12.04.2017/XNUMX/XNUMX Nikon camera was announced D7500.
Nikon D7500
Official announcement hereprices here и here.
I was asked to add this post here in order to wash the bones of Elder Nikon.
|
|||||
Nikon D7500 AnnouncementComments: 188, on the topic: Announcement of Nikon D7500Add a comment |
|||||
|
|
|||||
Nikon is killing himself more and more. Take the previous model, cut it down, put the price higher, ....?, Profit !!! Who got in the way of the second card, Ai? It was necessary to remove the screwdriver and make the lens non-removable and the price was $ 3000. Nikon, where is the logic? How can a stripped-down camera cost more? The system already raised questions with its illogicality, but after the last mowing decisions, I seriously thought about changing the system. There will be no continuation of d300 and d700, this is clear. Confusion and sloppiness - they promote this idea
Yes, and why did they make another battery again ?? Will each model now have its own batteries? The next step is to make it not removable, like in an iPhone. Here they write that users of Soviet glasses need ai, And Nikonovsky Ai ?? The line has become amateur, it is better to buy 5xxx then. In general - bzk
The alternative is ducks, i.e. Canon :)
Sorry for typos, it was from the tablet. Keskes "Ducks"? Right here http://photowebexpo.ru/articles/Announced-the-Nikon-D7500-camera the guys write that the price for a carcass will be 1250 dollars, with a whale of 1750. 1750, Karl !!! What's next, d900 with crop, built-in battery, not compatible with all lenses and with manual focus for $ 10 thousand? After AF-P-trimming compatibility and this craft I will not be surprised at anything. In my Nikon everything.
Ducks - from the anecdote about chickens and floods :)
You will not consider me stupid if I ask to clarify, maybe I don’t know this story ?;)
-Dad, what is an alternative?
-It’s hard to explain in a nutshell, well, here's an example:
You work in a factory, plow and plow from year to year, gradually save up money. One fine moment, you have enough money to move to the village. You buy a dozen eggs and hatch chickens from them. You feed them, drink them, take care of them, they grow up and begin to lay eggs. And you put them in an incubator and now you already have thousands of chickens. You take care of them and now you already have thousands of adult chickens. And now these thousands of hens begin to lay eggs, you are already a cool farmer! And then the flood is a complete kick! And it washes your whole farm, everything is dead, everything is washed away ...
- Dad, where is the alternative?
-Duck!
I think the batteries will still be compatible. as was the case with enel14 and enel14a.
They removed the second card slot, changed the battery.
Has the camera gotten better? no. Buy this? definitely not.
Nikon, the pinnacle of crop evolution - the D500. Everything else is not needed.
And as I understand it, Nikon is just the sensor and sensors (except for focus) from the D500 and put on the D7500. Therefore, if the D500 is the pinnacle of crop evolution, then the D7500 is close to it, but cheaper :)
They spat on the new model from head to toe. In general, all the spitting on the case. Everything would be fine if it were not for cutting the rheostat of the diaphragm. Goats are simple. There are no words.
I went to the bastard Ken Rockwell - he just pees with boiling water with delight - that's the paid skin! He lies and is not shy!
Do you think?….
He marked the rheostat, baht block and card slot as “missing” and not as “bad”.
Fine line of wording.
I think this is commercial opportunism - that is, paid for ((((
Maybe, of course, this citizen gets some bonuses, but he continues to bend his line. If you carefully read his reviews, then in the camera he is most concerned about the ratio of weight, price, quality and convenience for the user (focusing primarily on amateurs), and pays less attention to camera strength, buffer volume, rate of fire, AF accuracy, shutter speed and other important features for the professional.
For example, he sang songs about the D90, when the d300 (s) and d700 were in the yard, which he criticized for their heavy weight, and the exorbitant price at the time, not singing their virtues for the professional.
From his point of view, for an amateur camera almost everything got better, as he said they took the best from the d7200 and d500:
+ Weight reduced, even relative to d7200
+ The price has almost remained the same (now nobody recalls that the d7200 at the time of release cost $ 1200, not much less than $ 1250 for the d7500 now)
+ His favorite modes U1 U2 are present.
+ The outbreak is also there
… etc. I will not reprint his review.
And he didn’t consider that they cut it, which is important for the amateur (like he had no problems with flash drives in 10 years, and for FW optics, buy FF, because only there the windows will open).
Those. Ken bends his line further on the assessment of photographic equipment and does not change himself.
Personally, I will support the Timofey post on 16.04.2017 21:08.
So much negativity pours on Nikon, completely not noticing the merits. You see, Nikon didn’t release the ideal camera again, didn’t report something again, offended something again.
When the d500 came out (the camera of the year, according to many respected publications), there was a sea of negativity because of the price. Now, the campaign, history repeats itself.
It seems that if the camera is slightly different from the ideal or costs more than $ 1000 (for FF - $ 2000), then this is a failure of the company, in which a horde of hard-core marketers immediately starts up.
Friends, comrades. Be simpler and more restrained. Similar products will find their buyer, and maybe after 5 years buying on a used d7500 for pennies, you’ll say, oh, what was the Nikon company that didn’t follow marketing experts and at some point did not increase megapixels, and made a very balanced camera. Good to all!
Kenya Rockwell generally writes that Kenon is better. If you carefully read, then he takes off for a long time on him.
Yes, I honestly don’t know why everyone is constantly unhappy.
The D500 costs as much as the D200 and D300.
All of them are wrong, they wanted a touchscreen and a tiltscreen, please. But no, it's still bad.
The fact that the most important thing is the sensor from the D500, the large buffer and the new AF module are somehow kept quiet.
Like, there is no booster and you can’t attach a manual lens, so the camera sucks.
Booster is needed only in the report. It’s uncomfortable, the camera doesn’t fit into the case with it, you need to either unscrew it or remove the lens.
I don’t understand why it is needed in other situations? What, you can’t hold the camera on top with a pen?
For manual lenses, the crop is also not suitable, and they are not needed today. One fuss and waste of time. If you really want to, then buy a D700 or D600. Everything will come out cheaper.
I personally do not need a touchscreen at all. The second card ... This, of course, is a minus. But my cards have never been denied. They just need to be changed more often.
Anyway, the reporter will take a D500. And this one is really only for lovers.
I support. Kenya switched to Canon 5dm3 with nikon d3 and now sings songs that this is the best camera in the world.
All Nikon's modern prof. he suddenly began to distribute cameras due to the lack of U1 and U2, and calls the new focusing system of d5 and d500 a product of marketers (didn’t you let him touch every single focus point) and appreciated it rather sparingly, just like the cameras themselves.
In general, he has his own vision of good photographic equipment, his own scale of values and his priorities (for example, the reporting features are clearly less of a concern to him than the presence of a button or weight).
So Kenya himself writes that he is not a reporter even once.
How can he objectively evaluate reporting cameras?
What can he know about autofocus when the most dynamic scenes for him are his own children playing tennis in the bright sun, or just running on the lawn?
He shoots all sorts of garbage, shoots well, no doubt about it. But colleagues call him “toilet photographer”. That says it all.
I do not want to say that Kenya is nonsense, he has good, well-thought-out articles that it would not hurt anyone to read. But his reviews of technology and optics are quite superficial and one-sided. To put it mildly.
I will support.
Rockwell cannot objectively report reporting cameras, and you, friends, can?
Rockwell at least held all worthy models in his hands and compared, and you?
And Rockwell worked in the print media in the 80s and dealt with tons of films, including reports!
What is your esteemed track record that you pass verdicts here who can evaluate what and what ?!
Ken’s biased because it’s corrupt, then you need to pass everything through this prism
Yes, yes - when Ken Rockwell shoots three shots in bracketing mode, all three take first places, only in different categories, when Ken Rockwell unpacks a new memory card, it already has masterpieces, Ken Rockwell's shots are so perfect that Adobe released for him a special version of Photoshop, which consists of only one button "Close", blah blah blah, we have heard all this more than once.
And in general - "get it first", a great argument for all times :)
- And who are you?
(C) Shura Balaganov
I stopped reading his reviews, everything is standard:
1 - wow, this lens (camera, flash, etc.) is just lovely
2 - help my large family
The announcement is here (on Nikon's resource, not advertising!) http://prophotos.ru/news/19266-anonsirovan-nikon-d7500#comment-3258217428
For me it’s better to buy a full-frame Sony A with an adapter for such a terrible price. And to change your D7100 only for the sake of rheostat aperture and a new flash drive for the buffer and (finally) a movable screen, now even with a mirror you will not have to dance with a tambourine. Here
Questions to Kabushiki, be extinguished by Nikon for 100000 (the price of a circumcised miracle):
1. Where is the stabilizer on the camera (ala Pentax, Sony, etc.).
2. Where is the normal focus mode with the video. 51 focus points were left, with the whole micro-adjustment this photo is easily done in Lightroom, and with the video, you see, they again propose switching to 1,3 mode.
3. The new processor with a reduced matrix, why Fujifilm, Sony, Pentax, Olympus do not reduce the matrix, and by the technical characteristics their mirrorless D7500 already surpass. There is a video comparison of the D810 and Fujifilm X-T2 (crop), the dynamic range is already better with the X-T2.
4. Where is the electronic shutter.
5. Where is the normal mirrorless mirror for old lenses.
6. Why smartphones already have more features.
Nikon, first released the D7200 with some modifications to 30000 p. (although for the D7100 the Wi-Fi and GPS modules could be bought indecently cheaply or a tablet where it is all there), or screwed into Lightroom with pens. Apparently, after 3-5 years, my camera will not be Nikon.
Nikon skis sharpened in the wrong direction. It's time to start really improving the quality of both carcasses and optics. And then, with each release of new models, you understand that only the glass coatings and the agility of autofocus are really getting better. Everything else is only optimized and made cheaper. There is an aftertaste of some kind of disposability ...
One kind of pessimism ... When Nikon releases a new model with microscopic changes - howl (marketing profanity, etc.). When Nikon renews the camera - howling again (cut, worsened, broken ...).
And meanwhile, if Nikon was only chasing marketing, he would probably have crammed 30-40 megapixels onto the sensor ... Megapixels (despite the pursuit of laymen) are reduced to the optimal 20,9. Working ISO expanded down to 50 and up (no extension) to 51. The exposure meter sensor works at 200 thousand points. Minimum shutter speed 180/1 sec. The rate of fire is 8000 frames with a buffer of 8. And nothing like that, coupled with the parameters inherited from 50-7100, isn't it?
The price is high, yes. But both 7100 and 7200 are still on sale. And what a secondary market - take what you want. And those who yearn for the 7000th can take it practically in a new state for a very nice price.
The high price of a novelty is always the case, it is necessary to skim the cream off the lovers of the new. Then the remainder of 7100 and 7200 will go, the price will be reduced.
And yes, the camera is also for laymen, so you can't cut video out of it, you can't refuse wi-fi and gps ... All these buns don't cost much, but the audience of buyers is decently expanding. It is not so rare to buy a cool DSLR for a lot of money, expecting to get wow-photo shots.
Nikon - at least with some kind of update!
I completely agree with your words. I would like to add that those who want a professional crop camera can add $ 200 and take the D500.
+1 Now the cost of the D500 and D7500 is almost the same
Yeah, the same, how about:
D500 - $ 1999.95 (http://www.nikonusa.com/en/nikon-products/product/dslr-cameras/d500.html)
D7500 - $ 1249.95 (http://www.nikonusa.com/en/nikon-products/product/dslr-cameras/d7500.html)
The difference is $ 700 (1,5 times) ...
Do you live in America? Well then, yes.
https://foto-market.ru/index.php/product/fotoapparat-nikon-d500-body/
https://www.yarkiy.ru/goods/18968-nikon-d7500-body?_openstat=bWFya2V0LnlhbmRleC5ydTvQl9C10YDQutCw0LvRjNC90YvQuSDRhNC-0YLQvtCw0L_Qv9Cw0YDQsNGCIE5JS09OIEQ3NTAwIEJvZHk7Q0xub1Q1U2VYLWxWUGR3Z1pNMWVIdzs&frommarket=https%3A//market.yandex.ru/catalog/56199/list%3Fwas_redir%3D1%26srnum%3D25%26hid%3D91148%26rt%3D9%26text%3Dnikon+d7500&ymclid=924301784388493977400001
Is it possible to give links correctly? If you bring the price of one model in Bright, then take the second from there. In Bright on 19.04.17/500/150, the D7500 body is sold for 95 thousand rubles, the D65 body is set for 60 thousand rubles. The difference is XNUMX thousand rubles. or XNUMX% is, and it is significant.
Where did you bring the links from two different stores, and even wrote, and do not I live in America - I do not understand.
Just add not $ 200, but $ 700 ... In the official Nikon store, the price of the D500 is $ 2, the price of the D000 is $ 7500. Nikon has been on the market for a long time, they know how to make a fork in terms of price and options.
Oh, really, 700. But that doesn't change the essence of my message. D7500 is a wonderful AMATEUR camera
And did anyone claim that this is not an amateur camera? The entire 7000 series is amateur. And the D750 is amateur. The line “only for the pros” is narrow, because the segment of the pros is narrow. Mass sales of cameras cannot be achieved without amateurs. But the pros buy a lot of different body kit and specials. equipment - in these sectors they make a profit. Therefore, the unification of most of the camera lineup into the mass segment and the rejection of rigid division is inevitable. And cutting back on options to rank prices and get paid from any budget is also inevitable.
Many local commentators throw mud at the amateur camera for the lack of "professional" gadgets and features. And I sincerely do not understand them.
Just amateur (rheostat and price), a professional will take the D500.
And it seems to me that the diaphragm repeater is in demand by just an advanced amateur. The pros have modern lenses, the whale lover, and the old manual optics are used by advanced amateurs who do not want / cannot spend a lot of money on equipment, but know how to achieve good results with Ai glasses. IMHO.
In 2-3 years this camera will be available for sane money on the second-hand market, and here such a bummer.
I bought a full frame - the crop was not interesting at all. Here's a way out of the situation.
+1
Full frame didn’t kill D500 sales, but D7500: while nobody saw it in practice, it’s too early to say. Let's wait, we'll see ...
D500 is not an ordinary crop. It is rather a truncated professional camera. Moreover, it is cut only by the size of the frame, working ISO and the battery pack. The rest is a top-end device. Such a crop is taken for a long-range report in good lighting. Type of wildlife. Easy to wear and cheaper than a similar full frame.
Ordinary people switch to full frame because of the higher quality of the picture, its “artistry” (depth of field, bokeh), high ISO, wide angle.
Nikon even more emphasizes that the 7xxx line is amateur. There used to be “advanced amateur”, but now it’s just a good (and expensive) amateur camera.
In general, in time I jumped from Nikonov :) mirrorless cameras are getting better and better, and the development of technology almost eliminates most of the advantages of a full frame over crop.
Literally. As was the advanced amateur, so the advanced amateur has remained. Matrix and sensors, as on prof. crope, the main and additional screen are wonderful, the buttons are brought to the body, the balance of protection and weight-dimensions is observed, the focusing points are enough and well distributed, the pentaprism is preserved, the screwdriver for non-motorized lenses remains. Well, this is not at all an entry-level amateur camera - the most advanced amateur camera.
And the nickname doesn’t even say that she’s an "entry level", for this there is 3xxx / 5xxx.
They removed specific options so that the camera was not too "advanced" and did not compete with older models.
Removed: repeater, second card slot, baht. block. Did many advanced fans use this?
Readers of this site are very concerned about the lack of a repeater, which is not surprising. Here the possibilities of using Soviet and other manual optics are very well laid out. And if you conduct a survey among all owners of the 7000-series, how many will be upset?
It’s difficult to understand passions from a repeater, given that Nikon has not yet removed 7200 from production, i.e. there is a choice, and at least some time will be.
For commercial photography, reservation and baht. block is important, but for non-commercial is it so critical?
And why do you assess these not so significant losses, but are not at all interested in the heart of the camera - an excellent matrix and its environment from the processor and a system of sensors taken, as they say, from the D500?
And the display is rotatable with the ability to set the focus area - not just self-indulgence - now you don't have to crawl on all fours to shoot footage below.
Well, what to moan at the loss of the repeater and the second slot, if the camera should rise by the head compared to 7000/7100/7200? I look forward to frames.
Don't confuse Gogol with Hegel - rheostat and repeater :)
The 2nd memory card is convenient in on-site shooting and when splitting cards into video and photos. In addition, in the campaign the map is more difficult to lose. The battery pack is necessary for shooting in the cold and during long night shoots, the usual battery of night time-laps does not pull in time (especially in August, when the time for shooting is longer, but the night is colder).
Thus, from the consumer advantages of the new camera, I note a high shooting speed, a folding screen. Everything. The advantages of an effective ISO (they say 1 stop, but I do not see it), there is no stabilization.
I will not note cons, they are obvious.
A folding screen is needed a) for shooting from the ground b) for macro. For a selfie, you need to use the 5000 Series or Boot. To take pictures from the ground, a mirror helps, if you shoot macro, then to get sharpness you need a tablet for widows, which connects to the camera via usb. Alternatively, you can buy a wireless adapter for 3000 and use a smartphone. If you shoot when the sun is at its zenith, then no screen will help you, only through the JVI.
Shooting speed is important, but in sports or when shooting children / animals. As a lover, I had to use the full amount of the memory buffer very rarely and, most often, when shooting from a car.
The camera, from the point of view of the consumer, practically did not become better. There is no point in overpaying 50000. Even after 3-4 years, when the camera becomes cheaper, it will be easier and cheaper to take a used full-frame camera with stabilization and an adapter for my lenses.
I’ll also add: when shooting a video, I set up manual control of the aperture, and changed it on the lens during shooting, now this is impossible.
For the flash (both external and internal), you need to manually adjust the power%), TTL is called.
Then, a sinful thing, I thought that the D5300 is better or this piece?
So this is all clear. The question is not why you need a second slot, baht. block, rotary screen, rheostat, etc. Everyone already knows why. The question is: are these things that critical for the whole mass of 7000 series users? The fact that this is critical for individual buyers is undoubtedly so. And how many people who are critical to such an extent that they, wanting to buy a new camera, will opt for the old one? Perhaps only a few that will not do the weather in sales.
There is an assumption that before cutting off some options and introducing others, Nikon did some marketing research. Still, it's not the first year on the market to point a finger in the sky ...
I completely agree with you. Probably spent. Considering that instead of e-mail, the Japanese prefer fax, and Fukushima instead of the robotic IMR-2 systems, people put out them. They can also stop marketing at the level of the early 90's.
Who needs the D7500 with a list of mirrorless and SLR cameras on a roll of toilet paper that will surpass it. The segment that sat on
d7000 to d7500 (without taking into much consideration) will not pass.
Given the massive reductions in Nikon, I believe that stubbornness with faxes goes to the level of marketing.
Dmitry, just as the owners of D7000 did not switch to D7100 or D7200, so the overwhelming majority of them (I mean owners of D7000, D7100, D7200) will not switch to D7500 (the differences are not so dramatic - only if they killed their camera and need to buy something close and newer). People from Nikon are not so naive as to rely exclusively on them. The 7000th series is purchased by: a) owners of 3000-5000 series, who over time needed more functionality; b) owners of outdated advanced cameras, if they decided to replace them with a more modern analogue (such as D90); c) new buyers who want a “cool DSLR”, but with automatic modes (alas, this phenomenon is not uncommon). In fact, there is nothing wrong with the D7500 for most of the buyers. And those who know for sure that he cannot live without a rheostat, baht. block and the second flash drive - he will calmly take the D7200 or look towards the D610, as well as towards any other device that solves these tasks. And about mirrorless cameras, I won't argue at all - this topic is bottomless. Now sales of all cameras, both DSLRs and mirrorless cameras, have dropped. Nevertheless, DSLRs are sold in very large volumes and new models are needed in this market to compete successfully in it. This is the essence of the appearance of the D7500.
Timofey, without any sarcasm, I agree with your thoughts on the transition of owners of old equipment to new ones. After stealing his D5200 himself, he switched to a used D7100. But there is one “but”. The people who update the cameras are "advanced" amateurs, most likely reading reviews. With a lot of lenses, it certainly has no choice. But to buy the D7500 (it is clear that in 6 months the price will fall) having the D500 at the same price? It would be a different matter to make the D7500 a logical continuation of the D7200, but with a new matrix and focusing system, a higher rate of fire and a buffer. And for reporting there is a D500 (but without an on-camera flash). Here we cannot talk about the absence of technologies (they are already in the D500 and D5).
All camera sales have been falling for 9 months, but for Cannon and Nikkon they are falling 6% faster. As stated in one of the articles, “As a result, companies prefer to optimize production costs and from year to year churn out cameras that differ from each other only in the presence of secondary options, and photographers, in turn, are in no hurry to buy refurbished models, since the advantage of new cameras over old ones, as the rule is negligible. "
Using existing cameras, as I had a compact from the 2006 Olympus, and when photographing people in the sun, I had to do exposure compensation, set a flash, change the exposure of the horizon during processing and make either a “mysterious” dark person against the background of the sun or use a brush with exposure compensation, everything remained the same.
What prevents to attach to the camera the software that controls the flashlight for night photography at, say, a distance of 20 m? So they will release flashes worth $ 700, which in the dark do not give the desired viewing angle.
Otherwise, what will make a person buy a brick weighing 2 kg. and carry it with you.
Hey. I don’t understand ... What is this nonsense about manual settings for the flash? Not confused?
Who told you that the owners of the d7000 did not switch to the 7100/7200? I myself switched from 7000 to 7100 (there was not enough money for the d750), and immediately felt a positive difference of 7100. But now only FF is next!
I wrote that the vast majority did not cross. Exceptions happen, and your example is just confirmation :)
I don’t know that you got this especially when you switched from 7000 to 7100, but perhaps you had reasons that could not be reduced directly to the technical differences between these two cameras.
In general, sales of cameras, in particular DSLRs, showed a slight increase in the last quarter.
The absence of a second slot for a flash drive, a batblock, incompatibility with manual lenses - some kind of logic can be traced for an amateur camera, although not indisputable, of course. But why was the display resolution reduced? What is the deep meaning in this? Lower than 7200 and half as much against D500
If this camera produces results similar to the d500 when shooting at high ISO, then it will be possible to forgive a lot for it :) Well, it’s quite logical that the d7500 has become a trim:
Among the crops, Nikon had a d200 camera and was simpler d80, in parallel there were absolutely amateur d50 and d40. Everything was logical. They released the d300 - the simpler d90 and the amateur d3000 and d60 appeared. Again, logical. And then d400 did not appear, there was a slightly improved d300s and d7000 and d7100 appeared, which in a number of parameters were ahead of even the professional model, well, the initial ones continued from d5100 and d3100. And then the d7100 and d7200 almost completely blocked the capabilities of the d300s, which had already been discontinued. Pros shooting on crop either shot the old d300s, or already switched to d7100 and d7200. And then a professional camera appeared - d500. It didn't make sense to build a competitor in the form of a d7500 from the very beginning. So the d7500 is lighter, it has the same sensor and flash. Therefore, it was logical that some functions were cut down so that there was no struggle between the models. This was the case with d200 and d300 - the pros took them, and the advanced amateurs took them cut in terms of their capabilities, but not according to the d80 and d90 matrix. Now the place of d80 and d90 next to d500 is taken by d7500.
By the way, the canon had the same thing. There were top crops - 20d, 30d, 40d, 50d. And then they made an even cooler 7d. And so that sales of 7d did not suffer, the next two-digit model was severely cut and released 60d, which was already inferior to 50d in a number of parameters, ahead only by the matrix from 7d. So everything repeats itself. And everything is quite natural. I think the sales of the d7500 will not suffer much from such deterioration.
Everything about the case.
In general, Nikon upset me with this model, one castration of the second slot has already killed. It’s too early for me to change my 7100, but if I have to, it’s either 7200 or D500 (provided that the horse's price tag drops to 1500 beev per carcass), or crawl to full. Another alternative to completely blame, has already begun to glance at Fujiki.
I am the owner of 7000 models in my arsenal, with 610 I will never understand the cost of a cropped camera above a full cdr, no matter how tricky it is)
To each his own…
Nikon Official Store (USA): D610 (advanced ff) - $ 1500, new D7500 (advanced crop) starts at $ 1200. Older models: D810 (professional ff) - $ 2800, and D500 (professional crop) - $ 2000. The pricing policy is clear, divided by prices and options so that you can withdraw profit from any wallet.
What are you talking about when you write “the cost of the crop is higher than the full frame”? If you are comparing the store price of the D7500 with the aftermarket D610, then this is simply not correct - either we are comparing only the store price, or only the aftermarket for different alternatives.
new D7500 (advanced crop) !!! I would say: advanced-retracted crop: D
It all depends on the goals. If portraits are needed, high ISO, narrow depth of field, then, of course, d610 will be preferable to even a very good crop like d500. But it's very difficult to shoot a reportage quickly on the d610 - autofocus does not always cope with it. It is clear that they filmed before and with manuals, but still the d500 is a new step in the development of autofocus. It is extremely fast, accurate, aiming at night, and dots cover almost the entire frame. For a number of reporting purposes, d500 will be a cut above d610. On the same photo, participants, pros, who, having 5dm3, d810 and similar cameras have already met many times, still did part of the work on old 7d or d300s. For example, a subject, or portraits in a studio, a person with half a dozen ff cameras and medium format still shoots on topcrop, because there is no difference and in some cases the initial ff is less convenient and functional than topcrop. At the same time, weddings and bokeh lovers, at the first opportunity, change even a very good crop to the simplest ff. In general, it all depends on the tasks. And for a number of tasks, a more expensive crop is preferable to a cheaper full frame.
His matrix in d3xxx and more does not need an amateur.
That there too! Take an iPhone and spank a selfie.
Somehow you are dismissive of the younger Nikon line, comparing the camera with the phone.
Somehow you are neglectful of amateurs, measuring everyone according to your requests to the camera.
He did not compare, it is sarcasm - he could have written instead of “iPhone”, for example, “iron” - the meaning of the joke would not have changed much. The camera is not an arbitrary set of elements, but a complete technical solution. Dreaming of a car engine from a car in your own car makes as much sense as the desire to put a matrix from the D500 in the D3400. The D3300 and D3400 cameras are quite well-balanced models, and they give a good result for their money. What does not suit them in fact?
What do you dislike about an iPhone camera?
Most likely it will. This is the usual practice of camera makers (in the case of crop). First, the cool matrix goes to the top segment, then goes into the advanced and then into the amateur one. I think in a year and a half we will see a model d3 *** with this or a very similar matrix. So it has been since d3000, it is unlikely that something will change. Also, autofocus modules and a number of other parts of the cameras are moving little by little from older to younger. Actually, the same d3300 in the matrix was at the level of d7100, which, in turn, at the time of release seemed extremely successful in the matrix and many complained, they say, it is a pity there is no such matrix in fotik simpler. Autofocus d7000 (although there were complaints about it) was a big revelation after d90 for many, and then about the same module went to the amateur d5200. In general, in my opinion, there is not a single objective reason for the fact that over time the initial line of cameras does not acquire the same wonderful matrix as the d500 and d7500.
Of course, the reduction in the cost of advanced components allows, and competition makes it possible to develop and make the entire model range better: both senior and junior cameras. Moreover, we have to compete not only with other market participants, but also with our own used models of previous years. But only a friend must understand that happiness is not in one matrix. For example, the D3300 / D3400 have the same die as the D5300 / D5500 / D5600, and the D5200 is the same as the D7100 / D7200. The conclusion is simple: the entire amateur series (budget 3000s, mid-5000s and advanced 7000s) uses matrices that are close in quality. Nikon does not cut the matrix, but divides it into different segments by adding and cutting off other components, options and functions. Therefore, the owners of modern 3000s can complain about a lot, but not about the matrix. If they are not satisfied with the matrix in the first place in the 3000th, then they should have looked not even at the 5000th and 7000th series, but at least at the full frame in the 600th and 800th cameras. And ... then it is necessary to fork out 5 times more, for which I am sure, from the owners of 3000 cameras, few are ready.
It's not just a matter of curtailing functions, the advantages and disadvantages of some firms over others. The fact is that now everything costs a lot of money, and to be more precise in the wording after the beginning of the crisis we became half the poorer, and if in 2013 I thought about a full frame, now I don't even think about ... Maybe in two years I will take the D7200 when pretty much will become cheaper. and that's not a fact. For those who make money from photography, technique is critical for them; for amateurs, this is not the case.
The fact that they have become poorer is understandable, well, all the more so, in such conditions the 7xxx series becomes even more relevant as a workhorse for many. And here we see the reduction of important functions, for what? To reduce the price of the camera? Show me where? Maybe I'm blind? Or all the same to force, since you earn money, be sober as you go for the top line?
Apparently Nikon miscalculated when he thought that Krop fades into the background in photography and instead of the professional crop D300 camera, he released the 7000 series close to the professional crop cameras, leaving the full frame for professionals and making the 7000 series “almost” professional in the crop segment of his cameras.
It turned out that Krop not only continues to live, but a bunch of lenses came out to him, the same Sigmas 18-35 / 1,8 and 50-100 / 1,8, which, in terms of image quality and sharpness, give a picture quite comparable to a full-frame , and even for money for optics, much more affordable for photographers - so they had to revive a full-fledged professional Crop D500, and the 7000 series was again transferred to the subclass of the cheaper D90 with functions cut off from professional cameras, by the way, not very important for amateur photographers, focusing on on a matrix from an older brother, which allows you to get the image quality of a professional camera for amateur money.
In general, twisting the hands of the supporters of their system. It would be better to mirrorless on the crop fully rolled out :(
You mean what kind of "twisting hands" - how long has Nikon been a monopolist? The choice of cameras and lenses is gigantic today. There are a lot of both SLR and mirrorless cameras. I'm not saying that Nikon's line is not sickly, for any tasks, tastes and wallet + there is a large market for used equipment. Well, there are just a lot of competitive offers today. It's like being forced to buy a new camera. For me, for example, this camera is slightly more interesting in terms of features than the D7000, but it is not at all interesting in terms of the price (taking into account the sale of the D7000). And I am absolutely equal to this new product: whoever is interested will buy it, whoever is not interested will pass by. I pass by, sleep well, work to what I'm used to.
Please tell me what to switch from d90 with a budget of 1000-1500 raccoons, if you are only interested in photos (video is not necessary at all), Wi-Fi, bluetooth and so on are not interested. Maybe it’s really worth jumping off Nikon. Of the glasses, only 18-300 and 50 1.8g. Generally confused at the end.
for about that kind of money you can already buy: “Nikon D3X The camera is in perfect technical condition. The run was only 18 thousand frames. There are barely noticeable traces of use on the case. Includes charger, belt, paper, disk, two original batteries. Price 1600 $ or at the rate in hryvnia. "
I look at the photos presented in the review and I do not like them (at least half). Perhaps, this has nothing to do directly with the apparatus itself, but: what did they mean by this? For simple conditions - the usual Nikon picture, in general; for complex ... well, too, most likely somewhere it will look like, with an eye on the optics, of course. I would have looked at your pictures - so they are not. In a word, there was no desire ... There will be pictures from him - you look and it will become clear.
What photos? antikonik bot detected :)
Yes, it’s the head of one famous city.
Guys, honestly, I read all the comments, from the first to the last. And now I want to ask you all one question, which, by coincidence, is ripe for me today.
The other day, I ended the shutter on my d80, and today I realized that I won’t change it, in fact, I started to google it and see what Nikon got and that it became cheaper on the secondary, and went nuts. In short, as always there is no money; I don’t even look at novies. FF, too, I do not need anything yet. What is worth looking at? I can’t describe the budget, because I don’t focus on prices, but I don’t want to do dumb replacement with d80 for my younger brother, nevertheless, I want to take something more seriously, but definitely crop. Where to look?
Himself in almost the same situation, but only for an upgrade. I won't look at the 7500 for sure, 7200 or 7100. The main reason is the battery pack. The Chinese, of course, will come up with 7500, but it will be flawed, like 3x00 and 5x00. I'm already used to gripping it :) And I look at ff - prices on the secondary market are comparable to 7200 and even 7100.
I keep looking at the d300, but this is the same age specimen as my d80 used to be. That is, I will take a camera with the shutter already fired and which I will repair again after a couple of years ... Maybe I'm wrong, correct it.
On d7000, the transition from d80 is advisable, in general?
Dear community, why are there a bunch of bad reviews chasing Nikon? And why at the sight of one card slot, is everyone shocked? The same company, fuji, in its new xt20 camera, goes the same way, takes the sensor from the older model and trims everything that makes the camera professional. In modern conditions, this is normal, the company should earn money, but many wanted the d500 matrix for less money, including me, it’s worth understanding why you need the functionality that modern cameras give, if you don’t know it means you don’t need a camera. For example, it’s good for my tasks, the important thing is not a dead picture at 6400. Autofocus suits me and 7000, since most use only the center point, unless of course you shoot a sport. As for ff, I was the owner of the d750 with one lens, but sold it maybe. I realized that I’ll take a camera, a camera that is suitable for my tasks, and 2 more glasses !! And this fact itself is to compare the price of crop and ff Stupidity, you need to understand that the cost is not important cameras, but the cost of a set of glasses for each of them. And if you know that most people do not distinguish a picture from crop and ff, provided that quality glass is used. And the most important thing is not to lie to yourself. And then many just in the sky when they buy the first ff, and only 50 of the glasses, or dark zoom)) I was like that myself, and when I realized how much the whole set I needed cost, I stopped chasing what was expensive for me at that time , so I became the owner of 7000, 85,50 and sigma 18-35 all at 1.8) and you know for my tasks this is a great kit, the only thing is the noisy matrix. So why all this flood, to a simple truth, ask yourself the question why do I need this camera ?? And if you are not sure with the answer, you do not need it !!! If I know why I need it, I will buy it 2 years after the presentation, but for now I will squeeze it out of what I have, I often heard stories when a person raised money for 2 years for ff, instead of buying a crop and learning, and after the purchase he is a pro ) with an arrogant look towards those who are on the crop. To summarize, if nothing changes in 2 years, I will be about this camera, if fuji will not lure me))) and yes I know what I need from fuji .. Common sense, and take pictures)
Well, you have 2 lenses - 85 and 50mm, which work at full frame
it remains only to change the zoom)
Given the change in viewing angle, 50 need to be sold, 135 to buy and instead of 18-35 to take 24-70, and the carcass is also more expensive than 2 times. And the price flew to heaven
Because when the 7xxx line appeared, there was no D500 and the 7000 partly served as a top crop against the background of the outgoing D300s. And now the lineup has expanded and the 7500 had to move, that's all they whine that they removed the professional buns that were in previous versions for the same price (approximately). And the D500 type is very expensive ...
Removed the very necessary (some) buns, such as a diaphragm rheostat.
Those who are not interested in working with old manual optics - for those, of course, the camera is fire. And the price is also fire :)
Review Nikon D7500 by Sergey Samsonov
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JV4fK4iy7kQ
I looked, carefully studied the full sizes from this D7500 on the surveyors site. And as the former owner of the D7100, and now the D800, I can say that the microdetalization is noticeably worse for the 7500 and there is watercolor and grain even at low ISO, similar to the Sony nex and A7 with their non-chopping noise reduction. Color reproduction is close to real but the picture is tasteless, dead. 7100, although noisy, was sharp to stupor, but comparing this castrate D7500 with even an outdated full frame is generally ridiculous
You yourself answer your question, comparing crop and ff, this is ridiculous. To compare the picture of two cameras of the same class, you need to make it in the same conditions, on the same glass, like something that you wrote is a chatter))) with all due respect but the matrix from d500 can not be worse than 7100) you can find a million comparisons on various portals. And yes, the d800 is also imperfect if you look at things with your approach. Thank you, I hope you understand what I mean.
I looked at many examples with the D7500 from various sites and reviews and I can’t understand anything - not a single frame has any sharpness at all! In the landscapes, the background is covered in soap. The structure of the image is not at all the same as in the 7100 and 7200 and very much resembles the Kenon. There is no micro-detailing - everything is blurred with aggressive noise reduction in watercolor like on Sony soap dishes, even at ISO 100. The color rendition is not Nikon's at all - something in between the Canon 6D and the Sony a7. In short, some kind of shit, terrifying. So I think it's better to sit on the BU D800 and enjoy the perfect picture or buy something new with a guarantee and modern with watercolor noise at ISO 100?
What a horror
The best option is to rent this camera for a day or two and you will understand everything yourself. I did just that and am grateful to myself for it.
Dear Arkady! Do not advise what to take D7200 or D7500. I'm sitting on the D3300, but I want a more advanced DSLR. I read reviews, watch my father-in-law and really can’t understand which is better.
Previously, the 7200 was the top among the crop, and now the d500, and it seems like a d7500 downgrade camera is obtained.
D7500 is quite a good option, the best in the advanced amateur segment. D500 is already a professional / semiprof segment. I would recommend the d610. But if you don’t feel like contacting the full frame, then the d7500 is just right.
I support Arcadia! I bought the D7500 instead of the D7100 and am absolutely satisfied with everything. Sometimes, while arguing about something, we forget about the main task of a photographer - to display the nuances of our life from different angles. And everything else is the lot of idlers. Good luck to everyone in your work!
By the way, in the Nikon showroom I drove Nikon D7500 and D500 alternately for an hour and a half. There are no problems with finances - you can buy a full frame of the D850. But I do not need it, I shoot for the soul and for friends. So, I chose the D7500. Why, ask? It's more comfortable for me to work with her, and the quality of the images and the efficiency of these two cameras are absolutely the same, if you don't find fault. Once again I will make a reservation, I do not rent for money, only for the soul ...
Nice camera. Just bought, try. Comfortable, not heavy. Nikkor lenses 16-85mm, 35mm 1,8, Tamron 18-270mm, from Helios 81 manuals. I still have a few lenses for ff but have not tried it yet. Works great in insufficient refreshment. And right now we have no other because the polar night :). Auto ISO has set up to 5000 offspring that the noise does not strain. For the web is the thing. Tenacious af. Wonderful DD, the editor reaches out with a bang, my beloved old man d700 is far behind. Of the cameras that I have, only the Fujifilm Finepix s5pro allows this. Second slot? For whom it is important, for me not. And I doubt that this is important for an amateur. At room temperature, it warms a little in the area of the card compartment. If Bluetooth and WIFI are turned on, the battery eats quickly. Vobshem is a very convenient camera to use.