DXOMark Tests: Nikon D5200 Edges out the D7100?

[astroNikon]

Shooting weddings with a D5200? (and probably low end glass, since good glass costs money! (and somebody doesn't like to SPEND money) And there is probably a chart somewhere showing some crappy low end glass is almost as good as pro glass, that could be used to justify buying low end glass)

Not someone I can take seriously! And no images to make me think otherwise.

Rockwell ?

 

[astroNikon]

It's not just about the image quality. yes, image quality is important, but the D7100 provides a lot of features that many people look for.

we all know that ... except one person

and for that, we only have to say

Soft bunny, warm bunny
Little ball of fur.
Happy bunny, sleepy bunny
Purr purr purr.



purr purr purr is referenced here http://blog.rabbitnetwork.org/?p=470

 

[TheFantasticG]

I tell ya... I'm extremely happy with my D7000 image quality but the Wife and I are trying to start a family... Kids... Yeah, I want a better AF system. I'm considering going down to the local camera shop and trading mine in for a D7100... Cause I ain't springing for a D800.

 

[goodguy]

I tell ya... I'm extremely happy with my D7000 image quality but the Wife and I are trying to start a family... Kids... Yeah, I want a better AF system. I'm considering going down to the local camera shop and trading mine in for a D7100... Cause I ain't springing for a D800.

Well according to somebody on this forum you should get the D5200 because no matter what its the better camera then the D7100

 

[SashaT]

Man, read this whole thread and kept thinking one thing… It seems that the basic argument in this thread is the same as in any other hobby/passion/whatever you wish to call it. For example in the world of fly fishing, there is some really high end gear, low end gear and everything between. I often see some, for whatever reason try to justify their lower end gear by stating it is the same (or better) than the high end stuff.

Then in typical fashion the owners of the higher end gear jump in and justify why they own their equipment. Followed by the owners of the lower end gear stating why their gear makes more sense to buy and that the higher end stuff doesn’t really warrant the price difference. Hell, I could even make the same observations about another hobby of mine firearms.

Every time I see stuff like this I think “who cares”. If somebody wishes to spend their money on something that they like; then what is the big issue. If one likes the 5200 well good for them, if another likes the 7100 well good for them as well. It does not make one stupid or an idiot to spend more on something that they want. Maybe the features of one system are important enough to that person. At the end of the day does it really matter?

For the record, I only have been bitten by the photography bug for a short time. I started with and still have and use a low end D3000. When I decided to upgrade a little while ago, I opted for the 7100. The reasons were simple for me: the motor to run my AF D glass (having to manually focus on a fish is a huge PIA), tougher body and not being so menu driven just to name a few. Hell the first two alone were worth it to me based on the fact I use my stuff out on and in the water while fishing. The point of me even bothering to type this out is that different people have different wants and needs. There is no reason that I can think of to bash one or the other, that is unless one enjoys trolling…

 

[goodguy]

Every time I see stuff like this I think “who cares”. If somebody wishes to spend their money on something that they like; then what is the big issue. If one likes the 5200 well good for them, if another likes the 7100 well good for them as well.

Thank you, thank you exactly my point, everybody has their view, their needs and their dreams, its their money and who cares what they choose.
I believe any action we make in life that does not have a negative effect on others is ok and no one elses business.

Let me chime in giving another example of basic, middle and good (and expensive).

I used to be all about fountain pens, I had hundereds of them and had a lot of money tied up into it, I started with cheap basic pens (some vintage some new) and in time I started to creep up to the more expensive limited edition models.
Eventually I got into a company called (to those who dont know) Montblanc which make really beautiful pens, I had their entire line of "Writers Series".
I loved it but there were those who always though buying pens from this company was a waste of money.
I understood from where they were coming, for them it was an expensive eye candy, something to Schlep around to make others "see" how rich you were, they thought "why buy a pen that is worth hundreds of dollars ?" when you can get a pen which worked just as good for a fraction of the cost of this limited edition Montblanc pen.
I always tried to explain that for me it wasnt about show off at all, I hardly ever took these pens out let alone try to impress others with it, the collection was in my room for my pleasure in their boxes, I never understood why they care so much about my decisions and my choices, it really could get nasty sometimes (yes funny how silly thing like fountain pen can cause such a strong reaction with some).

Live and let live I say, we all have our unique view of life and we should accept and respect other people decisions even if we disagree and think they are wrong.

 

[astroNikon]

Because some people think you shouldn't waste your money on trivial things like cameras, and instead put your money into more meaningful things like a boat.

 

[SashaT]

It sort of reminds me of a thread on another forum. In this thread somebody was basically trying to call people that purchased one fly rod stupid for paying that much. This is because the model that person purchased used the same blank as the more expensive rod. Like in this thread , the individual overlooked the additional features of the higher priced model. Also like in this thread the poster there did not grasp the concept that people can buy whatever the hell they want.

Personally, like I did with fly fishing, I approach my camera purchases from the following standpoint. When I first started I had basic low end equipment and as I got more proficient I upgraded to higher end equipment. The higher end equipment that I chose were ones that suited my needs and to a lesser extent my wants. I really don't see the problem in spending money (if you can afford it) on things you enjoy AND use.

Now as far as the boat thing I say why not get both

 

[goodguy]

Because some people think you shouldn't waste your money on trivial things like cameras, and instead put your money into more meaningful things like a boat.

Nah, boats are tiny creatures, small potatoes in my book, I like BIG things like watches LOL

 

[Tinderbox (UK)]

well post a few photo`s from an D5200 and D7100 and see if anybody can tell which camera took what photo, i have had both camera`s and i could not tell the difference without looking at the exif data.

John.

 

[goodguy]

well post a few photo`s from an D5200 and D7100 and see if anybody can tell which camera took what photo, i have had both camera`s and i could not tell the difference without looking at the exif data.

John.

This is not how it goes John and you know it, the true magic happeneds behind the camera, the man that press the shutter button,
I have seen pictures that would blow you mind away taken with old 6MP Rebel Canon.
Cameras are not like Hot Rods where you put them on a drag strip and wait to see which car comes first.
Also everybody agrees the basic sensor/image quality is too close to notice, it really comes to the individual person to choose what camera is for him/her, are the added features worth the extra money or not.

 

[astroNikon]

well post a few photo`s from an D5200 and D7100 and see if anybody can tell which camera took what photo, i have had both camera`s and i could not tell the difference without looking at the exif data.

John.

This is not how it goes John and you know it, the true magic happeneds behind the camera, the man that press the shutter button,
I have seen pictures that would blow you mind away taken with old 6MP Rebel Canon.
Cameras are not like Hot Rods where you put them on a drag strip and wait to see which car comes first.
Also everybody agrees the basic sensor/image quality is too close to notice, it really comes to the individual person to choose what camera is for him/her, are the added features worth the extra money or not.

Yes but drag strip racing is not just about the car. The driver with the quickest reflex at the lights, fastest getting the car to grip, fastest through the gears while not losing anything and crashing, wins.

Oh yeah, the guy behind the camera analogy !!

 

[goodguy]

well post a few photo`s from an D5200 and D7100 and see if anybody can tell which camera took what photo, i have had both camera`s and i could not tell the difference without looking at the exif data.

John.

This is not how it goes John and you know it, the true magic happeneds behind the camera, the man that press the shutter button,
I have seen pictures that would blow you mind away taken with old 6MP Rebel Canon.
Cameras are not like Hot Rods where you put them on a drag strip and wait to see which car comes first.
Also everybody agrees the basic sensor/image quality is too close to notice, it really comes to the individual person to choose what camera is for him/her, are the added features worth the extra money or not.

Yes but drag strip racing is not just about the car. The driver with the quickest reflex at the lights, fastest getting the car to grip, fastest through the gears while not losing anything and crashing, wins.

Oh yeah, the guy behind the camera analogy !!

Agreed, agreed, agreed, there is always the human facotr even in drag racing but thats the best analogy I could think of

 

[AutofocusRoss]

Man, read this whole thread and kept thinking one thing… It seems that the basic argument in this thread is the same as in any other hobby/passion/whatever you wish to call it. For example in the world of fly fishing, there is some really high end gear, low end gear and everything between. I often see some, for whatever reason try to justify their lower end gear by stating it is the same (or better) than the high end stuff.

Then in typical fashion the owners of the higher end gear jump in and justify why they own their equipment. Followed by the owners of the lower end gear stating why their gear makes more sense to buy and that the higher end stuff doesn’t really warrant the price difference. Hell, I could even make the same observations about another hobby of mine firearms.

Every time I see stuff like this I think “who cares”. If somebody wishes to spend their money on something that they like; then what is the big issue. If one likes the 5200 well good for them, if another likes the 7100 well good for them as well. It does not make one stupid or an idiot to spend more on something that they want. Maybe the features of one system are important enough to that person. At the end of the day does it really matter?

For the record, I only have been bitten by the photography bug for a short time. I started with and still have and use a low end D3000. When I decided to upgrade a little while ago, I opted for the 7100. The reasons were simple for me: the motor to run my AF D glass (having to manually focus on a fish is a huge PIA), tougher body and not being so menu driven just to name a few. Hell the first two alone were worth it to me based on the fact I use my stuff out on and in the water while fishing. The point of me even bothering to type this out is that different people have different wants and needs. There is no reason that I can think of to bash one or the other, that is unless one enjoys trolling…

SashaT that's 100% nailing it on the head. I was largely misunderstood by those who need 7100's - I was really trying to encourage would be 5200 buyers that though it is an inferior camera in some respects, it's strength is that the image quality is equal to the 7100 (DXo claim it is marginal but better, but in real world shooting I doubt you would ever see that). I hope that in some way, the thread will indeed encourage those, to whom the 5200 features are more than enough, to go ahead with their purchase, and enjoy making really wonderful images, with the resolution in hand to crop some of them, where a better image emerges from doing so.

Likewise, some or all of the features of the 7100 which have emerged here may encourage those who need it, to go for it instead. The features don't come cheap, and you won't get better images than those from the 5200 in normal circumstances, but maybe for fast moving sports and action photograpy, bad weather use, it will be the better option.

My first Nikon was the D5000 and at the time the next model up the line was the 7000. This was more tempting as it had most of the 7100 features, plus was 16mp not 12mp like the 5000. I saw more compelling reasons to look at it. Then the 5100 launched, and for me, cancelled out most of those reasons.

From here, the timing of model releases came into play. Had the 7100 come along first, I might well have sprung for one. As it was, the 5200 arrived some four or five months sooner, and even though I was very pleased indeed with the results from the 5100, that extra resolution was a clincher. It meant that if and when image crops became needed, I could ditch a third of the image and still have plenty of quality for large prints. The must have feature on all three models was the flip out LCD screen. It was poorly executed on the 5000 as it was hinged on the base of the camera making it hard to use on a tripod. Not impossible, but harder. The 5100 corrected that with the hinge on the left hand side, repositioning the classic position of Nikon control buttons onto the right hand side and the top plate of the camera.

5200 is all but identical externally, except now we have release mode on a direct button (single, 3fps, 5fps, self timer etc) plus the excellent 7000's autofocus system, plus of course, that lovely resolution, shared by it's sister the 7100.

When shooting portraits, the eyes sparkle so realistically, unlike anything I've seen before. Shots of brides reveal the most wonderful detail in the veil, embroidery on the dress, every petal on a bouquet etc.

That both cameras can do this is beyond question. They are equal, yet they are not equal, that is true to say. If you need the features go get the 7100, if you don't, and you also need to buy a better lens at the same time, then Nikon have kindly slotted the 5200 into the lineup for you, so you can have both for similar money.

Whichever way you go, bear in mind that this kind of resolution deserves, and demands, a better lens than the 'kit' one. If money is tight think about prime's. Apart from low light improved capability (f1.8) when used at f8 they blow the socks off cheaper zooms, and give 700.00 zooms a good run for the money. On the DX cameras the focal lenghts are approx 1.5x more, so the 35mm = 50mm, the 50mm = 75mm, the 85mm = 125mm approx. Remember you have a built in zoom with you all the time, its called a pair of legs! It takes a while if you are a zoom only user, to get used to moving in, or away, from your subject.

Either camera will give you the results you are looking for. My parting shot (no pun intended) is that, unless you really need the features the 7100 offers, the 5200 deserves a very close look before you get the credit card out. Whichever you end up choosing, make sure you allow enough money in your budget for at least one high quality lens. This will last you through ownership of several bodies over the years, and they say lenses are cheaper to repair than camera bodies (fortunately, I've been lucky so far and not had to have any repairs done).

Thanks to SashaT for bringing such a common sense opinion to the thread, I fully agree with it.

 

[pixmedic]

I think this thread has long run its course, and as much useful information as is going to be posted here has been already.