Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Nikon Comparison D500 vs D7200

nikon

  • Please log in to reply
11 replies to this topic

#1 bear35

bear35

    Wolf Eel

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 194 posts

Posted 02 March 2017 - 11:10 PM

Hi guys,

 

Looking for some advice on my pending upgrade...

In a nut shell, do you think the extra money for the d500 is worth spending over the d7200?

Or as I am moving from 4/3 set up anything else out there worth thinking about?



#2 Alex_Mustard

Alex_Mustard

    The Doctor

  • Super Mod
  • 8595 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Peterborough

Posted 02 March 2017 - 11:42 PM

The extra money in the whole system price is quite small, so worth it.

 

But if you can find a secondhand D7200 system, then that would be very attractive. 

 

Alex


Alexander Mustard - www.amustard.com - www.magic-filters.com
Nikon D5 (Subal housing). Nikon D7200 (Subal housing). Olympus EPL-5 (Nauticam housing).


#3 trimix125

trimix125

    Eagle Ray

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 320 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Austria

Posted 03 March 2017 - 06:19 AM

Hi,
i have the D7100 for above water, and bought the D500 last autum.
Since then, the D7100 rest a lot ;-))

Have now a Hugy housing and except triggering the strobes, its great!!!
Specially the low light possibilities.

Regards,
Wolfgang



#4 Roger-Botting

Roger-Botting

    Triggerfish

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 32 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 03 March 2017 - 10:56 AM

I would venture that it depends on your finances and your ability to rationalize spending.
I bought used, I bought a refurb D7000 and used housing for several reasons, limited income, not planning to sell photos, and I could easily buy another D7000 for much less than my other camera, a D750.

And I doubt that you would really see the quality difference.



#5 JackConnick

JackConnick

    Orca

  • Industry
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1392 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Seattle, WA
  • Interests:Sailing, diving, women, cats

Posted 03 March 2017 - 12:39 PM

Cameras tend to be the cheapest part of an uw system to a large degree. As Alex said, the overall percentage to step it up to the D500 is fairly small.

 

The D500 is much faster, and has faster AF, especially for action and low-light with a host of other electronic improvements, besides a better sensor.

 

The other financial reality is that you are buying the latest technology and your resale later on is also going to be much higher (and easier to sell). You'll end up recouping much of the difference then.

 

Thanks,

Jack


Jack Connick
Optical Ocean Sales.com

Nauticam, Subal, Sea & Sea, Olympus, Seacam, Gates, Ikelite, Zen, Fix, 10Bar, Kraken, Light & Motion, iTorch/I-DAS & Fantasea Line
Cameras, Housings, Strobes, Arms, Trays & Accessories. System Packages. Photo Expeditions.

Blog & Gallery: Optical Ocean Sales Blog - Flickr Galleries: Optical Ocean on Flickr


#6 trimix125

trimix125

    Eagle Ray

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 320 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Austria

Posted 03 March 2017 - 12:47 PM

Hi,
the difference between D7100 and D500 is easy to see.
Sharpness with the same lenses, if i mount a long tele lens on its tripod rest, and change the camera, you will find out which was it...
Low light pics, autofocus and Speed.

Only the built in flash is missing.

The question is what you want and need...
And can afford, as well. And the D500 was a big Investment for me too. But sold my two D300 bodies, and a housing and some other stuff for it...

But the D7200 is said to be much better in image quality than the D7100.

Had tried a D610 as well, but autofocus was to slow in low light.

Regards,
Wolfgang

PS: Jack was quicker ;-))


Edited by trimix125, 03 March 2017 - 12:48 PM.


#7 Aquapaul

Aquapaul

    Eagle Ray

  • Team Wetpixel
  • 308 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ludington, Michigan
  • Interests:Photography above and below the waves.

Posted 05 March 2017 - 08:22 AM

I have had the D7000, D7100, D7200 and now the D500. The biggest difference has been focus ability. From the D7000 being quite poor at focus, the D7100 a lot better focus and significantly better images. The D7200 better focus then the D7100 and slightly better image quality. The focus ability of the D500 blows them all out of the water, it is fantastic. Image quality is similar to the D7200 until you start jacking the ISO up, then the D500 is a lot better.

 

  My take on these four cameras is that if you can't get in focus in a reasonable amount of time it sucks. The D7200 is a fine camera, focuses fast and in low light. The D500 is just a little better all the way around.

 

The D500 has no onboard flash. Not sure if that is a handicap or not. I have a Nautical housing for it with onboard flash triggers, the recycle time is no longer camera dependent, crazy fast.


Paul Chase

----}<))))"> ----------}<))))'>
-----------}<)))))))))*>

#8 Aussiebyron

Aussiebyron

    Great Hammerhead

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 704 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 06 March 2017 - 11:29 PM

I upgraded from a D7000 to the D500 mainly due to the excellent buffer of the D500 and its ability to due custom WB settings on liveviwe for video.  Again as others stated it depends on your real budget and what type of shooting you mainly doing.  The D7200 is still a very capable camera and might be an option worth considering if you can get the housing/body at the right price.

 

Regards Mark


Nikon D7000 with Aquatica housing

Nikon D500 with Aquatica Housing
Nikon 10.5mm FE, Tokina 10-17mm, Tokina 11-16mm, Nikkor 60, Nikkor 80-400mm


#9 bear35

bear35

    Wolf Eel

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 194 posts

Posted 08 March 2017 - 03:44 AM

Thanks for everyones comments.

It boils down to if the improvements are worth spending the extra £900 ($1100) on the body. It would seem most people think yes then as no one has said they would stick with the 7100/7200.

Looks like I have some more saving to do! 



#10 Nicool

Nicool

    Sting Ray

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 293 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Sydney, Australia

Posted 08 March 2017 - 05:11 AM

When i bought my D500 (upgrading from D300s) it was mostly the AF capabilities in low light which drove me.
It's a pity that the reputable photo magazines i read are not assessing these capabilities. In fact, their test benches for AF ability to track subject is definitely used with good ambient lighting, and fails to spot differences between recent cameras.
Then one has to trust camera specs, which say D500 focuses in darker environments than D7200.
For my photography this is very useful, esp when shooting below rocks where i can barely see but i noticed focus light (even red light) does disturb subject.
The D500 amazes me with shots i succeed in those conditions, and i just know by the specs that D7200 wouldn't succeed in as manu shots. How big is the difference, that i don't know :-/

#11 Js06

Js06

    Hermit Crab

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 3 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Brooklyn
  • Interests:art
    sport
    dc comics

Posted 29 April 2018 - 05:25 AM

More than one pro photographer in workshops I’ve attended recommended DX over FX sensors for bird photography because more of the pixels are concentrated where the birds are, in the middle of the visual field.



#12 Js06

Js06

    Hermit Crab

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 3 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Brooklyn
  • Interests:art
    sport
    dc comics

Posted 01 May 2018 - 11:12 AM

Maybe you will also be interested in this camera http://fixthephoto.c...era-review.html