Reading mode: Light Dark

D7000 sharpness vs D300

Go to last post
P

pilot175

Well-known member
Messages
106
Reaction score
15
Location
Yorkshire, UK
This is a request to anyone who has swapped from the D300 to the D7000. Are your pictures from the D7000 as sharp as the D300?

I purchased a new D7000 a week ago and I'm still not 100% happy yet with the sharpness compared to my tried and trusted D300. Yesterday I took both bodies on a wildlife shoot and with the same lens (300mm f4 with 1.7tc) the D300 shots are sharper with arguably more detail despite the increase in pixels from the D7000. Noise wise the D7000 is a massive step forward. I can now shoot clean ISO800 which is the main reason for buying the body. If I could nail sharpness to I'd be really happy with the new camera. I have fine tuned my lens combination for best results, tried picture controls, D lighting and everything else to coax the same result that is effortless for the D300. What am I doing wrong?

What are your experiences? Is the D7000 less sharp or do I have a problem?
 
1. Have you calibrated your D7000 for front/back focus with this lens yet?

2. Suggest you do a static subject, manual focus test using the LCD to compare sharpness, that will eliminate issues with point 1.

As you say, the D7000 should deliver more apparent sharpness except when the lens has less resolution than the sensors.

--
Bill
 
Thanks for the reply.

Yes I have used auto-focus fine tune and on a stand alone basis the D7000 holds up reasonably well. It is only because I'm used to year in, year out seeing sharp D300 images that I'm not 100% hence asking for other experiences. It may be that Nikon has sacrificed some sharpness for clean ISO800 performance. I'd just like to know what compromised I have to make, if any.

I have also used my 12-24 on a tripod and managed, with extensive PP, to get almost the same sharpness as the D300 (using hyper-focal distance at f11 hence eliminating AF fine tune issues) but a jpg out of the camera is still noticeably less sharp, no matter what sharpness setting I have set in the picture control (I have tried them all!).

If this is the best I can get I'll probably tread water with the D7000 until the D400 comes out later this year but I'd rather like to get good results with this combination.
 
My D7000 is every bit as sharp as my D300s (both in RAW & JPG however D7k jpg is set to +6, while the D300s is set to +4) and both of my D700s. Most of my photos are for portrait/event photography and I find the D7k skin tones to be much more pleasing from 800-3200iso than the D300s. D7k skin looks more natural similar to the D700. At times the D300s skin tone/texture can look a little plasticy when shot from 800-3200 iso. I also tested 2 other D7k's in store before purchasing mine and I also found them to be just as sharp with no focus issues. You may have a problem with yours if you can't get similar results from your D300. Good Luck!
 
With gear like yours, why are you discarding so much quality by shooting JPEGs? You are losing 96% of the color information and a minimum of 75% of the resolution info. All you are seeing is processing engine differences.

Reminds me of a couple tourists I met last year lugging D3x with 24-70 lenses. When I asked them what they did with their pix, they post low resolution images to the web and send 4x6" prints to friends.

--
Bill
 
Thanks. Are you seeing any extra detail from the 16mpx vs 12mpx? As it stands I cannot see any improvement. I know you have to pixel peep but I'm one of those people who want that last slither of performance, especially with sports, nature and landscape. It's nice to be able to read the drivers displays on an F1 car as it passes for instance or get fine detail of an animal’s iris.
 
what does a body have to do with sharpness ?
 
Thanks ;-) I shoot raw (14bit) plus jpg. My experience with the D7000 is that it takes a lot of processing to approach the jpgs of the D300 out of the camera. I only process RAW files for images that will be printed (a smidge larger than 6x4).

I think I saw the same tourist.
 
I own both cameras and use both regularly. Both are very sharp. I use mainly 24-70 2.8 and 70-200 2.8 lenses on them. I haven't had to correct for any back/front focus issues on my D7000.

--
Matt Mc
 
I only shoot RAW, I would say that the D300 files look sharper straight out of the camera compared to the D7000 and that the D7000 files need more sharpening to bring the detail out and then look good, I have also found that i need more shutter speed to get a sharp image so good light helps, I have just come back from Japan where i shot 40 000 images in 3 weeks using the D7000 and D3s and i have some of my best images from the D7000-saying that in low light the D3s is something else and always my first choice, Most of the problems i see here and elsewhere is from people using too slow a shutter speed

Dave
--
http://www.wildlifeinfocus.com
Facebook-David Courtenay Photography (www.wildlifeinfocus.com)
 
almost nothing. "softness" = user error in 99% of cases.
 
Agree! The minimum shutter speed is much more critical on the D7k then on EG the D90 and other 12mp cams.

I can live with that, but it is surely something to consider. Overall the D7k has a steep learning curve (at least to me after shooting DSLR from 2000). Gladly I like learning a lot....

Kind regards Perry
 
perry rhodan said:
Agree! The minimum shutter speed is much more critical on the D7k then on EG the D90 and other 12mp cams.

I can live with that, but it is surely something to consider. Overall the D7k has a steep learning curve (at least to me after shooting DSLR from 2000). Gladly I like learning a lot....

Kind regards Perry
Click to expand...
And you know the reason for this, right ?
Unrealistic user expectations.
Try this example: shoot both a D7000 and a D300 at the same shutter speeds.

Now, take the D7000 picture, and scale it down to 12 megapixels. See ? It's just as sharp, as the image from D300.
Reason ? Higher resolution demands better conditions.
 
I've got a D300, D700, and D7000.

When I first picked up the D7000, I struggled with getting crisp images.

Turns out that after testing, what I've found is:

If you are using extremely good glass, absolutely spot-on perfect focus, and a stellar support system, the D7000 is absolutely without question capable of extremely sharp, detailed images. Any of the above missing or not done to the fullest, not so much. Focus in particular is critical.

It's a far more demanding camera than I imagined. Particularly in the aspects of nailing focus.

My suggestion is to do some tests with your best lens, on a tripod, remote release, using strobe as illumination, of a 2D (not 3d) test target at a moderate distance, using the live view mode instead of the usual AF-S or AF-C focusing methods. You should get sharp pictures. Then it's a matter of determining what step in your shooting technique (including focusing) is causing your issues.

-m
 
But why would you want to scale it down?

The beauty of the D7000 is that I can crop further and still have the same detail as I got with my D90 (iq==d300s). This is brilliant for a bird photographer and I get less and more manageable noise and more detail and much better shadow (underparts) definition.

If your unsure whether the D7000 is sharp enough have a look at my flickr site. You will see D7000 and many D90 examples. Even when reduced down for web display the differences are still clear to me.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/brandon_birder/with/4879854151/

Cheers, BB
 
pilot175 said:
Thanks ;-) I shoot raw (14bit) plus jpg. My experience with the D7000 is that it takes a lot of processing to approach the jpgs of the D300 out of the camera. I only process RAW files for images that will be printed (a smidge larger than 6x4).
Click to expand...
What software are you using to process your D7000 NEF files? I have not been able to get the quality I like from LR3, but using Nikon's Capture NX2 it is very simple and quick with stellar results.I have found LR3 has been a huge disappointment for the D7000 NEF files. I hope Adobe can fix this.

Best regards,
Jon
 
Have you checked for accuracy of the placement of your focus point--different issue than back/front focus. In other words, is it focusing where you intended it to? I shoot wildlife too, and I'm having trouble with getting it to focus exactly where I had intended. That's critical in bird photography as you know.

Some folks here have started using AF-C, 9point dynamic, AF On for basically everything, including static subjects. That works pretty well sometimes. Not so well if your subject is far away or with busy background.

I do not have a D300 but I have a D90 that focuses perfectly well on bird's eyeballs using AFS, single point. I was trying to keep an open mind with the D7000 but after a week of real world shooting, not feeder birds, I'm kind of discouraged.
Regards,
Jolene

--



My galleries-- http://www.zenfolio.com/jolieo
 
I am struggling still. I have the 300mm f2.8, beanbag support, etc. and am having problems hitting 'eyeball focus' of sitting birds in the real world. I shoot small birds usually, at some distance away. I am very pleased at the 'cropability" of this camera--if I nail the focus.

I have been using the AF-C, 9 point dynamic, AF On method which does work pretty well, if your subject is close, plain back ground, nothing obstructing the view. Is it just practice or are you doing something else?
Thanks for any advice.
Regards,
Jolene
--



My galleries-- http://www.zenfolio.com/jolieo
 
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