Enthusiast stalwart: Nikon D7200 in-depth review

Still the best Nikon DX camera for general use.
Best sensor IQ, 24MP and better body than D3000/D5000 series.
D500 is of course best for serious sports and the only professional body.
D7500 is better for sports and low-light photography.

D500 is expensive and D7500 is starting to lose previous D7000 series features because of D500. I'd rather buy used D7200 for a good price than crippled D500 (D7500) that also loses it's status, but your needs may vary. D500 is absolutely worth it though if you can afford it.

I do not understand the current criteria. For me the d7200 camera is clearly golden level up in the video section. I know examples of current favorites and frankly only by bad faith can be compared. I do not say Nikon forever, but I feel like ... I believe in what I do and I see.

While you've guessed the sensor in D7200 is an updated version of Toshiba one, here in the following review it's showing that it's a Sony sensor like that of D5500!
http://www.lightandmatter.org/2015/equipment-reviews/nikon-d5500-vs-d7200-which-should-you-buy/
It is a bit confusing.

I bought it last week and in one or two days I'll get it. I can't wait until get it in my hands. love all Nikon's cameras. I have 8 Nikon DSLR: D40, D40x, D50, D200, D3200, D7200 and D810 and love all of them. my best time of photography is made with my litle D40 which is still my best buddy eveytime I go out walking.

For my needs this is the best digital camera i had until now :o) (before i used Film, 10D, D300, D700, 5DIII, X-T1)

Combined with the 16-80 it's perfect for my needs. I use it only for Landscape and nature photography. For other general photography i use a small 1" camera.

I use it since 6 months and now i can say the D7200 + 16-80 combo gives me the sharpest and nicest images i ever got. Much better than D300 +17-55, much better than D700 + 24-70G, a bit better than 5DIII + 24-70II. I didn't like the X-Trans for landscapes so i don't talk about Fuji ;o) )

It's not "pro" build like the Dxxx serie or like the 5DIII. But it's really smaller and really lighter and this is more important for me.

I never use video or liveview so i can't say anything about that. These features are much more intuitive and well implemented on the smaller cameras like the 1" ones (RX100, G5X, G7X ...).

Just my opinion.

After reading the review , with points like:
Best-yet APS-C image quality: good JPEGs and extensive Raw dynamic range
Class-leading low-light performance
Impressive AF subject tracking performance through the viewfinder
All AF points continue to work down to -3EV
Wide AF area with dense 51-point coverage
Well-implemented Auto ISO feature also available in M mode
Spot-metering linked to AF point
Flat Picture Control for more gradable video footage
Interval shooting and time-lapse features, with exposure smoothing
Quick and fairly simple Wi-Fi implementation
Very good ergonomics and interface design
Excellent battery life
In-camera Raw processing
Reasonably small, light body for a DSLR at this level
Why didn't the D7200 get a gold award?

Amazing how the D7100 got a 'Gold Award' while the D7200 got Silver. The D7200 has a much bigger buffer, better low light autofocusing, WiFi, longer battery life, sharper and cleaner Expeed 4 image processor, and better high ISO performance with an extended range... ALL features that prevented me from purchasing the D7100. Thank you Nikon for all the upgrades I cared about and wanted to see... ;)

I am planning to upgrade from my D300 soon. I have been considering either the D7200 and or the D750. I love to shoot a variety of wildlife and personal photos and have enlarged many of my now antiquated D300 photos. I am probably going to go with the D7200 because I am so accustomed to using and happy with my 18-200mm Nikon lens. From what I have read it has given the feeling that I will be very pleased with the D7200 and its capability compared to the D300 in higher iso photos. Thanks for your advice and any recommended lenses to use with such. thanks!!!

It has really stunning image quality. If you mount sharp lens on it like new 16-80 you could rely on all 24mp one by one. I think It deserved gold award.

I bought my D7200 in September used it a lot mainly for wildlife/bird photography. I liked it a lot for its low-light capabilities although there were some noise using the ISO6400 setting. Later I took it to Japan for a 24 day tour and found the shutter release froze on a few occasions (probably due to the cold). After usain for about a month the rubber skin on the bottom part of the grip peeled off about 10mm (poor glueing/workmanship in the Thai factory I guess). Last week I got a fright of my life when the SD card with a day's shooting of birds yielded no images although I reviewed them in the field. Test-shooting 2 shots immediately yielded the images. Dissatisfied I went back to the same spot and shot the birds again. This time they were there in the same card used the day before. Wonder what went wrong? I can't get the NFC to connect to my smartphone although I followed the youtube demos. I am bringing it back to Nikon service centre next week but how can I prove what went wrong?

I like the Nikon D7200 a lot, but it's a bit pricey for me. Is there any good option that costs about half the price? I'm considering Nikon D3300, it seems good as well: http://www.camerarunner.com/best-dslr-under-500/

The D7200 has been my first "brand new" body purchase since the D5100. I'm really liking this camera especially the twin card slots and the U1 and U2 menu options where I have one set to "actual manual" mode. In other words when I flip to that dial auto-iso turns off.

Yawn.....Wake me up when Nikon decides to get innovative...

It's strange that people are praising the -3EV focus capabilities of the D7200, but forget to mention that Pentax already done that, two years ago with K5II and K3 after.
Of course I'm not that ingenius to think the AF performance of K5/K3 are on par with Nikon in every aspect, but they at least could point that it is as precise and sensitive.

I've been using one, along with D750, since May. Interestingly I find the exposure much more consistent on the D7200 than the D750, and I like the lightness. I use a Tamron 10-24 and 16-300 for travel and really don't miss the weight! Image results are very satisfactory. My D7200 replaced a D5100, the size of which and quality was always a bit of a positive shock. I find the video unconvincing. AF is not user friendly or visually acceptable. If used manually, with care, results are excellent. But should we have to resort to manual to get the most from it? As a still camera there's little more I could wish for. Even WiFi is pretty slick. But to start, I did need tech support to get my head around it. Overall the Silver rating is fair, if you weight Video as heavily as the reviews of today's cameras do. As a still camera alone I would give it a Gold, despite the modest upgrade. The base camera was already darned good by all accounts. Sure beats my older D200!

I am using your own camera comparison tool to compare the D7200 against the cameras you state are equal or better (NX-1, a6000, 7DMII). Almost without exception, they are ONLY better in the video category.

Frankly, I personally do not give a .... ..... about video. The only thing that I could wish for in addition to the current features is the 91K sensor and maybe the higher ruggedness of the 7DMII. Otherwise, the D7200 is the perfect crop sensor camera for stills.

I think the the silver award is understandable but not fully deserved. I think it is more based on the perceived missing features not the quality and refinement of the operation of the camera.
I have shot mine for two months and it is a paradigm shift from my D90 in so many ways. Yes incremental revisions are getting pretty small compared to the heyday of 5 years ago. The Canon 7DII is a very good allegory to the 7200 and its iteration was over 5 years not 2 for the D7200.

Why oh why did Nikon cripple the top LCD display? Even the Nikon D70s I owned back in 2005 was able to display more information than D7200, namely white balance, auto focus mode and image size. I really got used to using the top LCD panel but I suppose I will have to switch to using the back screen instead.

I use Nikon professionally and have recently upgraded my D7000 to the D7200 just to keep up to date, skipping the D7100. I use a D810 for studio work but now go to the D7200 for wildlife shooting as it has a similar pixel density and gives the desirable extra 'reach'.

All opinions in these forums are subjective but, for me, the upgrade was well worth it and the camera, using good Nikon lenses, gives me the stunning image quality I've come to expect.

There are some fantastically capable cameras out there today and all have their merits but I am pleased to have added the D7200 to the list of Nikons I've owned, used and made money from since my first used Nikon 'F' in 1968.

Hi DPreview,

I have been a long time follower of this wonderful site, since the time of Nikon D1 days! the reviews have always been great source of info BUT!

The following has NEVER happened before, at least I have never seen it here before!

Pros: Reasonably small, light body for a DSLR at this level
Cons: Camera is bulky when compared to mirrorless rival

Why is a DSLR being compared to a Mirrorless? "Single Lens Reflex" is not Mirrorless guys, please!

First its reasonably small, light bidy for a "DSLR" at this "level" and then you guys go out of the way and totally change the "level" and compare it against a mirrorless?

One of these have to go, either the Pros or the Cons :)

Please Nikon, fully articulated LCD screens on all your DSLR's! There are so many uses for them.

Ehm - this review is something like a car review. Author likes VW Golf and so, every feature different is bug. This is DSLR, review DSLR, compare it to other DSLRs. Not to mirrorless, not to VW Golf. Thanks.

- es por demas de llamativo que pese a varios meses de salir la nikon d 7200 casi no se encuentran comparativas de fotos entre modelos de tomas con la dx 7100 y dx 7200 ¿¿?? y lo poco que se mostro que nikon aca en la 7200 tiene menos ruido a isos mas altos pero paga un precio por suavisar TODA LA TOMA arriba de 3200 iso...conclucion menos ruido pero TAMBIEN MENOS DETALLES DONDE JUSTO LO NECESITAMOS...nadie noto esa falencia.? saludos

Pretty disingenuous to compare D7200 size with OM-D E-M5 that is a micro 4/3 sensor in your "Shooting Experience" page. You should know better than that. Fujifilm X-E2 is a better comparison for size.
Still, look at the actual numbers, D7200 is only about 1.5" thicker and taller than the X-E2. Then in your "Body and Design" page, you complain that D7200 is not thick enough for a comfortable hold. What do you think would happen if you were to use the even thinner X-E2 camera. That would be torture on your fingers would it not?
Regardless, 1.5" is not going to break your arm or break your camera bag. Remember, lens size is about the same.

So, using the same lenses, how much better would out-of-camera jpegs be with D7200 versus my D5100? I am a jpeg shooter and never been bowled over by the jpeg quality I've been able to get out of the D5100.

Thanks dpReview for raising the issue of focus accuracy with SLR lenses. We love our reflex viewfinders, but increasing resolution is starting to reach the limits of this design. Zoom lenses often need different focus calibrations for different distances and focal lengths (and even f-stops sometimes), making the adjustments complex and too much for even the capable operator to do by AF fine tuning.

What’s needed now is focus mapping for each lens. Given the power of the modern camera’s IC, would it be possible for manufacturers to include a program in the firmware that maps focus for each lens at the range of distances, f-stops and focal lengths via the main sensor, and stores the data for calibration of the AF module?