D7200 vs D700 High ISO files?

[AllanW]

Hi all,

I have also posted this in the D300 forum.......

I am considering selling my D300 and D700 bodies and picking up a D7200.

Reasons are that I also have a D750 and I am looking for more reach but not at the expense of high ISO performance as compared to the D700.

Also, I checked out the D7200 at the store and found that the controls are very similar to my D750. This is very handy when shooting functions and having to move very quickly between cameras without having to stop and think about controls.

I currently shoot two cameras at functions (dual shoulder strap). One with 24-70 and the other with 70-200. I also occasionally shoot my D300 with the 70-200 for the extra reach but only in good light. It just doesn't cut it in low light crappy conditions compared with the D700 and D750.

So, for those with direct experience, how does the D7200 compare with the D700 for high ISO files?

Thanks in advance for any help you can send my way!

Allan

 

[HarrieD7000]

I think the extra reach also can be achieved with the DX crop on your D750. There are less pixels as with the D7200, so if you need the 24 MP, go ahead.

But just before you buy, make a shot with the D750 and the D300. Same distance. Then crop the D750 result to the same size and check what is better. If you can use a D7200 for a little while do the same. Also check if you really need a D7200 or if a TC-14E can do the same?

When you need a second or backup camera, I think the D7200 is great, but won't be used very much as soon as you are working FF.

--
Hope to learn from you all

 

[labalaba]

I've not compared D700 and D7200 directly but since D750 and D7200 are contemporary sensors and processors you should probably expect D7200 to be about 1 stop worse than D750 when the whole DX frame is compared to the whole FX frame. But that comparison is not valid if you will use the D7200 for extra reach; in that case the appropriate comparison is between the D7200 and the D750 in DX crop mode. You should expect quite similar high ISO performance in this case, although since the D7200 will have more pixels in the DX frame it may better facilitate post-processing to reduce noise, in addition to the higher resolution. If you were to compare the D7200 shot at 200mm with a 300mm lens mounted on the D750 shot in FX, the larger sensor would have the advantage again.

 

[AllanW]

I think the extra reach also can be achieved with the DX crop on your D750. There are less pixels as with the D7200, so if you need the 24 MP, go ahead.

But just before you buy, make a shot with the D750 and the D300. Same distance. Then crop the D750 result to the same size and check what is better. If you can use a D7200 for a little while do the same. Also check if you really need a D7200 or if a TC-14E can do the same?

When you need a second or backup camera, I think the D7200 is great, but won't be used very much as soon as you are working FF.

 

[AllanW]

I've not compared D700 and D7200 directly but since D750 and D7200 are contemporary sensors and processors you should probably expect D7200 to be about 1 stop worse than D750 when the whole DX frame is compared to the whole FX frame. But that comparison is not valid if you will use the D7200 for extra reach; in that case the appropriate comparison is between the D7200 and the D750 in DX crop mode. You should expect quite similar high ISO performance in this case, although since the D7200 will have more pixels in the DX frame it may better facilitate post-processing to reduce noise, in addition to the higher resolution. If you were to compare the D7200 shot at 200mm with a 300mm lens mounted on the D750 shot in FX, the larger sensor would have the advantage again.

Thanks!

I am actually interested in the D700 vs D7200 High ISO for those who may have shot both.

I wish Dpreview would keep old models in the comparison area.

 

[lac111]

Did you think of checking here?

Loading…

www.dxomark.com

As old as the D700 is, it's still better for high ISO than the D7200. I've sold in the past six months my D700 and D7000. The D7200 from all accounts is no more than half a stop better high ISO performance than the D7000. I compared the D700 and D7000, and based on that I'd say this DxO comparison is about right.

 

[ritmikov]

So, for those with direct experience, how does the D7200 compare with the D700 for high ISO files?

D7100 iso 6400


D7200 iso 6400

Now you know that D7100 & D7200 high iso are much the same, compare D7100 to D700. These are normalized to the lower resolution of the D700:


D7100 iso 6400


D700 iso 6400

The D700 might look a little smoother but it also loses detail. You can try to NR the DX file:




D7100 iso 6400 Noiseware Pro try



--

Hi-iso Sensor & NR software comparisons: http://bit.do/ritmikov

 

[StanyBuyle]

Had D700, and have D7200. High iso is quite similar, D7200 DR is MUCH better.

 

[StillLearning]

The D700 was my first really good lowlight camera. Ended up selling it for a D810. When I got my D750 last year I did some night shots to see how each of my cameras handled it. Did the same test with my D7200. These are 100% crops from full resolution. Both converted through NX-D using 'Better Quality 2013' NR. Original Full view was done with NX2 using 'Better Quality' NR. In better lit subjects the differences are closer.

Full view shot







Noticed a stop difference between the 2 sample so pushed 1 stop. Though I prefer the other one.

 

[labalaba]

I've not compared D700 and D7200 directly but since D750 and D7200 are contemporary sensors and processors you should probably expect D7200 to be about 1 stop worse than D750 when the whole DX frame is compared to the whole FX frame. But that comparison is not valid if you will use the D7200 for extra reach; in that case the appropriate comparison is between the D7200 and the D750 in DX crop mode. You should expect quite similar high ISO performance in this case, although since the D7200 will have more pixels in the DX frame it may better facilitate post-processing to reduce noise, in addition to the higher resolution. If you were to compare the D7200 shot at 200mm with a 300mm lens mounted on the D750 shot in FX, the larger sensor would have the advantage again.

Thanks!

I am actually interested in the D700 vs D7200 High ISO for those who may have shot both.
I wish Dpreview would keep old models in the comparison area.

comparing D750 with D700 should give you a fair idea of the D7200 capabilities.

 

[Sucama]

The D700 was my first really good lowlight camera. Ended up selling it for a D810. When I got my D750 last year I did some night shots to see how each of my cameras handled it. Did the same test with my D7200. These are 100% crops from full resolution. Both converted through NX-D using 'Better Quality 2013' NR. Original Full view was done with NX2 using 'Better Quality' NR. In better lit subjects the differences are closer.

Full view shot







Noticed a stop difference between the 2 sample so pushed 1 stop. Though I prefer the other one.

SS 1/15 in d700

and 1/30 in d7200

Why?

 

[StillLearning]

Taken several months apart. D7200 and D700 metered differently. Can't retake the D700 no longer have it. Could retake the D7200 using same metering as D700 and then push it but already know it will still look better. Better DR on the D7200. This was a torture test to see how the cameras behaved. In better lighting the difference is less but 24 mp still has more resolution then 12mp. The D7100 also looks better then the D700 in this test.

 

[AllanW]

Had D700, and have D7200. High iso is quite similar, D7200 DR is MUCH better.

 

[AllanW]

nt

 

[AllanW]

Thanks for the comparison. These particular samples have way too much light in comparison to what I shoot though. Thanks anyway!

 

[Westmill]

I had a D700 and a D7100 not so long ago.

My thoughts were that the D700 started to look cleaner from above 800 ISO. However, things are never that simple Viewing at the same size, closed the advantage a lot, since the D7100 files are twice the size. I would still give the D700 the edge but it is just that... an edge ! Then you have a far greater DR within the D7100. While this does not effect noise as such, it is still a part of IQ overall ! So this closes the gap even closer for deciding which is better ! It could be close enough for it to be a matter of personal taste !

Then there is another side that always gets over looked. If you need a bit of extra DOF then you can shoot a stop wider with DX which will then of course lower your ISO a full stop. In this situation the D7100 wins with ease !

Its a hard choice between these two for sure. I think the D700 has a slight edge if looking at nothing but noise, but its slight, and the extra DR of the D7100 makes for just a pleasing a pic. I could not pick a winner here.

 

[AllanW]

I had a D700 and a D7100 not so long ago.

My thoughts were that the D700 started to look cleaner from above 800 ISO. However, things are never that simple Viewing at the same size, closed the advantage a lot, since the D7100 files are twice the size. I would still give the D700 the edge but it is just that... an edge ! Then you have a far greater DR within the D7100. While this does not effect noise as such, it is still a part of IQ overall ! So this closes the gap even closer for deciding which is better ! It could be close enough for it to be a matter of personal taste !

Then there is another side that always gets over looked. If you need a bit of extra DOF then you can shoot a stop wider with DX which will then of course lower your ISO a full stop. In this situation the D7100 wins with ease !

Its a hard choice between these two for sure. I think the D700 has a slight edge if looking at nothing but noise, but its slight, and the extra DR of the D7100 makes for just a pleasing a pic. I could not pick a winner here.

Thanks for the feedback. If I understand correctly though, the D7100 and D7200 have different sensor manufacturers. Is that correct?

 

[Westmill]

I had a D700 and a D7100 not so long ago.

My thoughts were that the D700 started to look cleaner from above 800 ISO. However, things are never that simple Viewing at the same size, closed the advantage a lot, since the D7100 files are twice the size. I would still give the D700 the edge but it is just that... an edge ! Then you have a far greater DR within the D7100. While this does not effect noise as such, it is still a part of IQ overall ! So this closes the gap even closer for deciding which is better ! It could be close enough for it to be a matter of personal taste !

Then there is another side that always gets over looked. If you need a bit of extra DOF then you can shoot a stop wider with DX which will then of course lower your ISO a full stop. In this situation the D7100 wins with ease !

Its a hard choice between these two for sure. I think the D700 has a slight edge if looking at nothing but noise, but its slight, and the extra DR of the D7100 makes for just a pleasing a pic. I could not pick a winner here.

Thanks for the feedback. If I understand correctly though, the D7100 and D7200 have different sensor manufacturers. Is that correct?

Yes, but the D7200 is supposed to be ever so slightly better anyway. So should close that gap even further. I think I would go with a D7200 myself. As much for all the other improvements such as metering ect. Not to mention less weight The only reason perhaps to pick the D700 would be just a preference for FF in itself.

 

[don1966]

You do not get EXTRA reach, you get less amount of a view picture your self with a full frame body and you have a 20mm lens on standing at the back of the bus, you can get the whole back end of the bus side to side.

Take a DX or crop body camera, standing in the same place with the same lens, now take a picture the tail lights are not in the picture of the bus because the the sensor is smaller it doesn't fill the circle of the lens as much as the FX body sensor. You do not gain any extra "reach" as your wanting, when they say 35mm equivalent, its like you zoomed in further AKA cut more of the picture out.

 

[TriBeard]

This is getting extra reach. your 100mm lens becomes the same as a 150mm lens on a FF camera.

If you have two cameras, one FF and one APS-C. Both are 24 megapixels. If you use that 100mm lens, with the full frame you are going to get 24 megapixels of image at 100mm. with the APS-C, you will get 24 megapixels of image at 150mm. In order to "zoom" in the FF image, you'll have to crop, which means you'll wind up with an image containing less than 24 megapixels of data to match the field of view of APS-C. This is why many macro and wildlife/BIF photographers prefer APS-C. It does in fact give you more reach making your zoom lenses even longer than they would be on a FF camera.