Nikon D7200 Review- Photography Roundtable

http://photographyroun​dtable.com/3690/nikon-d7200-review/

So I recently was asked to be a contributor to the Photography Roundtable podcast/blog. David has had some great guests on the podcast lately (ryan dyar, ian plant, kurt budliger, my buddy adam woodworth- some of my favorite photographers), and I'm excited to be involved.

I've been interested in picking up a crop body as my main wildlife camera, so after my D750 got hit by a wave and needed to be repaired, I rented a D7200 for a week to hold me over and check out. I included some raw files to download to play around with in the review, for anybody who might be interested in picking one up as well.

I'd really appreciate some of you checking out the review, and actually review my review hah. It's been since college (4-5 years) since I've done much writing, so any feedback would be greatly appreciated. Anything else in these reviews you'd like to see?

Thanks in advance!

It's a good enough straight to point review. The only thing I don't like about this review (and it's common to almost all crop sensor reviews) is the comparison to full frame cameras and pointing out weaknesses in the camera with fx as an example.

Don't get me wrong, I often compare dx to fx when deciding what I'd like in a camera, but I think a crop sensor review should be done on the merits of the camera in its own format. It would imo be better to be compared to similar specced rivals. There's not much point in saying iso is ok but this higher specced different formats camera is better.

jaomul wrote in post #17583551
It's a good enough straight to point review. The only thing I don't like about this review (and it's common to almost all crop sensor reviews) is the comparison to full frame cameras and pointing out weaknesses in the camera with fx as an example.

Don't get me wrong, I often compare dx to fx when deciding what I'd like in a camera, but I think a crop sensor review should be done on the merits of the camera in its own format. It would imo be better to be compared to similar specced rivals. There's not much point in saying iso is ok but this higher specced different formats camera is better.

I definitely hear you there, and I really appreciate you reading it over. The first few days I had the rental, I couldn't help but keep comparing it to the d750- especially with how it handled noise and the flexibility of the raw files and dynamic range. Over time I grew to appreciate it for what it is, and really didn't want to have the review compare too heavily, but it was hard for me not to.

Again, thanks again for reading through and I'll definitely keep that in mind for the next review.

I understand its hard not to compare one with the other. Still don't overlook first line, it is straight to point good review.

I have a d7200 now on order

jaomul wrote in post #17583777
I understand its hard not to compare one with the other. Still don't overlook first line, it is straight to point good review.

I have a d7200 now on order

Yup, I'm picking one up this week as my primary wildlife body. The extra reach was so nice, sharp files, and just a fun camera overall. Thanks again!

jsecordphoto wrote in post #17583810
Yup, I'm picking one up this week as my primary wildlife body. The extra reach was so nice, sharp files, and just a fun camera overall. Thanks again!

I dare say most of what has been written or tested with the d7200 also applies to the d7100 with exclusion to the buffer.


P.

Pagman wrote in post #17593730
I dare say most of what has been written or tested with the d7200 also applies to the d7100 with exclusion to the buffer.

P.

How about the banding in shadow areas on the 7100 at ISOs above like 800?

Thanks for the review

Nice review, and I actually appreciate the comparison back to your full frame D750.

How would you say the D7200 compared to your D750 for the majority of your wildlife shots? Just as good 80% of the time? More? Less? Any other insight would be appreciated. I've shot the D750 against my D610 and know it is cleaner in the shadows at high ISOs. I would guess it would be at least that much better if not more than the 7200. But, in real world shooting, would the lesser high ISO capabilities of the 7200 be a deal-breaker for your type of shooting?

AZ Pix wrote in post #17600619
Nice review, and I actually appreciate the comparison back to your full frame D750.

How would you say the D7200 compared to your D750 for the majority of your wildlife shots? Just as good 80% of the time? More? Less? Any other insight would be appreciated. I've shot the D750 against my D610 and know it is cleaner in the shadows at high ISOs. I would guess it would be at least that much better if not more than the 7200. But, in real world shooting, would the lesser high ISO capabilities of the 7200 be a deal-breaker for your type of shooting?

Great questions. So I went and bought a d7200 about two weeks ago to use as my primary wildlife body. Unless I know my subject will be pretty close, or it's super low light, I use the d7200. Because I'm using the tamron (which mostly stays at 600mm and f8), I need a fair amount of light anyway so the d7200 does just fine most of the time. After using both cameras for a little while now, it's harder to compare the two because they are just different tools to me. The extra reach I get with the d7200 makes up for the weaknesses I've found, which primarily is how it handles noise especially when trying to boost shadow detail in post. Having that extra reach is really nice for me because I had lots of images from my d750 that I couldn't sell many prints of, because I had to crop significantly. They'd be fine for web, but it sucked having people want larger prints and the biggest I could do was like 8x12

Great insight! I appreciate you taking the time to explain your experiences! And coincidentally, the Tammy lens is just the one I would be adding to the next body. Thanks!

jsecordphoto wrote in post #17594093
How about the banding in shadow areas on the 7100 at ISOs above like 800?

How about the lack of of DR in the lower ISO's on the D7200 compared to the D7100. From what I have seen, the D7100 has superior DR in the 100-2,000 ISO range compared to the D7200.
The D7200 has superior DR in the higher ISO's, lack of banding at ISO's at or above 800 as you alluded to earlier.

If you shoot portraits, landscape, macro...only use the D7100. If you shoot for the most part at the middle to higher ISO's...night sports, birding/wildlife (early morning or evening lighting), then the improved high ISO DR and buffer on the D7200 is the better choice between the two.

By the way, I have never seen any banding from the D7100 at ISO 800, ever...not sure what you are talking about there. I just went back and looked at some medium ISO images from my D7100, and I did not see any banding, especially at ISO 800 or 1600.

JBlake wrote in post #17645050
How about the lack of of DR in the lower ISO's on the D7200 compared to the D7100. From what I have seen, the D7100 has superior DR in the 100-2,000 ISO range compared to the D7200.
The D7200 has superior DR in the higher ISO's, lack of banding at ISO's at or above 800 as you alluded to earlier.

If you shoot portraits, landscape, macro...only use the D7100. If you shoot for the most part at the middle to higher ISO's...night sports, birding/wildlife (early morning or evening lighting), then the improved high ISO DR and buffer on the D7200 is the better choice between the two.

By the way, I have never seen any banding from the D7100 at ISO 800, ever...not sure what you are talking about there. I just went back and looked at some medium ISO images from my D7100, and I did not see any banding, especially at ISO 800 or 1600.

I'd say this is a myth started by one YouTube review. I'll add to this thread in a few weeks. I want to rid my rose tinted glasses for new d7200

I had a d7100, sold and regretted instantly selling it. I can't yet see a difference in raw files, but I haven't taken to many. I'd say jpegs are slightly better on newer camera but won't swear on it.

However, I never saw d7100 banding either

This is an interesting read

http://www.dslrbodies.​com …-d7200-camera-review.html

JBlake wrote in post #17645050
How about the lack of of DR in the lower ISO's on the D7200 compared to the D7100. From what I have seen, the D7100 has superior DR in the 100-2,000 ISO range compared to the D7200.
The D7200 has superior DR in the higher ISO's, lack of banding at ISO's at or above 800 as you alluded to earlier.

If you shoot portraits, landscape, macro...only use the D7100. If you shoot for the most part at the middle to higher ISO's...night sports, birding/wildlife (early morning or evening lighting), then the improved high ISO DR and buffer on the D7200 is the better choice between the two.

By the way, I have never seen any banding from the D7100 at ISO 800, ever...not sure what you are talking about there. I just went back and looked at some medium ISO images from my D7100, and I did not see any banding, especially at ISO 800 or 1600.

I've seen the banding when trying to recover shadow detail as low as ISO800 on the 7100. As far as using this camera for landscapes, I can't say because I only use it for wildlife, and the 750 I use for landscapes. Also can't speak on the jpegs looking better on the 7200 vs the 7100 as I only shoot raw. Like I mentioned in the review, it wasn't meant to be the most technical review ever, just my opinion after using the camera for a bit. I don't have a ton of experience with the 7100, the 7200 is the first crop body I've owned in years, though I have played around with the 7100 I borrowed from a friend for a few days while considering picking up a 2nd body for wildlife.