Another D300 vs D7000 post !

Started Jun 13, 2011 | Discussions
Tony Beach
Senior MemberPosts: 4,764
Like?
Re: Don't think so, Just tried an experiment
In reply to sandy b, Jun 28, 2011

sandy b wrote:

My office at work has no windows, turned off all lights, just ambient light from the hallway. It was at least as dark as your shot. Focus locked every time, with the inexpensive kit lens.

Thom Hogan has reported that the D7000 is good, and comparable to the D300. That seems reasonable to me (I would add that the argument I've been having in this thread about the mirror blackout time is based not on an assertion of reasonable equivalence, but of "noticeable" improvement for the D7000). My expectation though is that a "D400" will bring some tangible improvement in AF over all the currently available DLSRs, and if that was important to me than I would hold pat on the D300/D300s and wait instead for that.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
sandy b
Veteran MemberPosts: 7,180Gear list
Like?
I agree.
In reply to Tony Beach, Jun 28, 2011

The D400 will most likely be an incredible camera. It should bury the D7k. But if one does not want to wait, or spend $2000 when the D400 comes out, the D7k is a viable alternative.

 sandy b's gear list:sandy b's gear list
Nikon Coolpix P330 Nikon D7000 Nikon D600 Nikon D610 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G VR +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
sandy b
Veteran MemberPosts: 7,180Gear list
Like?
Re: I have had a D3, D300s and a D7000
In reply to olyflyer, Jun 28, 2011

Well, the OP was asking for opinions. I gave mine, which as valid as anyone elses.

Short of buffer, some controls, and size, the d7k is the equal of the D300s, is it for everyone? Surely not, but it should considered and not dismissed out of hand, especially with the focus innacuraccy claims.

 sandy b's gear list:sandy b's gear list
Nikon Coolpix P330 Nikon D7000 Nikon D600 Nikon D610 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G VR +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Tony Beach
Senior MemberPosts: 4,764
Like?
I found the blackout comparison
In reply to olyflyer, Jun 28, 2011

olyflyer wrote:

PhillyFotog wrote:

Religion vs empiricism.

Did you actually measure the D7000 mirror blackout time or not? If not than you are just as much of a believer as anyone else here. If yes you should be able to give us the times or to point to a source. Until then, your "empirical" test is not very much worth.

Well, to put this argument to rest, and after some diligent research on my part, it does appear that the D7000 would have noticeably shorter blackout time than the D300. First, we know that the D300 has 100 milliseconds blackout time according to the review of that camera at Imaging Resource; second, I tracked down the mirror blackout time for the D700 here: http://www.nikond700.com/nikon-d700-review/compared-nikon-d700-vs-canon-5d/ ; finally, there is this video: http://www.youtube.com/embed/sLZqUJZ9ruw that shows that the D7000 and D700 appear to have the same mirror blackout time. At a difference of 33% I would say it is likely to be noticeable, and I wonder why it hasn't been brought up in comparisons between the D700 and D300 (which also makes me wonder if the D300s is any different from the D300 in this regard).

There, don't let it be said that I'm not willing to admit when I am wrong, and that I am even willing to go the extra mile to prove or disprove what I have said.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Tony Beach
Senior MemberPosts: 4,764
Like?
Re: I agree.
In reply to sandy b, Jun 28, 2011

sandy b wrote:

The D400 will most likely be an incredible camera. It should bury the D7k. But if one does not want to wait, or spend $2000 when the D400 comes out, the D7k is a viable alternative.

Yes, totally different tools, and the lower weight of the D7000 can be a plus for some. My biggest gripe with Nikon right now is that I want a camera that excels at landscape/studio photography, and Nikon's D3x is just too expensive; that's why I now shoot with an A850 (my D300 is a back-up in case the A850 breaks) and I would still choose the A850 over the D7000 for my purposes -- YMMV.

As for viable Nikon alternatives, I would also argue that holding pat on the D300/D300s for now is also a viable alternative -- that's what Thom Hogan has suggested. Given that it takes both time and money to adjust to new cameras, changing your camera every time a new model comes out starts to resemble a fool's errand.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
agc1976
Senior MemberPosts: 1,702
Like?
Re: Honestly
In reply to olyflyer, Jun 28, 2011

olyflyer wrote:

I am not sure why the D7000 would struggle here, but I have no experience with the camera, other than some small in-shop tests. Anyway, I never have had any focus issues with the lenses I have, thy all work fine under any conditions.

The photo was taken at night and the subject was not illuminated by any street lamp, I could barely see her through my viewfinder (I purposely positioned my subject in the dark to avoid any light to contamine my scene. I illuminated her with a flash bounced from the building at the left but this is beyond the scope of the discussion)

sandy b wrote:

My office at work has no windows, turned off all lights, just ambient light from the hallway. It was at least as dark as your shot. Focus locked every time, with the inexpensive kit lens.

You're shooting light objects with clearly defined edges. A dark skinned person in the dark is more demanding on the AF system.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
olyflyer
Forum ProPosts: 22,757
Like?
Re: I have had a D3, D300s and a D7000
In reply to Reilly Diefenbach, Jun 28, 2011

Reilly Diefenbach wrote:

The front of the bird's left foot is oof. The front of the right is also oof from the other direction. In other words, the focus plane is right through the eye, as intended and shown by the little red square in ViewNX. Now, if this isn't as clear as could be expected at ISO 100, that's beyond any reasonable expectation.

Download the original for a better look. The eye is as nailed as it's going to get with that lens at that f stop at that ISO and that level of NR.

Actually, looking at the original it is even more obvious. The birds left eye is fuzzy, just like the feather behind the eye, the back of her head. The focus is better on the left foot, but best is the left side of the bird. This is not a NR issue, I think it is a missed focus thing.

BTW, the red square is not an indication of where the focus actually is but an indication of where it supposed to be, which AF point was used. You can always focus and recompose and in that case the red square can be pretty obviously (and deliberately) wrong. Also, I am not sure how it is with the D7000, but in case of the D300s, if you have the 9 point AF selected only one red square is shown and it might not be the one used, but the center point of the 9 points.

Couldn't have made anything like this with my D90, not even close.

That's possible and I am pretty convinced that the D7k is a better camera than the D90. I have zero experience (not even shop test) with the D90. Never held one in my hands.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
olyflyer
Forum ProPosts: 22,757
Like?
Re: Don't think so, Just tried an experiment
In reply to sandy b, Jun 28, 2011

sandy b wrote:

My office at work has no windows, turned off all lights, just ambient light from the hallway. It was at least as dark as your shot. Focus locked every time, with the inexpensive kit lens.

As I said, the problem is not the light but the contrast. Your image has good contrast and the light is also better quality. Those outdoor sodium vapour lams are really difficult, more difficult for a camera than the normal office fluorescent lamps...

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
photoforfun
Veteran MemberPosts: 6,084
Like?
Re: I have had a D3, D300s and a D7000
In reply to olyflyer, Jun 28, 2011

olyflyer wrote:

photoforfun wrote:

sandy b wrote:

I now have only the D7000. I love the ergonomics, the quiet shutter, the 14 bit high speed shooting, the better IQ, most of all the weight. The build is outstanding. I have had no oil, no back focus. The AF is quick and accurate. I miss the larger buffer occasionally, and the low light capability of the D3, but no longer shoot weddings, so don't really need it. Would I trade it back for a D300? Never. Would I for a D400? Possibly, but that is going to be a close to 2000.00 camera, probably buy a D700 id I was going to spend that much.

I honestly think Nikon nailed the D7k, best cropped sensor camera available today imo.

+1, using D7000 next to my D700 and I had D300 and D300s. TMHO D7000 is a way better camera than D300(s)

I am not saying I don't believe you, but what makes you say the D7000 is better than the D300s? The images in the link below are definitely no proof of that statement.

D300 had the sensor I disliked the most of any DSLR I was using. OOCamera images were flat, poor DR and it D300 showed more than any DX cam noise at low iso in backgrounds and skies. This was also stated in the Dpreview D300 review.
I had S5pro and D300 at the same time and I prefered S5pro by far.

AF is great, also in lowlight:

That's possible too, but there is nothing below which is taken in low light. That underexposed image does not count and in any case, low light is almost never a problem, low contrast on the other hand is more problem for any camera. That's when most of them fail, but so far not my D300s.

http://www.fotografie.fr/fotoforum/viewtopic.php?f=54&t=1140#p3427

I don’t know why you guys take it so hard and try to defend the D7000 from every angle, even where no one has attacked it from. If it is fine and better than anything you have had before than be happy and use it.

-- hide signature --

Kindest regards,
Stany
http://www.fotografie.fr/
http://www.fotografie.fr/fotoforum/index.php

I prefer one really good picture in a day over 10 bad ones in a second...

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
olyflyer
Forum ProPosts: 22,757
Like?
Re: I found the blackout comparison
In reply to Tony Beach, Jun 28, 2011

Tony Beach wrote:

olyflyer wrote:

PhillyFotog wrote:

Religion vs empiricism.

Did you actually measure the D7000 mirror blackout time or not? If not than you are just as much of a believer as anyone else here. If yes you should be able to give us the times or to point to a source. Until then, your "empirical" test is not very much worth.

Well, to put this argument to rest, and after some diligent research on my part, it does appear that the D7000 would have noticeably shorter blackout time than the D300. First, we know that the D300 has 100 milliseconds blackout time according to the review of that camera at Imaging Resource; second, I tracked down the mirror blackout time for the D700 here: http://www.nikond700.com/nikon-d700-review/compared-nikon-d700-vs-canon-5d/ ; finally, there is this video: http://www.youtube.com/embed/sLZqUJZ9ruw that shows that the D7000 and D700 appear to have the same mirror blackout time. At a difference of 33% I would say it is likely to be noticeable, and I wonder why it hasn't been brought up in comparisons between the D700 and D300 (which also makes me wonder if the D300s is any different from the D300 in this regard).

There, don't let it be said that I'm not willing to admit when I am wrong, and that I am even willing to go the extra mile to prove or disprove what I have said.

I think one thing which may cause confusion is that people believe the D300 and the D300s are the same. I can not measure the D300 or the D7000, but I will try to measure the D300s if I have some time. I have what it needs to do the job except the time and the motivation. During my Olympus era I have done plenty of technical measurements but got tired of doing it. Maybe I will start again...

Anyway, my measurements will be pretty pointless unless the same measurements are made on a d7000, which is not going to happen.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads