D7100 a significant upgrade over D7000??

[smrags]

Hi,

I'll be buying a D7000 by the end of this month. Just went through the D7100 review posted on DPR. I personally won't spend extra to buy the D7100.

However, what are your opinions?

 

[Adam-T]

I`d definately not call it Significant by any means - not like the D7000 was over the D90 (That WAS sigificant, in fact a totally different body class altogether) .

If you need the bits the D7100 adds such as a very worthy resolution increase without high ISO penalty for the same print size, more cross sensors in the AF system, D2X-alike 2X High speed crop mode (But in RAW too !), instant 100% image review on pressing SET (like the D200 had but the lower cams never got before), better EXPEED-3 JPG engine with less smear and more detail, ability to use a £50 WIFI widget for camera control, Canon-like Auto ISO which goes on Zoom range, RAW movie streaming over HDMI & Stereo Mics then etc go for it

But you`re giving up the 7000`s better quality movies (7100 is softer according to DPR), the tough clip on screen protector (7100 is like a canon and its vulnerable LCD needs 3rd party protectors), the lovely and intuitive Live-view/Movie mode lever setup (7100 has a consumer style setup like the D3200) and the ability to recover over 4 stops of shadows without banding

I personally like the ability to stick a fast sharp prime like the 35 F1.8G on and crop to death to "Zoom" , 24Mp and sharp pixels are essential here (the new Sigma 18-35 F1.8 zoom will make 24Mp essential) , I also like as many cross sensors as possible even if they are illogically placed (all in the middle rather than across the frame), I never use DSLR movie modes (1" sensor cams like the RX100 are far more practical in real life with fast AF, Focus peaking on MF, AVCHD and broadcast quality footage) and if I`m Stupid enough to take a shot which is more than 4 stops under then I`d have more to worry about than a bit of banding - LOL - I`ve Only done it on bounced flash shots where it`s not recycled fast enough so not been the only once in a lifetime shot and even if it was, feint banding wouldn`t kill it (And Thom Hogan has found a util to remove it) .

--
** Please ignore the Typos, I'm the world's worst Typist **

 

[Shunda77]

smrags wrote:

Hi,

I'll be buying a D7000 by the end of this month. Just went through the D7100 review posted on DPR. I personally won't spend extra to buy the D7100.

However, what are your opinions?

Both these cameras offer effectively the same image quality when shot in RAW.

If you don't want or need the huge files of the D7100, get the D7000 and save yourself a fortune.

 

[coudet]

smrags wrote:

However, what are your opinions?

Better body, better resolution, better color, better noise, better dynamic range at higher range and worse at ISO 100.

Whether that's worth the upgrade, well, every man's gotta make his own decision.

 

[Daisy AU]

smrags wrote:

Hi,

I'll be buying a D7000 by the end of this month. Just went through the D7100 review posted on DPR. I personally won't spend extra to buy the D7100.

However, what are your opinions?

I suppose it boils down to what you want to achieve with your photography and what previous experience you have. I am on the learning curve and have owned the D7000 for about 15 months and love it. It's been a learning curve, coming from a point and shoot, but it is a great camera. If I was buying today and had the additional $$$, I would probably get the D7100 just because of the 24MP. Everything else is, for me, pretty much the same in both cameras. When I bought the D7000, it was the best of the non-pro, and I made that decision because I knew I wanted the best, knowing that I would never change to FX or become a pro and that camera would be a keeper for a long, long time. If you can stretch your budget, get the D7100 if only because of the 24MP. But, the D7000 is fabulous and you will be happy with it if you cannot afford the D7100.

 

[Peter Jonas]

coudet wrote:

smrags wrote:

However, what are your opinions?

Better body,

I am not quite sure what you mean.

better resolution,

Yes.

better color,

Maybe the factory JPG default settings result in a more pleasing result, but nothing you could not achieve by tweaking the settings on the D7000.

better noise,

This does not appear to be the case, at least not according to the DXO tests.

better dynamic range at higher range and worse at ISO 100.

Yes.

For me the most significant improvements are the one touch 100% zoom in playback mode and the mode dial lock.

On paper the AF system also appears to be more sophisticated, but I have never had an issue with the AF on my D7000.

Whether that's worth the upgrade, well, every man's gotta make his own decision.

True. For me, as good as the D7100 appears to be, for now it is a no.

 

[RobCMad]

I'm going to wait until Xmas, for the price of the D7100 to come down, it looks like a fabulous camera. If I already had a D7000 I wouldn't upgrade and most of the negative comments about the D7100 seem to be coming from people in that position (as well as the occasional blatant trol).

The sensor has improved but not with the leaps and bounds we used to get. There are many, many less threads from unhappy customers than there where with the D7000. The AF is a big draw for me, resolution (to crop and occasionally print big, I will see for myself about the OLPF), little improvements with the body (which has better sealing) and firmware. The review from this site is clear that the small changes from the D7000 result in a camera that feels better to use.

 

[fotolopithecus]

smrags wrote:

Hi,

I'll be buying a D7000 by the end of this month. Just went through the D7100 review posted on DPR. I personally won't spend extra to buy the D7100.

However, what are your opinions?

Depends on who you talk to, and what you mean by significant. One things sure, the upgrade isn't as significant, as the significant money you'll save by getting the D7000.

 

[JakeB]

smrags wrote:

Hi,

I'll be buying a D7000 by the end of this month. Just went through the D7100 review posted on DPR. I personally won't spend extra to buy the D7100.

However, what are your opinions?

I've owned the D7000 for a few years, my copy has worked flawlessly (i.e. none of those issues that were raised in photo forums) and am not particularly tempted by the D7100, though clearly there are improvements.

I just don't feel that any of the improvements will have a huge impact on IQ.

To be honest, my next upgrade from the D7000 will probably be in a few years to the successor to the FX D600.

 

[RobCMad]

fotolopithecus wrote:

smrags wrote:

Hi,

I'll be buying a D7000 by the end of this month. Just went through the D7100 review posted on DPR. I personally won't spend extra to buy the D7100.

However, what are your opinions?

Depends on who you talk to, and what you mean by significant. One things sure, the upgrade isn't as significant, as the significant money you'll save by getting the D7000.

Agreed, the D7000 is the best value at the moment especially with the discounts in the US and UK but that won't be true (in Europe) in a few months as the D7100 price drops.

 

[RobCMad]

JakeB wrote:

smrags wrote:

Hi,

I'll be buying a D7000 by the end of this month. Just went through the D7100 review posted on DPR. I personally won't spend extra to buy the D7100.

However, what are your opinions?

I've owned the D7000 for a few years, my copy has worked flawlessly (i.e. none of those issues that were raised in photo forums) and am not particularly tempted by the D7100, though clearly there are improvements.

I just don't feel that any of the improvements will have a huge impact on IQ.

To be honest, my next upgrade from the D7000 will probably be in a few years to the successor to the FX D600.

Fair enough, the days of big increases in image quality from generation to generation are gone now so if you do want a big jump in IQ you need a bigger sensor but is IQ a problem that needs solving with the D7000?

 

[inlawbiker]

It seems like a lot of people are looking very very very closely at the images and not seeing a ton of difference. If you add up all of the incremental differences are they worth the extra cost? Well that's a personal decision. The only one that really stands out to me is the auto-focus.

 

[smrags]

Thanks for the opinions!

I am going with the D7000 anyway, as I mentioned in the post.

I was just curious to find out what are general opinions about the D7100 and how its being received by people who know a thing or two about photography.

Ofcourse I have read enough about the additional benefits of the D7100 but I just couldn't figure out how much impact will it have in a real life situation. Probably the AF is the significant upgrade.

 

[Reilly Diefenbach]

Yes.

 

[jimofcan]

If Nikon has fixed the AF, it would be a very significant upgrafe all by itself.

 

[rska2013]

why do you care of our opinion when you stated you will buy 7000 over 7100, go for it

 

[JolieO]

I own both cameras and I never really took to the D7000 like I have to the D7100. The improved AF alone is enough to justify the purchase for me. I also find the metering easier to deal with. I shoot birds so the extra pixels are a nice bonus too.

There are many folks who love their D7000 so I wouldn't discourage anyone from purchasing it either. I just am much happier using the D7100.

Regards,

Jolene

 

[olynik969]

I have not like the D7000 since I got it (I got a very early one - first one sold by BB in Wichita); actually sold to me before it was supposed to be.

I was disappointed out of the chute and as much as I tried (and I really did try) - "TO ME" the D7000 was nothing short of a disappointment. Finally re-bought a D300s and the D7000 pretty much has collected dust since.

So - after the new AF system (pretty much that of the D300s) and other improvements (like much less "lurch" with the shutter/mirror mechanism), I just bought a D7100 (several days ago). "To Me" - it is a totally different camera than the D7000 (similar controls which I never had a problem with) - but "to me" that is where any similarities stop. From my first shots (I'm a Jpeg shooter for the most part - God forbid!!!) - the D7100 has been exceptional.

My mistake was not skipping the D7000 (or the one I got). There have been many who loved the D7000 and I'm sure I got a bad one, but bottom line... the D7100 (i have) is heads and shoulders against and above "the D7000 I had/have".

As always.... YMMV. Only my personal experience.

Bob

 

[pixelless]

The upgrade from the d90 to the d7000 was much more of an "upgrade" than from d7000 to the d7100. But if you "need" one of those minor upgrades, than one could argue that it is a a good buy!

For me, the biggest upgrade is the 24MP. Not that I think I need it, but I can see people wanting those extra MP´s. Others may say that it is the AF system, but I never had a problem with the d7k AF.

I want to say that I would like a "d400", but I know what I really need... more lenses!

 

[BlueBomberTurbo]

Dunno, if I had the choice, I'd never go back to my D7000. I had it since it was released, so I'd say I know the camera's image quality and rendering pretty well.

What I see with the D7100 is much more natural color, which is retained much better at high ISO. Along with finer grain and less chroma splotching, even though the overall luma noise level may be the same. And of course, a sharper and larger image, which is a double bonus if you like/need to crop. The images are so sharp, low ISO ones can be used at 100% zoom if necessary. Definitely something my D7000 could never produce, even with the same lenses.

If you've got good lenses to pair with it, the D7100's image quality will blow you away compared to any previous Nikon crop sensor camera (except the D5200, of course ).