1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

D7500?

Discussion in 'Nikon Chat' started by Craig20264, Apr 10, 2017.

  1. Andrew Flannigan

    Andrew Flannigan Well-Known Member

    I'd reckon that if you can't get the pictures you want using a D5300 you won't improve on them by spending more money. You call it an entry level camera but that's just marketing hype. By all means spend your money on a different camera but be aware that it won't improve your photography though it might renew your interest in the process of taking pictures.
     
    ChrisNewman and BinnyD7200 like this.
  2. BinnyD7200

    BinnyD7200 Member

    I'm happy with my photography, I like my pics. They aren't award winning obviously but I like them and I enjoy using the d5300, I just feel I want to upgrade, kind of like when you get tired of your car after 10 years haha. I thought about going full frame but I just don't know as I'd have to change all my lenses and things. But the 7000 series has more quick change buttons rather than having to scroll through the menu, to change some settings, it can be used remotely with my flash gun, battery life is longer, higher ISO obviously doesn't mean sharper images in low light but it could be that it better than the 5300, more af points. To me it seems like a no brainer, I just wandered what people who know more about this stuff thought. And I can get £300-£400 on eBay for my camera and I've found a new D7200 for £570 online so it's not a mega expensive upgrade, I'm seeing it as I'm getting a better camera, that's also more user friendly for £200-£300. Thanks for all and any help, as I'm sure you know but photography is a brain **** when starting out
     
  3. John King

    John King Well-Known Member

    The two digital cameras I use are quite old in the digital world but still very capable. (See 4 posts above yours) I always use the RAW setting which means the camera does not do any internal processing but leaves that up to you to do. That way you can recover far more information from shadows or highlights than you can from a Jpg image. You do need suitable software to do this quickly and easily. If your current camera was new, almost certainly Nikon would almost certainly have included some basic disc to let you do this - that is of course if your camera does have a RAW feature. (Nikon's name for RAW is NEF) I am not familiar with the D5300 so cannot help further.

    These are my thoughts but it is up to you to make up your mind
    .
     
  4. El_Sid

    El_Sid Well-Known Member

    Advantages of the D7xxx series will be things like faster and possibly more accurate AF (especially in follow focus use), better build quality (though if the D5300 is like my D5000 it's hardly flimsy), twin control dials (makes using manual mode easier IMO), in-body AF drive so not limited to AF-S/AF-I lenses (means you can use older AF lenses that lack their own motor). Most D7xxx cameras can also meter with manual focus Ai/AiS leses if that takes your fancy - though there seems to be some suggestion that the D7500 lacks this feature.

    I guess sometimes you just have to buy the camera want even if you don't actually need it...;)
     
    Andrew Flannigan likes this.
  5. Learning

    Learning Ethelred the Ill-Named

    The D7xxx has both front and rear control wheels which I like. The follow focus or as Nikon call it 3D-tracking is clever but not all that reliable (except in the D500 and presumably D5). Group AF works very well and has done so for years. The mega pixel race was stupid. There is a sweet spot between excessive pixels giving poor dynamic range and not enough pixels reducing sharpness. The D500 and D7500 with 20Mp is probably at that sweet spot for DX. The 24Mp is not far over the top and I had no complaint of it in my old (now traded in) D7100. The buffer in the D7100 was inadequate; fixed in D7200 which I never owned.
    I liked the interface of the D300 and waited for the D400 for years. I lost patience and bought a D7100, which I mollycoddled with the intention of trading in. When the D500 appeared out of the blue I bought one. Shortly after that the D300 fnally gave up after years of abuse. I traded the D7100 in and bought a second D500.I have also unearthed a D200 to use for those situations that destroyed the D300. As I have got older I don't climb or cave and have even become a fair weather hill walker; as a consequence that D200 will get little use.
    Oh yes, no doubt about that.
     
  6. ChrisNewman

    ChrisNewman Well-Known Member

    True in general, I think, but according to DxOMark, the D7200’s highest dynamic range (at low ISO, of course) is better than that of the D500 (and so presumably also the D7500). I think the choice is between a sensor optimized for best performance (both detail and dynamic range) at low ISOs, and one aimed more at fast shutter speeds and low light applications.

    Chris
     
  7. Learning

    Learning Ethelred the Ill-Named

    If we need DxOMark to inform us of some advantage of one camera over another then its time to give up photography as hobby.
     
    Andrew Flannigan likes this.
  8. John King

    John King Well-Known Member

    I for one will not bow to the advertising slogans promising better pictures if you buy their latest offering. Technically they will be advanced but has a buyer actually exceeded the capabilities of their current equipment? My two cameras (Digital) more than do what I ask of them as well as my prefered film cameras. Probably the only time I will replace either will be when their either pack up and cannot be replaced, or I actually damage or God forbid loose them. I have spent too much money on equipment and not seen the benefit of what it may be capable to continue filling the pockets of those who boast that their latest equipment will make me a better photographer.
     
  9. ChrisNewman

    ChrisNewman Well-Known Member

    When I chose my film cameras, I had little support except for the manufacturer’s brochure or leaflet, a brief hands-on in the shop, and the salesman’s recommendations. For choosing between today’s far more complicated digital cameras, I greatly value being able to read, on the internet, objective laboratory tests such as those from DxOMark, and reviews and opinions by testers and long-term users.

    Chris
     
  10. Learning

    Learning Ethelred the Ill-Named

    Indeed Chris we take all information into account and DxOMark is regarded as reliable. As reliable as DxO are, they are only measuring that which can be measured. There are also immeasurables. I used Nikon F90, F100, D200 and D300 before getting into the modern age. I am biased towards a particular type of interface. I would not have bought into D500 based on DxO alone. There was nothing in DxO to put me off and I like the interface; I was a duck taking to water. Technically the D7100 was OK but it was just not 'right' for me. The D7200 fixed the measurables (buffer in particular) but the interface was still not right. Liking the interface however is not the only issue.

    When it comes to choosing between D7200, D7500 and D500 then the biggest mistake is to buy the D500 because it is the most expensive and hence the 'best'. It is only the 'best' if one is shooting difficult erratically fast moving targets. Choosing between the D7200 and D7500 is more tricky. Potential uses need to consider what is gained and lost in each model.
    When someone writes about using a D500 for portraiture I have to wonder how much research they did before buying (There is a fairly current thread on that subject at the present time).

    Also something Nikon should worry about is whether photographers not requiring the fastest good enough AF but requiring the most accurate AF for not quite such agile subjects might be drawn to camera X. X as in Fuji. That might be a naughty thing to say in the Nikon room but who can deny that it is true?
     
  11. ChrisNewman

    ChrisNewman Well-Known Member

    I agree wholeheartedly with that view, with the caveat that I have little interest in portraiture, and wouldn’t comment on the suitability of cameras for that.

    Having begun my DSLR (and autofocus) experience with a D90, I expect I’d be content with the D7200’s interface, although I’d miss some of the additional controls from my D800. But your experience mirrors mine when looking for a pocketable compact. Statistically the Sony RX100 MkIII offered the best balance between pocketability and photographic performance, but some reviews had warned of its grip-free shape and small, closely-spaced buttons. A couple of minutes hands-on in the shop confirmed that it would be an ergonomic disaster for me. Having given the RX100 the thumbs down, I ignored the tactile delight of the Fujifilm X30’s manual zoom in favour of the 3× larger sensor area of the Panasonic LX100.

    I guess a sensor-based phase detection autofocus system, such as Canon and some mirrorless systems use, could make the already accurate live view focussing faster and more reliable, although Panasonic seem to get excellent results just by clever analysis of contrast AF data. But given the problems of aligning DSLR phase AF sensors precisely to produce accurate focus on a different light path to the image sensor, I suspect that mirrorless EVF viewfinders have an inherent advantage for focus accuracy through a viewfinder, although I still prefer an OVF for hand-held use. I get the impression that Sony’s full-frame mirrorless cameras are also starting to give Canon and Nikon very serious competition. I’d be very tempted by the A7RII if I made more use of a tripod.


    Chris
     
  12. Learning

    Learning Ethelred the Ill-Named

    Chris, you don't need a tripod to to use aA7Rll effectively, and you know it.

    I use D500 for what I bought D500 for, and more. I also use a D800 for subjects where that is a better choice than D500 and I know in advance what I am expected to shoot. Using the D800 is something I now do for some tasks that I am expected to perform. I bought the thing when all hope of a D300 s successor had died. Buying it was a mistake.

    The D500 is a wonderful lightweight D5 for doing action photography as an amateur.

    Purely for set piece photography Nikon's best offering is the D8xx series. Sony and Fugi already provide cameras better for that sort of stuff than any Nikon.
    Of course while I am using D500 for most planned of what I do, I am not going off to buy into Serious Sony or Fuji kit.

    I don't have a camera phone. My snap camera is a Sony RX100 Mlll. You are correct in stating that it is an ergonomic disaster. I have set up mine in a point and shoot mode. I use it like most people use the camera in a cameraphone. The results are very satisfactory. I wouldn't say that about any phone that has been produced so far, or indeed any other truly pocketable camera. Sony could have provided the stick on front grip as standard; they could have increased the depth of the thumb grip by half a milllemetre; neither would have increased the overall depth of the camera. The menu system is hardly logical. As much as I hate it, I cannot praise it enough for what it can do. Only later and more expensive cameras in the same series come any where near it in that segment of the market/.
     
  13. ChrisNewman

    ChrisNewman Well-Known Member

    Of course I realize I could use an A7RII hand-held with its EVF. I use my LX100 almost exclusively that way, and that of the A7RII is said to be far better. But I’ve never experienced an EVF that I would prefer to the OVF of my D800, and I think that would hold for the A7RII, particularly when trying to set the best angle for a polarizer. But when I use my D800 on a tripod, I usually use live view for more precise composition and focussing (often with a polarizer I’ll rotate it to select the best angle first, whilst hand-holding and using the viewfinder). Firstly it’s a nuisance having to switch the camera between viewfinder and live view (and turn the artificial horizon back on when I revert to the viewfinder). Secondly, I need glasses on to see the LCD clearly, but they get in the way when I want to use the viewfinder. Thirdly, trying to see the LCD in bright light can be difficult. Last month I was photographing some milkmaid flowers, the strong sun was behind and to my left, and even when I shaded the LCD with my hand, I struggled to see it. When I got home, I found that a few of my shots hadn’t focussed properly, but I couldn’t see that whilst the camera was in position on its tripod. If I had an A7RII (or another mirrorless, EVF camera), I don’t think there would be any reason to switch from the viewfinder to the LCD, provided I could get my eye to the viewfinder whilst it was on a tripod, and I’d have a view that wasn’t obscured by extraneous light.

    Chris
     
  14. PeteRob

    PeteRob Well-Known Member

    Clearly time to bring back the black cloth!

    I can't see anything of worth on an LCD when outdoors even if it is moderately bright. I have no idea how people manage without covering themselves up.
     
  15. Craig20264

    Craig20264 Well-Known Member

    Me neither. Even more so if I've got the wrong glasses on! It's a bit like the film days for me. I have to wait until I get home to see the results. (I can just about see the histogram which gives me some clues)
     

Share This Page