Previous news story    Next news story

Just Posted: Nikon D7100 in-depth review

By dpreview staff on Apr 26, 2013 at 00:44 GMT
Buy on GearShopFrom $1,146.9515 deals

We've just published our 25-page, in-depth review of the Nikon D7100. Sitting atop Nikon's APS-C DSLR lineup, the D7100 offers a 24MP CMOS sensor sans AA filter and a 51-point AF system that borrows heavily from the D4. In terms of ergonomics and handling the D7100 will feel familiar to D7000 users looking to upgrade, but it also inherits recent changes we've seen from Nikon in the D600 and D800 models. Is the D7100 a compelling option for enthusiasts tempted by the recent wave of affordable full frame DSLRs? Click the links below to find out.

949
I own it
283
I want it
75
I had it
Discuss in the forums

Comments

Total comments: 394
12
winsome19
By winsome19 (3 months ago)

Removing the optical low pass filter is a gimmick! Obviously Nikon is going to save some money by not having to put a classic filter in the camera. The marketing of this camera is full of pictures of landscapes. That is it as far as IQ goes. As far as indoors and low light is concerned, the D5100 is far better with realistic skin tones and colors. Those who want to use their cameras for indoor photography, skip D7100. Those who want a lighter camera with a better magnification and dials, skip D7100 and go for Pentax. Its amazing how one falls for the marketing hype and make this as a camera to beat!

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Lightweight003
By Lightweight003 (3 months ago)

For the most part a darned good camera. However if/when Nikon releases the next update; D7200??? it better have a Multi-angle screen plus built-in WiFi & GPS. I don't think Nikon has realised just how handy a Vari-angle screen is. My shortlist when about to buy my first DSLR was the Canon EOS600D or the Nikon D5100, as I wanted Live View AND I wanted something with a Vari-Angle Screen (I plumped for the Nikon D5100). As much as I liked the specs on the Nikon D7000 at the time and was tempted to stretch the budget, it did NOT have a Vari-Angle screen, . . nither does the D7100.

0 upvotes
SaulMDetofsky
By SaulMDetofsky (4 months ago)

When is the 1x1 aspect ratio coming out for the square crop factor? I want to buy a bunch of them! What Camera manufacture is going to step up to the plate first?

2 upvotes
Carlos Loff
By Carlos Loff (4 months ago)

Ok, the 7100 is cheaper, but the Pentax K-3 is the equivalent to a D400 and its surely cheaper than the D400 will be it it ever show up

1 upvote
Carlos Loff
By Carlos Loff (4 months ago)

The One to Beat ??? What a slogan when the Pentax K-3 beats all of it for less money - GIVE US the D400 or nothing, stop playing segmented this and that without this and that for crazy high prices

3 upvotes
WesWilson
By WesWilson (8 months ago)

As a 20 year pro who shoots a variety of projects, I purchased the D7100 as an "upgrade" to my D300. I was wrong. The 7100 has more pixels. That's it. Otherwise the 300 is simply a better camera. It focuses faster, it handles better, and it is a better made camera than the d7100. I feel the 7100 is simply Nikons attempt to lure MWACs and amateurs into their camp with a high-megapixel camera. IMHO Nikon does not make a pro-quality dx sensor camera at this time. That's a shame, since for sports especially a dx format camera has some advantages over full-frame. Come on, Nikon...where's that D400 we all want?

5 upvotes
Dave Mitchell
By Dave Mitchell (8 months ago)

Wes, I totally agree! I road tested a 7100 and found your same results. My 7 year old D300 Nikon out performs many others especially the wireless light triggering (Creative Lighting System) that Canon has just introduced. In the last few years, the D300 has been to more weddings than Kim Kardashian! Dave Mitchell

1 upvote
BarnET
By BarnET (4 months ago)

Focuses faster is kinda weird.......
They use the same bloody AF module. Sounds like placebo to me.
Handling and ergonomics is believable. The D300 is a bigger sturdier more pro body.

2 upvotes
Cankon
By Cankon (3 months ago)

You guys either have some serious quality control issues with your D7100 or your simply talking outta your asses. I do not have a D300 but I often help a good friend of mine with his for some product shooting. It's a great body and all but its clearly older technology, focus, Noise, low light performance and for good sakes, IQ!!! We used my D7100 back to back with his D300. Let's just say, he bugs my ass to bring in my D7100 when he wants us to shot some of his bigger ticket items. Slower focus??? What the H!!?

4 upvotes
JakeB
By JakeB (3 months ago)

@Cankon.

Yeah, these D300 guys are deluded bores.

1 upvote
Alberto Tanikawa
By Alberto Tanikawa (10 months ago)

I found the video from the D7100 plenty sharp using my 105/2.8 Macro and 24/1.4. After spending so much money on an FX body, and wanting to learn to shoot video, I find the D7100 attractively affordable.

FYI, to those concerned about headphones with larger plugs: the D7100 will accommodate the plug from an Audio Technica MH50, which is 3/8" (~9.5mm) wide.

0 upvotes
OseasMillan
By OseasMillan (11 months ago)

In terms of IQ The D5100 it's a great option. I can't see advantanges in IQ from the D7100 to D5100. I'll wait the next generation to consider buy a new body. Meanwhile new lenses is the best option.

1 upvote
TacticDesigns
By TacticDesigns (11 months ago)

Some benefits of the D7100 over the D5100 would be the User settings on the dial, ability to trigger an external flash wirelessly, focus adjustment, and the built-in focus motor. If you don't want one of these, than the D5100 is a good option. IMHO, it seems upgrading every other model release is a good bang for the buck.

0 upvotes
OseasMillan
By OseasMillan (11 months ago)

Hi Tactic.
Of course, I'm only speaking in IQ, the other benefits are amazing with D7100, In my case the D5100 is only for family, vacations and basic enthusiast use, no more.

Comment edited 35 seconds after posting
1 upvote
TacticDesigns
By TacticDesigns (11 months ago)

@OseasMillan
I've got the D5100 and I have to agree on the IQ. I take shots with this camera and I'm constantly saying . . . "That's insane." Like these shots . . .

http://www.flickr.com/photos/tacticdesigns/7196369006/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/tacticdesigns/7148331137/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/tacticdesigns/6543290555/in/set-72157631300869284

But me personally, I'm kinda insane about cameras, so I'm starting to look at the wireless external flash, focus adjust, and stuff like that. Of course, it's all a moot point until I actually purchase a Nikon external flash. <grin>

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
1 upvote
OseasMillan
By OseasMillan (11 months ago)

Very nice Shots, the Madelyn picture is amazing. After 2 years with my D5100 I know all the weakness body like extra controls, but the IQ is excellent, I have 3 lenses, I have the kit less 18-55mm, The sigma 18-200mm II, and the nikon 35mm f1.8, and let me tell you, the 95% of the time I use the 35mm, It´s the better cheap lens with an outstanding IQ. Congratulations for your pictures. Im searching an external flash too, right now I have the SB-400 and I like the portable size.

2 upvotes
TacticDesigns
By TacticDesigns (11 months ago)

If the Nikon D5100 camera were a car, I'd call it a Pocket Rocket! <grin>

I've been eyeing that 35mm f1.8. I've been thinking of getting it so I can try to get some available light shots around the campfire this summer. That would be cool! But I might get a flash unit first.

Cheers!

1 upvote
TacticDesigns
By TacticDesigns (11 months ago)

Well . . . I just got that Nikon external flash unit. I'm one step closer to getting that 35mm f1.8. LOL Although I'll probably use that flash more with my D90.

Comment edited 59 seconds after posting
1 upvote
OseasMillan
By OseasMillan (11 months ago)

Give me 5 mins to share some 35mm f1.8 pictures with you.

1 upvote
TacticDesigns
By TacticDesigns (11 months ago)

@OseasMillan . . . yes please. :)

0 upvotes
OseasMillan
By OseasMillan (11 months ago)

Please check the picture at 100% (Large View) and please verify the detail in the face. The 35mm lens offer a very nice detail.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/oseasmillan/8577597099/in/photostream

1 upvote
OseasMillan
By OseasMillan (11 months ago)

Another pic.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/oseasmillan/8721038878/in/photostream

1 upvote
TacticDesigns
By TacticDesigns (11 months ago)

I love them! Really nice capture of Leo. I zoomed in and yes definitely nice IQ. As for the 35mm f1.8, yeah, I want one too. :) Catch you around! :)

0 upvotes
Derma pro
By Derma pro (3 months ago)

OseasMilan
very nice photos. I just saw now and I liked so much. which lenses you are using with your D5100?

0 upvotes
ezyernie
By ezyernie (2 months ago)

I have the D5200 and a bunch of lenses. I have uses for them all, but the feature set on the D7100 is what I crave, so I may upgrade. It's really tempting. The 35mm is a dream lens. its low light performance is to be experienced. period. the 18-105 is my indoor event lens and is very decent in low light, not spectacular.

0 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (11 months ago)

Why no low-light video samples?

0 upvotes
GPW
By GPW (11 months ago)

Can the buffer be fixed with a firmware update?

0 upvotes
dennishancock
By dennishancock (11 months ago)

On the face of it, this is a lack of memory hardware not correctable by software. Something like a car with a two gallon gas tank. Unless of course the RAM is there and Nikon has switched it off.

0 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (11 months ago)

It seems the difference in the number of shots you can make before slowdown is not commensurate to the file sizes. It is like the RAW files in the buffer are uncompressed. So if compression would be added before buffering (as opposed to before writing to a card), more could fit in the same buffer.

0 upvotes
OysteinNL
By OysteinNL (11 months ago)

I do not know if the hardware support is but if:

Why not have a setting in the next firmware to fill both cards as load sharing ? The more data troughput we can have to both memorycards should certainly improve burst rates before the buffer is full.
The current possible setting RAW + JPEG still manages to overload the "RAW card" while the "JPEG card" still hase some bandwith to spare.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
1 upvote
Nikonb
By Nikonb (Apr 30, 2013)

To get the maximum burst in RAW mode you must have a Sandisk 95MB / s card and use 12 bits compressed RAW mode and disable distortion correction. In this configuration you can make a burst of 11 image at 6fp/s. And you can resume the burst after 3 seconds.
In 1.3x area 17 images at 7fp/ s. And if you do short bursts of 5 images spaced of one second there will be no limit.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
4 upvotes
RichDawson
By RichDawson (Apr 30, 2013)

Been looking for a new dslr and thinking of waiting for the Canon sl1.http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/consumer/products/cameras/slr_cameras/eos_rebel_sl1_18_55mm_is_stm_kit

But this nikon camera looks promising.

0 upvotes
cbq
By cbq (Apr 30, 2013)

The performance of the two doesn't seem to be anywhere close..

2 upvotes
Dan
By Dan (11 months ago)

That's like trying to decide between a Corolla and an Avalon.

1 upvote
peevee1
By peevee1 (Apr 29, 2013)

@DPR: your write:
"The ports on the D7100 are arranged behind three hinged doors. The separation means you only have to leave a narrow door open if you choose to attach the WU-1a Wi-Fi module."

Why would anybody attach WU-1a when the body has WiFi built-in? Copy-and-paste? ;)

0 upvotes
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (Apr 29, 2013)

The D7100 does not have Wi-Fi built in.

6 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (Apr 30, 2013)

So you fixed the mistake in your own specs then?

0 upvotes
Falconest174
By Falconest174 (Apr 29, 2013)

As an owner of both cameras, the D7000 and the D7100, I find the new a practical upgrade. The crop mode is very useful shooting sports (baseball) I don't shoot raw so I can't judge if the buffer is inadequate for use shooting sports, RAW but with JPEGS, I can rip off a 10+shot burst with no problem if I need to. Most of the time I find that I am shooting 2-4 shot bursts which never overwhelm the buffer, and I am able to do that almost continuously, more than adequate for my use. At one point I had a run of 5 consecutive batters with foul balls in the frame with the batters. The same when shooting pitchers throwing to the plate. A steady hand is essential with this camera as any small movement will kill sharpness as others have already mentioned. As I am a bit shaky at times, the use of OS on my optics is an essential. (comes from getting older)

2 upvotes
mforbes
By mforbes (Apr 29, 2013)

You guys crack me up, complaining about the buffer, I make my living taking photos of outdoor adventure events, zip lining, white water rafting etc., I use Nikon gear and have no idea what the buffer size is in any of my cameras, we don't have time to spray and pray and have the guests sort through a bunch of images and pick out the ones they buy, we do that for them by getting one or two good photos of them. If you need a large buffer for Fido running around the backyard, get a V1.

15 upvotes
TacticDesigns
By TacticDesigns (Apr 29, 2013)

Yeah. It may just be a spec on a page for some. But I push this taking pictures of my daughter during one of her gymnastics competitions [floor routine] all the time. In less than 2 minutes, there might be about ten poses that I want to try to capture. If I take 3 snaps of each, that's > 30 snaps. My Nikon D5100 can take ~32-36 pictures before it goes to sleep. My Nikon D90 about 10. My D90 I'm maxing out the buffer all the time. My Nikon D5100 I think I maxed that thing out maybe 3 times in the past 20 months. To me, I grab the D5100 for that situation everytime. It just depends on what you are shooting and what your expectations are I guess. :)

Comment edited 10 minutes after posting
4 upvotes
dennishancock
By dennishancock (Apr 29, 2013)

Precisely.

There would be a wide spread of requirements on buffer size taking a picture burst. It would depend on your personal situation and desired outcome.

Apparently gymnastics photography places different demands on the photographer than photographing white water rafters.

3 upvotes
TacticDesigns
By TacticDesigns (Apr 29, 2013)

It was worse when my daughter was trying out Cheerleading for a season and I offered to put together a video / slideshow for the team for the end of the season. In a 2.5 minute routine, I was trying to get nice pictures of the 10 teammates. But as fast and insane a situation as that was, that D5100 kept up, even using all the autofocus points. I'd walk away with 20-25 keepers each competition. That is another situation I've been in where I've put a lot of demand on the buffer. If a camera can't do this, I can't really use it. :(

2 upvotes
GPW
By GPW (Apr 29, 2013)

It's NOT spray and pray when you have waterfowl in focus and the subject is looking straight at you and does the wing flap while sitting on the water, you need as many frames as you can get to capture the moment. Wildlife don't stop and pose.

12 upvotes
bossa
By bossa (Apr 30, 2013)

After using my D800E's for awhile and then picking up my K-5 I almost have a heart attack when it reals off a few shots in continuous mode. One would expect a top notch APS-C camera to have a processor capable of handling a decent buffer size so maybe the actual chip in this camera can't take advantage of a large/fast buffer at those MP's so they just did it this way to keep costs down. ?

(I'm thinking of giving up punctuation.. what do you think?)

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 4 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Dan
By Dan (11 months ago)

What annoys me are people that accuse others of spraying & praying. What gives you the right to tell me whether or not the buffer is adequate? Do you know exactly what I'm shooting and how I use the camera? If it's big enough for you, congratulations. For others, this buffer size is horribly insufficient.

1 upvote
Big45acp
By Big45acp (11 months ago)

Spray and Pray folks are funny, no doubt. If the D7100 buffer is a problem for you I have three suggestions. 1) learn how your camera works, the D7100 will probably work just fine. 2) buy a more expensive camera, although you probably won't find anything that makes you happy. 3) If 100 frames at 7FPS (yes the D7100 does this) you should probably be shooting video.

0 upvotes
AveryFoto
By AveryFoto (11 months ago)

Got to love those who think they know it all. Try shooting Elite Competition Cheerleading and see how far that buffer gets you. If you are anywhere near as good as you think you are then that buffer won't come close. JPEG is only acceptable for amateurs and if you're shooting RAW then the buffer won't make it through one high level toss from step in to catch or one tumble pass before you're stuck waiting. My daughter did it for 3 years so I covered her plus sold to the rest of the team and shot 5 more teams from the same gym with up to 35 girls per team so the availability of shots was unlimited if you were fast enough. It was possible to overload a D300 @ 8FPS with a battery drive and extreme UDMA card shooting with both eyes open and walk away from a two and a half minute routine with over 200 good shots out of 500. Chasing one flyer being thrown you can shoot 10 shots with a 50% keep rate and that isn't just holding the shutter button down because if you did that you would miss every moment you were actually wanting. You didn't look for shots, you learned where they were going to be and watched for your next one with one eye while shooting with the other. I could have definitely used a D3 but was only shooting about 1/4 of the year so it's not like I could justify it. Not everyone is an amateur with more money and camera than they know what to do with or in a position to shoot full time. I will agree that shooting just about anything else except wildlife and racing shouldn't be much of a problem. Would you love that buffer with a giant crash happening right in front of your lens? I've also shot tons of little league and football and you shouldn't have any issue there. Biggest mistake people make with baseball is thinking those great pictures come from spraying when they don't. I can catch the ball within a foot of the front of the bat over 75% of the time on the second frame of two. The first frame is used to time the second, is triggered by movement of the bat and usually lands a good expression on the batters face. Shooting from the dugout entrance with a Nikkor 70-200 f2.8 @ 8fps I did a little test one day. When the ball left the pitcher I hammered down. Success rate of the ball being anywhere in one of the frames, less than 10% per batter and none of them close enough that I would use them. I never spray & pray and I would hate the buffer on this camera. There still needs to be a D400 for those of us who would prefer 18MP, standard 12,800 ISO, no scene modes or other automatic crap that would never be used and way more RAW speed. If you never overload this camera then you just don't have enough subjects moving fast enough and need to take a step up and shoot shuffleboard or something.

0 upvotes
1drey
By 1drey (Apr 29, 2013)

What a terrible set of sample images.

2 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Apr 29, 2013)

Subtle.

Anyway, I don't think they are terrible at all. They a samples, not meant to be post processed works of art.

4 upvotes
driftnomore
By driftnomore (Apr 29, 2013)

those who wear eyeglasses don't have a clear vision,thats why the terrible set of images...why not buy a hasselblad?

1 upvote
TacticDesigns
By TacticDesigns (Apr 30, 2013)

It's nice that this site adds samples to their reviews, rather than just leave everything based on the specs. My one thing would be I'd like to see more samples in low(ish) light with high(er) iso. (Like the picture of the lady in the antique shop.) Most cameras can give a good picture in nice light. But the camera that can give a nice picture in less than ideal light, that's useful. IMHO.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 7 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Collie Camp
By Collie Camp (Apr 29, 2013)

Check out the low ISO RAW compare-o-meter with the Sony NEX-7 enabled!

Whatever Sony did with the NEX-7, it seems to be right...at least as sharp as the new Nikon!

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 33 seconds after posting
1 upvote
oeriies
By oeriies (Apr 29, 2013)

I've been using the D7100 for 3 weeks with a 500mm f/4G and a 35mm f/1.8G. I've been a Pentax user for a while, currently owning a K-5. There is a lot of detail in the D7100 shots, which is important for birds and wildlife, and the continuous autofocus system is a dream compared to the K-5. The bummer is the buffer, as others have noted and as is clear in the DPReview appraisal. I spent an hour shooting seagulls in flight the second day I had the camera just to try to learn my new gear. I knew from the specs that I should get 6fps shooting raw. Fired off a burst to catch an on-coming bird -- 5 shoots and the camera stopped dead. I thought that for sure I had a defective unit. It was only when I went to the user forum here that I found that this is how the camera is designed. Nikon, you've got to be kidding. I hope there is at least a partial fix via software for the buffer problem that we'll see soon. It is a crippling flaw in an otherwise excellent camera.

7 upvotes
six34sigma
By six34sigma (Apr 29, 2013)

The camera does not stop dead. Hold the button down, it will continue to shoot but at a reduced rate. Like you I was convinced that the D7100 stopped dead but it will continue to take pictures at 1 fps. Thats a guess of 1 fps, seemed like that but it also could be faster. Also 95 mb/s sandisk cards will get you 7 images in a burst, and perhaps a better post burst rate than my supposed 1 fps. Turn auto distortion correction off and that number should go higher although I have not tested that.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
1 upvote
six34sigma
By six34sigma (Apr 29, 2013)

Tried a very quick test with 45 mb/s class 10 sandisk cards. Took a burst of 5 so thats about a second. Took 6 more images holding the button down in 9 seconds. A better test is warranted but thats a rough cut.

3 upvotes
SRT3lkt
By SRT3lkt (Apr 29, 2013)

There should be some options to choose from

Poor: 4 images in a bust [Subtract $90.00]

Good: 7 images in a burst +$0

Better: 16 images in a burst [Add $300.00]

Best: 41 images in a burst [Add $600.00]

0 upvotes
dennishancock
By dennishancock (Apr 29, 2013)

Nikon would do its customers right by recalling the D7100 and adding a larger image buffer.

0 upvotes
Amadou Diallo
By Amadou Diallo (Apr 29, 2013)

User tests are always a good thing to do and to share with readers, but keep in mind that we do cover this exact thing on the Performance pages of our reviews.

6 upvotes
GarysInSoCal
By GarysInSoCal (Apr 29, 2013)

Who the hell shoots dozens of birds in flight at 6fps in RAW?!?!?!? Oh paleeeeeeze... like your gonna print billboard sized images of that stuff... LOL! Dude... switch your D7100 over to hi-res JPEG and shoot 1000s of shots without missin a beat. You'll still have huge files to edit.

5 upvotes
Plastek
By Plastek (Apr 29, 2013)

GarysInSoCal - everyone serious?

1 upvote
bossa
By bossa (Apr 29, 2013)

I tend to do a lot of cropping when I shoot birds because the longest lens I have currently is the AF-S 300 F4 and a TC-14EII. To keep the aperture at optimum for sharpness and the shutter speed right to freeze movement I usually work in manual mode and with auto ISO on for exposure and use EV compensation to fine tune it. This usually ends up with pretty high ISO settings, depending on the available light. I'd be interested to see/hear how the D7100 goes in a similar usage scenario because those extra pixels would come in very handy as long as the extra noise wasn't great enough to lower the actual resolution.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
1 upvote
oeriies
By oeriies (Apr 29, 2013)

I didn't mean "stop dead" literally -- they don't give you enough space here at DPReview to write precisely. But when you're holding the button down and nothing happens for a second or more when you trying to fire off a burst, it seems like the camera has stopped dead.

I'm using a class 10 95mbs card.

I always shoot RAW, not because I'm going to make large prints but so that I can have all the flexibility possible in post-processing.

My Pentax K-5 will fire off a burst of 25-30 shots at 7fps in RAW before it slows down. That is what I'm used to and it is occasionally very useful when catching birds in flight. I understand the the file sizes are larger for the D7100 but the burst performance is, for me, suprisingly bad. Nikon should do what it can in software to improve this function, in my view.

Comment edited 9 minutes after posting
1 upvote
wakaba
By wakaba (Apr 29, 2013)

The darn incoming bird shoots...
I do that with IS0 0.3 and a 180mm Nikon prime. One out of a hundred shoots makes it. I just walk the half mile. And get the resolution I am after. No megazooms for me, crops look like liquid p....

0 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Apr 29, 2013)

The moral of the story is if you are looking to buy a used D7100 with low shutter actuations, make sure the seller is not a birder.

4 upvotes
FranciscoJG
By FranciscoJG (Apr 29, 2013)

My Pentax K5II makes photo continuously during 4.5 seconds, at 7 frames/s rate, in Jpg (31 images) until the buffer is full. Or during 3.5 seconds at 7 frames/s rate in Raw+Jpg (24 images). With the full buffer, continues to shoot continuously at 3.3 pictures per second up to exhaust the memory card. This is enough? For me Yes.
Is a very balanced product in all aspects of its construction, since the overall quality, ergonomics, excellent image quality, everything very carefully and thought to eliminate the weaknesses, which very few have.
Always wished a Nikon, I ended up buying this Pentax, but I can't regret that, on the contrary, these news are demonstrating that I made a good decision.
This Nikon D7100 makes five or six images only? What, during a second or less, and has the buffer full !? in a rate lower than my Pentax !? What can I say?

2 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (Apr 29, 2013)

How does that Pentax stabilize your OVF? Can you use it handheld with a long tele then?

0 upvotes
sandy b
By sandy b (Apr 29, 2013)

Amadou, So with the D7100 and fast cards, you can basically shoot 2.7 fps with a full buffer? Isn't that pretty quick buffer clearing for a 24 mps camera and doesnt that mitigate the small buffer complaints abit? I do miss the burst sound recordings DPR used to offer.

Comment edited 6 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
bossa
By bossa (Apr 30, 2013)

@ peevee1: The K-5 doesn't stabilize the OVF but it does stabilize ANY lens you can connect to the camera...ANY lens.

The OVF shows a HAND symbol which illuminates when the image is stabilized.

Also, the K-5 has Composition Correction which allows ANY lens to be used as a SHIFT lens. You can manually shift the sensor whilst looking at the Live View image or rotate the sensor for horizon correction.

Using the O-GPS1 unit the camera will track the stars (moves the sensor) for long exposure Astro photography as well.

The K-5 is a gem.

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
bossa
By bossa (Apr 30, 2013)

Actually I made an error in that last post. The Hand symbol appears in the OVF when the sensor is ready to go. If you take a shot when the sensor is not ready you can get a blurred shot where the sensor was in transit.

An interesting possibility with the SR on the Pentax is that it may be possible to try that Hasselblad trick where they moved a 50MP sensor around and collected photons creating a 200MP image. This could be used to counter the Bayer filter I suppose which, as you know, rejects 2/3's of the light going to the sensor.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
skyhawk04
By skyhawk04 (4 months ago)

Go into the menu and turn off distortion control. I have a d7000 and it made a huge difference. I shoot fine jpegs and raw at near 6 fps for at least 30 frames without buffering. Try it. Make sure you are using 95mb/sec cards. (sandiisk extreme pro) I say 30 frames but the truth is I have never ran into the buffer as that's the max continious burst I've done.

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
dennishancock
By dennishancock (Apr 28, 2013)

I have recently migrated to the D7100 from the D90 and it's proving a quantum jump in image quality, noise, color rendition, focus response, and features.

What condemns the D7100 to the insanely good category as opposed to the insanely great in my mind is the issue heavily discussed here--the image buffer. I'm not a sports oriented photographer and I'm OK with jpegs, but the thought that skimping on two dollars worth of memory is Nikon technical management's idea of the pursuit of technical excellence is astounding.

I'm getting a burst of 18 jpegs before the frame rate drops by approximately two-thirds. ( DX mode, optimal compression quality, fine image quality, large image size.)

Considering this camera is otherwise a technical tour de force, it appears Nikon technical management wasn't thinking. Marketing should be asking how many sales of the D7100 it will be losing because of this gaffe. Heads should roll. I know they would in America.

P.S. Great review, DpReview!

5 upvotes
d3xmeister
By d3xmeister (Apr 28, 2013)

Actually that's a marketing decision, not a technical one. Cutting costs is not the reason either with memory chips today. This tell me they still want to sell their D300s stock and release a faster tougher pro DX soon.

1 upvote
mtoneill
By mtoneill (Apr 29, 2013)

Actually, Nikon is wondering how much they can charge for a D7100s.

0 upvotes
Dan
By Dan (11 months ago)

Purposely crippling a camera in this way is not cool Nikon.

2 upvotes
d3xmeister
By d3xmeister (Apr 28, 2013)

I was a little skeptical about this sensor, because I saw serious banding in some samples, from different people. Also in the D5200 RAW files. But what dpreview tested show no banding even when pushed like crazy even at high ISO's.

So I have to admit the IQ is top notch from this camera, king of crop cameras no doubt.

I don't find the buffer a limitation as long as the camera does not lock up after a burst. If it does lock up, for me it's just useless, anybody tested this ? Can I take a picture imediately after a burst while the buffers empties to the card ?

0 upvotes
six34sigma
By six34sigma (Apr 28, 2013)

Yes you can take a picture after a burst. 5 shots with Sandisk 45 mb/s class 10 cards and then the camera keeps going but at a reduced rate and I don't know what that is 1 fps? The 1 fps is a wild guess on my part based on my test which was to make sure it was capable of additional shots. 5 shots is enough for an HDR run, you can get 7 frames with a 95 mb/s class 10 sandisk card. Turn auto distortion off and you can get more supposedly although I have not tested this.

Comment edited 10 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
d3xmeister
By d3xmeister (Apr 28, 2013)

OK I was worried. Man it does look like this will be my D5100 upgrade.

0 upvotes
six34sigma
By six34sigma (Apr 29, 2013)

Tried a very quick test with 45 mb/s class 10 sandisk cards. Took a burst of 5 so thats about a second. Took 6 more images holding the button down in 9 seconds. A better test is warranted but thats a rough cut. There is a pause after 5 and I moved the camera focused and recomposed and it took the shot.

The buffer is definitely small and you should buy Sandisk 95 mb/s class 10 cards. Others may be as good but not all cards are created equal.

0 upvotes
disasterpiece
By disasterpiece (Apr 28, 2013)

I'm kind of sorry that I didn't wait for D7100 when I bought a D7000 four months ago, but then again, the differences are not huge. Also, I tend to disagree with the hint that there will be D7000 owners wanting to get the D7100 - for me, it makes no sense to 'upgrade' to the same class and only one generation newer body. Again, for me, the more logical step up is an FX body with the appropriate lenses.

6 upvotes
six34sigma
By six34sigma (Apr 28, 2013)

Skip a generation or go FX in the meanwhile the D7000 is awesome, enjoy it.

3 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Apr 28, 2013)

It really depends on what your needs are. If you are interested in nature/wildlife photography, the ability to crop 24 mp files is quite useful.

Similarly if you have any interest in HDSLR video shooting, the D7100, like the D5200, is quite a big improvement in video quality.

And auction sites like Fleebay have made it so easy to sell gear, often without much loss, I'm not sure it makes sense to skip a generation if upgrading is going to improve your images or give you some feature you don't have.
That said, the D7000 is a wonderful camera with absolutely excellent IQ.

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
Dan
By Dan (11 months ago)

My biggest reason for going with the D7100 over the D7000 is the quickness of the AF system. The D7000 AF system is just unacceptably slow for me, while the AF system in the D7100 is blazing fast. This alone is enough of a reason to want the D7100 over the D7000.

0 upvotes
photosen
By photosen (Apr 28, 2013)

Another good, thorough review; it looks like a good camera but the buffer issue definitely seems as if they built it for a price point - much like Canon does. It sort of gives a reason for a D400. I still see this D7XX line as a Canon 60D, not a 7D competitor; and while it has many advantages over the 60D, that one is currently half the price. Something to consider if you think what matters is 70% the photographer, 20% lenses and 10% the actual camera...

1 upvote
molnarcs
By molnarcs (Apr 28, 2013)

I don't get this "problem:"
"Even more confusing - and as we've seen on previous Nikons - is that with Auto ISO disabled, adjusting exposure compensation changes scene brightness in the onscreen preview, even though the final exposure will (obviously) remain unchanged. Nikon's implementation of exposure compensation in manual mode is that it is used to change the metered target exposure, and it is precisely this target exposure that is simulated on the display."

Is there any other way to do it in LV? I don't find this confusing at all - it is as it should be. Personally, I never considered dialling in exposure compensation in manual mode. In Nikon's LV implementation you can still see a preview of the targeted exposure, then it's up to you how you reach that goal (bumping ISO or lowering shutter speed). How else could it work?

1 upvote
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (Apr 29, 2013)

Most cameras adjust the brightness of the screen to match the exposure. The best offer the choice (so that you can operate the camera in a studio environment and not be working with a black screen until the strobes fire).

However, when you get to the point that adjusting the exposure settings has no effect on preview brightness but adjusting something that doesn't affect exposure (meter bias) brightens or darkens the screen, then it's fair to describe it as confusing.

Which doesn't mean it's incomprehensible, but no, it's not 'as it should be' because there are simpler, more intuitive ways of making it work.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
Nukunukoo
By Nukunukoo (Apr 28, 2013)

I'm glad I read the review. I was really getting frustrated and puzzled as to why my crop 60i video kinda sucks. Upsampling is stupid and Nikon should fix that. Oh, well, I can always go for BlackMagic anyways... ;-)

2 upvotes
bossa
By bossa (Apr 28, 2013)

Does anyone know if the D7100 has Amp Glow problems like the D800?

I've got two D800E's and at ISO6400 things start to get nasty with a pink glow at the bottom of the picture. I'd rather use my K-5 or even my $299 K-01 (no amp glow that I can find) than the D800E in low light.

Now I must remember to take 'darks' for subtraction in PS when I'm in tricky lighting situations and operating at ISO6400+.

This may well be an area where a D400 could pick up the ball.

Comment edited 6 times, last edit 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
molnarcs
By molnarcs (Apr 28, 2013)

I haven't noticed any amp glow above ISO 6400 on my d800 (not the E version). I have probably well over a hundred ISO 10159 (Hi .7) photos. Pretty amazing that you can get away with such high ISOs nowadays. Anyway, you might want to check if others have this problem to see if it's a flaw specific to the E version (very unlikely). I for one never seen any pink glow (or any glow) on the bottom of my high ISO photos.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
mosswings
By mosswings (Apr 28, 2013)

Someone on the D7100 forum has just reported something that looks like really minor amp glow at the bottom of the picture, but at ISO 25600, unknown exposure duration.
So that makes two sensor companies whose products are vulnerable to (most likely) heating effects in the surrounding circuitry: Toshiba, and Saint Sony, creator of the D800 sensor.

0 upvotes
bossa
By bossa (Apr 29, 2013)

Here's a shot with my D800E at ISO6400. It's not meant to be anything but a demo of the issue so I've pulled the shadows up a bit to try and reveal some of the street. The issue is all but invisible if you leave the shadows alone though.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/steve-griffin/8690183015/

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
bossa
By bossa (Apr 29, 2013)

Is it possible to upload images in this thread?

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
molnarcs
By molnarcs (Apr 29, 2013)

I have some examples here shot at or over ISO 6400:
http://z7photo.com/2013/04/vol-de-nuit-night-flight-in-saigon/

The girl kissing the dog is ISO 10159, and this is ISO 6400:
http://z7photo.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Night-Flight-Bay-Dem-March-15-11.jpg

I just checked them in lightroom (increased exposure +3) and don't see amp noise. Might happen more often if using Live View perhaps?

0 upvotes
bossa
By bossa (Apr 30, 2013)

Thanks for that. The ampglow is really evident if you try to bring data out of the shadows at ISO6400 and with reasonably long exposure times.. say 1/60th and longer.

If you do a 30 second exposure at ISO6400 with the lens-cap on and eyepiece shutter closed you'll definitely see Ampglow and the bottom of the frame and probably hundreds of hot pixels.

0 upvotes
Frank C.
By Frank C. (Apr 28, 2013)

still waiting for the D400 review... ummmmm.... camera

9 upvotes
G Davidson
By G Davidson (Apr 28, 2013)

Same here, but I am wondering what they can put in to justify the name. This camera seems to get it right when it comes to resolution and IQ and weather-sealing to name just a few points, but not do so well with buffer, ergonomics or video.

For many this will be a dream camera anyway and I have to hand it to Nikon for making a DX camera that really captures the imagination, mainly due to the realisation of 'digital zoom' of such high quality it can realistically extend our lenses. I think looking at the intended limitations and Sigma's release of pro-level APS-C glass, there simply has to be a D400 on the way.

1 upvote
brendon1000
By brendon1000 (Apr 28, 2013)

This digital zoom will offer exactly the same IQ as taking a full res image and cropping it ! There is nothing to be gained in using the digital crop other than getting more photos before the buffer is full.

But yes there is little the D400 would be able to add to the D7100 except maybe a faster burst rate of say 8-9 fps with a bigger buffer but yes there is precious little the D400 would be able to add other than maybe a new sensor ? Or a newer AF system with even more AF points ?

Just speculation on my part of course. No idea if a D400 is even being considered by Nikon.

4 upvotes
Shamael
By Shamael (Apr 28, 2013)

The Sony A58 test-camera with the new 20 mpix sensor leaves me with the feeling that a new Pro body in APSC is on the way at Nikon, maybe a new APSC NEX as well. All we can do is wait. Maybe Thom Hogan heard something in this matter.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 1 minute after posting
1 upvote
lmtfa
By lmtfa (Apr 28, 2013)

No offense but Mr. Diallo seems to be the putting out most of the reviews. The camera reviews are few and far between. I am not speaking about agreeing or disagreeing. Information needs to be available quickly for the consumer to make informed decisions. Is dpreview waiting for purchasers to post their opinions of the cameras enabling them to hone in on specifics?

7 upvotes
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (Apr 28, 2013)

We put out four this month.

2 upvotes
six34sigma
By six34sigma (Apr 28, 2013)

Yes indeed. 1. Do not lower your quality otherwise the risk is in an unserious review. 2. But also see the camera refresh cycles increasing as the camera companies go after a shrinking market. Think that puts you in a bind, my opinion. Keep up the good work.

0 upvotes
lmtfa
By lmtfa (11 months ago)

Back in the day Barney, I can remember you put out that many in a week. These younger members don't know that.

@six34sigma. Im not questioning the quality. Where did I say that? Not only refreshes but camera phones, printers, software thats time consuming and maybe more staff would help and a whip;)

0 upvotes
GPW
By GPW (Apr 27, 2013)

Whoever at Nikon called this camera the new flagship of DX should be "rolled in broken glass and dipped in vinegar". Nikon Should have stuck to 18mp and cranked out 7-8fps with a larger buffer. THIS IS NOT a camera for fast action sports/wildlife no matter the card used. I am using a Sandisk Extreme Pro 32GB@95mbs and I am missing shots that I would normally get with my D300 because of the buffer, IT IS SLOW. The IQ is excellent even at high ISO all the way up to 2500, NOT kidding. If you shoot mostly stills get this camera, I think it can't be beat in IQ at high ISO, in this price range. I am a wildlife photographer and I am very,very disappointed with this camera for action shots. It is going back tomorrow!

11 upvotes
OseasMillan
By OseasMillan (Apr 27, 2013)

Is The buffer the only issue?

1 upvote
vFunct
By vFunct (Apr 27, 2013)

I agree that if the buffer is a limit then it shouldn't be marketed as their flagship DX camera. My understanding is that there is supposed to be a D400 on the way with bigger buffers and flash sync connectors.

The other issue I am curious about is the focus speed, if it tracks properly in action sequences. DPreview doesn't really test that part of the camera. We do not know if the upgraded AF module is any different from previous versions.

0 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Apr 28, 2013)

"rolled in broken glass and dipped in vinegar". Kind of extreme, don't you think?

Nikon never has had an 18mp camera, nor does any of Nikon's sensor suppliers make an 18 mp sensor.

But if you have the need to spray and pray maybe a different camera is more appropriate. I'm certain the majority of users are happy that the D7100 is in their lineup as it produces spectacular IQ and is far more versatile than a D300s because of the extra resolution. But AFAIK, Nikon never marketed this camera as a sports or action speed demon, and most experienced users know how to read specs and interpret marketing speak.

@VFunct
From the conclusion: Pros - "Fast, accurate AF system (inherited from Nikon D4)".

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
10 upvotes
robmanueb
By robmanueb (Apr 28, 2013)

Flagship DX, priced and labelled accordingly as a prosumer camera.

2 upvotes
Shamael
By Shamael (Apr 28, 2013)

"rolled in broken glass and dipped in vinegar"
that's modern violence, blame and shame on you.
Stick to the god ol' tar and feathers. :-)

1 upvote
yabokkie
By yabokkie (Apr 28, 2013)

half-mast-flag ship

0 upvotes
DELETED88781
By DELETED88781 (Apr 27, 2013)

As a owner of the D7100,Liveview implementation is bad not just the AF part. not only compare to mirrorless but far worst then canon

Other then that a sweet camera but i wish it could shoot faster. my cheap lumix lx7 is a way faster

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
4 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (Apr 27, 2013)

agree the frame rate is too slow. should be 8 fps at least. this is not a flagship APS-C camera (maybe a half-flagship).

think a better fast flip-flop mirror will need money which is against the design goal for the lowest cost.

but then, what I just said apply to 5D3, too.

0 upvotes
rusticus
By rusticus (Apr 27, 2013)

you want the fastest camera on the market - buy the Nikon 1 V1

3 upvotes
rhlpetrus
By rhlpetrus (Apr 27, 2013)

Excellent review and Nikon has the best overall APS-C dslr in the market, certainly so for stills shooter (the majority of us).

2 upvotes
Jahled
By Jahled (Apr 27, 2013)

"No aperture control in video mode" am I missing something? This is about the most important thing shooting in video mode!

7 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (Apr 28, 2013)

One can indeed set an aperture ahead of shooting--it's that one can't change the aperture during shooting, with the caveat that the aperture will change with some Nikon zooms at certain wide open settings if one zooms in on something, and/or a manual focus Zeiss lens will very likely let one change the aperture during shooting.

I'm quite sure that one can set an aperture ahead of time, I haven't tested my 50mm Zeiss in video on a D7100 body.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Jahled
By Jahled (Apr 29, 2013)

The problem is, is if you are shooting for television you have to stay on a 50 frame rate rendering everything else at the mercy of the aperture, given you can't really play with the ISO to much.

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (Apr 29, 2013)

J-

Right but these Nikons change the ISO while shooting video, at least if not shooting in full manual. Keeps things quiet.

0 upvotes
Ginetto
By Ginetto (Apr 27, 2013)

I still have to decide if to get this or the 16MP Pentax MKII s
Still prone to choose the Pentax due for the marvelous ergonomics and building; if I can read its review before the end of the year... :)

2 upvotes
FranciscoJG
By FranciscoJG (Apr 28, 2013)

I bought one K5II. I am delighted with it. Flawless ergonomics, impeccable build quality. Shames the latest Nikon products without doubt, by the sheer consistency which features in all the details of its construction and ergonomics design. The autofocus works fast and without hesitation on the inside, even when at f/2.8 the machine calculates a shutter time greater than 4 seconds, and only in a very dark the focus assist lamp lights up. I do not know whether it actually makes 7 frames per second, but I measured guaranteed 6.7 frames per second. The mirror is particularly silent, as well as the shutter. Even taking photos in Raw+Jpg, the buffer fills only around 24 to 25 pictures taken, and from there makes 3 photos in 2 seconds continuously, until there is no space on the memory card. If shooting in Jpg only, fills the memory between 32 and 35 photographs taken. This is done with a SDHC card 400x. At high ISO, the results are Extremely Good even at 1600ISO, and Very good at 3200ISO

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
5 upvotes
Ginetto
By Ginetto (Apr 28, 2013)

Thanks FranciscoJG for the "mini review" .
The needle is even more falling towards the K

1 upvote
FranciscoJG
By FranciscoJG (Apr 29, 2013)

Corrections to my previous comment, I did new tests to my Pentax K5II: if the shutter speed is greater than or equal to a thousandth of a second, it makes the 7 images per second guaranteed; after the buffer becomes full, the machine ensures 3 to 3.3 frames per second (not in two seconds as I stated previously) continuously until the memory card becomes full.
Movies, have very good image, excellent when played on a large HD TV.
Weak point so far? In movies, does not focus after it has started. Is a very good product and very balanced, but not perfect. Solution? Put in manual focus mode before starting the video, and focus manually, it is easy to focus while shooting, very effective.
For a non-professional product is just perfect. Better than some who claim to be.
I do not understand Nikon with its D7100, how you can make a product with a good sensor, a high-quality autofocus and fail in terms of overall balance!!?
Learn with this Pentax, this time you deserve to hear this.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
Seehund
By Seehund (Apr 27, 2013)

Why, oh why, doesn't the 7100 have an articulated screen? Its little brother 5200 has one, but it's a 7100-class camera I need and want to buy. Do the marketroids at Nikon still believe that people think that articulated screens signal "unprofessional" products?

Today, all DSLRs come with live-view and movie-modes. Previously some frowned upon that too as being "unprofessional". But now the features are here to stay, and thank god for that! One doesn't HAVE to use them if one never needs them. But why do manufacturers still insist on leaving out something that makes those modes actually useful, i.e. the tilt-swivel screen?

No, tilt-swivel screens aren't more fragile than anything else on a camera. If a photographer really wants to practise camera tossing, he can keep the screen folded in (he'll break his expensive lens long before he breaks his relatively cheap screen, which, when foldable, can be extra protected facing inwards).

(1/2)

Comment edited 36 seconds after posting
22 upvotes
Seehund
By Seehund (Apr 27, 2013)

(2/2)

People aren't using live-view mode with snail paced AF and the screen folded out for fast action while running around in the bush anyway. It's meant for slow work low down, high up, sideways, discrete street shooting from your café table, the camera placed on a tele-/microscope, and so on. Don't need it? Fold the screen in and forget about it.

Personally, I couldn't imagine going back to a screen that offers little or no advantage over the OVF in situations when OVF-work is out of the question. Sheesh, we're talking digital cameras of the 21st century!

Oh well. Maybe the Canon "70D" will get a better sensor than the 60D. Maybe the "7D Mk2" will get a tilt-swivel screen (yes, Canon are idiots too with the static screen of the current 7D).

7 upvotes
Paul Janders
By Paul Janders (Apr 27, 2013)

Seehund-
I agree. A folding, tilting screen is a real asset. It's great for macro work and a multitude of other shooting situations. For me, it's such a desirable feature that it seems the manufacturers would only make it available on their more expensive cameras.

Instead, it's just the opposite. You can only get this useful feature on less expensive models. It has never made any sense to me. As you have pointed out, the fragility of the screen is only a myth.

7 upvotes
philo123
By philo123 (Apr 27, 2013)

All, a tilting/folding screen is extremely difficult to implement and have full weather sealing. Hence the reason for the cheaper, entry level cameras having this feature. You'll see all enthusiast and pro cameras do not have this feature.

2 upvotes
abortabort
By abortabort (Apr 27, 2013)

@ Philo123 - What rubbish, Sony A77 and A99 have fully articulatin screens which are both weather sealed and plenty strong.

@ everyone else, this is the primary reason WHY Sony went to the SLT design, actively useful live view. It is NOT because Sony thinks EVFs are better, before the SLTs Sony had possibly the best OVF on the market. Having the EVF is more a nessersary evil of having such consistent use between rear screen live view and viewfinder live view.

6 upvotes
rhlpetrus
By rhlpetrus (Apr 27, 2013)

@abortabort: I'd never trade a good OVF for a good articulated LCD screen on a camera used for photography. Video is another story, but then there are plenty of good choices, from both Nikon (D5200) and many other makers.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 28 seconds after posting
3 upvotes
Seehund
By Seehund (Apr 27, 2013)

@rhlpetrus

You shouldn't have to trade a good OVF for an articulated screen, it's just that CANIKON for no good reason seem to have made up their minds that their most expensive cameras (with the best OVFs) should have the least useful, i.e. fixed, screens.

In his second paragraph, abortabort was discussing OVF vs EVF, and live-view behaviour.

1 upvote
Seehund
By Seehund (Apr 27, 2013)

@abortabort

"Sony A77 and A99 have fully articulatin screens which are both weather sealed and plenty strong. "

Exactly, not to mention the Canon 60D.

A tilt-swivel screen is probably one of the least difficult things to seal on a modern camera. A bunch of axial joints - big deal! Put some quite uncomplicated O-rings in there, done! Compare that to the complexity of sealing e.g. the combined shooting/drive mode dial or the combined power switch/shutter release on the 7100.

Are we to believe that the manufacturers can only afford to do weather sealed T/S-screens on their cheaper cameras?

2 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (Apr 27, 2013)

> It is NOT because Sony thinks EVFs are better,

EVF may not be better now but definitely OVF has no future.

0 upvotes
dougster1979
By dougster1979 (Apr 27, 2013)

You`r not the first to ask. The strange thing is, olympus released the first professional dslr with an articulated screen, the E3. For some reason Nikon and Canon, saw this as an amateur feature and have kept it for the lower range models. The only excuse i`ve come across is, the cost of weather sealing, how much do a few rubber seals cost. Whats wrong with a good OVF and articulated screen. The most perplexing INSANE aspect of DSLR manufacturer!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

2 upvotes
Iskender
By Iskender (Apr 27, 2013)

"The strange thing is, olympus released the first professional dslr with an articulated screen, the E3. For some reason Nikon and Canon, saw this as an amateur feature and have kept it for the lower range models. "

It's a lot less strange when you know those articulated screens were leaky. Olympus have a great reputation when it comes to weather sealing, with both water-proof compacts and extensively weather-sealed system cameras. Despite this it took another iteration of the model for them to get it right.

I'm thinking the other manufacturers looked at the price tag of the less-than-perfectly sealed E-3 and decided they'll do something easier.

1 upvote
1MPXL
By 1MPXL (Apr 28, 2013)

Get the A77 much cheaper. I got a refurb to give to my cousin - after playing with it for a few days i decided to keep it. So i called my cousin to tell him that i didnt find any A77 on refurb. lol.

0 upvotes
Spectro
By Spectro (11 months ago)

Live View Wired Remote Control and external live view devices are made by 3rd party if you need it for macro. I hardly ever use the live view except for movies recording.

0 upvotes
lera ion
By lera ion (Apr 27, 2013)

lack of low-pass filter greatly reduces maintenance costs in perspective dust and oil spots.
Buffer; 6-9 RAW/ D7100; 30-45 RAW/D300s. Price-quality is OK, but take your time.

0 upvotes
Dan
By Dan (11 months ago)

How?

0 upvotes
ConanFuji
By ConanFuji (Apr 27, 2013)

What's with all the high ISO shots?
The elephant dayshot with ISO 1400?????

0 upvotes
Amadou Diallo
By Amadou Diallo (Apr 27, 2013)

Look at the focal length. It''s a 225mm equiv, hence a 1/250 shutter speed.

11 upvotes
mantra
By mantra (Apr 27, 2013)

Hi

looks really a great camera

does someone know how could I clean the sensor seeing there is not low pass?

i guess it's really more dangerous , because the low pass is a "glass"

incredible how nikon is competitive ,lots of features ,image quality ,focus system ....... and price

thanks

1 upvote
Grevture
By Grevture (Apr 27, 2013)

There are still glass filters in front of the sensor - IR filters and so on. Its just a bit less functionality in the filters compared to earlier.

3 upvotes
RichRMA
By RichRMA (Apr 27, 2013)

Just from experiencing both the D7000 and D300, if a D300 update with that sensor was released, very few who compared them would buy the D7100 unless the price was substantially better (like $500+). When the D300 was released, it was something like $1800, but some months later, it settled in at around $1599. That would make it just $400 more than the D7100 body. I know there is a kind of trend toward smaller bodies now that mirror-less have become a normal market item, but when you'd got big lenses (e.g., 70-300mm f/2.8) it is much more comfortable balancing them with a larger body. Supporting a lens's weight by its focusing ring rather than simply using it to focus while you leverage back on the camera body (because it has a good grip, not a cramped one like the D7000/D7100) does not make for comfortable shooting. If these are still truly enthusiast cameras, and not pure consumer models, then someone will be waiting to buy a D400. If one ever appears.

5 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (Apr 27, 2013)

may be because the designer is a short person.

1 upvote
atelier O
By atelier O (Apr 27, 2013)

Even a D300 type body would be unbalanced when mounted with a70-300 f2.8 lens, if ever there's one.

5 upvotes
ponyman
By ponyman (Apr 27, 2013)

I can't remember any time when I was wishing that I was I was carrying something bigger and heavier

7 upvotes
le_alain
By le_alain (Apr 27, 2013)

Perhpas when you're not only carrying, but taking some shots !!!
:)

2 upvotes
robmanueb
By robmanueb (Apr 28, 2013)

I bought a D90 when I could have got a D300. It was several hundred dollars cheaper at the time and image quality was as good if not better even if the ergonomics weren't. Price is a huge deciding factor and even $400 is not insignificant. All speculation until we see a D400 anyway.

0 upvotes
RichRMA
By RichRMA (Apr 28, 2013)

And that is really what this camera is, a large step successor to the D90 and not the D300.

1 upvote
PLShutterbug
By PLShutterbug (Apr 27, 2013)

The menu grid for HDR mode Notes says "Available in JPEG and TIFF modes only" but the available Image Quality choices are RAW and JPG.

Where is the error? Does this camera support TIFF too, or should that be "Available in JPEG and RAW modes only?" - which means there really is no limit?

0 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (Apr 27, 2013)

TIFF as output and RAW as input only?

0 upvotes
Amadou Diallo
By Amadou Diallo (Apr 27, 2013)

It's JPEG only. That's now been corrected.

0 upvotes
Nukunukoo
By Nukunukoo (Apr 26, 2013)

Using a Class 10 on my D7100 and I really have no problem with the buffer size even with RAWs. Of course YMMV, but frankly, it's a non-issue to me, even when covering a hectic wedding event.

10 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (Apr 26, 2013)

maximum cost saving

1 upvote
marike6
By marike6 (Apr 26, 2013)

The D7100 is also a terrific video camera that has a huge advantage over many popular HDSLR cameras and the GH3 because, like the D5200, it has virtually no ugly moire or aliasing. Excellent colors, low-light ability and a really pleasing cinematic look. The aperture is a non-issue with inexpensive AIS Nikkors or the Samyang 35 f/1.4.

Philip Bloom just released a test of the Kessler Pocket Crane shot on the D7100:

https://vimeo.com/64692857

5 upvotes
mook360
By mook360 (Apr 27, 2013)

Very nice crane work. but why does the video looks so grainy and unsharp? is the footage compressed somehow?.

0 upvotes
hiro_pro
By hiro_pro (Apr 26, 2013)

great review. it is nice to see how this camera performs compared to its current peers. it is also good to see that if you dont need the additional features of the d7100 then you can get similar quality from the d5200 sensor.

However i suspect many people that are buying a nikon are probably upgrading from an older nikon and are already invested in nikon gear (lenses and such). i would be more interested to know how it compares to the predecessors such as the d7000 or even the d90 just to put things in perspective. i dont know that it needs to be mentioned on all 25 pages of the review but it would be nice to hear if or where the real world improvements are.

3 upvotes
ProfHankD
By ProfHankD (Apr 26, 2013)

Interesting. Go to the studio scene comparison tool. Add the NEX-7. Compare. Up to ISO 6400, the NEX-7 (out since 2011) clearly wins on both raw and JPEG. Above, the D7100 may be a bit better, although both look nasty and the NEX-7 seems to have both more noise and more detail.

Here's the point: the NEX-7 raw and JPEG image quality scores in the summary at the end of the review are POORER than those of the D7100! Huh?

2 upvotes
hiro_pro
By hiro_pro (Apr 26, 2013)

if you want to see the difference take both cameras on a trip. take some sunset pics, action shots and evening shots of people. there are certain things an SLR does in the real world that other cameras just cant do as well with. i just got back from the beach where i spent most of the time with my sigma 30 1.4 on my d7000. it is amazing the separation you can get with a good prime, but you need a good viewfinder to get it right. i am also not sure how well these mirrorless camera do indoors with a flash. i know the slr can shoot manual with a flash up to 1/250th to really freeze action.

2 upvotes
Kelly M Jones
By Kelly M Jones (Apr 26, 2013)

I just looked at the studio comparison and the NEX-7 doesn't clearly beat the D7100 at any ISO in RAW. I'm not saying the D7100 is better, just that it is focused a little forward of where the NEX-7 is focused. If you look at the watch face, the D7100 has a clear advantage. However, if you look at the writing and logo on the bottle in the upper left corner, then the NEX-7 is much better. My point is that if you are looking at things like sharpness, the studio comparison tool is not the best too. for the job. Lens variation and different focus planes will have much more influence on things like sharpness.

If you were talking about some other image quality, my apologies.

-Kelly

2 upvotes
hiro_pro
By hiro_pro (Apr 26, 2013)

sorry kelly. now that i read my first post it was a tad too.. not polite.

another issue you could be seeing is nikon is notoriously soft or conservative on sharpening. my boss had a sony slr when i had a d90. i forget the details but both cameras had the same sensor and were the same basic generation. i was constantly adding a pk sharpen layer to my shots to really make them pop. his shots were sharper out of the camera but didnt respond as well to sharpening. in this case my final post processed shot was clearly sharper/better. i know sony has come a long way since then so if you are serious abut the two cameras, i would download the raw from each and run it through your workflow to see which has the final best product.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
Kelly M Jones
By Kelly M Jones (Apr 27, 2013)

Oh, I didn't mean to imply you were impolite. Sorry if I came across in an abrasive manner. I just wanted to point out that in RAW the D7100 compares favorably with the nex-7. However, Nikon's default jpg output is quite soft, so I get where you are coming from.

Comment edited 12 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Shamael
By Shamael (Apr 28, 2013)

keep talking, at more than 75% off all the details on the studio test, NEX-7 has the better sharpness. 7100 has the same sensor and with good glass, there is no reason it will not perform as good. Just, Nikon needs 2 years to bring that after NEX-7 was out. I want to see a good camera seeing daylight with the 20 mpix chip. Sony's A58 is rather a downgrade from A57, than upgrade, much smaller buffer, no full swivel screen, slower burst rate, plastic mount. D5200 has most what i need, but no mechanic lens motor, 7100 has one, but no swivel screen, i do not care too much about burst rates anyway. So, let's wait and see. With 3 DSLR and NEX 7, i can survive.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 4 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
ProfHankD
By ProfHankD (Apr 29, 2013)

The discussion here seems to have been largely features of Nikon/DSLR vs. Sony/mirrorless -- which isn't my point.

The issue is that the DPReview summary scores say NEX-7 IQ is markedly inferior although the test results in the reviews do not support that conclusion. This type of bias casts doubt upon all DPReview's normally fine work.

It will be interesting to see what the review of the 7N says. ;-)

Comment edited 12 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
sandy b
By sandy b (Apr 29, 2013)

Not even close. At 1600 in raw the 7100 is a least half a stop cleaner.

0 upvotes
CeleryBeats
By CeleryBeats (Apr 26, 2013)

Awesome Camera, awesome review, awesome website, awesome everything

6 upvotes
Amadou Diallo
By Amadou Diallo (Apr 26, 2013)

awesome comment ;-)

17 upvotes
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (Apr 26, 2013)

Something tells me that if this camera fell short of a "gold" award the review would be less awesome. Still, it's a nice camera.

1 upvote
Valiant Thor
By Valiant Thor (Apr 27, 2013)

Awesome replies.

1 upvote
D300SandV1shooter
By D300SandV1shooter (Apr 27, 2013)

It'd be nice to reserve the word 'awesome' for events like a local star going supernova and outshining the sun - but I suppose we could always fall back on 'pretty neat'.

2 upvotes
Iskender
By Iskender (Apr 27, 2013)

Awesome defence of the original meaning of words in the English language.

0 upvotes
mcynkier
By mcynkier (Apr 27, 2013)

Just awesome.

1 upvote
Shamael
By Shamael (Apr 28, 2013)

i would even say more, "awesome".

0 upvotes
GabrielZ
By GabrielZ (Apr 26, 2013)

This camera isn't stellar at higher ISO's - which is a bit problematic for me.

2 upvotes
TacticDesigns
By TacticDesigns (Apr 26, 2013)

What camera are you comparing this to? FF? I'm not being funny. Just really interested. I'm shooting a lot at iso3200, so I've been looking at this more lately. Just wondering what some good options are.

2 upvotes
DDWD10
By DDWD10 (Apr 26, 2013)

Pentax K5II looks very clean, albeit with lower resolution.

7 upvotes
TacticDesigns
By TacticDesigns (Apr 26, 2013)

Yeah. The Pentax is up there. According to the DxOMark sensor / Sports chart, this Nikon D7100 just beats it out. I just looked up the actuations on my D5100 and see I'm at 44K+ so starting to think about . . . what's next? D7100, D600 or something else?

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 3 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
yabokkie
By yabokkie (Apr 26, 2013)

> very clean, albeit with lower resolution.

agree if you mean resolution hurted by noise reduction, disagree if you mean K5 got larger pixels because you are looking at a larger portion of the photo than on D7100, whether it's one on one or 100k on 100k pixels.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Illumina
By Illumina (Apr 27, 2013)

@tacticdesigns :
D600, you won't regret it

0 upvotes
TacticDesigns
By TacticDesigns (Apr 27, 2013)

@Illumina
Thanks. Yeah. I'm really leaning this way.

On paper, it looks like I get about a stop more to play with.

My wife and I volunteer taking pictures at gymnastics, so no flash, so I basically have that camera set to iso3200 and just leave it there. (It would be nice to be able to turn that up a bit.) Hence the obsession with iso3200.

I was admiring how well our shots on the D5100 were turning out. My wife said, I still see spots (ie. noise), so I went to the DPreview studio scene comparison tool and showed here the D3000 @ iso3200 beside the D7100 and D5100. Then she said, oh, I see. (Once you see those pictures, there is very little to debate.)

Then she asked me something she usually doesn't. While looking at the comparison tool, she asked me to show her a good camera. So I pulled up the Nikon D4. And then the D600.

After seeing the pictures, I told her how much the D600 was. Now . . . she didn't down right say no! <grin>

0 upvotes
TacticDesigns
By TacticDesigns (Apr 27, 2013)

Oh, yeah. Thanks DPReview for the Studio Scene Comparison tool. It's really pretty cool. And totally helped me show my wife what the difference between the cameras were. :)

0 upvotes
rhlpetrus
By rhlpetrus (Apr 27, 2013)

@DD: Pentaxes clean up their high ISOs, very obvious detail loss in Raw.

0 upvotes
Zerg2905
By Zerg2905 (Apr 26, 2013)

Thing is, Canon should do a proper 7D Mark II. If they do, it will not probably get the Gold Award here (and probably that will generate much bla-bla like comments), but many of its users will be rather happy. I am, my 7D is a "wreck" but it shoots high velocity RAWs and, if properly tuned, even low ISOs are acceptable. Not the 2013 quality, but acceptable and printable on A3. Canon, I hope you listen. Well. Cheers! :)

0 upvotes
vodanh1982
By vodanh1982 (Apr 26, 2013)

Good luck with new Canon camera's sensor.

0 upvotes
Zerg2905
By Zerg2905 (Apr 26, 2013)

Luck is not part of my plan. Never was. Cheers! :)

1 upvote
MarkInSF
By MarkInSF (Apr 27, 2013)

That's nice to know. Pretty much irrelevant in response to a review of the D7100. I'm sure many would like to see a proper followup to the 7D, but at this point Canon is just treading water until they get a new sensor (a proper modern one.) I expect we'll see that by the end of the year, and then the competition can begin anew. I don't have great respect for Canon's product strategy, but they still sell just fine even without great products. For now, the D7100 is a highly attractive camera Canon can't match.

1 upvote
Zerg2905
By Zerg2905 (Apr 27, 2013)

It is not entirely relevant, I agree. Please do the following (I will do a bit of "reverse engineering" with your comment): compare the 7D & the 7100 in RAW, 3200 or 6400. Is the 7100 better? Yes it is. It is "mind blowingly" good? No, it is not. And that, for a bigger, modern 2013 sensor, it's a shame. And, that's just Part One. Part Two: the EOS 7D is a rock and a machine gun (RAW) at the same time. The 7100 has to prove that, too. Cheers! :) P.S.: I am a big critic of the current Canon strategy, but I am not responsible for their P&L, so they should know better if this keeps the company alive or not.

0 upvotes
Gulyopapa
By Gulyopapa (Apr 27, 2013)

Canon 7Dmk2 gonna be MUCH more expensive ... not the same league ...

0 upvotes
Shamael
By Shamael (Apr 28, 2013)

"And that, for a bigger, modern 2013 sensor, it's a shame"
do you work for CNN, they are masters in miss-info, but they do it for the cause. The sensor dates 2 years back in time. Even the FF 24 has close to 4 years. But that does not matters. If Sony reworked and brought to the top the D200, 10 mpix, i would get it. Except for sensitivity, that sensor was amazing. And many sensors could be redone that way, instead of racing for pixels. Give them a new kick?

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Revenant
By Revenant (Apr 28, 2013)

"The sensor dates 2 years back in time."

If you're referring to the Toshiba sensor in D7100/D5200, it's not that old. It's not the same chip as the Nikon/Renesas sensor in D3200 or the Sony sensor in NEX-7/A65/A77.

0 upvotes
YogiGX20
By YogiGX20 (Apr 26, 2013)

How can Nikon advertise a "Top Model" that is out-performed by cameras 2 1/2 years older with regards to RAW buffer? I'm shooting with a K5 and can rattle away 25+ RAW pictures at 6 fps. Drove me nuts on my K20D when the buffer filled up. Great autofocus specs but shame the camera can't keep up with it. Other Nikons can, so to me that indicates that if you want better performance, Nikon wants you to go full frame!? Fingers crossed there will be a software upgrade like on the K5 which increased the RAW buffer from 10 or something to 25+. Was thinking of moving to Nikon for greater lens selection (+ flash) but that is an instant show stopper for me, as I take all my pictures in RAW format. Shame really ... I feel like Nikon has deliberately held back a bit too much iot leave a distinct gap to the next model. Not very convincing. I think they are trying too hard to pull level (or ahead) of the Sony a77 in terms of specs ...

19 upvotes
bobbarber
By bobbarber (Apr 26, 2013)

I could not agree with you more.

6 upvotes
six34sigma
By six34sigma (Apr 26, 2013)

With Sandisk 45 mb/s I get 5 - 14 bit RAW images before slow down. Its not a stop. Others have posted 7 images with 95 mb/s cards, before a slow down. For me 5 images is a must for HDR and expect that as the cards get faster and they will this number will increase. But try turning auto distortion off and you will pick up another shot or two before slow down. Its not 25 as you wanted ......

0 upvotes
Zvonimir Tosic
By Zvonimir Tosic (Apr 28, 2013)

Churning 24MP files vs churning 16MP files is not the same. If Pentax comes out with a 24MP camera, they will face same problem, so a new imaging engine / buffer are due too.
But not being Nikon has one advantage though — Pentax does not need to cripple one model to allow other 7 models to have their place based on slightly different specs.
Thus with Nikon, you do get a choice, apparently, but when you look at all things you need, you end up buying a more expensive model than Pentax asks for their own — which has it all, because of the no-nonsense lineup.

3 upvotes
ryanshoots
By ryanshoots (Apr 29, 2013)

Correct Zvonimir. I think Sony have figured out the 24mp images. They can do 12 FPS. It's a lot more data than 16 mp to be shunting around. Also was the K5 14 bit also. There is a significant difference in 14 vs 12 bit files as well.

Oh well, maybe Nikon will get off their behinds and bring out a dual processor D400 that can move these files about, though not sure all the D400 hopefuls want or need 24mp.

1 upvote
GPW
By GPW (Apr 26, 2013)

Anyone know if Photoshop Elements 9 can support the files from the D7100

0 upvotes
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (Apr 26, 2013)

Elements 9 used Adobe Camera Raw 6, so I don't believe it'll support the D7100 (support for which arrived with ACR 7.4).

You'd need Elements 11 (the latest version) for it to support such a new camera.

1 upvote
GPW
By GPW (Apr 26, 2013)

Thanks

0 upvotes
Phaedrus1962
By Phaedrus1962 (Apr 26, 2013)

Or use Adobe's DNG Converter (free) and convert your files to DNG format.

1 upvote
rhlpetrus
By rhlpetrus (Apr 27, 2013)

DNG is identical to ACR, I have tested the files with RawDigger. No need to update ACR, Elements, etc.

0 upvotes
dharma108
By dharma108 (Apr 26, 2013)

Hmmm...a gold award for a $1200 DLSR that shooters of sports/action and/or wild life--as in birds of flight, etc--can not realistically shoot in raw mode because of the buffer limitations?

Something does not compute for me here. The buffer limitations is a total deal breaker for me. Should it now be known that the 7100 is just for still photography?

7 upvotes
MarshallG
By MarshallG (Apr 26, 2013)

Clearly this camera isn't the best for action photography, but that doesn't mean it doesn't deserve its score. You might want to look at Canon's 7D if you want high frame rate performance. In the review, it ran for over 60 seconds at 8 fps in JPEG mode, and 24 RAW images at 4.9 fps. (I'm not trying to start a Canon/Nikon war; the 7D is the high frame rate camera that I'm familiar with, that's all).

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 7 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
stanic042
By stanic042 (Apr 26, 2013)

and not only for action..when you shoot a hdr panorama, 6 raw buffer will slow you down pretty much too

0 upvotes
martin11
By martin11 (Apr 26, 2013)

Sports/action are not shot in raw but always in jpeg.
Absolutely no use to shoot raw for action in dx

Comment edited 40 seconds after posting
3 upvotes
SergioSpain
By SergioSpain (Apr 26, 2013)

umm, speak for yourself martin11
Unless you're shooting sports for publication at halftime or after the game, then you should absolutely shoot sports raw, just like pretty much any other type of shooting.

6 upvotes
sandy b
By sandy b (Apr 26, 2013)

A bigger buffer would be nice but the D7100 has fast enough processing power to shoot 2.7 fps buffer full. That's quick. So is 3.5 fps in 1.3 crop mode. My type of shooting would not be handicapped by the buffer I think. After seeing some images being shown on the forum, I think this is a great camera for birders and wildlife shooters, especially with the improved Af module.

0 upvotes
wildbild
By wildbild (Apr 26, 2013)

My Canon 10D from 2003 buffers 6 frames in RAW. But hey.

0 upvotes
SergioSpain
By SergioSpain (Apr 26, 2013)

the 10D is a 6MP camera versus the 24MP of the 7100 that when it came out cost more than the 7100 does now, but hey

1 upvote
wildbild
By wildbild (Apr 26, 2013)

I forgot to tell you: 6 frames only can be really annoying!

0 upvotes
martin11
By martin11 (Apr 26, 2013)

Sergiospain

Shooting action in raw often means missing the best actionshot due to bufferingspeed and less frames a second.
Jpeg quality is great on this camera, why should you risk missing the picture for a little extra picturequality.
Besides, you will only see the difference on very large prints, screens , certainly not on anything smaller.
So no any anynewspaper will need raw , maybe the centerfold of a high quality paper would benefit from action shot in raw .(if you dont miss the shot)

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Grevture
By Grevture (Apr 27, 2013)

In reply to martin11: I shot sports professionally for daily newspapers (and has done so for many years) and I almost always shot raw, and so does most of my collegues i meet. It was years ago I met a professional shooting exclusively in jpeg. Raw means a easier workflow, with the fast computers we have today the processing speed difference is neglible, and in case you need more adjustments, it actually is quicker with raw.

I think the small buffer in the D7100 is an embarrassing mistake in an otherwise fine looking camera.

1 upvote
bobbarber
By bobbarber (Apr 27, 2013)

What I don't understand, especially after reading this subthread, is why manufacturers don't include more buffer and/or better processors and/or less megapixels.

Dropping Mp to 12 would make this camera twice as fast. Adding a better processor and more buffer to a 12 Mp spec would make it a real beast.

I truly, honestly do not get it. Why not take that approach?

I'd pay for a super-fast, responsive camera. The miniscule, hyped-by-trolls "improvements" in IQ aren't worth paying $100 for, let alone $1,200. Any modern DSLR is close to this output.

0 upvotes
wildbild
By wildbild (Apr 26, 2013)

And don't forget to buy a new computer first capable of handling the huge files ; )

1 upvote
FrancW
By FrancW (Apr 26, 2013)

I'll think I'll wait for the next serious Pentax K? review, before buying this one. Chances are they will be using the same sensor and so far they had a better result from any sensor then the main manufacturers.

12 upvotes
rhlpetrus
By rhlpetrus (Apr 27, 2013)

Pentax has used Sony sensors, this one is Toshiba.

1 upvote
Shamael
By Shamael (Apr 28, 2013)

Toshiba produces it, Sony develops it, it is the same as NEX-7, but Nikon is champion to find all tricks to make the world believe it is different.

0 upvotes
Total comments: 394
12