Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • 2 weeks later...

Just wondered if anyone has ordered one of these and what they think of it.  There are great deals on the D7100 now, and I don't know if its worth it to go with the D7200.  I have stayed with the DX Nikon and not sure if I should look at FX.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have the D7100 and did find the small buffer frustrating when I was photographing a jaguar. I don't do a real machine-gun style of shooting but do need lots of shots as an animal is moving. The D7200 has a much bigger buffer. I kind of wish I had waited to buy another camera because the D7200 looks like the next best thing to a D400. So puzzled by the lack of a D400 because it seems that all of us with the D300 would buy it.

 

Paulette

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I went from a D80 to D7000 and there was a noticeable improvement in quality. Especially with ISO, Dynamic Range and having two card slots. You will definitely get benefit from either a D7100 or D7200.

 

The higher resolution of the D7000 meant I had to upgrade one of my lenses too. It's flaws really showed up on the newer camera.

 

My only frustration with the D7000 is the small buffer.

 

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've got a D7100 ....and it's a bit of a conundrum really (love it's AF/Low Iso image quality and hate it's Poor High Iso quality.

 

-Great AF performance (the best you can get in a nikon DX body) even when the light is poor.

 

-Image quality is superb from ISO 100 upto ISO 400, ......then things begin to fall apart very quickly and all that resolution you paid for takes a nose dive! It's a real shame the excellent low light AF ability isn't backed up by decent high ISO image quality. Which makes it terrible for low light action shooters who worry about hiigh iso noise destroying their image.

 

-If your a tripod hugger or a "Sunny Days Only" type, and stay below ISO 400 ....you will love this camera as the image quality at low iso is breathtaking (D800E territory), Thats the only reason I'm keeping mine, it's excellent for landscape, macro and sunny weather action.

 

If you need a nikon with decent high iso's ...then I think you would be wiser to go with any Full Frame body (D700 & D3 can be had for a reasonable price), but if you want to stay with DX and still need excellent AF ability in a more able body with respectable high iso/noise levels then D300 or D7000 are safer bets (both make decent iso 1600 images).

 

Shame Nikon hasn't tried fusing a D2x body, D7000 sensor,  D7100 AF module and a D4 processor...Now that would be a D400!

 

So If the high iso image quality in the D7200 is the same as that of the D7100, then I think the few extra bells and whistles wouldnt pursuade me to buy it.

Parm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Thanks for input on the 7200.  I haven't tested my D90 against the D3200 or D200, but I would think the D90 might be the best low light performer.  I think of my D200 as a sunny day camera, and all three of these pass QC OK.  I think if I were going FX that I would go D750.

Marvin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.