7200 vs 7500? I have a question for the group. In the foreseeable future I will upgrade my D7000. The reason I wish to upgrade is my understanding that the autofocus engine of these...

doclrb

I have a question for the group. In the foreseeable future I will upgrade my D7000. The reason I wish to upgrade is my understanding that the autofocus engine of these cameras is quite a bit better than my D7000. And for the purists, yes I know I must grow my technique as well.

The D500 is simply out of my reach. I will go the refurb route. So the question for me is 7200 vs 7500. I do know that the 7500 is in some ways a D500 with regard to image processing. I’m not a fan of a single card slot, but many would say ‘get over it’.

So I would appreciate it if folks on the list might offer their experiences with either of these bodies or if anyone has compared them on their own. My principal lenses are Tamron 16-300 and 150-600 G2 w/matched 1.4x.

TY

Les

chrisg-optical Loc: New York, NY

doclrb wrote:

I have a question for the group. In the foreseeabl... (show quote)

I would say a lot depends on what kinds of subjects you are shooting mostly. The 7500 with its EXPEED5 engine is better suited for fast moving subjects - birds, wildlife, fast sports such as soccer, racing, etc. If you are a general photographer (like me) - travel, macro, architecture, still life, portraiture, etc., the 7200 might be the better choice - I recently opted for the 7200 over the 7500 for that reason, and also the single slot issue.

IMO, the 7500 is more of a junior version of the D500 rather than a progression of the D7xxx line, so they should have called it the D450 - I guess we will never see a D7300 or D7400?

It's also a choice between 20 MP 7500 vs 24 MP 7200....the former choice will provide for better low light results with the slightly larger photo sensor elements, but with less cropping ability.

As for the single slot issue probably not as significant as it once was - but if you opt for the 7500 get a high quality card 32 GB, class 10 speed or larger/ faster.

doclrb

Thanks so much. Sounds like I should go with the 7500 (birds, wildlife).

Les

Steve Perry Loc: Sylvania, Ohio

I did a review of the D7500 with a comparison to the D7500:

https://backcountrygallery.com/nikon-d7500-review-d500-d7200-comparison/

Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England

http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-493048-1.html
Three solid reasons NOT to buy a new Nikon D7500 ....
=======================================
Five Solid Reasons you might wish to consider the new Nikon D7500 ... that is, if you're in the market for a top-quality Nikon DX camera ...
http://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-493363-1.html

chrisg-optical Loc: New York, NY

Steve Perry wrote:

I did a review of the D7500 with a comparison to the D7500:

https://backcountrygallery.com/nikon-d7500-review-d500-d7200-comparison/

Great review - accurate assessment of the 7500 vs 500/7200 DX lines !

Thanks,

Bill_de Loc: US

Go with Steve's review.

The two threads recommended next, if history is any indication, will be just a lot of BS. By his own admission he likes to put out information just to get people to refute what he says. He is looking for post counts without regard for people looking for good information.

--

Stay clear.

Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England

Bill_de wrote:

Go with Steve's review.

The two threads recommended next, if history is any indication, will be just a lot of BS. By his own admission he likes to put out information just to get people to refute what he says. He is looking for post counts without regard for people looking for good information.

--

Stay clear.

Oh, thanks, Bill ... wise advice, I must say ....

Actually, it was Steve Perry's excellent rebuke on that first one, which made me want to share it ....

Quite a lot of good information, on that post, really - you know ....

Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England

Chris T wrote:

Oh, thanks, Bill ... wise advice, I must say ....

Actually, it was Steve Perry's excellent rebuke on that first one, which made me want to share it ....

Quite a lot of good information, on that post, really - you know ....

BTW, Bill ...

What's a "post count" ?

Is that something of which I should be aware?

Or is it privy information?

doclrb

Bill,

TY. Steve Perry’s video seems balanced and reasonable. I have found his Autofocus publication to be quite useful, even for my older D7000.

Les (aka doclrb)

Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England

doclrb wrote:

Bill,

TY. Steve Perry’s video seems balanced and reasonable. I have found his Autofocus publication to be quite useful, even for my older D7000.

Les (aka doclrb)

Just curious, Doc ... regarding your reasons to want to upgrade your D7000 ...

I made the mistake of adding a D7100 to my collection ... and - to tell you the God's Honest - I much prefer the results from the D7000!

The fact that Nikon DROPPED the Res on their new D7500 DOWN from the 24MP of the D7100 / D7200 - should tell you something!

The D7000 has a 16MP sensor ... the D7500 has a 20MP sensor ...

Look at Steve Perry's results with it ... fantastic!!!!

I'm sticking with the 16MP sensor of my D7000 ... much, much better than any 24MP sensor on the Prosumer series ...

Although, I do very much like the results the 24MP sensor gives me on the intermediates - the D5500 and the D5300 ....

Maybe - you should consider them, instead ... or the D5600 ... same deal ....

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

Chris T wrote:

BTW, Bill ...

What's a "post count" ?

Is that something of which I should be aware?

Or is it privy information?

The first line of your post says
Chris T (a regular here) (online) Joined: Sep 4, 2017 Posts: 2602

so your "post count" is 2602; you have been a member here for approximately 54 days, so you have posted approximately 2602/54 = 48 messages per day.

The first line of this post is
rehess (a regular here) (online) Joined: Jun 1, 2014 Posts: 5962 Loc: South Bend, IN, USA

so my "post count" is 5962; I have been a member here for roughly 1215 days, so I have posted roughly 5962/1215 = 5 messages per day.

Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England

rehess wrote:

The first line of your post says br Chris T (a reg... (show quote)

Oh, okay, RE ... thanks for filling me in ...

But, it really doesn't address Bill's concern, now - does it?

You're throwing statistics at me ...

That's not quite the same thing he's concerned about - is it?

48 Messages a day, huh?

Is there really that much time, in the day?

Sounds a bit creepy, huh?

Especially, since I haven't even been here for a full week ...

Just numbers, RE ...

Doesn't mean a whole helluva lot, huh?

Does that take into account I've put up well over 100 Topic Posts?

I don't think so ....

But, thereyago ... THAT little bit of info - addresses that, now - doesn't it?

Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England

rehess wrote:

The first line of your post says br Chris T (a reg... (show quote)

BTW, RE ... you seem to be making the implication I see this as some kind of contest, as to see who can put up the most posts ...

Is that it?

Let me tell you - the thought never ever crossed my mind ... I only put up Topic Posts for subjects which concern me ...

Since there are so many ... I decided a couple weeks back - I'd limit these to two per day ...

And, since making that pledge ... I've done exactly that ...

If I thought I were in some kind of contest - believe me - I'd not have done that!

Enough said!

WessoJPEG Loc: Cincinnati, Ohio

doclrb wrote:

I have a question for the group. In the foreseeabl... (show quote)