 plus full frame lenses.

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

Absolutely correct IF you can use a lower shutter speed without blur caused by the subject moving. But if freezing the motion requires a higher shutter speed because of a moving subject, you're back to FF, fast lenses and SW noise reduction.

tusketwedge Loc: Nova Scotia Canada

I have been shooting the 7100 since it first came on the market and have never had any problem shooting in low light situations,whether at 3;00 a.m. or shooting my son at a indoors concert. Just have to have the right lens ,like a 2.8 or lower f stop. If you using kit lens of 5 0r over ,it wouldn't get better results no matter what camera your using.Is all in the lens you attach to the camera.

cjc2 Loc: Hellertown PA

Oh wait, but if the OP buys a D500 body.......that's ALL he needs! My! My! The other options may be just that: options, but the OP plans to stay in system!

GrandmaG Loc: Flat Rock, MI

I shoot in RAW and PP in LR, with some photos further edited in PS. I usually shoot aperture priority.

YES, I often shoot in low light situations. With 24 grandchildren, there are many special events that take place in a dark church: Christening, 1st communion, Confirmation, wedding. This was not the first time that I've been disappointed by the shots I got in churches.

So, I reviewed the last 3 events taken in a church. I used a different lens at each one and every time I was disappointed in the results. I spent a lot of time trying to salvage a few good ones in LR, but this last event was the worst!! I'm going to post the worst from each lens and ask for advice on the critique area of this forum. Either I scrap the 18-140 lens (at least for indoors when no flash is allowed) & buy the Sigma 16-35mm f/1.8 for those situations or trade in the camera.

So, I will take your advice and review my technique first before giving up on the setup I now have.

GrandmaG Loc: Flat Rock, MI

Even though I got better results with the 24-70/2.8; I should have gotten decent results with the 18-140/3.5-5.6 because I was in the back of the church. The pictures really look horrible when I crop them. so, what IS the right lens?

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

As a Pentax user, I find this entire discussion to be very interesting. The Pentax users I communicate with view Pentax cameras to be reasonable competition for the D7n00 family, but the D500 to be in a league of its own, especially when high ISO settings are concerned, and for it to be pioneering new paths for all to follow eventually {by the new Pentax KP, for example}.

cjc2 Loc: Hellertown PA

Sure, you can get a camera with better low light capabilities and it's called a D5! Are you sure you need/want to spend that much. You already have one pretty darn fast lens in your arsenal, and that would be the 50/1.4. If you want the very best start with a D5 and buy every 1.4 lens you can get and perhaps even the Nikon 200/2. By the time you're done you will have spent a small fortune and you MAY not improve your work at all. Experience is what counts the most. The processor 4" behind the viewfinder is much more powerful than anything inside the camera. There is absolutely no substitute for experience, so go in some churches, with the lights off, and teach yourself to get great photos. Perhaps even buy a book or two on low light photography and learn, learn learn. I'm a professional sports photographer, and making images at night games, without flash, is my bread and butter. Yes, I use a D5 and a D500 and D810 as well. If I owned one, I'd use the 7100, 7200 or whatever I had. Before digital we used this thing called film. Try shooting that at ISO 5000! Seriously, dump the variable zooms, use the fast primes, and practice, practice, practice. Best of luck. If you want any specific advice, feel free to PM me.

GrandmaG Loc: Flat Rock, MI

You are probably right. Once I buy the Sigma 18-35/1.8, I will be committed to stay with DX.

GrandmaG Loc: Flat Rock, MI

Your advice is well taken. I have been studying my a.. off for the last four hours, trying to figure out what went wrong. Two of the pictures had ISO Hi2, so I scrolled through my menus and made sure that I set limits to ISO and shutter speed. The best picture was the first one, taken at 1/40, F5, ISO 2000; but, of course, no people are in that shot. Somehow the ISO jumped to Hi2. I didn't plan to use Auto ISO, but that's what must have happened. I noticed it after 3 shots and set my ISO to 5000, hoping for a decent shot. One time, I tried Auto just for the hell of it, and, of course, the flash went off. My daughter was mortified!!! After that, I turned the mode to "no flash", left ISO at 5000 and hoped for the best.

In LR, I could salvage a few pictures as long as I didn't crop too much. Thank God we took pictures outside, because they were wonderful.

So, during this whole ordeal, I checked a few places to see what the D7100 is worth and that pretty much made up my mind. They give so little compared to what I paid for it.

I'm putting the 18-140 on the shelf since I primarily use the 24-70/2.8 anyway. It seems to serve most of my needs. When I get the Sigma 18-35/1.8, that will probably stay on my camera most of the time. I use the 35/1.8 a lot, but probably won't after I get the Sigma. I'm pulling the 50/1.4 out of the bag and going out to practice in dark places! Lastly, I'm going to try to find a photography class.

GrandmaG Loc: Flat Rock, MI

Good to hear from a non-Nikon person. When I bought my first DSLR, I considered all brands. I bought the one that felt the best in my hands, after I had narrowed it down to Canon or Nikon. I am tied to Nikon now since I have so many lenses and probably will never go full frame.

The option to buy a D500 down the road can always be a possibility.

GrandmaG Loc: Flat Rock, MI

I have read every post and even though I have not answered every one, I have gotten a ton of useful info, as usual. Here are my conclusions: (1) I will probably not go full frame (2) I will buy better/faster glass (3) I need to practice more (4) and if I still want/need the D500, then, I think renting is the best idea.

maren

I purchased my D500 a month ago mainly for birding, other wildlife and rodeo. Was in a restaurant in dark corner last weekend, Had my D500 with a 45mm f1.8 lens, and took pix of new grandbaby. wasn't sure how it would turn out, and it was fantastic. It looked like the pix was taken in broad daylight. Sharp as a tac. I am so pleased with my new camera. A real photographer could make that thing talk. I am just trying to learn the extent of it's capabilities.

gmha32

Since the D500 doesn't have the commander mode, you can get the Nikon SU-800 commander that you can use to control/fire multiple flashes remotely. I get mine from KEH for $179, and boy am I having fun taking portraits of my wife and daughter.