D3100 v D7000

steelerdean

steelerdean

Suspended / Banned
Messages
618
Name
Dean
Edit My Images
No
I currently have the D3100. Bought it 6 months ago when I started getting into photography as a starter to see if it was something i'd like to pursue. It certainly is, and i've found that sports photography is what I enjoy the most. With this in mind, i've started having a look round to improve my kit. I recently bought a Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 which has made a world of difference. I'm now looking at improving my body. I'd absolutely love the D3s, but i've got absolutely nowhere near that budget. I've been looking at the D7000 and from what I can gather, it is a significant upgrade on my D3100. The main points I can see are a LOT more focus points, improved ISO performance and faster shutter speeds.

I was wondering what other people's opinion was? Is it worth the extra money moving my D3100 on in favour of the D7000 or, in reality, is the difference going to be minimal?
 
It's entirely your choice whether to make the investment, I use an EOS 7D but I see the D7000 is a very good piece of equipment at it's price point. I don't know how well it performs in situations such as sports photography.

Obviously the D7000 is more ruggedly built than the D3100 which can be a bonus if shooting outdoors where the camera will be exposed to the elements.

It's important to remember that while a higher-spec camera makes the job of taking photos easier, what cameras don't do is guarantee better results.

Again, it's your choice. :)
 
I don't know how the D3100 compares to a D70, sensor-wise, but when I upgraded from a D70 a few months ago, it was almost like the D7000 needed to be 'tamed', so to speak. The difference in image clarity was obvious, so any flaws in the images taken with the D70 that might have been 'ok', were definitely not on ok on the D7k...

I also found that I needed to upgrade my glass from the 18-70 that I already had to get the best out of the camera... Don't get me wrong - the 18-70 is bloody good for a kit lens, and it was fine on the D70, but it just didn't do the D7000 any real justice...
 
steelerdean said:
I currently have the D3100. Bought it 6 months ago when I started getting into photography as a starter to see if it was something i'd like to pursue. It certainly is, and i've found that sports photography is what I enjoy the most. With this in mind, i've started having a look round to improve my kit. I recently bought a Sigma 70-200mm f2.8 which has made a world of difference. I'm now looking at improving my body. I'd absolutely love the D3s, but i've got absolutely nowhere near that budget. I've been looking at the D7000 and from what I can gather, it is a significant upgrade on my D3100. The main points I can see are a LOT more focus points, improved ISO performance and faster shutter speeds.

I was wondering what other people's opinion was? Is it worth the extra money moving my D3100 on in favour of the D7000 or, in reality, is the difference going to be minimal?
Click to expand...

What on the D3100 are you finding limiting?

I did the same thing as you're thinking, for similar reasons (AF and general usability for sports) about 6 months ago. It's certainly a worthwhile upgrade, although the D3100 is no slouch (on centre point, anyway). The biggest change for me was in being able to tune the AF on the D7000 to my style of shooting, and having Dynamic AF be more reliable thanks to the density of AF points. It's a big step up from the D3100 AF, almost at D300/D3 level from what I've seen. The IQ improvements and handling changes from the D3100 are nice, but to me weren't that big a deal. That said, an easily usable ISO6400 is changing my mind :lol:


Not sure how the Sigma 70-200 compares to the Nikon, but there might be some improvement there to be had as an alternative if there is a big difference. If not, then the D7000 might be a worthy buy.
 
ausemmao said:
It's certainly a worthwhile upgrade, although the D3100 is no slouch (on centre point, anyway). The biggest change for me was in being able to tune the AF on the D7000 to my style of shooting, and having Dynamic AF be more reliable thanks to the density of AF points. It's a big step up from the D3100 AF, almost at D300/D3 level from what I've seen.
Click to expand...

I must admit that's what's calling me to it the most. I nipped into Jessops earlier and had a play with one. The possibilities with the focusing alone was mouth watering. I'm pretty limited at the minute to centre spot focusing. Would love to experiment more but that really is the limit with the D3100.

ausemmao said:
Not sure how the Sigma 70-200 compares to the Nikon, but there might be some improvement there to be had as an alternative if there is a big difference. If not, then the D7000 might be a worthy buy.
Click to expand...

I did so much reading before going for that lens. I specifically went for the latest OS model due to improved optics and reviews on it were very favourable, with a lot of them confirming it giving the Nikon equivalent a run for its money. I've been very happy with it since i've had it.
 
Roland200 said:
Have you had a look at second hand D3's as they are a superb sports camera. They are tough, weather resistant and excellent in low light and a lot cheaper than the D3S.
Click to expand...

I'd kill for one of those too! Unfortunately, they are also well over my price range at the minute. The D7000 looks to be around £650 second hand which is about what I can afford. The D3 still looks a far cry from that. :(
 
Im using a D3100 as im quite new to it all, and as Im getting a little bit more experience, Im getting quite tickled by the D7000. I had a play around with it in Jessops too. Fantastic bit of kit.

But having said that, rather than get the D7000, Im wondering whether it would be better to upgrade a lens. I dunno? Any suggestions?
 
wastedyears1981 said:
Im using a D3100 as im quite new to it all, and as Im getting a little bit more experience, Im getting quite tickled by the D7000. I had a play around with it in Jessops too. Fantastic bit of kit.

But having said that, rather than get the D7000, Im wondering whether it would be better to upgrade a lens. I dunno? Any suggestions?
Click to expand...

First step for me was definitely a better lens. For shooting indoor sports, an f2.8 was a necessity.

What do you have at the minute and what are you using it for?
 
I have a D7000 and was asked to shoot a girls football match last weekend. Im no sports tog and to be honest dont enjoy it at all, but it is a good camera for the job.

16mb for cropping :)
6fps shooting speed :)
i use single point focus and move it according (force of habit)
2 SD slots (6fps soon fills up an 8gb card so it spills over to the second card when the first is full)
high iso, i shot these around 2400 iso

thats just a few things never used a d3100 but can't see it being in the same park as a D7k tbh

Heres the shots i got of the game (like i said im no sports tog)

http://www.dmr-photography.co.uk/index.php/Special-Occasions/Sprowston-Girls-Football
 
DannyDMR said:
I have a D7000 and was asked to shoot a girls football match last weekend. Im no sports tog and to be honest dont enjoy it at all, but it is a good camera for the job.

16mb for cropping :)
6fps shooting speed :)
i use single point focus and move it according (force of habit)
2 SD slots (6fps soon fills up an 8gb card so it spills over to the second card when the first is full)
high iso, i shot these around 2400 iso

thats just a few things never used a d3100 but can't see it being in the same park as a D7k tbh

Heres the shots i got of the game (like i said im no sports tog)

http://www.dmr-photography.co.uk/index.php/Special-Occasions/Sprowston-Girls-Football
Click to expand...

Nice pictures. Do you mind me asking what lens you used and what aperture and shutter speed you were shooting at? Also, did you run the pictures through any software before uploading them to reduce any noise?
 
Ive recently upgrqaded from a D90 to the D7000 and I have to agree its a great bit of kit. The high ISO capabilities, more focus points and overall better focusing system, 16MP sensor and the 2,016 pixel RGB metering sensor were the main deciding factors when I was chosing to upgrade my body.

If im honest, 2 weeks in and im only just starting to get used to the camera. Its definately shown up floors in my photography that I got away with using my D90. Its also shown up some of my older lenses that were pretty decent on my D90.

I think its a great camera to upgrade to if your choosing to stick with a crop sensor camera, excellent value for money. I got mine for £600 with just 500 actuation's!!
 
steelerdean said:
First step for me was definitely a better lens. For shooting indoor sports, an f2.8 was a necessity.

What do you have at the minute and what are you using it for?
Click to expand...

I've got a 18-55 stock lens. Tamron 70-300 f4/5.6 and a nikkor 50mm f1.8. I feel I could maybe upgrade the stock lens which is the one I use the most. The Tamron lens I use the least and only got it to practice with, I hardly ever use it now, maybe it's down to quality ( I dunno). Maybe a upgrade from my Tamron might be a good idea.
 
steelerdean said:
Nice pictures. Do you mind me asking what lens you used and what aperture and shutter speed you were shooting at? Also, did you run the pictures through any software before uploading them to reduce any noise?
Click to expand...

No noise reduction used, and most of these are cropped.

The lens i use is the Nikon 70-300 vr (this needed Fine tuning)

Aperture was 5.6

Shutter speed was in between 1/800 to 1/1000

i used auto ISO up to 3200 most of them are between 1100 and 3200

all the photos on my site are with the D7k
 
The main differences are

- The D7000 has a focusing motor, so will work lenses without one
- The D7000 has DOF preview, and works the lenses mechanical aperture ring
- The D7000 has slightly better high ISO performance
- The D7000 shoots to 2 card slots at once
- Batteries last longer in the D7000
- The D7000 has 2 user preset modes
- the D7000 has a marginally higher pixel count
- D7000 has more focus points
- The D7000 has a different set up for white balance (more choices)


On a day to day basis, none of that makes a difference unless

- You shoot in an environment where getting a corrupted memory card is a problem
- You flip between 2 stable environments "I'm shooting with my off camera flashes" / "I am shooting without". The U1 U2 modes are really useful for this sort of thing
- You have a pile of legacy lenses without motors
- You shoot all day long
 
Richard King said:
The main differences are

- The D7000 has a focusing motor, so will work lenses without one
- The D7000 has DOF preview, and works the lenses mechanical aperture ring
- The D7000 has slightly better high ISO performance
- The D7000 shoots to 2 card slots at once
- Batteries last longer in the D7000
- The D7000 has 2 user preset modes
- the D7000 has a marginally higher pixel count
- D7000 has more focus points
- The D7000 has a different set up for white balance (more choices)


On a day to day basis, none of that makes a difference unless

- You shoot in an environment where getting a corrupted memory card is a problem
- You flip between 2 stable environments "I'm shooting with my off camera flashes" / "I am shooting without". The U1 U2 modes are really useful for this sort of thing
- You have a pile of legacy lenses without motors
- You shoot all day long
Click to expand...

You had forgot the general ergonomics, the D7000 body is larger but has more direct control buttons, it also has two dial which is extremely useful!
 
Advantages of the Nikon D7000

Many more focus points 39 vs 11

Set focus accurately within the frame
Significantly better image quality 80.0 vs 67.0

Around 20% better image quality
Significantly lower noise at high ISO 1,167 ISO vs 919 ISO

The D7000 has a slight edge (0.3 f-stops) in low noise, high ISO performance
Much more dynamic range 13.9 EV vs 11.3 EV

2.6 f-stops more dynamic range
Significantly higher resolution screen 920k dots vs 230k dots

4x higher resolution screen
Much larger viewfinder 0.62x vs 0.51x

More than 40% larger viewfinder
Has a built-in focus motor Yes vs No

Autofocuses with all autofocus lenses
Significantly better color depth 23.5 bits vs 22.5 bits

Distinguishes 2x more colors
Many more cross-type focus points 9 vs 1

Grab focus in difficult situations
Much longer battery life 1050 shots vs 550 shots

More than 90% more shots per battery charge
Has an external mic jack Yes vs No

Record high quality audio with an external microphone
Shoots significantly faster 6 fps vs 3 fps

2x faster continuous shooting
Much better viewfinder coverage 100% vs 95%

Around 10% better viewfinder coverage
Has a pentaprism viewfinder Pentaprism vs Pentamirror

Pentaprism viewfinders are typically brighter
Less shutter lag 238 ms vs 279 ms

More than 10% less delay when taking photos
Weather sealed Yes vs No

Sealed to shoot in the rain
Has more storage slots 2 vs 1

More slots allows storing more images without switching memory cards
Better boost ISO 25,600 ISO vs 12,800 ISO

The D7000's boost ISO is 1 f-stop better
Better maximum light sensitivity 6,400 ISO vs 3,200 ISO

The D7000's maximum light sensitivity is 1 f-stop better
Larger sensor APS-C 23.6x15.6mm vs APS-C 23.1x15.4mm

Almost the same
Higher true resolution 16.1 MP vs 14.2 MP

Capture more than 10% more detail in your photos
Much faster max shutter speed 1/8000s vs 1/4000s

2x faster max shutter speed
 
Now using the D7000 for virtually all my wedding work the D300 has been semi retired as a back up, the advantages are numerous;
Excellent jpegs
Autofocus is more accurate
ISO up to 1600 very clean
Lighter weight
Beware of using cheap lenses with the 7000 flaws will show that were not apparent previously and remember a good photographer can get great images from any camera.
 
Just to show you that the D3100 can get most of the shots the D7000 can:


A 1 by ausemmao, on Flickr


8 by ausemmao, on Flickr


Kit by ausemmao, on Flickr


Hang by ausemmao, on Flickr


7 by ausemmao, on Flickr


Men's Open 2 by ausemmao, on Flickr

That's a mix of D3100 and D7000. Richard nailed it in his post. In terms of absolute capability, you get more, but not perhaps as much as an additional lens might (depending on whether there is one that would fill a gap). What it does do is expand the applicability of that capability and make getting to some of that capability a little bit easier.

Most of the difference in the photos is down to composition and PP (i.e. photographer skills or lack thereof :p ), not the camera.
 
I have the D3100 and I don't find it limiting in performance.

I however would like more focus point options (I've started using these instead of focus and recompose) and I would also like to change more options quickly. I often leave metering on one mode or focus type on one setting rather than playing and changing as I have to dive int to the menu. This is the reason I want to upgrade to the D7000.

It comes down to how hands on you want to get. If you don't, the D3100 will do the job, if you play with some of the settings (use manual, S or A modes) but leave others alone, the D3100 will do the job. if you want to play with settings to squeeze every last ounce of performance - get the D7000.

I have a D3100 and I'm also looking at the same lens as the low light on longish shots is limiting my photo quality. The 3 realistic reasons to me for upgrading to the D7000 are focus motor, direct controls and focus points. At the moment, all my lenses have motors and the other 2 would be nice rather than a requirement. If this changes I will upgrade.
 
ausemmao said:
That's a mix of D3100 and D7000. Richard nailed it in his post. In terms of absolute capability, you get more, but not perhaps as much as an additional lens might (depending on whether there is one that would fill a gap). What it does do is expand the applicability of that capability and make getting to some of that capability a little bit easier.

Most of the difference in the photos is down to composition and PP (i.e. photographer skills or lack thereof :p ), not the camera.
Click to expand...

Some great pictures in that post.

If i'm honest, the big thing for me is noise at higher ISO. All my shooting is indoors, meaning I need to bump the ISO up to 1200-1600. While the D3100 is admirable in low light, the noise even at this level is noticeable and requires time processing each individual image. I'd be interested for opinions on how people think the D7000 performs at high ISO compared to the D3100.
 
By the way, thanks to everyone contributing to this thread - your input is very helpful.
 
Firstly, apologies for resurrecting an 18 month old thread, but the content is very pertinent to my question/dilemma.

I've had the D3100 for 2 years and it was my first dLSR, so the learning curve started there, but I think i've outgrown it?? (if thats what its called)

With the recent price drop and Nikon cashback offer, I've 99% convinced myself that its time to move from D3100 to D7000 (hell, even the wife isn't objecting) :love:

I see this move as setting myself up for my next couple of years shooting, but I still have questions and queries.

Wants from D7000:
Quicker access to AF modes (hunt in menus on D3100, external on D7000), metering access less required, but nice to have.

The extra control dial in A/S/M modes, although I sort of get by putting ISO on the Fn button on my D3100. Is the rear D7000 ISO button better or worse than the D3100 Fn method?

Confused over focus points:
I'm a single/middle point sort of guy, recompose if required in AF-S, but spend most of the time in AF-C. (I've also been using back button focusing lately too)

How would the D7000 help me when chasing my 2 kids around..... damn they move quick.

Reading about Auto, S, d9, d21, d39 and 3d is confusing the hell out of me. And the only time I got to play with a D7000 instore, the viewfinder lit up like a Christmas Tree. :eek:

What would/could change for me with regards focus points and tracking?

Lenses:
Apart from the 18-200, i'm not worried about the lenses I have not being upto the job; Tamron 17-50 2.8 Non-VC, Sigma 70-200 2.8, Nikon 18-200 VR and Nikon 35mm 1.8. I think they're not a bad set.

Quality Improvement:
I'm not expecting night and day improvement from ISO and general picture taking, but i'd be happy with a little uplift as about 30% of my photos are 800 ISO and above.

Playback:
Love the idea of being able to see the focus point on the screen on playback. Always worried i've not hit the right spot.

Auto-ISO:
Yes, semi-cheating, but i'd like to use Auto ISO a little more. But its a royal pain activating etc on the D3100 and there appears to options to get it on/off more quickly on the D7000.

Anything else i've missed? There probably is, so I may well add to those when it pops back into my head. :bonk:

I know a few of you who originally commented on this thread have made the same jump i'm considering, so any thoughts, comments or advice would be very much appreciated.

Cheers, Mick
 
Anyone? :D
 
I have.

Indeed, I've done the upgrading from the D3100 to D7000 route and the jump in performance is very notable. The list is too long to type up but the best thing is noise handling at high ISO settings. At 6400 ISO images remains quite noise-free so it makes it ideal for indoors type conditions without the flash (model railway photography).
The other thing is how the D7000 can handle rapidly changing conditions on the "P" mode (gatherings, christenings, etc) so much better than the D3100, that way I can enjoy taking the photos rather than spend too much time fiddling about with the settings (I usually have the M mode for night time photography and indoor stills) and yet the results are much more pleasing.
The issue I did have with the D3100 is how it kept wanting to "overcook" the exposure so I kept getting "blown" bits on the image, so I have to keep remembering to adjust the "stop" setting and the metering to compensate for that, with the D7000 it feeels like I don't need to do that.
At the end of the day, it does feel like I have a lot more "leg room" with the D7000.
 
Last edited:
You've obviously done you're research. The wife isn't objecting. Jfdi!

Get it online like from Amazon and you can return it within 7 days thanks to the DSR rules anyway for additional peace of mind. But i bet you won't return it. :)
 
Not sure if it's been mentioned but another sometimes overlooked but huge improvement of the D7000 over the D3100 is the viewfinder. Much bigger/brighter.
 
Ian D J said:
I have.

Indeed, I've done the upgrading from the D3100 to D7000 route and the jump in performance is very notable. The list is too long to type up but the best thing is noise handling at high ISO settings. At 6400 ISO images remains quite noise-free so it makes it ideal for indoors type conditions without the flash (model railway photography).
The other thing is how the D7000 can handle rapidly changing conditions on the "P" mode (gatherings, christenings, etc) so much better than the D3100, that way I can enjoy taking the photos rather than spend too much time fiddling about with the settings (I usually have the M mode for night time photography and indoor stills) and yet the results are much more pleasing.
The issue I did have with the D3100 is how it kept wanting to "overcook" the exposure so I kept getting "blown" bits on the image, so I have to keep remembering to adjust the "stop" setting and the metering to compensate for that, with the D7000 it feeels like I don't need to do that.
At the end of the day, it does feel like I have a lot more "leg room" with the D7000.
Click to expand...

Smashing reply, thanks. Any other D3100 to D7000 upgraders got any stories?

gadgeteer said:
You've obviously done you're research. The wife isn't objecting. Jfdi!
Click to expand...

LOL, I know...... was expecting a grumble of some sort.... Although I think she'd be fighting a losing battle. :lol:

grotty said:
Not sure if it's been mentioned but another sometimes overlooked but huge improvement of the D7000 over the D3100 is the viewfinder. Much bigger/brighter.
Click to expand...

Oh yeah, good call. Being a glasses wearer the small D3100 viewfinder does cause me a few issues.
 
Last edited:
I know its a small consideration but the LCD is one the reasons i'm looking to upgrade. I'm sure i've deleted photos before that I thought were OOF or under exposed...now i've learnt to wait until i'm home ( where I can view my errors on a laptop instead ).

Just got to get it agreed by SWMBO
 
Last edited:
damianmkv said:
I'm sure i've deleted photos before that I thought were OOF or under exposed...now i've learnt to wait until i'm home ( where I can view my errors on a laptop instead ).
Click to expand...

I think you're talking about the LCD (which is better on the D7000) - the viewfinder is what you look through to compose your shot and as said, it's much bigger, clearer and brighter on the D7000.
 
Yes sorry - that's what I meant ( that'll teach me as I should be working so I'm not concentrating. D'ope )

Edited my post for clarity
 
Last edited:
Anyone who has gone D3100>D7000 got any thoughts on my focus points & tracking question in post #29 (page 1).

Thanks.
 
Not a d7000 user, but considered one on my way to buying a d300s two years ago.
A great camera. Only went for the d300s on the basis of how it feels. But I reckon the d7000 would have produced better pics due to better g
High Iso performance.
 
Use afc and 3D for fast moving objects. My d7k and 18-200vr took some awesome pictures of fast sledging with my son.

Read Ken Rockwells autofocus guide for D7K - he simplifies it well.

I upgraded from a d40x - chalk and cheese!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top