Reading mode: Light Dark

D7000 for a wildlife shooter?

  • Thread starter Thread starter richardD300
  • Start date Start date
Go to last post
R

richardD300

Guest
Not sure whether this should be in the D90 or D300 forum, but for now I'll post it here.

I was surprised to see today the launch of the D7000. I do realise that it is a D90 replacement, but this leaves me with a quandary. I have become very keen on wildlife and although I have a D700, I stupidly sold my beloved D300 to help fund the 700. Soon afterwards I discovered the pleasures of wildlife photography, but FX did not give me the reach even with my 70-200 and 300mm prime lens. So I bought a second hand D90 and have been very pleased except that I missed the 51 point focusing. This week I've been thinking about buying a D300s or a second hand D300 for wildlife.

Wildlife photography often requires much post shoot cropping and thus extremely small image sizes. Certainly not enough pixels for large prints, So, here we are, the D7000 has a 16.3 Mega Pixel DX sensor which may make cropped images more likely for printing, but has a 39-point auto focus system. Both cameras have sealed bodies which is important when it rains etc. I guess the D7000 post launch and by Christmas will be at a much lower price too.

For the wildlife photographers out there, what are your early thoughts on the D7000 v the D300s please, always accepting the D7000 is likely to end up less cost than a D300s. I have only had a cursory look at the spec, but the new camera looks promising.

--
richardD700
http://www.pixels4u.co.uk
 
39-point AF+16MP+DX+D700-like ISO performance is the best formula so far you can find in Nikon's DSLR product lines for wild life shooting.
 
I'm in a similar position. I shoot pretty much 100% wildlife, and I currently own a D300 and a D700.

I find the D700 is good for wildlife photography in a lot of situations, but you are right, there are times (a lot of times in fact) when only a camera with a high pixel density will do. So, which camera to choose?

I don't really like the look of the D7000 body, as ergonomically it looks like a too big a step down from the D300 I already have. I use the AF and metering mode switches all the time, so a body lacking those is not for me.

On the other hand, if the sensor in the D7000 is far better than the D300 sensor, then I'd still consider getting one, at least until the D400 appears next year. It would have to be very good indeed though - by which I mean D700 standard (which seems unlikely, despite what the published ISO range of the D700 is).

I plan to wait for the reviews (and the price to drop), then if it looks good I'll get one at Xmas time!

--
My photos:
http://nickburtonswildlifephotography.blogspot.com/
http://nickburton.smugmug.com/
 
AF modes on the D7000 are controlled by a center button on the front AF/MF switch. Depress this with a left finger and you switch AF servo modes and AF area modes via the front and rear command dials.

A very nice touch actually, easy to do whilst keeping the eye to the viewfinder.
--
Holmes
 
High pixel count surely helps if you like to crop your images and I guess the new 16 MP sensor will do, but I guess you'll have to invest in good lenses too if you want sharp results after cropping.
 
Yes, the importance of good glass! To get the best out of my D700 I invested in 14-24/24-70/70-200 and a 300mm f/4 prime. The best way to describe the difference I found was WOW. The weddings I occasionally do became so much better, landscape improved and of course the speed to capture wildlife was remarkable. The glass is more important in my view to the most expensive camera.

--
richardD700
http://www.pixels4u.co.uk
 
I don't see why not. It certainly has the AF system and FPS for wildlife, along with a ruggedized body for harsher environments and the advantages of DX crop factor magnification. Add the lighter weight in case you need to hike it around, and it's a winner in my book.
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

It's easy to argue about equipment and technique, but hard to argue with a good photograph -- and more difficult to capture one .



Gallery and blog: http://esfotoclix.com
Special selections: http://esfotoclix.com/store
Wedding & Portrait: http://esfotoclix.com/wedevent
Flickr stream: http://www.flickr.com/photos/22061657@N03
 
Wildlife photography often requires much post shoot cropping and thus extremely small image sizes. Certainly not enough pixels for large prints-I find this statement wrong-i rarely have to crop my images and if i do its not by much, What your statement shows is that you are lacking in focal length,field craft or a hide/blind, I would forget the camera and get a longer lens or extender and use some concealment to get closer to your target species

Dave
--
http://www.wildlifeinfocus.com
Facebook-David Courtenay Photography (www.wildlifeinfocus.com)
 
I quite clearly stated my lenses and yes I do have Nikon 1.4, 1.7 and 2.0 teleconverters. I shoot from a hide mostly and even then sometimes birds of prey remain at long distances away. Of course I get loads of shots of all types of wildlife where no cropping at all is required, but even if you've got a 600mm lens on a DX camera I doubt your capabilties to always capture without sometimes having to conduct severe cropping.

I think this forum is great, but I don't apologise for saying why are there those who don't meaningfully contibute, just criticise.
--
richardD700
http://www.pixels4u.co.uk
 
It looks great to me as well, which is why I have prordered it. Currently, my main camera is a D300s, so I will be testing ISO capability between the two when I get the D7000. I agree that no matter what lens you have and what you do to get close, there will be may times that you want to crop in to get a better composition/image. Having 16 MP vs 12 will help with that. I have alwys tried to keep 3000 x 2000 as my absolute smallest crop area, and even that only in extreme cases. Now, by starting with 4928 x 3264, that gives more options for cropping when needed. I do agree that my best captures are when I am really up close with the wildlife I am photographing, and that includes bears! :)

--
http://www.pbase.com/jctangney
 
Unless you are after the most challenging of wildlife motion pictures I got ot believe the D7000 is going to be superior to the D300s/D300. The only time where I think it will surely be worst is for the fastest of AFS focus tracking for things like BIF

I have liked my D5K output and thought it was the equal of the D300 except for some downing of the JPG inside the camera compared to the D300 I once had. But auto focus was no comparision.

I predict next year there willbe a superior body released that takes the focus up a notch.

it is in those elements that Nikon will extract extra money from the gearheads. Pixels and ISO and vidoe is marketing candy for the easily swayed crowed.
richardD300 said:
Not sure whether this should be in the D90 or D300 forum, but for now I'll post it here.

I was surprised to see today the launch of the D7000. I do realise that it is a D90 replacement, but this leaves me with a quandary. I have become very keen on wildlife and although I have a D700, I stupidly sold my beloved D300 to help fund the 700. Soon afterwards I discovered the pleasures of wildlife photography, but FX did not give me the reach even with my 70-200 and 300mm prime lens. So I bought a second hand D90 and have been very pleased except that I missed the 51 point focusing. This week I've been thinking about buying a D300s or a second hand D300 for wildlife.

Wildlife photography often requires much post shoot cropping and thus extremely small image sizes. Certainly not enough pixels for large prints, So, here we are, the D7000 has a 16.3 Mega Pixel DX sensor which may make cropped images more likely for printing, but has a 39-point auto focus system. Both cameras have sealed bodies which is important when it rains etc. I guess the D7000 post launch and by Christmas will be at a much lower price too.

For the wildlife photographers out there, what are your early thoughts on the D7000 v the D300s please, always accepting the D7000 is likely to end up less cost than a D300s. I have only had a cursory look at the spec, but the new camera looks promising.

--
richardD700
http://www.pixels4u.co.uk
Click to expand...
 
Dave Courtenay said:
Wildlife photography often requires much post shoot cropping and thus extremely small image sizes. Certainly not enough pixels for large prints-I find this statement wrong-i rarely have to crop my images and if i do its not by much, What your statement shows is that you are lacking in focal length,field craft or a hide/blind, I would forget the camera and get a longer lens or extender and use some concealment to get closer to your target species
Click to expand...
^^^^^^ This ! What Dave said! Bravo!

I will wait for the sensor test before deciding.

A poster above claims D700 like saturation. We will see when the test are complete. They are jamming a ton of light buckets on the small sensor. We will see.

For me, the camera body is not the limiting factor in my wildlife photography - and I doubt it is in many folks cases.
 
You have taken me wrong of you think i was criticizing, I was mealy stating facts, I have been a wildlife photographer for as many years as i can remember, I just dont take shots of tiny dots and crop them in, I did all that years ago and learn by my mistakes, I supply agencies that require a minimum of 10 mp files so as i shoot 12mp cameras the most i could crop would be 2mp and i just dont, If i cant get the shot i dont shoot-its old school and thats the way i am, i shot slides and you just dont crop then so i try not to crop now unless its a yeti i wont waste my time, I do use a 600 most of the time and some times with an extender but as i say if the subject is too far i will sit back and watch and wait until the time when its within my reach

I have written on my blog that digital is giving people bad photographic practices in my opinion and one of them is thinking that you can take a shot at distance and crop in, if i dont shoot for agencies then my images are printed to A3+ and larger and as you state you cant do that with a highly cropped image, My advise again is not to buy a higher pixel camera but to invest in good quality long lenses and take your time and set the scene so that the subject comes to you
Regards

Dave
http://www.wildlifeinfocus.com
Facebook-David Courtenay Photography (www.wildlifeinfocus.com)
 
To me it looks like the specs are there for wildlife. Using a D90 for wildlife
was far more challenging than my D300. The D7000 at 6fps is good,
however is auto focus speed is lacking then maybe not so good.
The D90 and D300 are night and day, at least mine were.
Of course some animals are slow/large/up close, but for those that aren't,
you need to be on your game...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
w
Next unread
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top