Nikon D7500 back in stock


The Nikon D7500 DSLR camera was sold out since it started shipping two weeks ago. Many stores received a new shipment today that also includes the D7500 lens kit:

  • Adorama (body only and lens kit in stock)
  • B&H (currently out of stock)
  • Amazon (body only and lens kit in stock)
  • BuyDig (lens kit in stock)

Update - the $200 off on the D7500 kit was a mistake.

This entry was posted in Nikon D7500 and tagged . Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • why did they go from 24mp to 20, have nikon finally got the message 20 is enough mine only has 16

    • Mansgame

      I think for a cropped sensor camera 16-20 is the sweet spot and 24 for FX. Even my gold ring lenses can’t handle much more.

      • totally agree

        I use 16mp all the time, but mine is FF, and I am happy with that, my 7100 was good but NO 2 card slots I wouldn’t touch it for “work” or a backup

        • fanboy fagz

          I agree regarding using 2 slotted cameras but many pros I know have and still use the d700 which has 1 slot.

          • But there is no substitute for safety, I would never shoot a wedding or a sports event with just one camera body or a camera without backup in the form of two cards

            • Thom Hogan

              Is that really “safety”? I’ve yet to hear of a story where a second slot “saved the day.”

            • I have had THREE Sandisk pro CF cards fail in five years, it happens, one assumes that people with cameras with just one slot are happy to risk their business and reputation, I am not

            • Thom Hogan

              Please describe the failure. And, in particular, how a second slot would have solved the problem.

            • Well all three became unreadable not seen by the camera, and YES I have been into IT for 30 years and build computers, both Sandisks recovery software “card recovery pro” and another I use failed to read the cards. Returned to sandisk, received three replacements due to a “fault” in the card

            • El Aura

              You are implying something here without spelling it out. When each of the three cards failed, did you (a) use them in a camera with two card slots, both filled with memory cards, (b) had the camera write all images to both cards, (c) were able to read all images from the other card (as in, the card in the other slot from the one with the failed card)?

            • Thom Hogan

              So the camera became inoperable?

            • Nemmondom Meg

              Move the read protection button or vhatever 1 mm down. Basicalli it is enough if you put your finger nail between that and the card body itself. Worth a try. I have like 5 cards unreadable and this trick worked. Hope you are lucky and works for you too.

            • Jorge Tavares

              Am I missing something? I think all he’s saying is that if you are set up to write to both cards and one fails there’s your safety net. Why all the attitude towards his comment?

            • Thom Hogan

              This is how myths get started. e.g. “you need a second slot to protect against card failures.” Just like “you need a protective filter over your lens.”

              When someone makes an absolute assertion, I’ll challenge it.

              As I point out below, I don’t dispute that a second slot is useful. But is it truly useful primarily for the reason that people are asserting? I have my doubts.

            • I have never heard of a person who’s life has been saved by a seat belt or air bag, does that mean no one has

            • Thom Hogan

              I have.

            • El Aura

              You never heard any report of an accident or crash test, that stated that without the seat belt the car occupant would not have survived?

            • I responded to THIS comment “I’ve yet to hear of a story where a second slot “saved the day”

              I said “I” as in PERSONALLY and replied “I have never heard of a person who’s life has been saved by a seat belt or air bag” as in “I” personally, sheesh…………… plain English,

              I also said in plain English “Well all three became unreadable not seen by the camera”, where the second card was used due to the first being corrupt, is that clearer for you

            • El Aura

              You don’t seem to understand the difference between “of” and “from”:
              — “Heard of a person” means ‘received information about the person or what happened to the person’.
              — “Heard from a person” means ‘receiving information from that person’.

            • Allen_Wentz

              The value of a second slot IMO is that it facilitates flexible, quick and easy backup strategies.

              It is the backup strategy that saves the day but it is the second slot that allowed the easy backup strategy. And we all know backup that is not easy is often skipped.

              Most important is the ability to instantly pop Card #2 out and give it to a friend, mail it away, whatever. While still keeping Card #1 with the camera. In the field that capability is HUGE.

              Plus of course two slots allow all kinds of useful configurations in addition to just backup.

            • Thom Hogan

              I’m not disputing that a second slot is useful. I’m trying to get any real story of where the second slot has “saved the day.” To date, no such story has made it my way. Indeed, I’m aware of card issues that occurred with dual slot cameras, despite the second slot, which is the opposite of what people claim.

              As people should know, I don’t take marketing claims as proven. We have far too much of that going on out there. I’m data and fact driven. So where is the data showing that second slots are “saving the day”?

            • Miguel Lecuona

              Hey Thom — how about this one — on D810 I shoot a 32GB CF Card in Slot 1, for Raw, and a 32GB SD Card in Slot 2, for jpg backups. During one 8 hour event, I ran out of room on the CF Card, did not have access to a second CF Card on my person, it was back in the bag several hundred yards away, and the show went on. I ejected CF card and double-recorded Raw/JPG on the SD.

              Because of the split Raw and JPG, the second slot had a significant remaining balance and I was able to keep shooting stills & video to capture those live moments until I could get back to the bag and swap everything out.

              Naturally, a second slot was not the only way to resolve this, as I keep backups on me now to avoid even this issue, but this was my saved-day real world scenario.

            • Ushanas Trivedi

              This doesn’t need 2nd slot in camera but spare card. 2nd card can ‘save the day’ only if it was on back up & 1st card fail after shoot

            • Thom Hogan

              Right. But this isn’t the “I need a second card slot because cards fail and having a second slot means I never have a data failure” story, which is generally the scenario that all those lamenting the missing card slot use to support their complaint.

              A second card slot is useful, no doubt. I think I’ve been clear on that. What I’m trying to get to is just how often the “my card failed and a backup saved me” scenario has actually happened. I know of no such cases at the moment. Again, this is how myths get started.

              Do I want a second card slot? Sure. But not because it saves me from card failure.

          • MB

            If they are still using D700 as their main body we can only assume what kind of pros they are …

            • fanboy fagz

              dont assume

            • Those would be the kind of pros who knew to pick the best body for the job and still can get good enough output with it. Good enough that they can afford to shoot with it.

            • Sawyerspadre

              Happy pros? They must not have much gear angst…

        • snappur

          According to official technical specifications, the Nikon D7100 does have dual SD card slots.

      • CERO

        The D8XX are doing fine with 36MBpix.

        and 20Mb was just because the D500 had that size of sensor.
        Why waste money in research to make a 24mbpix new sensor when you can use the one of your flagship.

        • I have my D4s’s and D810s and am very happy with 16MP in fact I also have a D80 which I use

          • CERO

            aaaand? Just because you’re fine, does not means that the tech should stop advancing in giving better specs.

      • AnotherView

        Yup. The ONLY reason I pull my 21MP D500 out of the bag is when I need its superb AF capability or 10 FPS. My D810 continues to be my workhorse camera simply because when it comes to IQ, it consistently outperforms the D500 even though the D810 “only” yields 15MP (in DX equivalent). And pretty well all I shoot is birds.

    • Semaphore

      D7500 is obviously positioned as a scaled down, more budget friendly D500. Hence the same sensor.

      I guess the next D5xxx will be the higher res, 24mp line, and the old D5xxx will mege with the old D3xxx for one super budget DX line. Would makes sense to be honest.

      • Allen_Wentz

        There is much more to sensors than just total pixel count.

        Even issues like available production volume are important.

      • Andrew

        Actually 3 MP is really not worth talking about in terms of higher resolution as it is so marginal at best. The real higher resolution camera is the D810 at 36 MP but then again it is not a prosumer camera, it’s more for the pro especially with its bigger body 😉 Nikon might just increase the D5xxx and D3xxx line to 28 MP seeing that the generally consumers would think that they are getting a more advanced camera ;-).

        • Chinky

          You are right that the difference of 3 mp is not noticeable. I see no difference in the details in photos shot from my d750 and d500. However, imaging-resource.com does prove that there’s a slight difference in details, but I personally see no practical difference and shoot with the d500 as my main camera. Having said that, I hope the d500 successor does have more than 20.9 mp as I want more megapixels for cropping.

    • ola

      The real reason is sensor readout speed.

      The limiting factor for the number of MP a sensor can have is the readout speed and the number of FPS you want from it. The D5 has 21MP * 14fps = 294 MP/s @ 14 bits per pixel. Simply state of the art. For the D500 they choose the same MP count. Better fabrication yield or marketing not wanting to cannibalize D5? We don’t know, maybe booth. Using it in the D7500 might give economy of scale, and FPS is a nice feature.

      Avoid common misconceptions, facts about MPs and FPS are:
      * MP count limits FPS, not processor.
      * More MPs are better

      • 24×36

        What?! If FPS was limited by MP count ONLY, then we should have seen a steady erosion of fps for EVERY body with more MP than previous bodies with less MP. Clearly, it is you that have a “misconception.” The processor throughput is definitely a FPS limitation, which is *affected by* MP count, but MP count is certainly *not* the *only* thing that limits FPS.

        • ola

          First, why is your logic different when you apply it to processor speed, than it is when you apply it to sensor readout?

          Secondly, I did not say MP cont is the *ONLY* limitation. Mechanics is one for example. But since you do NOT need to process the images in realtime, why is the processor speed important, according to you?

          • 24×36

            My logic isn’t different, I said both affect FPS (“FPS limitation, which is *affected by* MP count”). You, on the other hand, said (and I quote) “MP count limits FPS, NOT processor” (emphasis mine). Processor speed limits how fast the images can be read from the sensor and written to the memory card. More MP count will use more of that processor capacity – but it is the *combination of* MP count *and* processor speed (and memory card speed, if you choose the wrong cards) that dictate FPS limits, not ONLY MP count as you did indicate.

            • ola

              Look at the processor in the Nikon 1J5, it does 60FPS * 20MP = 1200MP/s. Why would Nikon not use that processor in the D5?

              About your logic, you said:
              “should have seen a steady erosion of fps for EVERY body with more MP than previous bodies with less MP”
              Why does that apply if sensor is limiting, but not if processor is limiting?

            • 24×36

              No, it only does 60fps if you *fix* autofocus on the first frame. Otherwise, just 20fps. So stop comparing apples and oranges. And I didn’t say *only* the processor is limiting, either. Stop putting words in my mouth.

  • Allan

    When will we know how well this model is selling?

    • Andrew

      Is that type of information usually posted on Nikon cameras? When the D800 was introduced it took months (maybe 8 months if I can remember correctly) before the back orders were cleared. And Nikon was manufacturing over 35,000 cameras each for the two models every month not to mention the size of the original shipment.

      Gaming console manufacturers typically produce about a million consoles before launch though they have a much larger audience. I was hoping to get the D7200 but when I noticed that its update was relatively mild, primarily addressing the buffer issue and improving the autofocus performance in low light situations, I knew that my wait would continue. I was looking for something that had more of the ergonomics of the D750. But this D7500 is much more than I expected. A nice, little, D500!

      • Allan

        “Is that type of information usually posted on Nikon cameras?”

        I think the answer is no. But some people might have access to this information.

      • Thom Hogan

        Nikon did not manage to make 35k D8xx bodies a month to my knowledge. You’re quoting their “expected run rate” numbers. They fell short of that, which is one reason why the D800 models were in short supply early on.

    • Sawyerspadre

      If you buy one, it will sell better….

      I am sure it will take great images and better Video than every other DX Nikon, except the D500.

      If it fits your needs, buy it.

      We already know that no new DSLR or Mirrorless is going to be the volume leader, as the iPhone will be leading that race…

      • Allan

        I’m curious to know how big this segment of the DSLR is today (specifically the D7XXX line and similar cameras from other manufacturers, not mirrorless), and what is Nikon’s share of this market compared to other manufacturers like Canon. How fast is this segment shrinking? If I remember Thom recently compared the sales of the D90 to D7xxx; something like a 10-fold drop.

        • Sawyerspadre

          There doesn’t seem to be a very accurate reporting. CIPA numbers are overall shipments from the manufacturers, but that doesn’t measure sell through. There are some samples of retail sales that I heard of recently, but they were a slice of retailers in the US.

          It seems clear that Canon, Nikon and Sony, are 1, 2 and 3, in that order. This assumes you aren’t counting smartphones, and you can see odd blips, like the one Sony blew their horn about early in the year. They said they had moved into #2, ahead of Nikon, in Full Frame ILC. This is good eveidence that you can slice your statistics the way you like. They chose a short period, when Nikon had just ended promotions, and when they were promoting heavily, and they only included one market.

          The top three ILC brands are about 75%, with the rest battling for the 25%.

          Thom probably has the best perspective.

          Do you want to know for business reasons, or because you think it will impact you as a user.

          Canon and Nikon are the most complete systems, and there is no user that would be unhappy with the results, beginner to pro.

          If Mirrorless is your preference, Sony, Fuji and Olympus are great products, that are sitting in different niches than Canon and Nikon, for the most part.

          • Allan

            “Do you want to know for business reasons, or because you think it will impact you as a user.”

            Simple curiosity about the trends in this segment of the camera market. (I have a D90 and a D7100; I will eventually look at the D7500. I don’t need a D500.)

        • Sawyerspadre

          If Nikon sold a million D90, they probably sold 600k in D7000, 400k in D7100 and 400k in D7200. Keep in mind that as these cameras got better and better, the need to upgrade feels less acute. A D7000 or D7100 is still a very capable camera. The market is not only shrinking from smartphones, it’s also a factor of the current camera you own being good enough for your use.

          These are NOT actual numbers, but are used to illustrate the kinds of proportions that are likely.

          • Andrew

            It seems that sales in the camera market have followed two trends, smartphones and peoples economic condition. But with regards to smartphones, they really should mostly impact the compact camera market. They do poorly in low light situations and do not offer the advantage of zoom.

            No doubt those high monthly cell phone bills and the need for frequent product upgrades has eaten into a lot of disposable incomes. Then the gaming consoles costing about $400 a piece with the need to purchase new games have done likewise.

            I have always felt that as more consumers (youths in particular) grow up around technologies and smartphones which give them access to built-in cameras with video capabilities, eventually higher-end camera sales will go up. But eventually it will be the job of the camera companies to market their products effectively as to why photography (and not just their product) is a means of capturing wonderful memories.

          • Thom Hogan

            Nikon sold over 2.5m D90’s. Best I can tell the D7000 did half that.

            • ITN

              That’s not so bad for a somewhat more expensive camera body.

            • The D90 was a big hit, I had one 🙂

            • Sawyerspadre

              Good info, mine was a wild guess.

        • Captain Megaton

          “how big” is probably less of a concern to Nikon than “how profitable” and the combination of reasonably high volume with reasonably good margins means I am confident that the D7000 segment remains a comfortable breadwinner for them even if they are not flying off the shelf at D90 levels. The D7500 is certainly a very important camera for Nikon.

    • that’s the only thing I’ve seen online and it is not official numbers:

      http://www.photosynthesis.co.nz/nikon/camera.html

      • Allan

        By the range of the serial numbers?

        • Yes, not very accurate.

  • BVS

    Also note that the kit is now $1,546.95 (compared to $1,746.95 previously), so only $300 for the 18-140 now.

    • good point, I will update my post

    • Or the body price itself is settling down to reasonable levels.

      • Allan

        That was (too) quick.

        I’m confused. The body, by itself, is selling well. And because the kit wasn’t selling, they dropped the price? I suspect there is some other reason.

        • Captain Megaton

          ‘wasnt selling’ might be too strong – perhaps its a readjustment based on the ratio of kits and bodies sold so far, or just a simple re-tweaking of the price points. $1750 for the 18-140 (blech) was not attractive at all.

          • Sawyerspadre

            Nikons intro price only holds for preorders. The 18-140 only feels like a deal at $300, because they just dropped the price. That is a reasonable market price for that lens.

            After the pre-orders, then Nikon always adjusts the price to a more realistic market price. They will be selling a lot of D7500 at $999 later this summer and maybe lower for the holidays.

            • BVS

              $300 is the usual price for a refurb 18-140 though, so you’re getting new with warranty for the same price.

            • Captain Megaton

              Do people who preordered get to pay the lower price? Otherwise you’d have to be nuts to preorder.

            • Sawyerspadre

              No, that’s the point. They are still trading on the old-school notion that we need to be the first to own the latest. The earliest adopters pay the most.

              As we are seeing however, there is now a good chunk of customers who wait to see if there are any issues.

              Also, if you own a D7200, how urgently do you need a D7500?

              The pre-order period is a skimming strategy.

            • Allen_Wentz

              Agreed the pre-order period is a skimming strategy. And waiting a year will save 10%.

              BUT some folks need a new camera, not just an upgrade to the last similar model. When you need a new camera, you buy it.

              E.g. I preordered the D500 as soon as I had tested it. Because I needed a new DX body (my D2x only likes base ISO and my D5100 is just a junker body that lives in the truck). I had not previously liked the D7xxx series at all.

              Waiting a year I could have saved some money but that would have been a year without a D500, which in retrospect would have been a really dumb move.

              Today I am in a similar position in FX, waiting for just the right body to convince me to upgrade from D3. We shall see. But if the right body for me shows up I am unlikely to waste a year without a body I want just to save a few bucks.

            • Bev Howard

              I hope so @ $2597 body only here in NZ it’s a ridiculous price

            • Andrew

              It took Nikon one year to discount the D500 by 10% from $2,000 to $1,800. And now you expect that Nikon will immediately discount the D7500 by 20% within 2 months of launch? I do not see that happening 😉

            • It depends on what kind of product it is. Pro grade drops in price very slowly. And nikon has made it very clear that D7500 is a non pro camera no matter how good it may be.

            • Andrew

              I hear you, but I would not hold out hope on a price drop this soon 😉

    • Spy Black

      That lens has hideous amounts of optical distortion. Not worth a dime as far as I’m concerned. If this camera interests you, buy the body and seek out an alternet lens.

      • BVS

        It’s the best of the ‘super zooms’ though, and it makes a nice casual walk around ready-for-anything type of lens. It’s pretty sharp over the whole range, reasonably small and light, and gives you 27-210mm coverage.

        Looking at the distortion specs was originally off putting to me as well, but in practice it’s rarely been an issue. Personally, I’m happy to have mine and it’s been worth the $300 I paid for it.

        Sure, for important/pro work get something better though.

      • Thom Hogan

        And what, pray tell, is “optical distortion”? Do you mean linear distortion?

        • Allen_Wentz

          I think he means visibly wonky. It is a technical term. ;~)

        • Spy Black

          I suppose my terminology is incorrect. I meant extreme barrel to extreme pincushion on a heartbeat distortion. I think there’s one setting around 55mm where everything looks normal, then you’re off again in one way or another.

  • Eric Calabros

    And now disqus put ads between the comments! Clever bastards 🙂

    • That should not happen – I have disabled the ads but every few months they reset my settings and start pushing ads again.

      • Ric of The LBC

        doesn’t bother me. If it helps keeping your site going I’m all for it.

    • disabled them again… it will take a few hours for the changes to update my page

      • T.I.M

        It does change from the usual Spanish/Russians hot girls.

        • BVS

          Hot Russian girls on my screen is fine with me. 🙂

      • Eric Calabros

        Thank you again

  • BVS

    Kit for $1346.95 (-$400) at Adorama!? Gotta be a mistake? I guess get it quick if you want it.

    • Sold out already – a good deal indeed.

      • BVS

        Says “coming soon”, but I’m still able to add it to cart and checkout though.

        • They should honor the price if It is a mistake.

          • BVS

            The $200 off the kit isn’t a mistake, it’s just that Adorama (only) had it $200 off twice. The kit is still $1,546.95 which is $200 off the previous price of $1,746.95.

            Anyway, it looks like Adorama has fixed the price now.

            One other interesting thing I just noticed on Adorama is that they let you bundle the 70-300 AF-P VR with the D7500 for $250 (vs. $400 if you buy it separately).

            • yes, it was Adorama’s mistake and they fixed it already

  • Aldo

    This is a good second body/back up camera. I just wouldnt risk shooting paid work with it. I’ve had too many memory cards fail. It’s not just about the card failing… but having a copy of the photos instantaneously is something kinda priceless.

  • Yanny Nao

    Enough of ISO and megapixels, Nikon needs to launch a camera with auto focus in video without hunting. Canon has the monopoly, Sony tracking is poor.

    • sandy

      How good was the Nikon 1 version? Otherwise Canon may have it locked up in patents.

    • Chinky

      I totally agree with you! I’m waiting for such a camera. I tried the Canon t7i but the video (and stills) IQ is horrible. I do like the Sony a6000 video Ad but the stills IQ is horrible. Nikon has great video and stills IQ. They really need to work on their video AF.

  • Jan

    Does anyone know the release date for Europe (Belgium). ‘Available soon’ is the only answere I’m getting here.

    • Jeffry De Meyer

      Belgians shouldn’t care about this camera, Belgians know to buy the d500.
      Don’t make belgians look bad, we have our governments to do that.

      • Jan

        And why should I spend the extra money on the D500. I’m upgrading from a D3300, the D7500 looks like a perfect fit for my intended use.

        • Jeffry De Meyer

          Because you will be getting a better built more capable device for like ~€400 extra.
          if it the d7500 was like €1100 OK, I would understand picking that one over the d500
          but since it is +-€1500…

          • Jan

            You got a point, especially since their is a 200€ cashback action atm on the D500. So it’s ‘only’ 250€ more than the D7500.

            • Allen_Wentz

              The dual card slots and faster XQD for PP workflow alone make the D500 well worth the extra cost. There is no substitute for dual card
              slots in a pro body.

            • Jan

              Don’t I need a card reader for that. I usely just connected the camera to the computer for importing to Lightroom. I saw that the D500 supports USB3 vs USB2 on the D7500…
              Well you guys gave me something to think about tonight, I had saved up 2000€ for the upgrade, so it is possible to go for the D500.

            • Allen_Wentz

              I strongly recommend handling both bodies before making a decision. Differences in feel can be huge, and will be what you live with for the next 100+k image captures.

            • Jan

              I shot with a D7200 before, the D500 is a bit bigger. But I don’t expect a real problem with that. I’m going to check one out this weekend and then I’ll decide. Tnx for the good advice.

            • Allen_Wentz

              The XQD slot alone or the pro body or the AF or the LCD or the better battery – any _one_ of those – are enough reason to go for the D500.

              Built-in flash of the D7500 is a detractor for me because I value toughness and hate a stupid flash popping open at inopportune times. Some others disagree.

              The D7500 is a bit smaller and lighter. I prefer the heavier-duty body but each photog should handle and personally decide.

            • Jan

              I bought the D500, spended a bit more than planned, but with the cashback it was worth it. Tnx for the advise!

          • Allen_Wentz

            D500 rocks. It is a truly pro body.

      • Allan

        lol

  • Дмитрий

    1347$ it’s normal price now

  • Pablo And-Jennifer Gabetta

    Are there people still thinking that the D7500 shares a sensor with the D500??
    I keep hearing that.
    The D500 has a 23.5×15.7mm sensor with 20.56mp.
    The D7500 has a 23.5×15.6mm sensor with 20.51mp.
    They are obviously different designs.
    They will perform different. Don’t know which one is better yet, probably won’t be able to tell difference in real the world but they are different.

    • Chris

      Should be the same. It might just be cut down a bit more to fit a different sensor housing.

      However, those sensors in d7500 might have a different tolerance compared with whatever they picked out for d500.

    • Allan

      Thanks for pointing that out. Your observation raises many questions. (It’s hard to believe that it’s not the same sensor; I think it would increase the cost significantly for Nikon if the sensors are different.)

    • Thom Hogan

      Nikon has often used different masking techniques on the same sensor.

    • Jeffry De Meyer

      When they do a couple of thousand wafers of chips they start seeing where things go wrong and make adjustments to further improve the production runs and have less faulty chips per wafer.

      Wouldn’t be surprised one bit the D500 has a production run 1 cmos and the d7500 a second run or something chip.
      But both have the same specs

      • Pablo And-Jennifer Gabetta

        Nikon website has different specs for both.
        Which specs are you talking about?

        • Jeffry De Meyer

          The specs the silicon has to comply to, what nikon does with it is up to nikon.

          • Pablo And-Jennifer Gabetta

            Jeffry, I’m a little lost here; The D500 has a physically larger sensor than the D7500, and it also has 50 thousand more pixels, but you are saying they are the same?

            • Jeffry De Meyer

              Wouldn’t be surprised all that much if they are being sold as the same or a very close product

            • Sawyerspadre

              Same sensor, different live pixel area in the margins.

            • sandy

              The D500 is .004″ larger, the thickness of a human hair. Differences in masking could well explain the very minor differences you listed. I would certainly tend to believe they are basically the same.

            • Pablo And-Jennifer Gabetta

              0.004″= 50 thousand pixels.
              I’m not saying one is better than the other, I’m just saying they are not the same.

    • Hans98Ko

      Well, it can still be the exact same sensor. The difference can be caused by the design of the mirror box and the installation of the sensor behind the mirror box also known as masking. And that is why on the specification, it is always given as an approximate number rather than an exact figure. One will ask how I know this could be it? Well, I am involved in the design of photographic equipment at one time as well as being an ISO auditor performing process and quality audits on all sorts of industries around the world.

  • Hans98Ko

    Aldo, the D7500 can still use the dedicated wifi unit to transfer files directly to an external disk, computer or printer. So you can still have instant offline backup.

    • Allen_Wentz

      WiFi backup is not instant. It should not be discussed as such in terms of backup.

      WiFi is slow and less than bombproof. Backup needs to be both totally reliable and manually verified. For those who need real backup there is no substitute for dual card slots in a pro body; and, fast card readers to back that up to at least one secondary location.

      • Andrew

        OK let us look at the situation realistically. The chances of your main camera going kaput and the D7500 as your backup at the same time also having a problem disk error is highly unlikely. Where does this scenario end, get a third backup! You are more likely to get stuck in traffic, miss your flight, or having any number of things happen before you would lose your pictures to such a scenario.

        Now all my musings I am certain will apply to the majority of people out there, but apparently when you use words like “less than bombproof”, I know that you are not the majority 😉 So for you, nothing short of a carbon copy of the most secure setup will do – and that makes sense! And so I fully understand 😉

        I personally would just like to see Nikon pack everything in a D7500 class body and give us an option for a higher cost purchase, but apparently their management team is inflexible when it comes to providing various options. The closest they came to doing that was with the D800 and D800E.

        • Allen_Wentz

          Realistically (your term) the D500 is a _much_ better camera for a fairly small amount more money. No way the D7500 is justified at its current pricing relative to the D500.

          I will not bother to argue, but please note that I disagree with your alleged statistics to validate the single-slot camera.

          • Andrew

            Well at least you validate your bias that your opinion is influenced by the single-slot. But disparaging a product on that basis is questionable behavior. Your very conduct tell me that if it was not for the single-slot, you most likely would have considered purchasing the D7500 especially to use as a backup. But you are not the first, I have seen many other professionals react in the same way over this issue and so I take it as a basic human flaw.

            I would gladly have paid $1,600 for the D7500 for the many reasons contained in its extensive new list of features. But clearly the D7500 is not for you. As Nikon says, the D7500 is essentially 90% a D500 in a smaller and lighter package. So by Nikon’s own reckoning, 90% of $2,000 is a $400 difference – but these are rough estimates!

            I will gladly take the existing $750 discount on the D7500 off the list price of the D500 of $2,000. People who argue about price difference are often making statements not based upon facts. I am confident that the image sensor in the D500 and D7500 including the many major components these cameras share make up a much higher percentage of their manufacturing cost than things like build quality, size, and weight. Or even feature like illuminated buttons.

            The D500 is a professional camera but I would not say a much better camera than the D7500. The word “better” is subjective and must be backed up with facts or else must be relegated to the notion of an assumption.

            The things that relate to exceptional image quality such as the image sensor, metering system, image processor (EXPEED 5) are identical. The D500 does not have even a 1% advantage over the D7500 in all of these critical areas. These are facts!

            The only feature that the D500 has that I would consider paying $300 over the D7500 is the wider focus area or greater focus points which for wildlife action shooting may be useful. But it is by no means a critical feature not even for wildlife photography; just like 8 fps versus 10 fps. The rest in terms of build quality, size, and weights is a total none factor except for those who value these things.

      • Hans98Ko

        Maybe is a wrong choice of words on my part, I should have use on the spot instead of instant, because anything that requires processing and travel over the air that requires handshakes and redundancy check is not going to be instant. While on the spot means when one is taking photos, it is also being transfer to the backup system.
        Well, you can’t blame a guy who’s main language is not English, can you? ☺️

        • Allan

          Your English is excellent.

          • Hans98Ko

            Thanks for the encouragement and support.

          • Allen_Wentz

            Agreed.

  • disqus_ErOzKSxw9P

    You can use SnapBridge to automatically back it up to Nikon image space. It’s not ideal but better than nothing

    • Simon Chen

      That’s going to take couple of hours to offload.

  • nek4life

    Zzzzz… Anymore coverage of the 28mm 1.4E? It’s one thing for Nikon to keep a tight secret, but it’s another thing to forget to keep marketing it after you make an announcement. Surely there must be more ambassadors out there using this lens.

    • I think we will see more when it starts shipping at the end of the month.

      • nek4life

        You would think they’d like to keep the hype train going for more preorders. Looking forward to more samples.

        • nwcs

          No one’s ever accused Nikon of having great marketing…

          • That’s the problem why they are giving up so much market share to Canon.

            • nwcs

              It’s certainly one of them!

  • T.I.M
    • Jeffry De Meyer

      Well sure it has to remain competitive with the canon 5ds, the pentax k1 and the sony a7r2 for a couple of more years.

  • BVS

    If you want to go FF, D750 can be had right now for $1,496 with free grip included. I’ll be surprised if 6Dii betters the D750 in any meaningful way, other than having DPAF.

    • Jorge Tavares

      Why?

      • BVS

        Most of the major specs are out now – 26mp, 45pt AF, no 4K, single card slot, $1,999. Unless it’s the DPAF that you really want it doesn’t seem worth the cost of switching.

  • I received one of the first D7500s’ from B&H. In hand it felt much like a D5XXX series camera, not a D7XXX series. The first test I ran was low ISO, and mine had a “Hot Pixel” at high ISOs, so I returned it. The problem did not appear at ISO 2,200, but was there at ISO 8,000. I did not test all ISOs, so can not say at what level it would have first appeared. Location of the pixel was approx. 40% from right hand side, and approx. same from top of frame, so could not be cropped out.
    I only shot 10 frames, so did not have enough experience to say anything else about the camera.
    Note: The camera will run on an EN-EL15 (Li-ion20) battery. I had no issues with using that battery. The charge level showed good, and changed some as I used it for setting up the camera, but again I did not shoot enough to judge overall effectiveness of that battery, so can not comment on battery life.

    • nwcs

      Hot pixels are a fact of life. All sensors have them and accumulate them over time. I personally wouldn’t have worried about a hot pixel at ISO 8000. At least the return policy was good for you.

    • Hans98Ko

      All sensors will have certain amount of defective pixels, just like memory chips have certain amount of defective locations. All you need to do is to mask it out by performing sensor cleaning twice.

      • I turned the camera off and on several times (with auto cleaning set for power down and power up). The hot pixel was still there.

        • Hans98Ko

          I am not sure if you are aware that by powering up and down with sensor cleaning activated is actually different than performing the sensor cleaning twice consecutively without getting out of sensor cleaning mode.
          But anyway seen you can still return it and have it exchanged than might as well do it if it makes you feel better.

          • I was not aware of the difference. I will keep that in mind for the future. I assume you mean just the electronic cleaning of the system, not a MUP sensor cleaning.

            • Hans98Ko

              Yes, only electronic cleaning.

  • Nemmondom Meg

    Seems nikon rumours is innovating more than nikon

  • Allen_Wentz

    With a D7100 in hand I suggest waiting to see what new FX bodies fall from Nikon in the next few month then decide based on handling them and your personal needs. D5, D500, D750, D810 are all already excellent choices for you to choose among and we should soon have at least one more!

    • I’ve rented 750 and 500 for weekends and loved them both. I’m really interested in a 750 successor. I have such a wide range that I do. Occasional sports so I need a few more FPS. But also, concert lighting and a bump in ISO would be nice. There’s not perfect camera, but a FF with 500 specs would be the ideal for me…under $2,500. A guy can dream right?

      • Allen_Wentz

        An FX D500 is logical, but the extra cost of the bigger sensor makes US$2500 very unlikely.

  • How expensive would it be for Nikon to build a own sensor fab? Especially if they want to produce a sensor with integrated PDAF for a mirrorless camera? Is this something worth for instead of having dependencies to Sony? My thoughts are that Sony could hold back some technology advancements against competitors or make their sensors much more expensive for others to buy, so that the competition can’t compete well in price?

    • Allan

      I suspect very expensive.

      Nikon seems to be very conservative. It would be risky building such a facility for itself, and to compete with other sensor manufacturers.

  • Allen_Wentz

    Your observations are cogent and generally correct. I tend to value things differently in a DSLR body than many other folks here do.

    Nuances of IQ are _much_ less important to me than
    A) ruggedness,
    B) ergonomics & feel,
    C) ability to get the shot (which is also why A & B matter so much).

    So I do say the D500 is a _much_ better camera based on my A-B-C values above. Specifically:

    – Far superior LCD allows for better review of composition and especially focus.

    – Solid, feels-rugged body gives confidence to the photog that the gear will get the job done under abusive conditions. It is why I buy Nikon. Not so with previous D3xxx, D5xxx, D7xxx (but I have not handled the D7500).

    – XQD card ~50% faster than SD allows maximum possible workflow bandwidth, especially moving forward. I have been in digital capture since its beginnings, and have found optimizing PP bandwidth to be very relevant. The D7500 is not just SD, it is slow UHS-I and USB-2 versus UHS-II and USB-3 for the D500.

    – Dual card slots add confidence and add backup capabilities. Having mailed home a cheapo SD card, for instance, can save your project when some third-world federales appropriate your camera gear.

    – Even small AF improvements matter. The D500 has 6x as many cross-type focus points, and across a wider EV range.

    – Available continuous shooting of 20 sec at 10 fps versus 6 sec at 8 fps is kind of a big deal for confidence at “getting the shot.” Shooting a horse going over a jump and then finding the buffer full as the jockey falls off two seconds later is very disconcerting to one’s creative thinking. A fat buffer adds confidence. Or you shoot your 6-second wad at an eagle in flight – – and then he dives on prey. Etc.

    So those are my reasons that I think the D500 is a much better value. Note that IQ was not mentioned, because I routinely printed to 13 x 19 and have had many 4-color glossy ads published in high-end magazines with my 12 MP D2x doing the image capture.

    Every Nikon made today technically has better IQ than the 2004 D2x, so I evaluate new bodies on
    ruggedness,
    ergonomics & feel,
    ability to get the shot.

    That is why I think the D500 is a superior choice for a bit more money. If the D500 cost twice as much the D7500 would make more sense.

    • Andrew

      Based upon these reasons, I concur that the D500 is a much more substantial camera than the D7500 in terms of specifications 😉

      Thanks for taking the time to express your thoughts and views on this matter.

  • Andrew

    You are really a candidate for the D850 which will come with something like 46 MP and a full frame sensor. I think Nikon is going to be quite hesitant increasing the megapixel count on the D500 successor as their two main parameters for this camera is performance in terms 10 fps or higher and high 51,200 ISO image quality.

  • Andrew

    The D820/850 coming about a year and a half after the D5 was launched should give us hope that this camera will move the bar forward a bit. I mean not just the higher megapixel count and inheriting much of the advancements and ergonomics of the D500, but other surprises. I would not want to speculate but this (2017) being about 3 years since the D810 was launched in July 2014, there is much anticipation 😉

  • Was surprised to see it in Costco already as a kit.

  • Back to top