D7200 or move up (Page 2): First of all you need to ask yourself if you actually need a full frame camera. Your D7200 APS-C camera produces fabulous images already. I photograph...

Jerrin1 Loc: Wolverhampton, England

Les Brown wrote:

I am an avid amateur with many, many years of experience with good "amateur" Nikon gear. I have gone from a Nikkormat, FMs, to a D90, now to a D7200 with kit lenses, and a new 200-500. I am certainly not rich, so am I missing out on a giant leap by not moving up to pro level gear...D850 etc. if I am not intending to sell my work, but I do strive for better, sharper work for my own satisfaction.

First of all you need to ask yourself if you actually need a full frame camera. Your D7200 APS-C camera produces fabulous images already. I photograph wildlife almost exclusively and have no requirement for a full frame camera. I use a D500 APS-C and an Olympus EM1 mark II M43 format camera. To be honest, I only ever view my images electronically via a 55" UHDTV: and most of the time cannot discern any difference in quality between images taken on either camera. If however, I ever decided to make large prints (larger than 10 x 8) from either I would not be disappointed in the resulting quality. I also own a Nikkor 200 - 500mm f5.6 and would have no issues with using it on a D7200 because I know how good the results would be. Though the D850 is the only full frame DSLR I would ever purchase, I have no intention of changing my D500 for one. I would hold the same opinion if I owned a D7200. Hypothetically, if I owned a D7200 and wished to stay with Nikon, I would only change it for a D500.

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

Les Brown wrote:

I am an avid amateur with many, many years of experience with good "amateur" Nikon gear. I have gone from a Nikkormat, FMs, to a D90, now to a D7200 with kit lenses, and a new 200-500. I am certainly not rich, so am I missing out on a giant leap by not moving up to pro level gear...D850 etc. if I am not intending to sell my work, but I do strive for better, sharper work for my own satisfaction.

If you are happy with your results you need not worry.

delottphoto

Hi folks,
I am a successful studio and event photographer. I "swear" by my D7200. I am buying another one Christmas when the price typically drops $200. Of course, you need "good glass."

jccash Loc: Longwood, Florida

Les Brown wrote:

I guess I'll stick with my 7200 as it seems good for wildlife. BTW I love my 200-500, well worth my cost.

I jumped up from the D7200 to D500. I also have the 200-500 mm lens. Great combo.

camerapapi Loc: Miami, Fl.

Stay with what you have UNLESS the D7200 is not fitting your photographic style. I do not own the D7200 but from what I know it is a very good camera with an excellent AF. I seriously question if you will see a difference in your images switching to the D850 in which case you have to start to buy lenses made for that camera.
Nikon makes pretty good kit lenses and although you did not mention which one you have unless that lens is not doing what you need from it there is no reason to buy something else.
Sharpness in your images depends more on you than on the lens. If you do your part the lens will perform to perfection and ALL modern lenses are of excellent quality. I still shoot with lenses from the 60's and 70's to my full satisfaction. Many of them are single coated and still the images are of very good quality.
Stay with what you own and if necessary just revise your technique to make your photography even better.

lamiaceae Loc: San Luis Obispo County, CA

rgrenaderphoto wrote:

Really? A 46 Mpix camera will not put as many pixels on the image as a 24 Mpix one? Images from a D850 are 8256x5504, the D7200 6000x4000. How is that more pixels?

For wildlife, a Dx camera and lens are better than a full frame. If you are doing landscape, then Full Frame is the way to go.

24MP x 1.5 ^2 = 54 MP

54 MP>45 MP. Remember it is area of the sensor we are comparing, DX to FX, i.e., the D7200 has higher absolute resolution for its sensor; higher pixel density. But as with any FX camera its images out perform DX for various other reasons, noise, less need to enlarge. What is/was the pixel count for a Nikon Df or D3 (compared to D7100 or D7200)? Think of film 35mm vs 6cm.

dcampbell52 Loc: Clearwater Fl

Les Brown wrote:

I am an avid amateur with many, many years of experience with good "amateur" Nikon gear. I have gone from a Nikkormat, FMs, to a D90, now to a D7200 with kit lenses, and a new 200-500. I am certainly not rich, so am I missing out on a giant leap by not moving up to pro level gear...D850 etc. if I am not intending to sell my work, but I do strive for better, sharper work for my own satisfaction.

On the one hand, you might want to get better lenses for your D7200. On the other, I wouldn't dump the D7200 but would also invest in a Full Frame camera. You would be able to use ALL of your full frame lenses on the D7200 as well. Personally, I have a D7100 and a D610. Its a good combination. I have also replaced all but one of my DX (also kit) lenses with good quality Full Frame lenses which can be used by both cameras. The benefit is that having one of each gives me a backup, both use the same batteries, both use the same lenses, and I can use the FF camera for normal to wide shots and use the Crop Sensor (D7100) for my normal to long shots. (actually I use both). I carry both cameras about 90% of the time because it gives me instant access to both types of lenses.

ELNikkor

I'd stick with the D7200 until you feel you've really blown some shots because of some feature it lacks that you can find in the D500. FX would be an unnecessary and expensive move at this point.

ToBoldlyGo Loc: London U.K.

I went from a D7200 with 200-500 lens to a D500. With this lens attached, I've noticed improved focussing speed and accuracy, but I do like to photograph birds in flight. For me it's worth the upgrade. If you don't need improvements, or the advantages of a full frame, the D7200 is a great camera. It does in my opinion have nicer colours too. That's very subjective though.

JennT Loc: South Central PA

Yes--D500 will be exciting for you!

NikonJohn Loc: Indiana U.S.A.

I would say you have a pretty good rig now, in my opinion. I use a D500 and I wish I had that 200-500 zoom for when I am birding. I have also been considering the Tamron 150-600 (second version). The Tamron has weather seals that the Nikon lens lacks, but I like the fixed aperture on the Nikkor. Thought the weather seal is probably the bigger factor for me, I’m an all weather shooter. 😊 If you got a D500 you’re pixel count would go down a little but you’re auto focus would be much better. If you primarily shoot birds I would stick with the crop frame DX sensor to get the 1.5x crop factor on the long lenses.

Country Boy Loc: Beckley, WV

The 18 - 105 lens you ask about is a kit lens. However, I have the same one on my 7100 and while I want to get a better ever day walk around lens, I can't find one I like better. It is not razor sharp but it does take exceptionally good photos and I like the range.

gvarner Loc: Central Oregon Coast

Les Brown wrote:

I am an avid amateur with many, many years of experience with good "amateur" Nikon gear. I have gone from a Nikkormat, FMs, to a D90, now to a D7200 with kit lenses, and a new 200-500. I am certainly not rich, so am I missing out on a giant leap by not moving up to pro level gear...D850 etc. if I am not intending to sell my work, but I do strive for better, sharper work for my own satisfaction.

Not that I know what "pro level gear" is, but if you're not a pro I'm not sure it would be that much of an advantage given the leap in cost. If your 200-500 is a DX lens, it's effective focal length is 300-750. It won't use the full area of a full frame sensor.

old poet

Ha, ha, ha!😀😁😂🤣😃

Bill Waxman Loc: Friday Harbor, San Juan Island, Washington

Barny wrote:

Get a D500, and your 200-500 will be excellent for BIF. You can still use your DX lenses. Uses the same processor as the D850. Excellent in low light quick focus and 8 fps

I agree wholly with the above, having had a D7100 and using a D7200 for a time. The D500 is far and away a better birding camera owing to its incredible focusing system (right out of the D5 with only some exceptions). Coupled with a decent telephoto you will get shots you have only thought about in the past. The D850 is a lovely camera as well but far more expensive and full frames lenses are not inexpensive either and together the increased weight and bulk might just be more tiresome than you want to put up with.

The D500 has a higher frame rate at 10 fps and a huge buffer. You can increase battery life by getting the higher powered (more expensive D5 battery with adapter) or use the available grip that holds a second regular battery or Alkalines in a pinch.

I've been using Nikon cameras since the 1965 version of the "F" and, in my opinion - for my purposes - the D500 is the best of the bunch.

Bill Waxman