D7500 backward step ?:

heartyfisher

When the d500 came out I was very happy.. but it seemed clear to me almost immediately ( and I posted on it ) that it was the last hurrah of the Pro DSLR. After a year and the release of the D7500 ( I like @Sports logic "D500 backup") It seems even more clear to me that the next big iteration will be a set of Nikon Mirrorless pro level cameras.

Still regarding the D7500 there is a lot of logic/attraction in the idea of [D7200,D7500,D500] combo for the top of the range 3 prong DX offerings... . Want more pixels/DR/ISO100 get D7200. Want prolevel wedding kits get dual/triple D7500 if you like working with multiple cameras. Get a D500 if you like working with a single fully featured top of the line kit(get a D7500 as backup).

Like many people have noticed.. Nikon seems to be in a holding pattern/"failing"/not innovating etc etc .. Looks to me to be indicating that they are gearing up for a big bang release of Mirrorless say 3-4 bodies and 6-8 lenses !! .... or they could implode .... (Awesome DL ? would also explain in a way why DL got cut.. too much awesomeness- wouldn't you like DL features served with FX/DX sensor? )

retread

Using a D7500 to backup a D500 will not have the same controls. If I were to backup my D500 I would prefer another D500 or at least something with the same controls.

A D7200 in a D500 body would excite me. Not a true D500 backup but could be used without a blink. Just pick it up and start shooting and all dials and buttons function the same.

Can I afford a second D500? No. A D7200 will cost less than a D7500 and if I have to use different controls that may be the way to go.

Will Nikon discontinue the D7200 and if so will there be some real bargains?

Pistnbroke

just for clarity the battery life is not reduced on the D7500..when testing the flash must be fired 50% of the time on a D7500 . The D500 has no flash so the battery lasts longer ..QED
as for the numbering I think they just wan everyting to end with a 5xx D5 D500 D750 D7500 ....so is it D850

NSXTypeR

ggbutcher said:

I get the concern though. When it counts, you don't want to be exposed to a single point of failure, especially with a component with a non-zero probability of failure. I work in aerospace, sometimes wish more folk got that concept.

So, my question to the pros is, would you consider Snapbridge to a phone, tablet, or laptop to be an acceptable alternative to a 2nd SD slot for redundancy? Failure-mode wise, you'd have diversity in both media and the path to it, so there's a compelling redundancy argument. Having not the opportunity to use Snapbridge, I don't know it's particular reliability, but if it works it would seem to be a prudent alternative to a 2nd SD slot.

I understand that point too. But the D7200 and the D500 are both still available. I just wish that they made the D500 XQD only or SD only, it cuts down on the clutter.

Snapbridge if they didn't improve it from what I heard was fairly slow and not too great. I think you're also limited to jpg small too, and it really drains the battery.

retread said:

Will Nikon discontinue the D7200 and if so will there be some real bargains?

Probably not for the next year at least, Nikon tends to keep older models around. The D7000 was still available new when the D7100 came out, and I think the D7200 too.

ggbutcher

NSXTypeR said:

I understand that point too. But the D7200 and the D500 are both still available. I just wish that they made the D500 XQD only or SD only, it cuts down on the clutter.

Snapbridge if they didn't improve it from what I heard was fairly slow and not too great. I think you're also limited to jpg small too, and it really drains the battery.

Ah, hadn't considered battery usage. Feeling a little sheepish, one of the things I still admire about my F2 is that it will take properly exposed pictures with no battery at all. Oh, and jpeg only would kill it for protecting the raw image, which IMHO would be the most important data.

retread said:

Will Nikon discontinue the D7200 and if so will there be some real bargains?

That's how I procured my D7000 body, US$454 on Amazon, right as they announced discontinuance. Hasn't been that cheap since, although I'm not sure where they're still getting them "new"...

manhattanboy

NSXTypeR said:

But the D7200 and the D500 are both still available. I just wish that they made the D500 XQD only or SD only, it cuts down on the clutter.

The D500 is XQD only; the SD card is there as back-up as serves its purpose when the XQD cards are full.

Pistnbroke

@manahtten boy ....you have this wrong ..the XQD andSD card can be set to record a backup ie all pictures on both cards . I just checked the manual (p96) and overflow is only one on the options available. The pair operate just like the dual cards in any other Nikon. If this was not true it would be as bad as having one card.

Capt_Spaulding

@Pistnbroke; What is the benefit of using two different card types, other than reducing expenses? In the grand scheme of things, it seems to me that memory cards are least expensive part of this activity. Other than that, it strikes me as just a PITA.

Personally, the lack of two slots of the same type is a negative in my evaluation calculus. I know there's something I'm missing. Any help?

retread

I have a D500 with two card types and live with it. I would prefer they be the same. I am not sure if the XQD is faster but send the raw to it and a jpeg to the SD card.

manhattanboy

Pistnbroke said:

@manahtten boy ....you have this wrong ..the XQD andSD card can be set to record a backup ie all pictures on both cards . I just checked the manual (p96) and overflow is only one on the options available. The pair operate just like the dual cards in any other Nikon. If this was not true it would be as bad as having one card.

Sorry about that as I was not clear in my explanation.
I shoot only with the XQDs.
But with 10fps shooting RAW the XQDs fill up pretty quickly, and I can go through a quarter terabyte pretty easily. The SD cards are there for when all the XQDs are filled up or alternatively if you need a reminder of what a full buffer feels like
In some ways the SD cards are really nice as I can just steal the SD card from the 810 or other cameras if I really need it.

heartyfisher

"But with 10fps shooting RAW the XQDs fill up pretty quickly, and I can go through a quarter terabyte pretty easily" ??

With my D500, I find my need for space is LESS then when I used my D7200 .. ( more a usage/workflow thing than the actual 24 vs 21 MP thing). I am just curious about your need for space ...

Hiker

New on the forums. I went to Costco and bought a new D7200 kit on Saturday. I'm not waiting for the D7500. My D3300 lacks many things I need it for despite it has served me well in the past. It's now in service for a possible focusing issue. I've been wanting a D7200 now for over a year. I will be selling the kit lenses to help off set the price. Dumping my Sigma 17-70mm (that lens creep is annoying, especially when I'm hiking) and getting the better 17-50mm f2.8.

Jeff

Pistnbroke

Good choice Hiker ..dont froget the focus adjust and if you shoot jpeg or wish to make the screen sharper push the sharpness up to +9 in the menu ( if you dont your jpegs will be junk)

Hiker

Reading through the manual now. Thanks for the advice Pistnbroke! Big learning curve coming from the simple D3300. And I only shoot RAW!!

Jeff

Pistnbroke

Well you still need a nice sharp screen to zoom into ..remember that the U1 U2 remember EVERYTHING in the menus ..best to set what you want in A then save to U1 or U2.
You have 4 preset options P A U1 U2 just at the twist of a dial. any questions just send me a pm or start a new thread.

manhattanboy

@heartyfisher
To me it's a mindset issue. With the 7100 or 7000 I always knew I couldn't shoot forever so would just pick and choose more. The D500 handles everything you throw at it so I find myself shooting more just because I can. I am not sure my keeper rate is any better though LOL. When I teach others starting out I always suggest they use a prime as a zoom lens makes you lazy. To some extent the D500 has made me lazy. Not enough light? Just crank up the iso. Need to capture action? Let the 3D tracking follow it for you and hold the shutter down and let the xqd cards capture it for you.

NSXTypeR

manhattanboy said:

NSXTypeR said:

But the D7200 and the D500 are both still available. I just wish that they made the D500 XQD only or SD only, it cuts down on the clutter.

The D500 is XQD only; the SD card is there as back-up as serves its purpose when the XQD cards are full.

Oh, I thought you could choose either XQD or SD for storage. In that case they might as well have gone full XQD instead.

Sports

Pistnbroke said:

... options ...

manhattanboy said:

The SD cards are there for ...

Ideally, you'll configure how to use the 2nd card based on your job. Do you need max performance or safety? (Too bad if you need both, well, buy a D5.)
XQD + SD means that if you want to play it safe (storing a duplicate of every RAW file), you're ultimately degrading the performance of the camera (because SD is slower).
2 x XQD would mean that you could get 100% performance with backup storage.
Both options, of course, lets you use the 2nd card as an "overflow storage".
For what it's worth, Nikon told us that there wasn't enough space for two XQD slots.

heartyfisher

NSXTypeR said:

manhattanboy said:

NSXTypeR said:

But the D7200 and the D500 are both still available. I just wish that they made the D500 XQD only or SD only, it cuts down on the clutter.

The D500 is XQD only; the SD card is there as back-up as serves its purpose when the XQD cards are full.

Oh, I thought you could choose either XQD or SD for storage. In that case they might as well have gone full XQD instead.

Yes you can ... read the follow-up posting...

retread

With D500.

I send raw to XQD and jpeg to SD card. Bigger file to faster card and smaller file to slower card. It is not as good sending a full backup to each card but some backup and I think a faster option. With the big buffer maybe I don't need all the speed and should send both files to both cards. My SD cards are usually half the size of my XQD cards.

Maybe not the best option but how I have been doing it.

Pistnbroke

oif course the storage /1 card option could be solved if Nikon put say 32GB of internal memory in the camera and a card slot. For me anyway that would be fine as in all my cameras I leave on card in slot 1 24/7 from the day I buy it and only remove the no 2 card

IanG

Thom Hogan seems to think that the D7500 (making a huge effort to drag the discussion back to the D7500 here...) is a reasonable evolution...sadly this is probably the first time I don't agree with him.

Sure 4K video will probably be interesting to 3 or 4 people, but the price hike seems unreasonable given all the rest that has been stripped. And yes I agree the D500 shutter/sensor is great - so why not just leave it in the D500?

And finally as the bodies get lighter and lighter, so does there ability to absorb shutter/mirror shock - I can hand hold 1/2 second on most of my bodies - I defy people to de this (on a regular basis) on super-light bodies.

To me the D7500 is 'waste' of an iteration - they could have done so much better without 'diluting' a really excellent series of models in the D7***

donaldejose

At first glance I agree the D7500 should have continued the D7xxx pattern of magnesium body, dual card slots, battery grip, etc. instead of adopting attributes of the D5xxx series (plastic body, one card slot, etc.) However, we now have the D500 which has all the features of the prior D7xxx series so it is to serve as a pro DX body like the old D7xxx series did. We really didn't lose anything and actually gained things, albeit at a higher price. While the D7500 can be seen as a D7200 replacement minus, the D500 can be seen as a D7200 replacement plus. I know one BIF/wildlife photographer who replaced his D4s with a D500 for increased resolution and reach with his existing lenses; it really is that good. Also, I expect Nikon to start a new mirrorless line this summer and it likely will contain a body which replaces the D7xxx line. So we have to wait a bit to see the full pattern Nikon intends to produce. Those wanting a DX replacement for their D7200 will likely have two choices: the D500 and a new DX mirrorless body with magnesium body, dual card slots, battery grip, etc. All is not lost, the sky is not falling, Chicken Little.

BVS

Playing devil's advocate here. If the D7500 had the magnesium body, dual card slots, and grip, along with all the other new stuff, why would anyone except hardcore action and wildlife photogs buy the D500? The only major differences would be an extra 2fps, better AF system, and 'pro' body. I imagine most people would consider 8fps to be 'enough'. The pro body could be a plus or minus depending on who you ask. Which leaves maybe just the AF system. Is that alone worth an extra $750? Probably not for 90% of people trying to decide between the two.

What are the alternatives Nikon could have done? Would people have been happier with one of these instead?

Alternative 1 - All In with Same Price - Keep everything from D7200 (card slots, grip, etc.) and add all the new stuff in D7500. Price is $1,250. Almost nobody buys D500 and it's another 7 years (or maybe never) before a D500 successor.

Alternative 2 - All In with Price Increase - Keep everything from D7200 (card slots, grip, etc.) and add all the new stuff in D7500. Price increases to around $1,500 to pay for all the new goodies. This opens a big gap in the lineup between D5600 and D7500 and 80d/a6300 steal sales.

Alternative 3 - D7300 Token Upgrade - Keep everything from D7200 and just do a minor upgrade - 6fps@14bit raw, new metering sensor, snapbridge, maybe 4K. Price is $1,250. Boring upgrade, everyone complains, not significantly better than 80d/a6300.

Alternative 4 - D7500 As Released - Upgrade a bunch of stuff with D500 tech. Drop stuff that 90% of customers probably don't use (dual card, grip, AI tab) to pay for it. Keep price mostly the same (D7200 was $1,200 when first released) with small increase for inflation. Power users bemoan the loss of the card slot and grip, but have the option to upgrade to D500 instead.

manhattanboy

BVS said:

Playing devil's advocate here. If the D7500 had the magnesium body, dual card slots, and grip, along with all the other new stuff, why would anyone except hardcore action and wildlife photogs buy the D500? The only major differences would be an extra 2fps, better AF system, and 'pro' body.

Frankly the only good reason to buy the D500 over the D7500 is the AF system. Is it worth $750? Yes it is.
Yesterday just for fun I went back to look at some action series shots on the 7100 where I had not yet eliminated the out of focus shots. My opinion now is that my keeper rate with the D500 is substantially better, which is even more impressive if you consider that the D500 is firing almost twice as fast as the 7100 did for full size RAWs (the 7100 only shot 6fps with full size RAWs). Generally I find that the slower your fps, the better the AF system is able to catch and follow your subject. If I had to shoot with a D7100/7200/7500 again I would now probably lower the fps to allow for better tracking, and probably will just use Qc mode on the 810 now given that it reduces down the fps for the old AF system.