Jump to content

Going DX D500 vs. D7200


Sandy Vongries

Recommended Posts

I should say I've been very tempted by the idea of something like a D3200 as a backup just because it's small and light - it's an argument that may interest be in a mirrorless Nikon. The handling issue may mostly be what I'm used to - generally I don't mind the weight. I've certainly chosen to carry cheaper cameras when going somewhere dodgy - it's also why I like my F5 missing paint, and why I was happy with a cheap silver 28-200 on my D700 for a few years.

 

On the other hand, I'm currently on a business trip and (not feeling very well) just took my RX100, to save weight. (Relatively. I still have three laptops with me...) Horses for courses.

 

I was thinking about a D3400 as a light-weight travel/family party option to my heavier D7200.

But then I looked at the specs for the D5600, and it is only 20 grams heavier than the D3400. Which made the D5600 look like a better option. But the D5600 is also about $250 (or 50%) more expensive than the D3400. Is the D5600 worth the cost difference?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 75
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

About the pivoting screen.

With my D70 and D7200, I was hoping/thinking that it would not be an issue to me.

That is until the day I was lying on the ground to get a ground level shot.

At least for that shot was, it was on a dry/clean gym floor.

I would hate to be on my belly in dirt or mud, to get a shot.

And I would hate to give up a shot because I did not want to get dirty to get that shot.

So for me, a pivoting screen would definitely be a plus.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Could it be the lack of U1/U2 that the reviewer is missing a lot and therefore concludes that the ergonomics of the D500 is not that great? I liked it on my D7000 and D610. I knew I would miss it on the D800 and D800E. However, I got used to having it in My meny and there are many other advantages that compensate for it.

 

Of the two, for your intended purpose, a D7200 should fit the bill. Is there anything you feel it is lacking?

 

However, might I suggest another contestant for your money that would add to your photography whilst still meeting your two initial requirements; a used D800 or better yet a D800E. You already have the FX-lenses.

 

The price tag for a nice D800 is close to D7200 money, so there is the ”less valuable camers for rough places”. (Would not the Df be good for this as it looks like a ”worthless” remnant from the 1970s to the untrained eye?) Cropped to DX mode you have about the same amount of pixels on a D800 as you do on your Df. Good for both birds and macro. Using FX, you get more detail than with the D750. The difference in iq was bigger that I thought when going from 24 to 36 MPix, especially when croppimg bird shots. All of a sudden, the DX mode made sense. Having said that, the D800E provided yet another noticeable improvement in iq over the D800, so that was camera I ended up keeping.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, I have found the guy to be relatively accurate on gear that has interested me and that I have bought & used.

 

It's a source of opinions, sometimes of hardware he's actually used rather than just looked at the specs of. Some of the advice is valid, some is highly biased towards a "hurts my eyes" style of shooting, some is based on bizarre priorities, much is poor advice if you're not shooting exactly as he does, and many of the reviews are simplistic and highly out of date.

 

Still, it's a source of information, and taken with an appropriately large pinch of salt that's a good thing. It's mostly a danger for novices who haven't developed a filter for what to ignore.

 

My biases against the site are the casual racism, having been a bit burnt by trusting some glowing lens reviews that weren't really deserved, and the time when I mentioned a feature request that I'd previously sent to both Canon and Nikon (having said as much) in a private email to the author, and then saw it appear on the site as a "patent disclosure". But there's some useful stuff there despite that.

 

I guess the issue is that the D 500 is another relatively expensive camera which negates one of my goals - an inexpensive pro / enthusiast camera.

 

That's certainly true. A D500 is a budget D5, but that's a high target to budget under.

 

Second, with cameras as with a rifle opposed to a machine gun, my preference has always been the single accurate shot rather than spray and pray.

 

I generally agree - but I've found a burst to be useful for birds in flight (say my goose taking off from last Wednesday) when I want a sequence.

 

I positively HATE touch screens - it amazes me sometimes that my kindle is not permanently embedded in the bedroom plasterboard.

 

Professional curiosity... EInk Kindle, or Kindle Fire tablet? The responsiveness of the eInk ones isn't all that good in my experience. Some people can't get capacitive screens to work (probably a skin moisture thing); a capacitive stylus may make a difference. I wasn't expecting the D500's to be useful, but it really helped image review for me. I'm used to having a protective cover over my screen, so I'll have to be careful when I go D850.

 

I'm shopping the D 7200 used on line - I'll probably be able to get one used for around or under $700. If it doesn't do what I want, it can go. Do appreciate all of the input!

 

Good luck with it - I trust you'll report back!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sandy: Hmm. Sorry to hear that. The touchscreen on the D500 didn't do anything except when you have the screen on - image review (which is harmless and useful), live view or menus (for which you can still use dials). I didn't have any false touch problems changing settings, and I do have a large nose. YMMV.

 

Mike: Same problem with my laptop, which is why I disable its touchscreen. Not liking greasy smears, I usually just blow on the camera. Currently I have quite a bit of dust and hair behind my screen protector, which is annoying because I have to take the L-plate off to get behind it.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

OK, sorry about the wrong "expression"then, what i meant to say has nothing todo with spray and pray but with the ease of keeping the moving subject in focus when on a gimbal an using the liveview mode, the atticulating screen makes that a bit easier because you can look "down" on it when it is tilted 45 degrees , do not really know how to explain that in another way...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, sorry about the wrong "expression"

No apology required - I actually posted the rifle / machine gun analogy before I saw your use of it. I am something of a dinosaur - I find live view ineffective (for me) and use the viewfinder 99% of the time even on tripod with gimbal. When I have to lie on the ground for a shot, I just do it. I had motor drives in film days, but never much liked them because most often what I got was "almost" the moment I wanted - the same applies to the much more effective burst digital shooting. I shoot single - if I capture the moment it is worth the ones I miss. Unless we are professionals, we get to play the game the way we choose and set out own handicaps!

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gary, with respect to the low end Nikons, I think it might depend on what features you need or can do without. The very latest D5600 and D3400 seem to have dropped a couple of small but useful features in favor of connectivity. On the D3200, and maybe others of its ilk, there is no true time exposure, except when you use a remote. The D5600 has no IR sensors any more, and the D3400, I think, has only one in front, where the older ones had front and rear, which I used often enough to miss them. I'd look at the D5500 if it's still available, or at a D3300 if you basically want to up the ISO performance of a D3200.

 

If I were looking now for a replacement for the D7100 I'd likely get a D7200, just for the slightly better high ISO performance.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally, I bought a D7200 in 2015 and as soon as the D500 was available a year later, I bought one when supply was still tight. For me, the better AF and higher frame rate makes the D500 an easy choice for wildlife photography, and I am glad to use the more-robust XQD memory cards. The touch screen is definitely a plus but not absolutely critical.

 

However, for Sandy, the situation seems to be completely the opposite. The D7200 is a smaller and less expensive body. Its controls are almost identical to those on the D750 to a point that they are pretty much the FX and DX versions of the same design (but the D7200 does not have an articulated LCD). And SD cards are common among his existing Df and D750 (although the D500 also has one SD slot).

 

Both the D7200 and D500 can meter with AI/AI-S lenses.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shun, I agree with you 100%. I like the D7200 for the same reasons you do, particularly given Sandy's question. However, if he wants more than just a DX version of his D750, then I think the D500 would be his best bet. It will give him DX sensor characteristics along with the advantages you described above. I guess it comes down to what Sandy wants to accomplish, and whether or not the added abilities of the D500 are worth the extra money.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess it comes down to what Sandy wants to accomplish, and whether or not the added abilities of the D500 are worth the extra money.

D7200 New just under $1000 - Refurb $750, New D 500 $1895, Point was to get to a Pro / Enthusiast DX that was less expensive. Replacing my DF would be expensive, but not much more than the D500. As to the features differences, Don't need the rapid fire, touch screen, additional kind of memory card (well supplied with SD), almost never use articulated screen, etc. The extra iso and AF would be nice, but you don't miss it till you've had it. Similarity to the D 750 a big plus. Worst case, I should be able to get most of the dollars back of I find I don't like / don't use the 7200. Watching a couple on line, will probably pull the trigger this week. Thanks again for all the advice!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No apology required - I actually posted the rifle / machine gun analogy before I saw your use of it. I am something of a dinosaur - I find live view ineffective (for me) and use the viewfinder 99% of the time even on tripod with gimbal. When I have to lie on the ground for a shot, I just do it. I had motor drives in film days, but never much liked them because most often what I got was "almost" the moment I wanted - the same applies to the much more effective burst digital shooting. I shoot single - if I capture the moment it is worth the ones I miss. Unless we are professionals, we get to play the game the way we choose and set out own handicaps!

 

I can relate to you.

I was shooting tennis, and was frustrated that I was missing shots at 6 FPS. The shots I wanted were between the shots the camera got. Your "almost" the moment.

Switch to single shot, and I ended up with more keepers. Timing was working.

 

But move from fall to winter sport season, and soccer, and my finger timing is NOT working well. I am getting some shots well AFTER the ball has left the player foot. Clearly my timing is way off. I don't know if it is the colder ambient temp or what.

 

I shoot sports with my D7200 set for CH (6fps), yet the vast majority of my shots are single fired.

But very weirdly, when I want to fire off a single frame, like of the scoreboard, I usually end up firing 2 shots. It is like my brain is getting in the way.

 

One thing that I did learn, is that sometimes I get a good shot from a burst sequence. But it wasn't the shot I was originally after.

Example, I found that in both tennis and soccer, the shot just before the racket hitting the ball or the foot hitting the soccer ball, is a more powerful looking shot, than the shot of the contact with the ball. Learned something new.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can relate to you.

One thing often overlooked is knowledge of the sport. That knowledge allows the photographer to anticipate what is about to happen. I played soccer and football, various Martial Arts, and now have shot quite a few rodeos -- I'd be hopeless at first at new sports - Tennis, I wouldn't even know where to start. I suppose a genius photographer could puzzle things out quickly -- but even there would improve with exposure (pardon the pun!).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sandy, I shoot with a d500, d 810 and a d800e. I use my d 500 almost exclusively for nature and wildlife and about 50% of that is birds. For my needs, the d 500,s features make it a far superior choice than the d7200, which I tried out when it was first introduced. The features that make it so are it’s much larger buffer size, fast read and write XQD cards, higher frames per second and a far superior af system. I focus with back button focusing, or af-on button, and the d 500 has one but the d7200 does not. And the joy stick feature is an unbelievably attractive and useful feature for action shots. The d500 has it.

 

But if you do not need these, you may not want to pay for them. My advice is to borrow or rent both of them and put them through their paces shooting the same stuff with the same lenses and then make your decision.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since Sandy already has a D750, other than being DX, the D7200 is probably 90%, 95% the same camera but with a fixed LCD on the back side. He should have a good idea how the D7200 is like.

 

If one wants "the best" Nikon DX DSLR money can buy in January 2018, definitely opt for the D500, but January is probably the wrong time to get the D500 new in the US, as those $300 off and free grip promotions are gone for now.

 

Since the OP is not after "the best" DX body and actually prefers something less expensive and smaller, the D7200 seems to be a great fit. If one buys it used or refurb but wants "the best" shortly after, it is probably cheaper to sell it and take a small loss than renting, which is not exactly inexpensive.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...