Reading mode: Light Dark

D7000 right for me?

Go to last post
larrywilson said:










To OP,

Yes some people are disrespectful and feel they can say anything over the internet. Don't pay any attention to these people, usually they don't have anything to give to the forum.

I owned both a d300 which is essentially the same as the d300s and now have the d7000 for my wildlife photography. I went with the d7000 for a much improved sensor with more resolution and much better noise control. I can shoot my d7000 up to an iso of 1600 without much PP for noise. The d7000 is smaller than the d300/s, but is well made with some water resistance. Be careful in rainy weather. If a light shower once in a while, probably ok if you wipe off the camera once in a while before it gets too much water on it. If solid rain then need to protect with a plastic bag or rain cover. The af on the d7000 is excellant in decent lighting, but can be tricked on a lower light day (dark cloudy) if subject is far away and the day has little contrast.

I would recommend the d7000 for your use.

Larry
Click to expand...
+1. I own a D80, a D300, and a D7000. The D7000 is superior is almost every way, especially overall IQ. And I have NO idea why some think the D300/300s focus better in low light, or any other condition. I have NOT found this to be true, my D7K focuses as fast/well in low light etc as my D300, if not slightly better.
 
TFergus said:
nfpotter said:
+1. I own a D80, a D300, and a D7000. The D7000 is superior is almost every way, especially overall IQ. And I have NO idea why some think the D300/300s focus better in low light, or any other condition.
Click to expand...
Probably because it does.
Click to expand...
Wrong. Period.
TFergus said:
TFergus said:
I have NOT found this to be true
Click to expand...
Irrelevant.
Pros have.
Click to expand...
Rude. Period. Also, define "pro", and then tell me why it matters.
 
nfpotter said:
TFergus said:
nfpotter said:
+1. I own a D80, a D300, and a D7000. The D7000 is superior is almost every way, especially overall IQ. And I have NO idea why some think the D300/300s focus better in low light, or any other condition.
Click to expand...
Probably because it does.
Click to expand...
Wrong. Period.
Click to expand...
Right.. because YOU haven't noticed it.
nfpotter said:
nfpotter said:
nfpotter said:
I have NOT found this to be true
Click to expand...
Irrelevant.
Pros have.
Click to expand...
Rude. Period. Also, define "pro", and then tell me why it matters.
Click to expand...
"Pro": someone that KNOWS photography, has expertise with it, or in the often used sense "makes money with it".

Why does it matter?

A whole bunch of people in the D300 forum that have (or in most cases "had") the D7000 complaining about it's unreliable focus in low light.... it's front/back focus problems... people in the D4 forum backing that. And pros at the camera stores I visit tend to agree.

ALL of that matters more than some guy that hangs in this forum always defending his camera choice.

Maybe you have everyone on ignore that had something bad to say about your camera... otherwise you would have seen a hundred threads in here on the topic.
 
nfpotter said:
chiane said:
You really want to lug a d7000 backpacking? Might as well throw in a few rocks as well.
Click to expand...
Wow, you must be weak.
Click to expand...
Yes, I'm always amazed at the variety of comments on the camera...for some it's a big heavy machine that you can't take anywhere...and then there are those who say it feels like a toy camera in their hands and want something that feels more pro-level. I certainly never found it to be too heavy, but I'm used to a heavier feel of my cameras.
--
Herby
 
TFergus said:
nfpotter said:
TFergus said:
nfpotter said:
+1. I own a D80, a D300, and a D7000. The D7000 is superior is almost every way, especially overall IQ. And I have NO idea why some think the D300/300s focus better in low light, or any other condition.
Click to expand...
Probably because it does.
Click to expand...
Wrong. Period.
Click to expand...
Right.. because YOU haven't noticed it.
TFergus said:
TFergus said:
TFergus said:
I have NOT found this to be true
Click to expand...
Irrelevant.
Pros have.
Click to expand...
Rude. Period. Also, define "pro", and then tell me why it matters.
Click to expand...
"Pro": someone that KNOWS photography, has expertise with it, or in the often used sense "makes money with it".

Why does it matter?

A whole bunch of people in the D300 forum that have (or in most cases "had") the D7000 complaining about it's unreliable focus in low light.... it's front/back focus problems... people in the D4 forum backing that. And pros at the camera stores I visit tend to agree.

ALL of that matters more than some guy that hangs in this forum always defending his camera choice.

Maybe you have everyone on ignore that had something bad to say about your camera... otherwise you would have seen a hundred threads in here on the topic.
Click to expand...
We've already established (I think) that there are/were some D7K's with focus issues from the factory (mine was one, but only with 2 of my 10-12 lenses, and is great now, after service). We've also established that MANY people didn't know about the very large individual focus points on the D7K. Those, in my somewhat educated opinion, are more to blame than anything, and have likely cause the HUGE amount of misconception.

Of COURSE the "pro's" at the camera store (as if every person that works at a camera store is a "pro") will say that - they'd love to sell you a more expensive camera.

Why would I care about what people have to say about "my camera" (the D7K)? I have clearly stated that I currently own both a D300 and a D7K, have shot them side by side, and the D7K does just as well if not better with AF in general. Your "fanboy" comment makes zero sense.

Do you own both cameras?

Oh, and I actually don't have a single user on ignore, FYI. Not even "angry pixel".
 
nfpotter said:
chiane said:
You really want to lug a d7000 backpacking? Might as well throw in a few rocks as well.
Click to expand...
Wow, you must be weak.
Click to expand...
Let me guess, you are used to carrying a big heavy FF around, and have meat hooks or hands? The d7000 takes two hands to shoot. There are plenty of smaller dslrs out there, anddslrs are about as big as they come, so yeah, it is not small. Maybe its small compared to the biggest ff, but thats about it. No thanks.
 
chiane said:
nfpotter said:
chiane said:
You really want to lug a d7000 backpacking? Might as well throw in a few rocks as well.
Click to expand...
Wow, you must be weak.
Click to expand...
Let me guess, you are used to carrying a big heavy FF around, and have meat hooks or hands? The d7000 takes two hands to shoot. There are plenty of smaller dslrs out there, anddslrs are about as big as they come, so yeah, it is not small. Maybe its small compared to the biggest ff, but thats about it. No thanks.
Click to expand...
I DO have a "lightweight" setup that I carry occasionally, but most often I am carrying a D7K, Bigma, 24mm, 35mm, and 50mm primes, an 18-55 VR or 18-105 VR, 105mm Macro, Tokina 12-24mm, one or two SB600's, a bunch of filters, extra battery and memory cards, etc, etc. It's about 35-40 pounds, and then I often add a tripod or monopod.

My "lightweight" setup is the D7k, a flash, and 4-5 lenses (not including the Bigma, at 4.5 pounds), plus some accessories.

Besides, you SHOULD be using 2 hands to shoot, proper hand-held technique makes for sharper photos.
 
zirtico said:
IQ will be noticeably worse than the D7K, but not bad at all.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't say it is noticeable worse. Yes the D7000 is better at higher ISO's and has slightly more detail but unless your pixel peeping there's not a lot in it in the real world of picture taking.
 
TFergus said:
chiane said:
The d7000 takes two hands to shoot.
Click to expand...
Name a DSLR that doesn't !?
Click to expand...
Oh, I don't know, a K-5 or K-r with pancake primes, several Sony's, even the 3100 or 5100 with a small 'for Nikon' lens.

Put it this way, outside of FF, name a bigger dslr that the d7000? As far as dslr's that aren't full frame, the d7000 is about as big a brick as their is.
 
nfpotter said:
chiane said:
nfpotter said:
chiane said:
You really want to lug a d7000 backpacking? Might as well throw in a few rocks as well.
Click to expand...
Wow, you must be weak.
Click to expand...
Let me guess, you are used to carrying a big heavy FF around, and have meat hooks or hands? The d7000 takes two hands to shoot. There are plenty of smaller dslrs out there, anddslrs are about as big as they come, so yeah, it is not small. Maybe its small compared to the biggest ff, but thats about it. No thanks.
Click to expand...
I DO have a "lightweight" setup that I carry occasionally, but most often I am carrying a D7K, Bigma, 24mm, 35mm, and 50mm primes, an 18-55 VR or 18-105 VR, 105mm Macro, Tokina 12-24mm, one or two SB600's, a bunch of filters, extra battery and memory cards, etc, etc. It's about 35-40 pounds, and then I often add a tripod or monopod.

My "lightweight" setup is the D7k, a flash, and 4-5 lenses (not including the Bigma, at 4.5 pounds), plus some accessories.

Besides, you SHOULD be using 2 hands to shoot, proper hand-held technique makes for sharper photos.
Click to expand...
Ok, it's one thing if you are a pro to carry around 35-40 lbs. of equipment because that's what you need to make the money. But for the enthusiast, that's insane. I don't need to take the perfect picture that bad.
 
chiane said:
nfpotter said:
chiane said:
nfpotter said:
chiane said:
You really want to lug a d7000 backpacking? Might as well throw in a few rocks as well.
Click to expand...
Wow, you must be weak.
Click to expand...
Let me guess, you are used to carrying a big heavy FF around, and have meat hooks or hands? The d7000 takes two hands to shoot. There are plenty of smaller dslrs out there, anddslrs are about as big as they come, so yeah, it is not small. Maybe its small compared to the biggest ff, but thats about it. No thanks.
Click to expand...
I DO have a "lightweight" setup that I carry occasionally, but most often I am carrying a D7K, Bigma, 24mm, 35mm, and 50mm primes, an 18-55 VR or 18-105 VR, 105mm Macro, Tokina 12-24mm, one or two SB600's, a bunch of filters, extra battery and memory cards, etc, etc. It's about 35-40 pounds, and then I often add a tripod or monopod.

My "lightweight" setup is the D7k, a flash, and 4-5 lenses (not including the Bigma, at 4.5 pounds), plus some accessories.

Besides, you SHOULD be using 2 hands to shoot, proper hand-held technique makes for sharper photos.
Click to expand...
Ok, it's one thing if you are a pro to carry around 35-40 lbs. of equipment because that's what you need to make the money. But for the enthusiast, that's insane. I don't need to take the perfect picture that bad.
Click to expand...
Lol. Insane, huh? Love your insulting tone.

I'm not a pro. I'm also not a weakling. Hit a gym, so you can join us that can carry more than 2 pounds of camera gear if we wish. Would also love to see you try to shoot the Bigma hand-held for a few hours. Not MY Bigma, though, I wouldn't want you to drop it.

Oh, and it's "badly", an adverb.
 
nfpotter said:
chiane said:
nfpotter said:
chiane said:
nfpotter said:
chiane said:
You really want to lug a d7000 backpacking? Might as well throw in a few rocks as well.
Click to expand...
Wow, you must be weak.
Click to expand...
Let me guess, you are used to carrying a big heavy FF around, and have meat hooks or hands? The d7000 takes two hands to shoot. There are plenty of smaller dslrs out there, anddslrs are about as big as they come, so yeah, it is not small. Maybe its small compared to the biggest ff, but thats about it. No thanks.
Click to expand...
I DO have a "lightweight" setup that I carry occasionally, but most often I am carrying a D7K, Bigma, 24mm, 35mm, and 50mm primes, an 18-55 VR or 18-105 VR, 105mm Macro, Tokina 12-24mm, one or two SB600's, a bunch of filters, extra battery and memory cards, etc, etc. It's about 35-40 pounds, and then I often add a tripod or monopod.

My "lightweight" setup is the D7k, a flash, and 4-5 lenses (not including the Bigma, at 4.5 pounds), plus some accessories.

Besides, you SHOULD be using 2 hands to shoot, proper hand-held technique makes for sharper photos.
Click to expand...
Ok, it's one thing if you are a pro to carry around 35-40 lbs. of equipment because that's what you need to make the money. But for the enthusiast, that's insane. I don't need to take the perfect picture that bad.
Click to expand...
Lol. Insane, huh? Love your insulting tone.

I'm not a pro. I'm also not a weakling. Hit a gym, so you can join us that can carry more than 2 pounds of camera gear if we wish. Would also love to see you try to shoot the Bigma hand-held for a few hours. Not MY Bigma, though, I wouldn't want you to drop it.

Oh, and it's "badly", an adverb.
Click to expand...
No thanks on the Bigma, I wouldn't carry 10 lbs. to go waste my afternoon taking pictures of birds at a football field length, unless I needed a cure for insomnia.

And if you are going to deputize yourself as the self-appointed grammar police, at least use complete sentences.
 
chiane said:
No thanks on the Bigma, I wouldn't carry 10 lbs. to go waste my afternoon taking pictures of birds at a football field length, unless I needed a cure for insomnia.
Click to expand...
Some people don't consider it waste - maybe you should enlighten us on what "exciting' photography you do that doesn't put you to sleep, so that we may all benefit ;)

--
WSSA# 280
James
 
jimmybob said:
Some people don't consider it waste - maybe you should enlighten us on what "exciting' photography you do that doesn't put you to sleep, so that we may all benefit ;)

--
WSSA# 280
James
Click to expand...
That's pretty profound. Some seniors don't consider scrap booking a waste either.
 
chiane said:
chiane said:
Some people don't consider it waste - maybe you should enlighten us on what "exciting' photography you do that doesn't put you to sleep, so that we may all benefit ;)

--
WSSA# 280
James
Click to expand...
That's pretty profound. Some seniors don't consider scrap booking a waste either.
Click to expand...
You haven't answered the question........
--
WSSA# 280
James
 
jimmybob said:
chiane said:
jimmybob said:
Some people don't consider it waste - maybe you should enlighten us on what "exciting' photography you do that doesn't put you to sleep, so that we may all benefit ;)

--
WSSA# 280
James
Click to expand...
That's pretty profound. Some seniors don't consider scrap booking a waste either.
Click to expand...
You haven't answered the question........
--
WSSA# 280
James
Click to expand...
+1, let's hear it.

Oh, wait! I see! You've got some pics of little choo choo trains. Awww, how cute.

Like I said, WEAK.

Go bug people in the Pentax forums, weakling.
 
chiane said:
TFergus said:
chiane said:
The d7000 takes two hands to shoot.
Click to expand...
Name a DSLR that doesn't !?
Click to expand...
Oh, I don't know, a K-5 or K-r with pancake primes, several Sony's, even the 3100 or 5100 with a small 'for Nikon' lens.

Put it this way, outside of FF, name a bigger dslr that the d7000? As far as dslr's that aren't full frame, the d7000 is about as big a brick as their is.
Click to expand...
LMAO. Idiot. The D300/300s is a good bit bigger than the D7K, for starters.

Stick with your weak arms and weak one-handed shooting technique. I'm sure your toy trains will be wonderful, patient subjects for you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
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