keep the 7100 and...
Coming from D300, I think the 7100 is enough for most shooters,including myself. A lot of hoping and praying for D400 here and elsewhere. I myself like to shoot wildlife etc., but also a lot of landscape type shots. For me, 7100 and fast cards work well for semi fast shooting. D800 will be my next choice, even if d400 is released. I have no issues with buffer etc..and Ishoot only raw. If you want more I assume its better high iso and fps. Almost certain it won't have both.
I'm enjoying the D7100 and the buffer doesn't bother me nor the size of the camera. This coming froom a D300 with grip shooter. I still have my D300 and own a D700. Not sure if I would sell my D7100 and get a mythical D400, but if the rez was the same and more robust, then I probably would.
The D300 was the right camera at the right time.The gap between FX and DX was wide, both financially and technically. That gap is much closer now. A D400 will sell, but no where near in the numbers that the D300 did, unless it is priced very near the D7100.
keep the D7100 and ... wait for D4x.
Because D7100 is highly capable and with right lenses you're (almost) not lose to any existing camera. At least distance between D300 and D700 was more than between D7100 and D800.
If you'll got the big bucks, go D4x, if your budget tigh stay with D7100.
Didn't mind shelling out some bucks for lenses, but D4x will be out of reach price wise.
The issues with d7100 not being robust enough? Other than weather sealing, what do we need. I not taking the thing into combat. NW rain is a good test. So far so good.
Ray, for you, it sounds like you've found your next camera. Will be true for some others as well, but not me.
I shoot sports and that's my passion (not so much my skill). I stand out in the rain if that's when the game is. I've gotten better over time and get a lot of positive feedback from families of the players (high school). I don't make any money, I just love shooting this way. My D300 has been through a lot and still functions like new. That's the kind of durability I expect from a D400. The only D300 non-sports photos I take are occasional vacation shots and random shots now and then. For most of that type of shooting I actually rely on my Sony P&S.
While I believe the D7100 may well end up my next camera, it's only going to be that way if Nikon does not make a D400 - not because I wanted it. And who knows, maybe a D3s will come my way instead.
I have stopped by my local dealer to try out the D7100 and while it's nice, it strikes me as too small for easy use, I miss some buttons, and maybe it's just me, but I hate paying for video features I'll never use (may be true on the D400 as well).
Enjoy the D7100 and photography in general. I plan to enjoy the D400 and sports in general
Gary, the D7100 is as well sealed as the D800, and better built than the D600. D7100
uses the D4 AF so its got good fast reflexes. Only the Raw is affected by the small buffer
and using the fastest SDHC cards lets you shoot a burst and it empties right away.
You can get a third party grip like a Pixel Vertax MB d15 for extra button, larger grip area.
Also, you can program many controls AF start like the Function, DOF, etc. buttons
to behave like having that extra button. Remember the D7100 has an I info button that
is the trade off very useful to get into the menus to make changes, and my setup and U1 and U2
buttons to help make the camera very customizable and easy to use. Only people who shoot
videos grumble about having to exit video mode to change aperture setting.
For fast 13fps and good videos I use a Nex 5n instead, and use some of my Nikkor lenses
via adapters, but you can shoot about 100 frames non stop with the D7100 in Jpeg.
See the camera is not designed as a Raw sports camera, its a Jpeg sports camera.
I just don't think a $1200 camera that has so much good features that trickled down from
much more expensive FF cameras can be criticized for the money its way better than most
people need. Even high iso, and 24mp resolution without the Bayer digital filter, are high end
features, your not paying extra for. Dual SdHC card slots like the D300 and D400.
I hope that Nikon makes a D400 and that its not out of your price range, but I wouldn't
wait for it, since Nikon may or may not make it for you. Myself, I was using a
D70 for a decade waiting for a camera that had 90% of what I wanted before buying
a D7100. I wanted a No mirror version of the D7100 using an HD 2mp Digital VF for quiet
easy to see in the dark VF with no mirror noise or shake. I also, only wanted a 18mp sensor
for FX high iso like performance. I didn't get those things, but for the price I'm happy.
Also, I pre-ordered the Sigma 18-35mm f1.8, to get the same general noise profile as an FX
using F2.8 glass, and I would be looking at getting the just announced Samyang 16mm f2
for a little wider view at one stop faster than my Tokina if I didn't already have it.
I have lots of F1.4 glass so I personally don't see ever switching to FX, the DOF and High ISO
noise these days is easy to get around with the smaller DX body. Just use fast glass and work
at one or 2 f-stops lower ISO.
I was put off by the buttons on d7100 at first, but like them now. A lot more convenient the the banks on d300. I do wish it had the 10 pin remote release however.
The minute the mythical D400 whatever is out, assuming it has all that the D7100 is lacking, my D7100 is gone.
Yes...it has better high ISO than my 300s bodies.
Yes the ability to crop more is nice.
The ergonomics are lacking (especially the lack of a dedicated AF-On button), the buffer is lacking even with the highest speed cards. If you don't shoot fast moving subjects the buffer is OK but IMHO, no more than OK.
My Wildlife Images at:
I agree that it can be better in a number of ways, but since I don't make money at it for most part it works.
Maybe as others have said, a d4 and the new 800mm might compliment that style of shooting better.
Guess we will see what a d400 has to offer that will make it a "must have"
I don't use AF-ON for songbirds, no buffer issues there, colour is good and it's great to be able to separate exposure comp and flash comp. Although the noise in the darker areas can be worse than the D300 and D300s, it cleans up much better.
Now that I'm shooting wading birds it's a mixed bag. When I get close and use the 500 f4 at f4 to f5 it's great. The shots really pop! When the herons take off the tracking is good. When the birds are further out and I'm shooting with the TC I don't see much improvement over the D300/s, and only get about 67% as many shots in a given sequence as I'd get with the D300/s. For birds in flight in good light I prefer the D300s.
When the D400 arrives this will be my backup camera.
I got the 7100 because of the belief of better hi iso and croppability.. that being said, was hoping for a little better in the iso dept. Lr and dfine ckean up the grain well, but kinda hoping it would be better.
Guess that's going to be the ongoung issue with the smalker sensor.
Assuming sane sensor as 7100 but fps and buffer is higher, how close in price to d800 r people willing to spend for d400? I myself think a better sensor is in order to make it worth the jump.
|Hook Head Lighthouse by kroker|
from Best Photo of the Week
|Green turtle in the shallows by gcachon|