D7200 Pre release and early adopters discusion

PB_PM

The first thing I do with any new camera is switch out of Matrix metering. Centre weighted or spot all the way.

If you find the camera is over exposing all the time, that's what exposure compensation is for.

manhattanboy

The first thing I do with any new camera is switch out of Matrix metering. Centre weighted or spot all the way.

If you find the camera is over exposing all the time, that's what exposure compensation is for.

I shot the 7100 on spot all the time and probably will end up doing the same for the 810. But technically it is supposed to have a much more advanced metering system.
Frustratingly the blow outs are not all the time or I could dial down exposure. I might migrate back to spot metering but it's a tiny frustrating with the group AF as you don't quite know where the spot is until it's over. Really just curious what metering folks use with group AF.
Thanks for the suggestions though. Appreciated.

sevencrossing

The first thing I do with any new camera is switch out of Matrix metering. Centre weighted or spot all the way.

I can only suggest you look at D800
I never use any else
I have to admit I nearly always change exposure , highlights and shadows in post
in tricky lighting, I use bracketing to be safe, but always end up using the one in the middle

Capt_Spaulding

@Captain have fun. Like Pitchblack said for the majority of folks FX is the best move and the 610 is a simple camera to operate. I probably would have ponied up for the 750 or 810 to prevent gear acquisition syndrome from hitting you in a few months time LOL.

Thanks, I'll try. I gave considerable thought to doing just as you suggested, but concluded that slope was VERY slippery. I got on pretty well with my 5100 for three years. If the 610 carries me that far, I can upgrade to a D920 and have a decent back up. That's the idea anyway. We'll see how it plays out. If it doesn't, I already have some great recipes for crow.

PB_PM

The first thing I do with any new camera is switch out of Matrix metering. Centre weighted or spot all the way.

I can only suggest you look at D800
I never use any else
I have to admit I nearly always change exposure , highlights and shadows in post
in tricky lighting, I use bracketing to be safe, but always end up using the one in the middle

I've owned the D800 for over two years, I still don''t use matrix metering most of the time. I don't often shoot subjects where bracketing is practical, so that is not always a helpful way to overcome problems.

manhattanboy

Now that the 7200 manual is out, it is confirmed that the 7200 does not have group area AF.
All I can say is why is Nikon toying with its endusers? They must know that people who would buy the 7200 versus the 7100 sitting on shelves right now knows about advanced features like group area AF and their main selling point increased buffer depth.
7200 manual is here is anyone wants it:
http://download3.nikonimglib.com/archive1/BLXYI00h4qaR01fiDuZ53t0rd756/D7200UM_NT(En)02.pdf

moreorless

With regards to the top plate LCD for me Nikon have gone in the right direction. For the majority of shooters having a proper exposure scale will IMHO trump other functions as will having larger clearer displays for basic outputs. AF mode is a bit of a loss but really I would argue the kind of shooter who changes that often will likely have the camera to his eye more where as the kind of shooter who wants exposure details is more likely to depend on the LCD more.

Photobug

Besides there is always the "i" button to see some of the data.

funtagraph

Because @PitchBlack did mention D750, I checked the price diff. 45% more money is 100% more sensor area, he considered it as the better sensor. I see a tilt display, more AF options, in DX mode equally fast (?) and a huge buffer as well. Of course, when I got my first Nikon, the D7000 was reasonably less money than a D700. But these days the differences became small. I don't see any real advantage to go DX with a D7x00. A D5500? Okay, there's a big gap to FX. But those D7x00 models?

DPreview put some nice samples on their site, made with a Sigma 18-35 Art Worked pretty well, @Spraynpray. Just saying

manhattanboy

The only advantages are cost and crop factor. If you are shooting wide then fx all the way, if you are shooting tele on the other hand the choice is more interesting

sevencrossing

The only advantages are cost and crop factor.

I have ask before, could some post some comparisons, showing just how big the advantage crop factor ( reach) is ?
including some at higher ISO values

donaldejose

I don't have either of these pieces of kit but I think using a D7200 with the new 300mm f4 PF lens could be quite an advantage for birders because it gives them a 450 mm combo for much less cost and at much less weight. Yes, you don't have f2.8 but that is only one stop and with sensors capable of better high ISO images you can probably just shoot at a higher ISO.

Perhaps someone who has a D7200 and a 300mm f4 PF lens could comment and post some images.

sevencrossing

... for much less cost and at much less weight.

wight and cost are an undisputed advantage of dx
but a few people like the idea a more expensive and heavier Nikon DX

donaldejose

"a few people like the idea a more expensive and heavier Nikon DX " Yes, but remember the D300/D300s did sell well for Nikon so it may be more than "a few people" who want that robustness. I mentioned the advantage of a D7200 with a 300mm F4 PF lens because this is the D7200 thread. Those who want a more robust DX body may find the same advantage in a D400/D500 with a 300mm F4 PF lens.

funtagraph

"Did sell well" says a lot - how many other options to choose had the buyers at it's time? Sometimes I read the phrase "build like a tank" and I think that's misleading. After all, with those HR sensors tolerances get smaller and the body is a high precision instrument. Even if there's no visible scratch, a lot of parts are not "build like a tank". Most of them have to do with the mirror concept. I think it's fair to say that instead of building another DSLR like a plastic tank, they should take the efforts to make a mirrorless DX or FX which would be much easier to ruggedize. Not all, but some of the latest issues of Nikon bodies were caused by the mirror concept and it's risks.

sevencrossing

-how many other options to choose had the buyers at it's time?.

D80 - not really up to the job
D700 - excellent but at time, a lot more expensive and in short supply
D3 - very expensive

No D7000, D600 or D750
Even the excellent, value for money D90, came later
it should also be remembered a lot of local news papers were converting to digital
and The D300 was a very popular camera . In the UK, that market has vanished, the local full time press photographers, have ether retired or been made redundant

manhattanboy

The only advantages are cost and crop factor.

I have ask before, could some post some comparisons, showing just how big the advantage crop factor ( reach) is ?
including some at higher ISO values

Hope this helps. I would not recommend to anyone to shoot a smaller sensor in low light (high ISO). For that, bigger sensors with less pixels all the way...there is no cheating physics
https://www.flickr.com/photos/mbcaton514/7098829561/
https://www.flickr.com/photos/channel37/5151236323/

http://www.curtiswiklund.com/blog/2011/07/crop-sensor-vs-full-frame/
https://hangingpixels.wordpress.com/2009/10/15/crop-factor-50mm-vs-full-frame-85mm-bokeh-test/
http://imgarcade.com/1/28mm-lens-crop-sensor/

DaveyJ

Having looked at this video shoot out I cannot say that this makes that great a case for FX compared to DX. I have OWNED cameras that were HUGE format. Wish I could have the money back I spent on large format and most I spent on medium format. It was at least $150,000. I have used FX digital in the field. I distinctly prefer DX. Also note that the "low light" depicted in this comparison video is actually fairly bright but mostly showing a sunlit area and a fence in shadow. I looked at this comparison with the fairly large screen I am using here. If this is the best example you have.......it is very weak! Every time I see a D810 used to illustrate why we need FX, say a Cheeta chasing a Gazelle I would just pick a D7100 or a D7200 and the right lens to shoot the same scene. Actually the biggest thing is to be at the right place at the right time.....and then use good enough gear. All this business on having some SPECIFIC rig for the job leaves me cold. When we are using a Cat 315 Excavator we aren't thinking a bigger machine could have done the job better! It is a poor workman who blames his tools. Not that a D810 wouldn't be welcome here.

manhattanboy

Actually the biggest thing is to be at the right place at the right time.....and then use good enough gear.

This is so true.

I am not sure if you are responding to me or not. Someone wanted side by side examples of the crop factor advantage that DX gives. Personally I like DX quite a bit, and I still feel like the 7100 meters much more consistently then the 810. I have this issue where the 810 will ramp up exposures throughout a CHigh spray for some reason. For example, ISO 64, ISO 100, ISO 200, etc. WTF is going on?! The 7100 is a rock and once it picks an exposure it barely moves. I think I am going to have to start shooting the 810 in total manual, but just sucks that you can't use autoISO like you can in the 7100.

JonMcGuffin

WTF is going on?! The 7100 is a rock and once it picks an exposure it barely moves. I think I am going to have to start shooting the 810 in total manual, but just sucks that you can't use autoISO like you can in the 7100.

Can you elaborate why you can't use auto-iso on the D810 as you can on the D7100? Doesn't the D810 have even better AutoISO controls?

manhattanboy

@Jon not sure what is going on. The iso is dictated by the metering but there should be little reason why in a burst sequence the exposure is deviating by up to 2+ stops for the exact same scene. I updated the 810 firmware today and reset all of the camera settings. Have to go out and shoot some more now to see if it is corrected. Never had this problem with the 7100 which in a high fps burst keeps exposure pretty constant. I like to shoot manual with auto ISO. not the end of the world if I have to manually set it but it is annoying nonetheless. Maybe I mucked up some 810 setting to cause this (fingers crossed that's what it is).

DaveyJ

@ manhattanboy: Thank you for the D810 versus the D7100 link. Our use in our farming business (which is very diversified) makes a lot of use of imagery to sell clients on our work. If I was only going out to take pictures i would often take a bigger camera than if I have work to do, etc. My son and grandsons are better known today for their photos than I am today. A long time ago I was on the national banquet speaker hot list. Today in my 70s I am nearly forgotten.

The biggest point I have in photography is that an individual can take really great pictures of thing that he or she dearly loves. But I also believe that it takes a certain level of camera to achieve results we expect. I have for years been a DIS-believer in point and shoots. I even owned a Leica P&S to see if anybody could make one that was worth the money. But cameras are getting better and better today. I also believe that digital was a great advent to photo enthusiasts as was the computer. I also believe greatly that bigger cameras require more expensive glass, etc. Gone are the days when I felt I could afford $7,000 TO $10,000 lens.

My belief right now is that for our family DX is a good ADDITION to current video rigs. More and more of our work is underwater or aerial. To me those UW or aerial photos are NOT DX country even. For UW or aerial we have come to expect 4K resolution (still and video) from small cameras. It is only a matter of time before technology to allow smaller cameras of even higher quality.

I would right NOW take a D7200 Nikon over any new camera if I required a no holds barred perfect today rig.
Then would come the question of what glass I owned or needed to add. Problem there is that many of the choice lens would be now for me too much money. I think there needs to be more Nikon lens with DX reach greater than 300mm. EVEN if it requires f stops higher than f4. I used to use f 8 lens on view cameras a lot and do not fear their use in 35mm digital one single bit.

sevencrossing

I think there needs to be more Nikon lens with DX reach greater than 300mm. EVEN if it requires f stops higher than f4.

why not use a TC on the AF-S NIKKOR 300mm f/4E PF ED VR

manhattanboy

There is a new comparison for the Studio out on DP Review here:
DP Studio link here

In my view there is the slightest of resolution improvements from the 7100 to the 7200 but it looks like this is because the sensor is marginally larger. ISO performance in RAW looks unchanged, and frankly (except for the corners!!) the Samsung NX1 looks like it outresolves both Nikons with cleaner high ISO images. The low resolution of the 7Dm2 shows its limitations, but the DR was not as bad as everyone is making it out to be. Yes the 7Dm2 can't compete with the 810, but it is within a stop or so of the DX Nikons. Overall, the fact that the graying D7100 does so well against newer cameras is pretty impressive. I guess the 7100 is not destined for the graveyard anytime soon.

JonMcGuffin

@Manhattanboy

Thanks for the link. All that does is just confirm all along what has really been the case for quite some time now and that is that FF sensors give you a one stop advantage over their crop counterparts and yes, that's about it.

Comparing all these bodies if dpreview hadn't listed the name of the camera body above the image you would never know which is which, they're all virtually the same no matter how discerning you might think you are. From a practical approach there is virtually no differences between NX1, D7100, D7200, 7DM2.

I'm ashamed to admit I really need a reality check and quit spending so much thought and resources on these minute differences and just start working on becoming a better photographer and post processor. THESE are the elements that separate, not which camera you use.