Nikon D7xxx owners thread

BillN_33 said:
I use my V1 a lot with a 300mm Nikon for close ups, especially Dragonflies. Walking around with a long lens I find the V1 difficult to use ..... it's far better for me on a tripod. The DX, D7200 is great as a walk about with the 300mm PF with or without the TC x 1.4 ..... I notice the difference in IQ if I stick the x 2 on it........... D7xxx - I only find noise a problem with crops of small birds ..... unless the light is good and you are within a few feet

The 300mm f2.8 VR is not bad with the x 2 TC, but it is far better with the x 1.4 ......... the 600mm f4 is great with the x 1.4 and D750 - if I am on a tripod or bean bag I definitely prefer the D750

General shots with say a 50mm or the 70 200mm I use the D750

Landscapes and similar stuff which I don't take much of, I tend to use a DPM and I always take quite a few shots with a DP3M, which at ISO 100 and ISO 200 give really stellar and different images

I'm retired so can indulge myself a little with Camera kit ..............

I would not worry too much about wanting high MP's Chris, my D700 is still up there with the current crop
Click to expand...

I think I'm after the impossible so have to accept the limitations of what's out there! I can't afford a 600mm f4 (and wouldn't want to carry that weight around). The d7200 is a good camera in good light, it's literally just the higher ISO that's my problem. This is all stemming from the fact that a while back I planned to get the d7200 and the Sigma 150-600mm. Since the lens is f6.3 I was thinking that with the 1/3rd stop I'm losing over my current f5.6 setup, I'll need to up the ISO even more and read that the d7200 was a good upgrade in noise over my old d7000. This is why the noise is becoming an issue for me and I'm looking at how I can minimise that. I don't want to think "oh it's an overcast day and I only have f6.3 so I might as well not go out." I want a body where I can just up the ISO to compensate and still be happy.
 
htid said:
Very good, but that's on a d810 though, which I expect to be good at 640 ISO ;)
Click to expand...

I wasn't presenting them as good though ... just saying that small birds/big crops can be difficult despite the camera :)
 
gramps said:
I wasn't presenting them as good though ... just saying that small birds/big crops can be difficult despite the camera :)
Click to expand...

Your photos don't show that though since they're really good! Or do you mean the foliage rather than the noise being 'busy'?
 
htid said:
Your photos don't show that though since they're really good! Or do you mean the foliage rather than the noise being 'busy'?
Click to expand...

Primarily the surrounding twigs & foliage ... just one of the obstacles with photographing small birds :)
 
I'm hoping to put the D7200 through its paces over the next few months so I can make my own assessment. I do think us photographers worry too much about stuff like noise. When I show my wife photos I've taken she never comments about the background noise or any technical details, to her and many other non photographer they look at the subject and how it makes them feel. There was a good canon advert recently that monitored the eye movement of a non photographer, a photography student and a pro photographer (who took the image) when they looked at the same image and they talked about it too, it was interesting to see and hear how they each saw the image differently.

@htid what lenses do you currently use?
 
Last edited:
rob-nikon said:
I do think us photographers worry too much about stuff like noise.
Click to expand...

I think you are right ... also many togs do not use careful noise reduction where appropriate.
 
rob-nikon said:
I'm hoping to put the D7200 through its paces over the next few months so I can make my own assessment. I do think us photographers worry too much about stuff like noise. When I show my wife photos I've taken she never comments about the background noise or any technical details, to her and many other non photographer they look at the subject and how it makes them feel. There was a good canon advert recently that monitored the eye movement of a non photographer, a photography student and a pro photographer (who took the image) when they looked at the same image and they talked about it too, it was interesting to see and hear how they each saw the image differently.

@htid what lenses do you currently use?
Click to expand...

I saw that thing you're talking about but that was to do with how who they thought the person was reflected how they took the photo.

Anyway you might be right, a lot of photographers may worry about noise when others won't notice, but really I'm taking the picture for me because the only other people who see it are the few people who may look at any thread I post in here. If I'm not happy with it, it's not good enough (and I'm very picky!). I have the 300f4 + 1.4xtc glued to my camera and I'm very happy with the quality, just lacking a bit of reach. Gramps I'm not included in that (in case you meant me) I do use selective NR and spend quite some time layering images and applying different levels for different layers. As you know though, if the bird in general is noisy, the only way to fix that is to lose detail and contrast.
 
Last edited:
htid said:
Gramps I'm not included in that (in case you meant me) I do use selective NR and spend quite some time layering images and applying different levels for different layers. As you know though, if the bird in general is noisy, the only way to fix that is to lose detail and contrast.
Click to expand...

Not aimed at you Chris, a general observation ... but you are right some conditions are very poor for photography and it doesn't stop us 'hobbyists' clicking away for the fun of it :)
 
htid said:
If that's 6400 you must surely have done quite a bit of NR at least on the background?
Click to expand...

NR has certainly been applied but that's what it's for :)
At ISO 6400 I'm delighted at that result for a £600+ camera and I've got quite a few the same from this morning ... a little bit of work is well worth it IMO :D
 
AdamSi said:
Oh I'm sure it is helping your thoughts about it hahaha just not in a good bank balance way ;)
Click to expand...
I'm thinking of more of a downgrade so potentially the bank balance may look better and the wife happy too! It does seem to be a good lens.

I just can't get my head around the 300 f4 pf when my 70-200 + 1.4tc can give 280mm f4, I'm sure the the 300 f4 pf + 1.4 TC gives a better 400mm f5.6 than the 70-200 and 2x TC. I'm tempted to hire one soon to see how good it is.
 
rob-nikon said:
I just can't get my head around the 300 f4 pf when my 70-200 + 1.4tc can give 280mm f4, I'm sure the the 300 f4 pf + 1.4 TC gives a better 400mm f5.6 than the 70-200 and 2x TC. I'm tempted to hire one soon to see how good it is.
Click to expand...

No question the 300 f4 PF + TC1.4 is better than the 70-200 f2.8 + TC2.0 (I've used it) and it works brilliantly with the TC1.7 :)
 
Chuckoir said:
Don't mean to break up the bird chat, but ventured up to Warwick Castle today. Light was pants so went for mono.

1. 4-shot panorama
Warwick Castle Pano by Chuckoir, on Flickr

2. 3-shots merged in LR.
Warwick Castle HDR by Chuckoir, on Flickr

3. Little Man looking unimpressed.
Joseph by Chuckoir, on Flickr

Sorry for the lack of birds... as you were. :D
Click to expand...
Very nice, I've thought of visiting Warwick castle but I've never got there, I may have to get there this year at some point.

For a minute there I thought your buggy had airbags fitted with that big yellow bulge!
 
rob-nikon said:
Very nice, I've thought of visiting Warwick castle but I've never got there, I may have to get there this year at some point.

For a minute there I thought your buggy had airbags fitted with that big yellow bulge!
Click to expand...
Thanks! It's the first time I've been there and as the brother-in-law is visiting from the States, seemed like a good excuse to go.

You'd be surprised by the amount of people who think the seat has airbags in... ;)
 
As happy as I am with mirrorless I do really miss my nikons. I never had any complaints about the tammy 150-600 in good light on either the D810 or d7200.
image.jpeg
 
Popped in to Gloucester Cathedral on Friday, testing the cameras high-ish ISO limits, and not a bird in sight! ;)

1. F5, 1/13sec, ISO 2000
DSC_2989 by Chuckoir, on Flickr

2. F1.8, 1/40sec, ISO 1250
DSC_3048 by Chuckoir, on Flickr

3. F1.8, 1/10sec, ISO 400
DSC_3056 by Chuckoir, on Flickr

I've been here a few times and it's somewhere I really enjoy visiting, as the place just oozes history, but it's really difficult to photograph due to the lighting. I probably haven't done it justice, but I gave it a try! :)
 
Like the 1st Steve, lots to see there and personally I love the Cloisters :)
 
Is there a charge for photography in the cathedral? My in-laws are just up the road so we do go to Gloucester quite frequently. I used to live and work in the city many years ago....literally next door to the cathedral.........but haven't visited it in ages.
 
Mountkeen said:
Is there a charge for photography in the cathedral? My in-laws are just up the road so we do go to Gloucester quite frequently. I used to live and work in the city many years ago....literally next door to the cathedral.........but haven't visited it in ages.
Click to expand...
3 quid, but all proceeds go into the maintenance of the cathedral. Never taken a tripod in, but I'm sure they'd all it. Given the struggles I've had with shutter speed and ISO, I'm taking mine in next time.
 
What shutter remote is everyone using? I am looking for one, not sure if to get the genuine Nikon one or a third party one.
 
Really considering rejoining the 7200 club.
Looks like it's a toss up between this and the d750
 
addicknchips said:
Really considering rejoining the 7200 club.
Looks like it's a toss up between this and the d750
Click to expand...
If I didn't already have a couple of DX lenses when it came to me upgrading, I would have gone for the D750... Having said that, the D7200 is a fantastic camera, I love mine, and considering it can be picked up for less than £600 it's a bargain.

But the GAS in me is still contemplating chopping in my DX gear for FX...o_O
 
Last edited:
Chuckoir said:
If I didn't already have a couple of DX lenses when it came to me upgrading, I would have gone for the D750... Having said that, the D7200 is a fantastic camera, I love mine, and considering it can be picked up for less than £600 it's a bargain.

But the GAS in me is still contemplating chopping in my DX gear for FX...o_O
Click to expand...

Have only ever bought fx glass as they can be used on both dx and fx bodies.
Ideally looking at the tammy 150-600 as I've used this in the past with decent results.
or perhaps the 300f4.
 
Chuckoir said:
If I didn't already have a couple of DX lenses when it came to me upgrading, I would have gone for the D750... Having said that, the D7200 is a fantastic camera, I love mine, and considering it can be picked up for less than £600 it's a bargain.

But the GAS in me is still contemplating chopping in my DX gear for FX...o_O
Click to expand...

Who is selling them for that price... on the lookout for one
 
gramps said:
HDEW £615, don't know of cheaper.
Click to expand...
Thanks, I know about them but they had non in stock last week when I rang, but they do seem to be the best option.


addicknchips said:
Someone on eBay with next day delivery £599
Click to expand...
Problem is with the warranty if anything goes wrong, could turn into a nightmare.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top