Ok, I have to ask... D7200 VS 80D

[SuzukiGS750EZ]

Ok, so for the op.. after reading through this I can tell you that the most important difference between these two camera bodies is... you.

Your skills will determine your results far more than say a difference in high ISO to low noise, or dynamic range, etc.

So don't worry about the stats between the two cameras and focus on your technique. That's really what is going to make the biggest difference in the final outcome.

Fair enough.

 

[spiralout462]

The 80d is better for Canon shooters, the 7200 is better for Nikon shooters. Neither is "better" than the other.

 

[TCampbell]

You shouldn't agonize over camera brands. In today's market, "every" current camera is a very good camera.

I am somewhat amused by those who declare that some camera is "better" because of one attribute. First... there are so many attributes to consider and nobody wins hands-down in all of them. It's _always_ a game of trade-offs.

Second, the "camera 'a' has better dynamic range than camera 'b'" causes me to ask the question: At which ISO is this true? It turns out the ISO makes a difference. Just because a camera has more dynamic range at one ISO does not mean it has more at another (all digital cameras lose dynamic range as you increase the ISO). Depending on the difference between upstream vs. downstream amplification of signal in the sensor, some cameras lose dynamic range faster than others. A camera with better dynamic range than another at low ISO may trade places and have LESS dynamic range at high ISO. (This turns out to be the case in many Canon vs. Nikon comparisons).

But that's just one aspect of the camera and there are so many. The Canon 80D has dual-pixel CMOS AF which allows it to a better job of continuous AF while shooting video -- but that would only be important if you like to shoot video (this is something I rarely do). But if you do want a camera for it's video capabilities, this single feature makes a huge difference.

In the pecking order of things that help you produce good images, the camera body ranks fairly low down on that list. While it's certainly possible to have gear that is holding you back... usually that's not the case... usually your own skill is what's holding you back.

If I were to rank things that I believe help contribute to better looking images then I'd say the list is:

1) YOU - your skill... knowing how to use the tools you have to make gorgeous shots. You can buy a wonderful camera, leave it fully automatic mode taking JPEG photos and get awful results all day long. The best piano in the world wont help me play beautiful music if I don't learn to use it and practice.

2) Lighting -- the best light isn't "natural" light (natural light can be awful)... the best light is the light you can control and get it to do what you want. This means some auxiliary lighting and light modifiers can be a tremendous help. But it also assumes you'd know how to use them (see #1 above).

3) Lenses -- Lenses can provide so many attributes to the shot... the ability to "compress" the depth of a scene or "stretch" the depth of a scene, create a shallow depth of field, the quality of blur that you can apply to out-of-focus areas, the shape of diffraction spikes on points of light... and then there's the things we commonly think of and bundle into the term "sharpness" (which is really quite a few different optical attributes.) There are other attributes that indirectly impact the image... such as the image stabilization capability or the performance of the focus motors (some are fast... some are sluggish and this can vary by lens type... not necessarily anything to do with the brand. If you're shooting action you probably want snappy/responsive focus motors. If you're shooting video you probably want smooth and quiet focus motors. If you're on a budget maybe you just want cheap/affordable and focus motor performance isn't high on your list.

4) Camera body -- and this is last on the list. You can have an amazing camera body, but without #1, 2, or 3 above it may still be a struggle to produce the results you want.

Lastly... there's the question of what you want to do with the camera. Some cameras have optimizations that cause them to be particularly good at certain things... and this isn't just a brand comparison question, it's a model comparison question.

 

[weepete]

Suzuki, as others have pointed out don't worry about it. The 80D is a more than capable camera and is a very good choice of body. Sure, the 7200 is slightly ahead in a couple of areas right at the edges of performance. In most scenarios you won't be able to tell the difference between an image shot with either camera.

 

[bigal1000]

80D if you have Canon lenses. D7200 if have Nikon lenses !!

 

[KmH]

I discovered why most of the pros shoot with Canon !

That begs 2 questions.
1. What was the reason why you think you discovered?
2. What source of information or poll indicates most professional photographers use Canon camera gear?

 

[SuzukiGS750EZ]

I discovered why most of the pros shoot with Canon !

That begs 2 questions.
1. What was the reason why you think you discovered?
2. What source of information or poll indicates most professional photographers use Canon camera gear?

The white lenses at NFL games of course

 

[Peeb]

I'm a Nikon guy but I have owned 4 canon cameras over the years (2 film and 2 digital) and they were WITHOUT EXCEPTION really fine instruments that captured great images. My first real camera was a canonet GIII f/1.7 rangefinder, and it was SO awesome.

Thinking that the Nikon will make 'sharper' images is really chasing fool's gold. The sensor and lack of AA filter on the Nikon give you an advantage, but the story is mostly told in the combination of the glass and the operator, IMO.

EDIT: so why am I a nikon guy? Paul Simon, of course. A song that catchy makes you GOTTA go get a nikon and shoot kodachrome (back when you could)....

You'll be humming that tune the rest of the day now, BTW.

 

[beagle100]

I discovered why most of the pros shoot with Canon !

That begs 2 questions.
1. What was the reason why you think you discovered?
2. What source of information or poll indicates most professional photographers use Canon camera gear?

The white lenses at NFL games of course

\

sure, the big white Canon lens is for pros (especially sports)

 

[gregdandou]

A month and a half ago , i bought a canon 80d after close examining both the Nikon d7200 and 80d at a store in Athens . The grip , controls and quality
of the 80d is FANTASTIC . The d7200 looks and feels cheaper and older.

I was surprised after touching holding and pressing the shutter
buttons and the main control dials of both of
them , how much nicer the 80d grip and controls feel
compared to the d7200. That is the main reason
why i changed my mind after holding both
of them simultaneously and bought 80d.

So far i have taken 1300 pictures and some videos from
the canon camera , and i am more than satisfied with the image
QUALITY , both jpeg and raw ( set Fine Picture Quality and High ISO Noise Reduction to ‘’1’’) . The autofocus is instant and accurate , for both stills and
videos with either the vf or the lv. The only thing i
don't like is the auto tracking ability of subjects through
the vf. The good news is that tracking through the lv is
awesome.

I believe that d7200 is equally good or even better than 80d
with stills or tracking subjects , but the build
and feel quality of the Canon is unmatched .

Don't believe everything you read
from the so called experts . I had read all the reviews and
critics for two months and i was biased and ready
to buy the Nikon d7200, but i had my mind
changed after a visit to a store …. and found out myself , of aspects they never reviewed in comparisons .

The cost for changing the shutter
mechanism in Greece is 160 Euros for the 80d after
100.000 shots and 300 Euros for the d7200 after 150.000.
So after 300.000 shots , the Nikon will cost 600 Euros while the Canon 480 Euros.

Go to a store that has both of them
touch and hold them , experiment with their buttons ,
menus and controls and make your own
conclusion. I don't think that any serious amateur
photographer will ever see the so called
difference in dynamic range or
differences at iso 25600 taken simultaneously at
the same place with similar lenses and
settings from both cameras.

Both cameras are great but I could
buy only one , I forgot all the expert reviews about
superior image quality of the Nikon and chose the Canon for
the build quality , control and the awesome grip.

I am 45 years old and my older
SLRS are PENTAX and MINOLTA so no strings
attached to either the Nikon or the Canon cameras ,
last and least my profession is Civil Engineering
and Topography , not paid photographer.

Greetings from
GREECE .

 

[greybeard]

I'm a Nikon guy but I can honestly say that I would probably be just as happy with Canon or Sony or pretty much anything else. Looks like the Nikon might have the edge in shadow detail but the Canon has the edge with video, AF, flippy touch screen. I just bought a D750 but there are times I've thought about a 5d MK iii or iv. My pictures probably wouldn't look much different no matter what I used. It would still be ME pushing the buttons. Just like you and the 80D/D7200 thing, it will still be you pushing the buttons. I just digitized a bunch of Kodachrome 25 slides I had shot back in 1981 with a Minolta SRT 201 and a 50mm f/1.7. My pictures I shoot today with my high tech new equipment don't look all that much better than those I shot 30 some years ago with with a manual match needle camera and a 50mm lens.