hands-on review of the D7100

Started Mar 15, 2013 | Discussions
rhlpetrus Forum Pro • Posts: 25,685
Re: Resolution and AF Re: Very good hands-on review of the D7100

My point was just a practical one. Variations in AF accuracy that are not quite visible at 12MP (D700) may well become visible at 36MP (D800). Assuming the AF system and sensors are exactly same.

Actually, Roger Cicala analysis of D800 and D4 has shown that the D800 is the most accurate of the FF bodies regarding AF (central point).

-- hide signature --

Renato. http://www.flickr.com/photos/rhlpedrosa/ OnExposure member http://www.onexposure.net/ Good shooting and good luck (after Ed Murrow)

 rhlpetrus's gear list:rhlpetrus's gear list
Leica D-Lux (Typ 109) Nikon 1 V1 Nikon D7000 Nikon 1 Nikkor 10mm f/2.8 Nikon AF Nikkor 35mm f/2D +4 more
rhlpetrus Forum Pro • Posts: 25,685
Now all APS-C sensors are not Sony

Horshack wrote:

mosswings wrote:

We now have a additional IQ difference between the dx and fx bodies...pattern noise vs. none - non-exmor vs. exmor. It also makes me wonder if Sony opted out of providing Nikon with its latest generation 24mp exmor sensor...because it planned to put that in its nex7 followon that just ahout announced. From sony's point of view, its dx sensor are critical...it has full frame, but nikon is more of a pro presence there. we'll see.

I doubt Sony withheld any sensor technology from Nikon; Sony needs those volumes to help cover sensor R&D and amortizing the production run costs. So I agree, APS-C volumes are critical and the loss of the D7100/D5200 sensor socket to Toshiba was probably very bad news for Sony.

D3200 uses a Nikon design, not Sony or Toshiba.

-- hide signature --

Renato. http://www.flickr.com/photos/rhlpedrosa/ OnExposure member http://www.onexposure.net/ Good shooting and good luck (after Ed Murrow)

 rhlpetrus's gear list:rhlpetrus's gear list
Leica D-Lux (Typ 109) Nikon 1 V1 Nikon D7000 Nikon 1 Nikkor 10mm f/2.8 Nikon AF Nikkor 35mm f/2D +4 more
rhlpetrus Forum Pro • Posts: 25,685
Re: D7100 seems significantly better than D7000

inasir1971 wrote:

I had a look at the RAW files from Focus Numerique.

Just downloaded the images for ISO 800, 1600, 3200 for the D7000 and the D7100. The EXIF data was changed in the model field from "NIKON D7100" to "NIKON D5200" which allows Lightroom 4.4 RC to process the images. We can't be sure that the D5200 profile used by Lightroom is correct but it works temporarily and any proper support can only be better.

White balance was adjusted, sharpening 45, 0.7, 70, 20. D7100 files also had luminescence NR 15 applied. The D7100 files were downsized to the same size as the D7000 files (4928 on the long edge).

The D7100 files seem significantly better at these higher ISO's showing less noise at equivalent size and more detail - possibly around a stop or so. Interestingly the D7000 files show more moire/aliasing than the D7100 files. Any banding that has been reported is not something that I can see - if it is there it is very hard to detect in any normal use, or requires such a push that the image would degrade so much any way.

The images need to be looked at at the same size for comparison - I have downsized the D7100 to D7000 size. Please note that the D7100 files will report D5200 as model:

D7100 ISO800

D7100 ISO1600

D7100 ISO3200

D7000 ISO800

D7000 ISO1600

D7000 ISO3200

To me, the D7100 looks around a stop better than the D7000 - that is the D7100 ISO1600 looks as good as the D7000 ISO800, etc.

While the FN images leave a lot to be desired, the differences between the two are too significant to be bad testing - I don't think they are close, the D7100 is a significant improvement.

(Luminescence NR always reduces detail - there is no free lunch - so applying that to the D7000 files would reduce detail further)

Thanks for the good job. Are you sure you have the same settings on both? I guess you left the default chroma NR ON (usually 25 value), since these show almost no chroma noise. The difference here is much more than I would expect after resizing, more like 1/3 to 1/2 stop, after some comparisons of D5200's and D7000's files. I also recall that on images from this site the D5200 looked better than on images from DPR and IR. We have to wait for more samples.

-- hide signature --

Renato. http://www.flickr.com/photos/rhlpedrosa/ OnExposure member http://www.onexposure.net/ Good shooting and good luck (after Ed Murrow)

 rhlpetrus's gear list:rhlpetrus's gear list
Leica D-Lux (Typ 109) Nikon 1 V1 Nikon D7000 Nikon 1 Nikkor 10mm f/2.8 Nikon AF Nikkor 35mm f/2D +4 more
fotolopithecus Senior Member • Posts: 1,699
Re: D7100 seems significantly better than D7000

rhlpetrus wrote:

inasir1971 wrote:

I had a look at the RAW files from Focus Numerique.

Just downloaded the images for ISO 800, 1600, 3200 for the D7000 and the D7100. The EXIF data was changed in the model field from "NIKON D7100" to "NIKON D5200" which allows Lightroom 4.4 RC to process the images. We can't be sure that the D5200 profile used by Lightroom is correct but it works temporarily and any proper support can only be better.

White balance was adjusted, sharpening 45, 0.7, 70, 20. D7100 files also had luminescence NR 15 applied. The D7100 files were downsized to the same size as the D7000 files (4928 on the long edge).

The D7100 files seem significantly better at these higher ISO's showing less noise at equivalent size and more detail - possibly around a stop or so. Interestingly the D7000 files show more moire/aliasing than the D7100 files. Any banding that has been reported is not something that I can see - if it is there it is very hard to detect in any normal use, or requires such a push that the image would degrade so much any way.

The images need to be looked at at the same size for comparison - I have downsized the D7100 to D7000 size. Please note that the D7100 files will report D5200 as model:

D7100 ISO800

D7100 ISO1600

D7100 ISO3200

D7000 ISO800

D7000 ISO1600

D7000 ISO3200

To me, the D7100 looks around a stop better than the D7000 - that is the D7100 ISO1600 looks as good as the D7000 ISO800, etc.

While the FN images leave a lot to be desired, the differences between the two are too significant to be bad testing - I don't think they are close, the D7100 is a significant improvement.

(Luminescence NR always reduces detail - there is no free lunch - so applying that to the D7000 files would reduce detail further)

Thanks for the good job. Are you sure you have the same settings on both? I guess you left the default chroma NR ON (usually 25 value), since these show almost no chroma noise. The difference here is much more than I would expect after resizing, more like 1/3 to 1/2 stop, after some comparisons of D5200's and D7000's files. I also recall that on images from this site the D5200 looked better than on images from DPR and IR. We have to wait for more samples.

Well in these the D7100 significantly better in noise, and resolution as might expect, but there's something funny going on with the noise aspect of these shots. I mean they're a little too good in the comparison I think.

 fotolopithecus's gear list:fotolopithecus's gear list
Nikon D610 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.8G Tamron SP AF 90mm F/2.8 Di Macro
Roar Arne Velle
Roar Arne Velle Forum Member • Posts: 98
7100 / 600 IQ, weight and price

I have compared these two. Getting the best out of D7100 with 3.8 micron pixesl you realy need the best of lenses. With 6 micron as in D600 you don't if you only want the same as from a D7100 and still will benefit from better DR, noise, colour debt, sensivity ++. I compared the D7100 with Tokina 12-24 (good, but probably not good "enough" for the sensor), N 35 1,8, N 50 1,8 (portrait) and N 70-200 4, - and  just as good or better: D600, N 18-35, N 50 1,8 and N 70-300. The latter cheaper and lighter. If you ad. the 85 1.8 a little more costly. Does this make sense?

 Roar Arne Velle's gear list:Roar Arne Velle's gear list
Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX5 Nikon D7100 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-140mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 35mm F1.8G Tamron SP 90mm F2.8 Di VC USD 1:1 Macro (F004) +14 more
inasir1971
inasir1971 Veteran Member • Posts: 3,625
Re: D7100 seems significantly better than D7000

The images from Focus Numerique are a bit odd in that the D7100 images are approximately 0.5EV brighter.

I did not adjust any of the exposures as that would directly affect the comparison - equalizing the brightness levels would have given the D7100 a 0.5 EV noise advantage.As to why the images differ in brightness, it is not clear.

They both show the same exposure parameters (ISO, Tv, and Av). While the lenses used were different, they are both primes and I wouldn't expect that much difference between them. Other possibilities include scene illumination being different, aperture lever mis-calibration or hardware fault; actual ISO values between the two cameras might differ (we know that manufacturer ISO values differ from measured ones significantly).

The differences seen are more than 1 stop (maybe around 1.5) but the D7100 may have an advantage here of only around 0.5 stops due to testing, which is why I suggest that the differences are greater than can be accounted for by the poor testing methodology of FN.

How much better will have to wait till we get better tests...

Default chroma NR 25 on both

 inasir1971's gear list:inasir1971's gear list
Sony RX1R II Nikon D4 Nikon D850
fotolopithecus Senior Member • Posts: 1,699
Re: D7100 seems significantly better than D7000

inasir1971 wrote:

The images from Focus Numerique are a bit odd in that the D7100 images are approximately 0.5EV brighter.

I did not adjust any of the exposures as that would directly affect the comparison - equalizing the brightness levels would have given the D7100 a 0.5 EV noise advantage.As to why the images differ in brightness, it is not clear.

They both show the same exposure parameters (ISO, Tv, and Av). While the lenses used were different, they are both primes and I wouldn't expect that much difference between them. Other possibilities include scene illumination being different, aperture lever mis-calibration or hardware fault; actual ISO values between the two cameras might differ (we know that manufacturer ISO values differ from measured ones significantly).

The differences seen are more than 1 stop (maybe around 1.5) but the D7100 may have an advantage here of only around 0.5 stops due to testing, which is why I suggest that the differences are greater than can be accounted for by the poor testing methodology of FN.

How much better will have to wait till we get better tests...

Default chroma NR 25 on both

The more of these off the cuff tests I see the more confused I get. I guess as you say, we'll just have to cool our heels until the authoritative tests are done.

 fotolopithecus's gear list:fotolopithecus's gear list
Nikon D610 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.8G Tamron SP AF 90mm F/2.8 Di Macro
Stuntflyer Regular Member • Posts: 126
Re: TechRadar Graphs

I would be interested in your comments regarding the TR findings below.

sandy b
sandy b Veteran Member • Posts: 8,955
I would take Techradars findings with a grain of salt

They normally do not match other reviewers findings, like DXO, (Funny, seeing as they use DXO), I think their testing is very suspect

 sandy b's gear list:sandy b's gear list
Nikon Coolpix A Nikon 1 J1 Nikon D750 Nikon D7100 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 70-200mm f/4G ED VR +10 more
Reilly Diefenbach
Reilly Diefenbach Forum Pro • Posts: 12,611
Re: Focus Numerique...french site...has all iso samples....

Another Mike has said the D7100 is sharper by a goodly margin (it is,) and you guys can take that right to the bank.

 Reilly Diefenbach's gear list:Reilly Diefenbach's gear list
Nikon D500 Nikon D850
Reilly Diefenbach
Reilly Diefenbach Forum Pro • Posts: 12,611
Re: I would take Techradars findings with a grain of salt

Hmmm.  The test chart resolution spread (18-28-34) along the various Nikon bodies D7000 to D7100 to D800 looks right on to me.  They are actual pics, after all.

 Reilly Diefenbach's gear list:Reilly Diefenbach's gear list
Nikon D500 Nikon D850
_sem_ Veteran Member • Posts: 5,023
Re: TechRadar Graphs

Stuntflyer wrote:

I would be interested in your comments regarding the TR findings below.

I think their findings are garbage, and it is not the first time they publish crap.

There should be a clear advantage of the FX D600 over the DX D7000 and D7100 at high ISO which they fail to find.

Reilly Diefenbach
Reilly Diefenbach Forum Pro • Posts: 12,611
Re: TechRadar Graphs

Graphs aside, they actually find it perfectly if you download the full size jpg high ISO test samples.

http://www.techradar.com/reviews/cameras-and-camcorders/cameras/digital-slrs-hybrids/nikon-d600-1096671/review/7#articleContent

The D600 is a lot better at 6400, to no one's surprise.

 Reilly Diefenbach's gear list:Reilly Diefenbach's gear list
Nikon D500 Nikon D850
fotolopithecus Senior Member • Posts: 1,699
Re: TechRadar Graphs

_sem_ wrote:

Stuntflyer wrote:

I would be interested in your comments regarding the TR findings below.

I think their findings are garbage, and it is not the first time they publish crap.

There should be a clear advantage of the FX D600 over the DX D7000 and D7100 at high ISO which they fail to find.

The one thing I feel confident in saying after two days of contradictory evidence, both pro, and con, is that nobody knows nuthin!

 fotolopithecus's gear list:fotolopithecus's gear list
Nikon D610 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.8G Tamron SP AF 90mm F/2.8 Di Macro
mosswings Veteran Member • Posts: 8,920
Re: D7100 seems significantly better than D7000

inasir1971 wrote:

I had a look at the RAW files from Focus Numerique.

Just downloaded the images for ISO 800, 1600, 3200 for the D7000 and the D7100. The EXIF data was changed in the model field from "NIKON D7100" to "NIKON D5200" which allows Lightroom 4.4 RC to process the images. We can't be sure that the D5200 profile used by Lightroom is correct but it works temporarily and any proper support can only be better.

White balance was adjusted, sharpening 45, 0.7, 70, 20. D7100 files also had luminescence NR 15 applied. The D7100 files were downsized to the same size as the D7000 files (4928 on the long edge).

The D7100 files seem significantly better at these higher ISO's showing less noise at equivalent size and more detail - possibly around a stop or so. Interestingly the D7000 files show more moire/aliasing than the D7100 files. Any banding that has been reported is not something that I can see - if it is there it is very hard to detect in any normal use, or requires such a push that the image would degrade so much any way.

The images need to be looked at at the same size for comparison - I have downsized the D7100 to D7000 size. Please note that the D7100 files will report D5200 as model:

D7100 ISO800

D7100 ISO1600

D7100 ISO3200

D7000 ISO800

D7000 ISO1600

D7000 ISO3200

To me, the D7100 looks around a stop better than the D7000 - that is the D7100 ISO1600 looks as good as the D7000 ISO800, etc.

While the FN images leave a lot to be desired, the differences between the two are too significant to be bad testing - I don't think they are close, the D7100 is a significant improvement.

(Luminescence NR always reduces detail - there is no free lunch - so applying that to the D7000 files would reduce detail further)

Pretty much what I saw on VNX2.  Thanks for the downsizing work.

 mosswings's gear list:mosswings's gear list
Olympus XZ-1 Olympus Stylus 1 Nikon D90 Nikon D7100 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-105mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR +5 more
(unknown member) Contributing Member • Posts: 566
Re: D7100 seems significantly better than D7000

inasir1971 wrote:

I had a look at the RAW files from Focus Numerique.

Just downloaded the images for ISO 800, 1600, 3200 for the D7000 and the D7100. The EXIF data was changed in the model field from "NIKON D7100" to "NIKON D5200" which allows Lightroom 4.4 RC to process the images. We can't be sure that the D5200 profile used by Lightroom is correct but it works temporarily and any proper support can only be better.

White balance was adjusted, sharpening 45, 0.7, 70, 20. D7100 files also had luminescence NR 15 applied. The D7100 files were downsized to the same size as the D7000 files (4928 on the long edge).

The D7100 files seem significantly better at these higher ISO's showing less noise at equivalent size and more detail - possibly around a stop or so. Interestingly the D7000 files show more moire/aliasing than the D7100 files. Any banding that has been reported is not something that I can see - if it is there it is very hard to detect in any normal use, or requires such a push that the image would degrade so much any way.

The images need to be looked at at the same size for comparison - I have downsized the D7100 to D7000 size. Please note that the D7100 files will report D5200 as model:

D7100 ISO800

D7100 ISO1600

D7100 ISO3200

D7000 ISO800

D7000 ISO1600

D7000 ISO3200

To me, the D7100 looks around a stop better than the D7000 - that is the D7100 ISO1600 looks as good as the D7000 ISO800, etc.

While the FN images leave a lot to be desired, the differences between the two are too significant to be bad testing - I don't think they are close, the D7100 is a significant improvement.

(Luminescence NR always reduces detail - there is no free lunch - so applying that to the D7000 files would reduce detail further)

Let me first say that I have no interest in either of the cameras and that this post is more about testing and comparison methods than anything else. It is amusing to me how some "camera review" sites can be so sloppy in their testing approach and still be able to pass it all off as valid data.

I only looked at the ISO 800 shots from both cams but I suspect this is the same in all of them. Look at the bottom left of the pictures - the light reflections in the lens of the vintage camera (and a few other spots) indicate that the shots were taken under different lighting conditions; angles to be more precise... looks like either the test boards or the lights were rotated 90 degrees. This alone might have caused slight underexposure in one and that means more noise... I can't speak for anyone else but I know I would not base my purchase decision on these samples, that's for sure.

Reilly Diefenbach
Reilly Diefenbach Forum Pro • Posts: 12,611
Re: TechRadar Graphs

From what I've seen so far, this camera is the first and only DX camera capable of doing really good, highly detailed like a 5D or close to D800 files for landscape or other assignment for which lots of intricate detail is a benefit.  Focusing is much improved as well. That alone is a very big deal and should at least double or triple your keeper rate on difficult subjects.

Doubters should download the full size jpgs here:

http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/dslr/d7100/sample.htm

and ask themselves honestly, can my camera do this?  The answer is no if it's DX.  Nikon has absolutely hit it out of the park with this one.  No one to blame any more if your pic isn't good.

 Reilly Diefenbach's gear list:Reilly Diefenbach's gear list
Nikon D500 Nikon D850
anotherMike Veteran Member • Posts: 9,123
Re: TechRadar Graphs
2

Yea, you  nailed that last comment. When I was shooting my first test shots with the D7100, that was exactly what I thought - how far cameras have come and how there are no excuses if the pictures aren't turning out. If someone can't get an unbelievable image out of a D7100 (or D600 or D800/E) at most reasonable ISOs at even pretty serious print sizes, it ain't the cameras fault, it's the guy (or gal) in the mirror who is the problem. That's gonna cause some folks issues because it's far easier to blame the tool than to admit one must go back and improve ones craft.

As a note, I also don't get where this "D7100 is noisy" set of posts is coming from. At low ISO, I've got no problems with it, and I'm one who thought the D300 sensor wasn't much due to the low ISO grit it had, so I'm sensitive to low ISO grunge. (Also one reason I distinctly don't like the Canon 7D at all).

I don't expect a 24mp DX machine to be a high ISO superstar like a D3s or something; that's not its role in my book.

-m

Gar Ber Regular Member • Posts: 116
Re: edited version

Thanks for the pointer, when I have a couple of hours time, I'll look at the boat picture and make a comparison regarding the noise pattern profile to see if they're actually related or not.

jonrobertp Forum Pro • Posts: 12,875
PhotographyREVIEW.com has new samples.

The samples look good in that review...I like the 6400iso...very clean ..imo.

 jonrobertp's gear list:jonrobertp's gear list
Canon PowerShot G7 X Canon G3 X Panasonic ZS100
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads