Review D7200 mini review

Joined
Mar 23, 2008
Messages
3,125
Location
Santa Barbara, California, U.S.A.
I bought a used D300 because the D7100 was so bad for sports, maybe i had a bad one who knows, but it was only for sports, it was fine for wildlife

i thought the d300s was exactly the same as the D300
You have a point - I don't shoot sports regularly, only BIF. At first I thought the D7100 AF was erratic, but that was probably operator error - over time I got a consistently high keeper rate with it... I shot hummingbirds a few times with it and was blown away by how many shots were tack sharp! Overall, I rate the D7100 on par with the D800 - which is not bad company at all since the D800 is much more expensive and has a lower pixel density.

That last point may be affecting your perception, too - the D7100 is a lot less forgiving when it comes to AF precision than the D300 with half the pixel density!

Cheers

Mike
 
Joined
Jan 7, 2006
Messages
955
Location
Detroit
I don't have a d7200, so can't comment on that. I do have a d300, d800, d810, d3s, and d7100. I haven't had the d810 long enough to do any controlled AF tests, but I have done controlled AF tests with the d7100 vs the d300.

The test was tracking a person on a bicycle that was moving at a fairly good speed, directly toward the camera, from far to near. All tests were done with a 200 f/2, which is the best, fastest, most accurate AF lens that I own. This is one of the more difficult AF tests that I know of. In several runs, the d300 never once lost focus. The d7100 completely lost focus at least twice, on every run. All of the failures were when the subject was near the end of the run, closest to the camera. The tests are in line with my general impressions of the AF capability of both cameras. My d300 is better at tracking and AF in general use, than my d7100. Maybe I have a bad d7100, but given the comments of a number of other folks, I don't think so.

I'm not saying that the good experiences that people have related here are wrong. We all shoot different things, using different techniques and lenses, with different expectations. I expect any camera, that I use for sports/action, to at least equal the d300 AF, under the most demanding circumstances that I know of and that's how I test them. My tests may not be applicable to others and certainly, YMMV.

As for the incremental update discussion. My opinion is that the d7100 supposedly has the same or newer AF module as the d300 and I would expect it to perform the same or better, given the time frame differences. Certainly the d7200 has benefit of newer tech, but that shouldn't excuse the AF performance issues of the d7100 that at least some of us have encountered. I've stopped using the d7100 and went back to the d300 for any sports/action that I think is going to be a problem. Otherwise, the d7100 does quite well as a general purpose camera, IMO.

Kerry
 
Joined
Feb 20, 2011
Messages
3,741
Location
New Zealand
Yep I used to use the D300s in preference to the D7100 for field team sports, solely because it focussed and tracked better.
I'm disappointed to read Randy's assessment of the D7200, I kinda wish there was no improvement over the 7100! o_O
Must...... hold............... out............... for............ D400............ :mad:
 
Joined
Aug 15, 2010
Messages
2,967
Location
Sydney Australia
That's what I keep thinking. I've wanted to upgrade from my trusty D200 for over a year and the prospect of a D300 replacement...well, it ain't exactly KILLIN' me, but still....
The other thought that keeps bouncing around in my head is other than build quality what is it that you would expect from a D300 replacement that the D7200 does not have?

Im assuming controls will be a part of this, Im genuinely curious.
 
Joined
May 11, 2006
Messages
42,283
Location
CHARLOTTE
Real Name
Randy
The other thought that keeps bouncing around in my head is other than build quality what is it that you would expect from a D300 replacement that the D7200 does not have?

Im assuming controls will be a part of this, Im genuinely curious.

nothing, we are done, seriously. I will probably not buy another DX body after the D7200. I leave today for a few days shooting in SC and I am taking 1 body, not the D4 or the D800, I am taking the D7200 because the light will be great and I need the reach
 
Joined
May 11, 2006
Messages
42,283
Location
CHARLOTTE
Real Name
Randy
Yep I used to use the D300s in preference to the D7100 for field team sports, solely because it focussed and tracked better.
I'm disappointed to read Randy's assessment of the D7200, I kinda wish there was no improvement over the 7100! o_O
Must...... hold............... out............... for............ D400............ :mad:
LOL, your disappointed because it is so much better.

The D7200 performed superbly shooting LAX last weekend. It is (IMO) the successor to the D300 and you know what, I like all the plastic because when I take the grip off this is a great little travel camera. Now if someone wants to drop their camera the D7200 is probably not the best choice:)
 
Joined
May 11, 2006
Messages
42,283
Location
CHARLOTTE
Real Name
Randy
I don't have a d7200, so can't comment on that. I do have a d300, d800, d810, d3s, and d7100. I haven't had the d810 long enough to do any controlled AF tests, but I have done controlled AF tests with the d7100 vs the d300.

The test was tracking a person on a bicycle that was moving at a fairly good speed, directly toward the camera, from far to near. All tests were done with a 200 f/2, which is the best, fastest, most accurate AF lens that I own. This is one of the more difficult AF tests that I know of. In several runs, the d300 never once lost focus. The d7100 completely lost focus at least twice, on every run. All of the failures were when the subject was near the end of the run, closest to the camera. The tests are in line with my general impressions of the AF capability of both cameras. My d300 is better at tracking and AF in general use, than my d7100. Maybe I have a bad d7100, but given the comments of a number of other folks, I don't think so.

I'm not saying that the good experiences that people have related here are wrong. We all shoot different things, using different techniques and lenses, with different expectations. I expect any camera, that I use for sports/action, to at least equal the d300 AF, under the most demanding circumstances that I know of and that's how I test them. My tests may not be applicable to others and certainly, YMMV.

As for the incremental update discussion. My opinion is that the d7100 supposedly has the same or newer AF module as the d300 and I would expect it to perform the same or better, given the time frame differences. Certainly the d7200 has benefit of newer tech, but that shouldn't excuse the AF performance issues of the d7100 that at least some of us have encountered. I've stopped using the d7100 and went back to the d300 for any sports/action that I think is going to be a problem. Otherwise, the d7100 does quite well as a general purpose camera, IMO.

Kerry

another IMO but I think AF on the D7100 was dumbed down to sell the D7200.....no other camera out 2 years ago had that focus stealing problem, and for me it was only when there was alot of moving parts. BIF, even against static trees, was fine, against a blue sky it was even better. There is no way the D300 should have still been better, 8 years latter. We got hosed but it's over now, well not really, i still own a D7100 and based on FS prices I may just keep it for non sports stuff
 
Joined
May 11, 2006
Messages
42,283
Location
CHARLOTTE
Real Name
Randy
You have a point - I don't shoot sports regularly, only BIF. At first I thought the D7100 AF was erratic, but that was probably operator error - over time I got a consistently high keeper rate with it... I shot hummingbirds a few times with it and was blown away by how many shots were tack sharp! Overall, I rate the D7100 on par with the D800 - which is not bad company at all since the D800 is much more expensive and has a lower pixel density.

That last point may be affecting your perception, too - the D7100 is a lot less forgiving when it comes to AF precision than the D300 with half the pixel density!

Cheers

Mike

this is IMO a too many moving parts issue and the camera (usually in the middle of a burst) suddenly starts focusing on the wrong player (in soccer)......

IMO higher MP bodies are just as not forgiving as lower ones
 
Joined
Jan 26, 2005
Messages
15,253
Location
Marysville, WA
another IMO but I think AF on the D7100 was dumbed down to sell the D7200.....no other camera out 2 years ago had that focus stealing problem, and for me it was only when there was alot of moving parts. BIF, even against static trees, was fine, against a blue sky it was even better. There is no way the D300 should have still been better, 8 years latter. We got hosed but it's over now, well not really, i still own a D7100 and based on FS prices I may just keep it for non sports stuff
What is your theory on the D7100 having a "dumbed down" AF based on? The new AF bits in the D7200 were not available 2 years ago when the D7100 came out. I totally disagree with your "focus stealing" comment. I shot my D300 side-by-side with my D7100 and had focus stealing occur on both bodies. The best way to see this was shooting Short-eared owls near the ground. Same went for shooting Football and Baseball. I did have to muck about a bit with the Lock-on settings, but after that I did not detect any focus stealing. What I did find, however, was that the D7100 clearly acquired focus much more quickly, not surprising with the 5-6 years of added development.

But to claim "dumbed down" when the technology that the D7200 uses was perhaps a best a dream in Nikon's eye seems a bit overboard to me. Now, if you can point me to some factual basis for that comment, you might change my mind ;) I most certainly would agree with a statement that said the D7100 buffer was dumbed down, no doubt there, and if that was all the D7200 provided I might agree.
 
Joined
Jan 26, 2005
Messages
15,253
Location
Marysville, WA
i used to hate Sigma but I might get their 150-600 Sport after my experiences with the 120-300

They sure look like a new company
I shot the older 120-300 for years with Arena, College, Pro football and it was a great lens then, no surprise the newer versions are as well. My first Long Lens was the Sigma 500mm f4.5. Comparing that to the Nikon 500mm f4 I would give the sigma a 90-9% "as good" rating. The Sigma EX series top end lenses have always been darned good. Just talk to folks who have the 300-800mm f5.6, what a monster.
 
Joined
Apr 5, 2009
Messages
621
Location
So. IL USA
The other thought that keeps bouncing around in my head is other than build quality what is it that you would expect from a D300 replacement that the D7200 does not have?

Im assuming controls will be a part of this, Im genuinely curious.
While I'd like as many controls as they can jam on there, it really is a build-Q issue. Compared to the D20, the D720 feels...well, not exactly flimsy, but definitely less like the tank I'm used to. I shoot a LOT in relatively cold weather, so I'm a little worried about the D7200's sealing. Then again, that part might just be a mental hurdle.

Personally, I like the extra "reach" the DX format gives me, so I'd prefer to stick with it.
 
Joined
Jan 26, 2005
Messages
15,253
Location
Marysville, WA
While I'd like as many controls as they can jam on there, it really is a build-Q issue. Compared to the D20, the D720 feels...well, not exactly flimsy, but definitely less like the tank I'm used to. I shoot a LOT in relatively cold weather, so I'm a little worried about the D7200's sealing. Then again, that part might just be a mental hurdle.

Personally, I like the extra "reach" the DX format gives me, so I'd prefer to stick with it.
A little perspective on "cold weather" shooting. We were just in Montana in February. I was laying in the snow photographing foxes and badgers with my D810 and D7100, both at times laying in the snow, as well as being snowed upon. Both cameras have also been "rain exposed", that is quite a normal thing here in Washington you know ;) Not drenched, mind you, when the rain gets that bad the cameras all get rain coats. Point being I have not treated the D7100 any different than I did the D300 or the D800 or the D810, and none have suffered any issues. All bets are off, of course, if you try a "dunk test" leaving a camera submerged. But I would question your sanity if you did that with any Nikon on purpose without using an underwater case. We also get plenty of winter days here where with wind chill we are down in single digits, no issues there either.

I personally think that far too much is made of the "build difference" thing, but then again YMMV.
 
Joined
Apr 5, 2009
Messages
621
Location
So. IL USA
A little perspective on "cold weather" shooting. We were just in Montana in February. I was laying in the snow photographing foxes and badgers with my D810 and D7100, both at times laying in the snow, as well as being snowed upon. Both cameras have also been "rain exposed", that is quite a normal thing here in Washington you know ;) Not drenched, mind you, when the rain gets that bad the cameras all get rain coats. Point being I have not treated the D7100 any different than I did the D300 or the D800 or the D810, and none have suffered any issues. All bets are off, of course, if you try a "dunk test" leaving a camera submerged. But I would question your sanity if you did that with any Nikon on purpose without using an underwater case. We also get plenty of winter days here where with wind chill we are down in single digits, no issues there either.

I personally think that far too much is made of the "build difference" thing, but then again YMMV.
Thanks for all that! The D200 is the only DSLR I've ever had and I really enjoy it...but it's pretty long in the tooth.
 
Joined
May 11, 2006
Messages
42,283
Location
CHARLOTTE
Real Name
Randy
What is your theory on the D7100 having a "dumbed down" AF based on? The new AF bits in the D7200 were not available 2 years ago when the D7100 came out. I totally disagree with your "focus stealing" comment. I shot my D300 side-by-side with my D7100 and had focus stealing occur on both bodies. The best way to see this was shooting Short-eared owls near the ground. Same went for shooting Football and Baseball. I did have to muck about a bit with the Lock-on settings, but after that I did not detect any focus stealing. What I did find, however, was that the D7100 clearly acquired focus much more quickly, not surprising with the 5-6 years of added development.

But to claim "dumbed down" when the technology that the D7200 uses was perhaps a best a dream in Nikon's eye seems a bit overboard to me. Now, if you can point me to some factual basis for that comment, you might change my mind ;) I most certainly would agree with a statement that said the D7100 buffer was dumbed down, no doubt there, and if that was all the D7200 provided I might agree.
What is your theory on the D7100 having a "dumbed down" AF based on? The new AF bits in the D7200 were not available 2 years ago when the D7100 came out. I totally disagree with your "focus stealing" comment. I shot my D300 side-by-side with my D7100 and had focus stealing occur on both bodies. The best way to see this was shooting Short-eared owls near the ground. Same went for shooting Football and Baseball. I did have to muck about a bit with the Lock-on settings, but after that I did not detect any focus stealing. What I did find, however, was that the D7100 clearly acquired focus much more quickly, not surprising with the 5-6 years of added development.

But to claim "dumbed down" when the technology that the D7200 uses was perhaps a best a dream in Nikon's eye seems a bit overboard to me. Now, if you can point me to some factual basis for that comment, you might change my mind ;) I most certainly would agree with a statement that said the D7100 buffer was dumbed down, no doubt there, and if that was all the D7200 provided I might agree.
MY D300 AFed better than my d7100 did for sports like soccer and football where there a lot of moving parts.

The D300 is 8 years older than the d7100

Dumbed down
 
Joined
Jan 26, 2005
Messages
15,253
Location
Marysville, WA
MY D300 AFed better than my d7100 did for sports like soccer and football where there a lot of moving parts.

The D300 is 8 years older than the d7100

Dumbed down
OK, Randy, I give up. Obviously you must have much better insight than mere mortals like me. Or ...

Thom Hogan
Imaging Resource Folks - "There's also a new 51-point autofocus system, based around a Multi-CAM 3500DX AF sensor as seen previously in the Nikon D300 and D300S"
And those are just a couple.

At least we agree that D7200 is a cut above, or at least we do today .......
 
Joined
Jan 26, 2005
Messages
15,253
Location
Marysville, WA
Thanks for all that! The D200 is the only DSLR I've ever had and I really enjoy it...but it's pretty long in the tooth.
D200 is a great camera, sold mine when I upgraded to D300. Each generation gets better, but not always in the ways I would like. What I have seen that helps me in the newer bodies is simply the ability to shoot in more varied situations than prior, which is what I think we should expect.
 
Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Nikon Cafe is a fan site and not associated with Nikon Corporation.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Copyright © 2005-2019 Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom