D7200 or D800?

[gckless]

Your opinion: D7200 or D800?

I've got a D7200 now, and I've borrowed a D800 with the ability to purchase possibly at the same price I could sell my D7200 for. So far, I'm not impressed with the D800. Only thing I'm seeing it does better is noise. I'm finding AF is better and photos are sharper with the D7200, even when photos are taken with the subject the same size. So, I can't really crop in any tighter due to the poor focus, the extra MP do nothing for me there.

I guess I'm slightly biased though, since I need the reach the crop sensor has given me so far. I commonly shoot sports, so that's why the AF is important to me. But even in the still test shots I've been taking, the D7200's photos just look better. So now I'm really reluctant to switch, even beyond the focal length advantage.

I know for most of you that haven't tried both, it probably sounds weird, how can the D800's images look worse? And that's exactly what I thought. Think I'm doing something wrong, or do you think this could be accurate?

 

[cgw]

Keep the D7200.

 

[gckless]

Keep the D7200.

Why do you say that?

 

[Watchful]

Is the 800 properly calibrated for focus?
The D810 is a nice camera that I really like, I haven't tried an 800 though to be honest.

 

[gckless]

Is the 800 properly calibrated for focus?
The D810 is a nice camera that I really like, I haven't tried an 800 though to be honest.

It isn't, so that's one thing. Another is I'm using a 70-300mm VR, so not the best lens. Everything I'm reading about this body says that it will highlight anything that isn't perfect. I may be better off just picking up the 70-200mm VR he has.

 

[table1349]

A great body can not make up for poor glass, it only records what it sees. Great glass on the other hand can improve the image quality of an average body. Since you are speaking of sports the 70-200 would be the better choice.

 

[Watchful]

I'd start by comparing two well calibrated camera with the same lens so you are comparing apples to apples and go from there.

 

[gckless]

A great body can not make up for poor glass, it only records what it sees. Great glass on the other hand can improve the image quality of an average body. Since you are speaking of sports the 70-200 would be the better choice.

That's what I originally thought too. But this guy (who I met at the track and took photos of his car) told me to take the D800 home and get back to him in a couple days. Dammit, he knew what he was doing! Lol.

He still hasn't said his price for either. Depending on price, I may have to get both. I'd then have to sell the few shorter DX lenses and D7200 I have and pick up just one FX lens for around the 24-70mm range.

I'd start by comparing two well calibrated camera with the same lens so you are comparing apples to apples and go from there.

I agree with you. Without completing the AF fine-tune just yet, what I'm seeing is that the D7200 is sharper to a point, but the D800 has more detail overall and past the D7200's limits. Does that make sense? I also do believe the glass is limiting the D800 here, but the 70-300mm VR has some decent reviews. DXO says it ain't all that hot though, which I trust more. I do like the images from the D800 more overall though, that's for sure. So much more usable in high ISO, even though it only goes up to 6400 native. D7200 I'm hesitant to go above 800! Then again, I seemingly need more exposure for the same shot, generally in the way of higher ISO.

So I dunno yet, it's a big (read: expensive) change. No doubt the D800 is more capable in almost everything I need it for, except for a couple FPS which the larger buffer makes up for in my eyes, and reach, which actually concerns me a bit. That's if I can use it better and support it with better equipment.

 

[jaomul]

Not sure why the d800 is worse to you but anyway I'd keep the d7200.

No point in upgrading to a camera that firstly you have doubts about and second that you may have to do a lot of adjusting to sort out. Micro focussing adjustments on lenses,especially zooms is a pain in the backside, and usually ends up putting them out somewhere else along the range

 

[robbins.photo]

I agree with you. Without completing the AF fine-tune just yet, what I'm seeing is that the D7200 is sharper to a point, but the D800 has more detail overall and past the D7200's limits. Does that make sense? I also do believe the glass is limiting the D800 here, but the 70-300mm VR has some decent reviews. DXO says it ain't all that hot though, which I trust more. I do like the images from the D800 more overall though, that's for sure. So much more usable in high ISO, even though it only goes up to 6400 native. D7200 I'm hesitant to go above 800! Then again, I seemingly need more exposure for the same shot, generally in the way of higher ISO.

Having shot the 70-300mm VR I can tell you that for a telephoto lens it's one of the sharpest you can get in that focal range. It is definitely not "mediocre" glass by any stretch of the imagination. Some of the older, non-VR lenses in that focal length were, but the VR version is a very sharp lens.

I shoot a lot of telephoto myself, and recently upgraded my D7100 for the D600 and I can tell you I'm happy with the switch over. When I really feel like I need that extra "reach" I can very quickly put the camera in DX mode and get the same FOV as the 7100 had, though I don't do that too often to be honest.

Ultimately of course it comes down to shooting situation, if you can get better, more consistent results for what your shooting with the D7200 then best to stay with it.

 

[gckless]

Man, that's what I thought about the 70-300! But I've been using it on the DX, so I wasn't sure how it performed on an FX body. Dynamic range is awesome on the D800. At ISO 4000, the D7200's color kinda falls apart. Background of test shots I have that should be subtly colored look B&W, but are rendered properly on the D800. Man do I want it for anything less than telephoto work.

But, at least 50% of what I do seems to be telephoto work, and I'm hesitant to switch because of the extra reach I get due to crop factor. I find myself hitting the end of the 70-300's zoom range sometimes, and that's 150mm more (effectively) than what I'd have on the D800. Here's one shot I would have never gotten:

Moto2 by Gilbert Kless, on Flickr

I think I get good shots with the D7200, I'm happy with them at ISO100. I guess I'm only thinking about it because of the good deal I can get on this body. That, and anytime I need to push the ISO even slightly I'm not super happy. And the DR of the FF. And the look of FF. And MP. My head is spinning right now.

Maybe I'll skip the 70-200, get the D800 body, a good shorter zoom lens and use it for static car shots. Ah, decisions.

 

[jaomul]

I think at iso 100 the d7200 had the same dynamic range as the d800, I read that somewhere.

The d800 will still give 15mp on the crop area vs your 24mp from the d7200. Depending on how much more you need to crop that might be enough, many pros using a d3 or d3s manage with 12

 

[robbins.photo]

Man, that's what I thought about the 70-300! But I've been using it on the DX, so I wasn't sure how it performed on an FX body. Dynamic range is awesome on the D800. At ISO 4000, the D7200's color kinda falls apart. Background of test shots I have that should be subtly colored look B&W, but are rendered properly on the D800. Man do I want it for anything less than telephoto work.

I love the D600 myself, I get better results from it than I did from the D7100 even in better lighting situations. I will be investing in a better telephoto lens for it though, like you the 70-300 mm sometimes just isn't enough reach. I'm considering a variety of options in the 400-600 mm range at the moment, though it will be a couple of months before I finally get tot he point where I can start looking seriously.

But, at least 50% of what I do seems to be telephoto work, and I'm hesitant to switch because of the extra reach I get due to crop factor. I find myself hitting the end of the 70-300's zoom range sometimes, and that's 150mm more (effectively) than what I'd have on the D800. Here's one shot I would have never gotten:

You can shoot the D800 in DX mode, which will give you the same "reach" as your D7200. I've done it a couple of times with the D600. Something you might want to test and see if it will work for you.

 

[gckless]

I think at iso 100 the d7200 had the same dynamic range as the d800, I read that somewhere.

The d800 will still give 15mp on the crop area vs your 24mp from the d7200. Depending on how much more you need to crop that might be enough, many pros using a d3 or d3s manage with 12

At base ISO, I think you're right. Above that though, the D800 definitely outshines it. Plus, even at base, there's that FF look, which is largely due to DoF but also a couple other things.

15MP is good enough for things I don't need to crop, I'll give you that. But if I'm in crop mode a decent amount of time, then why don't I just keep the D7200? That's my dillemma.

Man, that's what I thought about the 70-300! But I've been using it on the DX, so I wasn't sure how it performed on an FX body. Dynamic range is awesome on the D800. At ISO 4000, the D7200's color kinda falls apart. Background of test shots I have that should be subtly colored look B&W, but are rendered properly on the D800. Man do I want it for anything less than telephoto work.

I love the D600 myself, I get better results from it than I did from the D7100 even in better lighting situations. I will be investing in a better telephoto lens for it though, like you the 70-300 mm sometimes just isn't enough reach. I'm considering a variety of options in the 400-600 mm range at the moment, though it will be a couple of months before I finally get tot he point where I can start looking seriously.

But, at least 50% of what I do seems to be telephoto work, and I'm hesitant to switch because of the extra reach I get due to crop factor. I find myself hitting the end of the 70-300's zoom range sometimes, and that's 150mm more (effectively) than what I'd have on the D800. Here's one shot I would have never gotten:

You can shoot the D800 in DX mode, which will give you the same "reach" as your D7200. I've done it a couple of times with the D600. Something you might want to test and see if it will work for you.

Well that's good to hear about the D600 results. See above for my thoughts on the crop mode. And I know if I make the switch I'll regret it the first time I'm out on track lol. But then in the paddock, the D800 is far better. Ahhhhhhhhh.

 

[fmw]

Your opinion: D7200 or D800?

I've got a D7200 now, and I've borrowed a D800 with the ability to purchase possibly at the same price I could sell my D7200 for. So far, I'm not impressed with the D800. Only thing I'm seeing it does better is noise. I'm finding AF is better and photos are sharper with the D7200, even when photos are taken with the subject the same size. So, I can't really crop in any tighter due to the poor focus, the extra MP do nothing for me there.

I guess I'm slightly biased though, since I need the reach the crop sensor has given me so far. I commonly shoot sports, so that's why the AF is important to me. But even in the still test shots I've been taking, the D7200's photos just look better. So now I'm really reluctant to switch, even beyond the focal length advantage.

I know for most of you that haven't tried both, it probably sounds weird, how can the D800's images look worse? And that's exactly what I thought. Think I'm doing something wrong, or do you think this could be accurate?

You want to trade a camera that works for you for one that doesn't. What kind of sense does that make? Spend your time making images rather than obsessing about equipment.