Reading mode: Light Dark

Differences between d7200 & d750 ?

Go to last post
The DX crop mode on a D750 FX camera is about 10 MP. The full frame FX mode on D750 is 24MP.

The full DX area of D7200 (DX camera) is 24MP.

To use DX lenses on D750 would only give you 10MP resolution in DX mode, while DX lenses on D7200 give you full 24MP because of pixel density and they cover full area of sensor.

To take advantage of the D750 and full 24MP resolution you would need to buy FX lenses. (mostly more expensive than many DX lenses, except for some primes like 50mm F1.8 which can be $200 and 50mm is a FX and works on DX. All new FX lenses mount on new Nikon DX cameras.)

The advantage of the D750 is less noise at iso of 1600, 3200 and higher 6400 etc., so better image quality in very low light, retaining more detail and less noise when correcting incorrect exposures in post edit softwares.

If you can afford the overall higher price of FX like D750 with FX lens selections, it is clearly the winner in low light photography. However, if mainly an advanced enthusiast photographer or taking photos for extreme distance like wildlife, sports, in moderate light, the D7200 might be the better choice and more affordable solution. Both are capable of great images, keeping in mind the pros and cons of each.

Like comparing apples and oranges, there are differences in FX and DX formats. Both camera maximum resolution is 24MP, though, there are differences in low light image quality though.
 
Last edited:
wassim al malak said:
2- IQ , sharpness , colors .
Click to expand...
In the context of sharpness, the following post is relevant:

Loading…

www.dpreview.com

sharpness - an interesting aspect in photography that we all strive for. We certainly know it when we see sharpness in those images that makes us: wow. I find that sharpness depends on a host of issues or variables that when they come together deliver sharp images, but if one aspect or variable is awry then sharpness can be spoiled. No doubt others can add or counter some aspects on the list below, which I would welcome, as it is a learning curve for all of us. The variables include:
  1. Poorly focused lens or lens/camera misalignment
  2. Shutter speed too slow for hand holding even with stabilization
  3. Shutter speed too slow for the velocity of the subject
  4. Aperture setting, not a sharpness issue per se but a perception issue relative to DoF
  5. Holding technique not providing a stable platform
  6. Breathing technique disrupting a stable platform
  7. Not letting the lens/camera stabilization system settle down
  8. Quality of the lens or the lens not having the aperture sweet spot selected
  9. Use of poor quality filters
  10. One’s post processing skills and PP
There may be more variables that others can offer or comments to counter what I have said, but I believe it is worth knowing that there are a number of variables and how they impact on sharpness so that you can work with them or counter them in order improve sharpness.
 
Flashlight said:
Random Photographer said:
wassim al malak said:
Hello for all ,

Except some features as tilting screen , 1080 @60fps , group AF , except such features what's the differences between the d750 and d7200 ?

using the same lenses in same cases on the d750 and the d7200 , what is the differences in terms of :

1- resolution , pixel density , pixel peeping .

2- IQ , sharpness , colors .

any opinions are thankful .
Click to expand...
Hey Wassim,

I get that some people might be confusing by not giving a clear black/white difference between the two, that's because it really isn't that defined a difference if you think about it from a professional/enthusiast level. But since you're working your way up, I'll try to make it a bit clearer.

It's like the difference between a point and shoot camera with a lot of buttons and a DSLR. Why did you start using a DSLR instead of a regular camera? It was probably for blurrier backgrounds (bokeh), and more dynamic range (ability to adjust RAW files by a lot, and make dark pictures brighter, etc,), and to take better pictures when it's dark out. It's not just about detail, because even Cell phone cameras can take really detailed pictures when there's enough light. Yet you still bought and use a DSLR.

Well, going to full-frame cameras is essentially the same thing. Essentially, a bigger sensor. It allows for even blurrier backgrounds (bokeh), More dynamic range in post, and much better pictures in darker situations than APC-S Sensors. The difference won't be as dramatic as going from cell-phone to DSLR, but there is still a big difference, especially with the D750.
Click to expand...
DxO reports more dynamic range for the D7200 than for the D750.
Flashlight said:
The only reason you would want to stay with the smaller APC-S sensor is if you like to take pictures of things far away, like birds or planes. The smaller, denser, APC-S sensor lets you use smaller, less expensive, and basically more convenient lenses than full frame counterparts.

That's about it. If you can afford a full-frame camera, which aren't crazily expensive as they used to be (~$3000+ Canon 5DMKIII, new vs. ~$1900 D750, new (or you can buy grey market with a good credit card, ~$1400 with credit card warranty)), then go for the full-frame and get the best consumer image quality available today.

Random
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
drivecancel said:
I seriously doubt you will notice those DR differences though but you certainly would notice the ISO performance differences.
Click to expand...
There's a 1 1/6 stop DoF difference between FX and DX. If you shoot images on both with the same aperture then yes, you have a stop less DoF and a stop better ISO on FX. If you maintain the same image parameters, as in taking the exact same image, there´s hardly a difference between the two.
 
wassim al malak said:
goosel said:
The main difference is that the 750 is Full-Format (FX) and that the 7200 is APSC format. (Others have mentioned this)
Click to expand...
and i knew that , but i didn't try the FX yet to compare .
Click to expand...
not knowing what you know and what you don't. Just a starting point.
wassim al malak said:
wassim al malak said:
But what does mean for image quality?
Click to expand...
can't i ask it like that ? can't i ask about IQ between those ?
Click to expand...
Of course you can. My 'question' is only rephrasing yours.
wassim al malak said:
wassim al malak said:
The larger FX sensor has more surface area and gathers more light.
Click to expand...
that's clear .
wassim al malak said:
It also means that wide angle lenses are effectively a lot 'wider', and tele lenses 'shorter'.
Click to expand...
that's what i'm searching for .
Click to expand...
good
wassim al malak said:
wassim al malak said:
You also have less DOF meaning less in focus and more 'blur'.
Click to expand...
so , if i wanna shoot landscape with 15-30 on d750 , i will don't have the big DOF if i dial the right aperture and focus at the right point ?

must i use a DX body to achieve that ?
Click to expand...
no just stop down a bit more then you would have with DX.
wassim al malak said:
wassim al malak said:
When it comes to sharpness and IQ though. In good light with equivalent lenses you'll probably not be able to see any relevant difference.
Click to expand...
that's clear .
Click to expand...
Your question wasn't clear, you specifically asked about IQ.
wassim al malak said:
wassim al malak said:
However, in poor light the D750 will clearly be superior because the larger sensor gathers more light.
Click to expand...
that's a point , will it be sharp in such case ? or it will turn to softness ?
Click to expand...
depends how little light is available. It will definitely be better than D7200.

BTW: would have made life a lot easier for all if you had asked specifically about the Low-Light situation...
wassim al malak said:
thanks for your helpful reply ,

thanks for your answers .
Click to expand...
 
wassim al malak said:
if so , how can we run out of that diffraction ?
Click to expand...
We can't diffraction is simple physical border that limits resolution

Once you With the D750 i believe it starts kicking in at around F8-11. With a denser sensor you will start seeing this effect sooner. but they have more depth of field at the same F-stop anyway.

The only technique that can give you massive depth of field while maintaining resolution is focus stacking. Google that technnique other people are better at explaining that then i am.
wassim al malak said:
ND filters ?
Click to expand...
No ND filters limit the ammount of light coming in. Therefor you can use slower shutterspeeds without having to resort to higher F-stops which could lead to diffraction.

Great for capturing moving water there are plenty of examples that show the effect of ND filters.
 
You stated that the only lens you have is the Nikon 18-55. You will need to make a big investment in lenses to see a noticeable improvement with either camera. You might keep that in mind when deciding what to get.
 
People talk a lot about better high ISO and less DOF, but the reality isn't necessarily that rosy red for FX. The difference in light sensitivity is probably somewhere around one stop, and for telephoto lenses, that is insignificant, since with the DX format, you have access to a 130m eqv. f/1.4, a 300mm eqv. f/2.0 etc. At the wide end, it's not that easy, but on the other hand, there are a couple of stellar wide-angle zooms for DX available, like the Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8, the Sigma 8-16mm and not least the Sigma 18-35mm f/1.8. Since DX lenses, as well as the D7200 body, are mostly much cheaper than the FX equivalents, you will be able to afford more high quality glass.

I shoot FX myself (D810 and D700), but if the D7200 had been available when I bought the D810, that camera would not have been a choice as obvious as it was at the time. In your shoes, I would probably have bought the D7200 and spent the money saved on a good lens.
 
RemcoDo said:
j_photo said:
You say: indoor events , landcape , portrait , and family

FX advantages:
For shooting indoors with low light, the D750 should have somewhat less noise when shooting at high iso compared to the D7200.

When shooting portraits, the D750 allows more control over depth of field. The selection of available lenses for portrait work match up somewhat better with FX sensor size than DX.

FX disadvantages:
FX bodies cost more and in some cases FX lenses cost more than equivalent DX lenses, for example 24-70/2.8 (FX) compared to 17-55/2.8 (DX).

Lasltly: In good light and unskilled hands, you won't see any difference between results from the two bodies. Judging by the kinds of questions you are asking, my guess is you will see no difference between the two. But if you gain experience and develop your skills, the FX body could offer advantages over time.
Click to expand...
If you know what you are looking for you can see some difference in the RAW file. But if you have to compare the two shots from the D7200 and D750 that were post processed it really is up to the experts.
RemcoDo said:
If you can afford FX gear and are ambitious in your goals, there is no harm in purchasing something you can grow into. But if funds are limited, you will probably get more value by sticking with DX at least for now.
Click to expand...
If you can afford it choose the FX. If not, go for DX and invest in FX lenses so you can eventually grow into FX. If JPG is the output that you want I would not invest in FX. If you only look at your photos on a screen I also would not choose FX.
Click to expand...
Sounds dubious to me. How do you look at a RAW file, except to post process?

And who are these experts who can see what the rest of us can't?
 
Last edited:
wassim al malak said:
Hello for all ,

Except some features as tilting screen , 1080 @60fps , group AF , except such features what's the differences between the d750 and d7200 ?

using the same lenses in same cases on the d750 and the d7200 , what is the differences in terms of :

1- resolution , pixel density , pixel peeping .

2- IQ , sharpness , colors .

any opinions are thankful .
Click to expand...
Owning both the D7100 (which has nearly identical IQ as the D7200), and the D750, I would say that the decision is relatively simple. If you are primarily into wildlife photography, where the extra reach of dx is a big advantage over FX (given the same lens and shooting distance), go with the D7200. If you don't need the extra effective focal length of dx, go with the D750.

Even though I'm primarily interested in wildlife, I decided to buy a D750 for the times when I'm shooting in poor light, which is often, and I carry both bodies with me. If I could only own one camera body, it would be the dx. On the other hand if I was interested in a wide variety of photography and could only own one camera body, it would be the D750.
 
about face detection , you're right , it's in VF on d750 but on d7200 i's only in LV which i don't use for stills .

in fact , i knew everything about d750 & d7200 specs and features , i remember it more then my children names :) BUT i was asking about differences in IQ , sharpness , noise ... .
 
stack focusing ?

that's new for me , i'll search for it .

thanks :)
 
thanks for your notes , i appreciate that .
 
thanks for your help ,

i really don't care about the reach of DOF of the d7200 because i don't shoot birds or wildlife .

i often shoot in low light , or landscapes in day light , so seems like the d750 will be my final word , even the budget !

hwo want thing , must pay for it :)
 
sure !
 
that's clear ,

thanks
 
sure , i'll with the new body i think .

you're right .
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top