D7200 Officially Announced(link)

[ajohnw]

Curious Jeremy disregarding pixel counts, dubious in some ways anyway do you see any real advantages of the d7100 over the d7000 ?

John
-

[JR1]

Curious Jeremy disregarding pixel counts, dubious in some ways anyway do you see any real advantages of the d7100 over the d7000 ?

John
-

No, in fact and I am known for my er............ honest bluntness, I wish I had not bought the 7100 and sold the 7000, as I said 99% of al the sports shots on www.jrs-photography.co.uk are the D7000

[NorthernFocus]

For those with a D7100, are you even interested in purchasing the D7200 and if so what is it about the D7100 that you've found limiting? Do you find yourself one step away from FF?...

There are two main limiting factors with the 7100 for shooting wildlife. The buffer only holds 6 frames inew 14bit NEF format and better highe ISO would be a big plus. The 7200 fixes the buffer issue but it's still unclear whether ISO is improved. Nikon has published some confusing marketing material regarding ISO.

I am not a step away from FF. I shoot both.

[Nicks Pics]

I'm assuming here Nick you are referring to the buffer capacity.



I suspect they have based that statement due to a lower ISO image capture having a smaller file size to a higher ISO capture of the same image due to the noise. The noise also varies depending upon the lightness/darkness of an image.

Here's a link to one article that may explain why they have used the criteria in their spec;

http://petapixel.com/2009/12/22/why-...er-file-sizes/

Yes, I think the buffer capacity upgrade would be useful to some, even though it may make little difference to others.

That's a good suggestion as to why the ISO might affect shooting rate.