A baby D3s? British Journal of Photography review D7000

Started May 28, 2011 | Discussions thread
Grevture Veteran Member • Posts: 4,188
One point I would agree to, though ...

BruceEvans wrote:

One interesting thing is his constant stating that the D7000 is "as good as the D3 BUT..." I'm sure the D7000 is a nice and capable camera but from this review at least, it's not a "baby D3."

It could be said of the D7000 that it shares one treat with the D3, which is a to small buffer size in relation to its frame rate capability

(Which was fixed in the D3s, btw)

The review sounds like it's written by a person who's a writer first and a photographer second.

I would agree on that.

If being baby-anything, the D7000 is more of a baby-D700 (which make the numbering all the more interesting ...) After all, the D700 is a high end, but all out full stop pro model with FX, the same could be said of the D7000 and with DX. Both are sort of "high end enthusiast" models for their respective sensor size. A future D400 would on the other hand be a much more likely "baby D3/D3s" candidate.

From the history cabinet: When releasing the D3 and D300 back in 2007 Nikon actually at several times during the press event mentioned the D300 being a "baby D3" and said that this relationship was much stronger then between D2x and D200 (where the latter eventually got the nickname "baby D2x").

-- hide signature --

I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every moment of it!

By the way, film is not dead.
It just smell funny

 Grevture's gear list:Grevture's gear list
Nikon D70s Nikon D3 Nikon D3S Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/2.8G ED VR II Nikon AF-S Nikkor 17-35mm f/2.8D ED-IF +7 more
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow