D7500 backward step ?:

WestEndFoto

I would agree with this. The D500 will just iterate as it is. The D7500 is the new D5600. Well.....better than that, but the new second tier DX camera.

I wonder what they will do with the D3xxx and D5xxx series? Mirrorless perhaps?

Capt_Spaulding

WEF, I don't see myself as having a dog in the mirrorless or the D7500 fight, but that's about as plausible a projection as I've seen, particularly wrt the roles of the D3xxx and D5xxx. Time will tell, but it'll be interesting to watch.

WestEndFoto

Capt_Spaulding said:

WEF, I don't see myself as having a dog in the mirrorless or the D7500 fight, but that's about as plausible a projection as I've seen, particularly wrt the roles of the D3xxx and D5xxx. Time will tell, but it'll be interesting to watch.

Yes, the Great Game is in play.

Capt_Spaulding

[insert popcorn munching emoji]

NSXTypeR

Sports said:

NSXTypeR said:

Thom Hogan had predicted that the D500 could continue to iterate upwards and end up being a D500 in D5 body

This is no longer possible. The D850 is FX, high-MP, AND a pretty fast camera, so a DX that gets close to the D850 price has no chance.
If the D800 series had stayed a "slow-ish" camera, then perhaps ....

Who knows, maybe I'm overly optimistic.

In any case, I'm not even going to consider buying a camera until my D7000 dies. So I'm perfectly fine sitting and waiting a while.

mhedges

Sports said:

NSXTypeR said:

Thom Hogan had predicted that the D500 could continue to iterate upwards and end up being a D500 in D5 body

This is no longer possible. The D850 is FX, high-MP, AND a pretty fast camera, so a DX that gets close to the D850 price has no chance.
If the D800 series had stayed a "slow-ish" camera, then perhaps ....

You are probably right. The only issue would be lenses. That would be another big expense. But since the DX lineup isn’t all that comprehensive there’s a good chance of already owning several FX lenses.

A little OT but I wonder how much expense is really associated with increasing speed. I would think it’s much less than with film since there’s no motors to deal with.

KnockKnock

As DX shooter, I'd be happy to jump to the D7500. Mostly for the flip-screen and touch UI. A couple things irk me, but I could get over them: rear IR port gone and the 2nd SD card. I've never had a card/slot fail though, so I can't call that a realistic issue, and I get the feeling there are other remote/app triggers instead of the handy ML-L3.

With mirrorless on the horizon though, I'm planning to sit tight on my D7100 until the dust settles. D7500 may become a bargain, or the new tech may pull me in. Biggest gripe of my current setup is the need for AF-fine-tune.

Photobug

See the main board for a great price on the refurnished D7500.

NSXTypeR

I got to try a D7500 today at Best Buy for a short period of time. It felt very familiar to me other than the fact that the ISO button moved to the top. Yes, the top LCD is smaller, but overall I liked the flippy screen the most. AF was quite snappy in the semi-poor indoor lighting conditions. I also actually noticed a slight decrease in weight because it was paired with a 18-140, similar in size/weight to my 18-135. I think you'd be remiss if you were a DX shooter and looked over the D7500 simply just because it has 1 card slot and no AI-S support.

The only thing that'd really put me off is the price, but it's a fairly new camera so I can't ding it for that. The D7000 or so ends up being closer to $1000 as it begins to age.

BabaGanoush

Interesting blog post by Thom Hogan regarding Nikon's desultory marketing of the D7500:

"Nikon has been moving further and further away from their customers over the years—and by customers, I mean both dealers and photographers. Emails like the one I reproduce above are the result. Note that this particular customer has feelings. He's not so much faulting Nikon for something as he is making the point that he's not feeling good about his purchase [of the D7500]. Half of his issues got resolved eventually; the other half may end up getting resolved in a firmware fix (I'm not holding my breath).

"That's not his point. His point is that he's not feeling good about his purchase. And remember, this is a very good camera. One I like a lot and I think is far better than Nikon's marketing manages to convey. Gee, what happens when Nikon makes a more mediocre product? ;~)"

The question his post raises in my mind is this: Would you buy an automobile from a company that ignores you and otherwise treats you like dirt? If not, why would you buy an expensive camera from a company that treats you this way?

WestEndFoto

KnockKnock said:

As DX shooter, I'd be happy to jump to the D7500. Mostly for the flip-screen and touch UI. A couple things irk me, but I could get over them: rear IR port gone and the 2nd SD card. I've never had a card/slot fail though, so I can't call that a realistic issue, and I get the feeling there are other remote/app triggers instead of the handy ML-L3.

With mirrorless on the horizon though, I'm planning to sit tight on my D7100 until the dust settles. D7500 may become a bargain, or the new tech may pull me in. Biggest gripe of my current setup is the need for AF-fine-tune.

I had a card slot fail. A photographer shooting my wedding on a Canon 5D Mark 2, before they had two slots. I tell anybody dealing with a photographer that if they don't have two slots in their camera, one used as backup, then stay away from the amateur.

Consider this, I am spending $35,000 to go to Paris, Malta, Sicily, Santorini, Crete and London this fall. The primary objective is to get good photos. I am not cheaping out on card slots. Now I realize that many will have a cheaper vacation, but consider how much you value your photos and how much it really costs to get them.

WestEndFoto

BabaGanoush said:

Interesting blog post by Thom Hogan regarding Nikon's desultory marketing of the D7500:

"Nikon has been moving further and further away from their customers over the years—and by customers, I mean both dealers and photographers. Emails like the one I reproduce above are the result. Note that this particular customer has feelings. He's not so much faulting Nikon for something as he is making the point that he's not feeling good about his purchase [of the D7500]. Half of his issues got resolved eventually; the other half may end up getting resolved in a firmware fix (I'm not holding my breath).

"That's not his point. His point is that he's not feeling good about his purchase. And remember, this is a very good camera. One I like a lot and I think is far better than Nikon's marketing manages to convey. Gee, what happens when Nikon makes a more mediocre product? ;~)"

The question his post raises in my mind is this: Would you buy an automobile from a company that ignores you and otherwise treats you like dirt? If not, why would you buy an expensive camera from a company that treats you this way?

Yes, Thom's article is depressing reading. Still waiting to see if Nikon screws up my f-mount investment. Hopefully I don't have to go to Canon.

Pistnbroke

Quote....
Would you buy an automobile from a company that ignores you and otherwise treats you like dirt?

Yes its called FORD.....less than 2500 miles and wont go backwards below -4 eg C..
"You did not buy it from us its leased so you don't own it ..go away..."
Ford Kuga with PowerShite transmission.....

WestEndFoto

Pistnbroke said:

Quote....
Would you buy an automobile from a company that ignores you and otherwise treats you like dirt?

Yes its called FORD.....less than 2500 miles and wont go backwards below -4 eg C..
"You did not buy it from us its leased so you don't own it ..go away..."
Ford Kuga with PowerShite transmission.....

Yup, I am a Toyota customer.

niemeyjt

I read Thom's article. Very interesting but one point I would have added - shall we call it "spec marketing".
Imagine a new buyer doing a side-by-side spec comparison with a 7200:
- one SD slot less
- 3MP less
- no grip
- $350 extra
Issues like EXpeed 4 vs 5, 4K vs 1K and 2fps extra will be lost at first sight. Potential buyers may not give it a second sight and just go for 7200.
Perhaps with flippy screen, 1 slot, no grip they got the numbering wrong - 5700 might have been better?

HankB

My hunch is that the actual manufacturing cost savings from these downgrades (MP reduction is a different issue from these other “downgrades”) were negligible and therefore cost savings had negligible weight in the actual product design decisions.

The Nikon product design marketing geniuses were probably motivated primarily to keep more daylight between the D7500 and the pro-level D500. Conversely, the D7200 was top dog in the DX line back when it came out.

Inflating the perceived superiority the “top of the line” by merely sabotaging the lower models is standard marketing practice. For decades, the auto giants deliberately skimped on sound insulation in the lower models to make them sound a bit "tinny", thus perceived as lower quality from the upper models built with the same mechanical parts on the same assembly lines.

mhedges

niemeyjt said:

I read Thom's article. Very interesting but one point I would have added - shall we call it "spec marketing".
Imagine a new buyer doing a side-by-side spec comparison with a 7200:
- one SD slot less
- 3MP less
- no grip
- $350 extra
Issues like EXpeed 4 vs 5, 4K vs 1K and 2fps extra will be lost at first sight. Potential buyers may not give it a second sight and just go for 7200.
Perhaps with flippy screen, 1 slot, no grip they got the numbering wrong - 5700 might have been better?

Also no metering on AI lenses, right?

I agree that they took too much away from the D7500 to be able to realistically sell it as an upgrade over the 7200. Even if it is technically the better camera.

As far as the flippy screen - To me the screens on the 5500/5600 are far more useful, because they flip out and around. I can't see how the screen on the 7500 is really useful as anything other than a waist level finder. But full disclosure I haven't used it so maybe in hand it's better that I imagine.

I wonder why they didn't put the 5500/5600 style screen on it? The only guess I have is durability and/or weathersealing. I'm sure the screen on the 7500 is much sturdier since it has a more limited range of movement.

spraynpray

It should have been the AF and processor of the D7500 in a D7200 and a price hike. That would have given them a brilliant DX line up. Speed, buffer, build quality and buffer depth would be the pro upgrade. I would have bought one for sure.

Just my 2c.

mhedges

I think if they did that there wouldn’t be enough of a separation to justify having the D500 in the product line. The D500 really put them in a tough spot.

HankB

When I set up my colony on Mars, product design will be by engineers and specialists in the respective field (photographers for photo equipment, etc) with accountant input to maintain cost/benefit discipline. No marketeers!!!

Photobug

spraynpray said:

It should have been the AF and processor of the D7500 in a D7200 and a price hike. That would have given them a brilliant DX line up. Speed, buffer, build quality and buffer depth would be the pro upgrade. I would have bought one for sure.

Just my 2c.

+1 spraynpray

WestEndFoto

HankB said:

When I set up my colony on Mars, product design will be by engineers and specialists in the respective field (photographers for photo equipment, etc) with accountant input to maintain cost/benefit discipline. No marketeers!!!

Problem is, without the marketers, you won't sell many tickets or raise much money.

PS:
Full disclosure: I am a CPA.

Pistnbroke

Don't forget the D500 has the horrible pro controls so you could put U1 U2 as another plus for the D7200

spraynpray

True, true.

WestEndFoto

It is the opposite for me as it wastes dial space. If I only shoot raw and typically aperture priority, is there any benefit of the U1 and U2?