Downsize from Nikon D7100, but to what?

Zarch

Zarch

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,005
Name
Mick
Edit My Images
Yes
Putting this out there for some thoughts from the collection wisdom. :)

I was using my D7100 yesterday at my little girls birthday party and realised its feeling quite unwieldy.(no sheet Sherlock) Granted, I had the big Sigma 18-35 1.8 ART on there and SB-700 flash, but all the same, its a big unit.

So was wondering what options I could have to downsize to?

But before we jump in with suggestions, here's what I like about the D7100 and what I'd like to retain. Then we'll talk about my lenses to be replaced.

What I like about my D7100 and what i'd like to keep on a replacement.
  • Back button focus (i'm just used to that now)
  • Auto-ISO in manual (some may shake their head, but I like this way of shooting)
  • Two dials (makes Auto-ISO work perfectly)
  • Image quality (So either same or a couple of stops better ISO/low-light would be good. See lens note below why)
  • Auto-Focus (Can't recall it ever letting me down)
  • All settings with instant buttons and dials, no hunting in menus.
  • Manual focus points on thumb.
My current lenses that i'd like to replicate in new set-up
  • Nikon 18-140 3.5 to 5.6 (I use this one during the summer for outdoor dancing galas where versatility of reach is more important than constant aperture)
  • Tamron 17-50 2.8 (My 90% of the time workhorse. I love this lens)
  • Sigma 18-35 1.8 ART (My luxury indoor/low light heavy beast. This gets used for things like kids Nativity plays etc when light is low)
  • Sigma 70-200 2.8 (I rarely use this, so worst case I could lose this from the portfolio)
Now I could also potentially lose the 18-35 1.8 if the new body had a couple of stops better low light ISO performance than the D7100. Ie I could use a 17-50 2.8 type, not having to use the 1.8 if that makes sense.

SB-700 Flash. I'd like to be able to replace this multi pivot angle flash in any new set-up.

Cost - could I get a replacement, with appropriate lenses (and flash unit) for the same cost (or a smidgen more) than what i'd get by selling the D7100 body, all the lenses and the flash? I'm happy to buy second hand.

Or am I just being a bit hopeful and naive? :p

What are my options? Micro Four-Thirds? Anything M43 that is better than my D7100?
Fuji? Sony? Olympus? Stick with crop sensor? I really don't know what is out there as possible options.

Any ideas or thoughts that I could go and investigate would be very appreciated.

Thanks in advance.

:ty:
 
Last edited:
Why not keep the DSLR kit and just get a companion system for days when the DSLR is too much?

I've been a MFT user since just about day one and I'm currently a fan of the GX80 (available with £100 cash back) and the tiny and excellent 14-42mm Mega OIS. Add a fast prime and that little and cheap set up fulfills most of my needs. The Sony A6000 seems to be doing well in the sales too.

Dunno about "better" but if you can resist the urge to pixel peep almost anything is good enough these days and doubly so after downsizing the image for final viewing.
 
Hi Mick,

I'm yet to find a mirrorless setup that can match DSLR in terms of AF and as a system. Apparently there's some out there but the ones I know of are either going to be significantly more money than your D7100 or aren't going to significantly reduce your bulk/weight (for example an EM1 with 12-40mm f2.8 and 600-r flash).
 
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! Don't do it. It's a brilliant set up.
Go on Flickr and have a look at some of the recent images, see what other people achieve good results with.
But then again, "I KNOW NOTHING!" I'm from Barcelona.
 
If your not bothered about the 70-200 let it go,look at something in the m4/3 even if its a less than best set up,use it while you still have the DX,give it a few months and you should have an idea then.
 
For a similar price of your D7100 second hand (£350/£400?) it is going to be difficult to get something better than you already have. It's unlikely you will find something that's 2 stops better ISO than the D7100 in a lighter body, even full frame is going to give maybe 1.5 stops better ISO in a slightly larger body and weight.

Let the 70-200 go and look at a m4/3 camera/lens setup for travelling light. There was a good price on an Olympus recently.

Cameras are like tripods, there has to be s compromise, you can't have fast lenses, large sensors with great low light capability and small/lightweight.....unless technology improves greatly.
 
I downsized to a Fuji X-T10 from my D7100. No complains at all and at current prices, I'd be going for an X-T1 if in the same boat.
 
woof woof said:
Why not keep the DSLR kit and just get a companion system for days when the DSLR is too much?

I've been a MFT user since just about day one and I'm currently a fan of the GX80 (available with £100 cash back) and the tiny and excellent 14-42mm Mega OIS. Add a fast prime and that little and cheap set up fulfills most of my needs. The Sony A6000 seems to be doing well in the sales too.

Dunno about "better" but if you can resist the urge to pixel peep almost anything is good enough these days and doubly so after downsizing the image for final viewing.
Click to expand...
Can't really afford to keep both, would have be one or the other.
 
snerkler said:
Hi Mick,

I'm yet to find a mirrorless setup that can match DSLR in terms of AF and as a system. Apparently there's some out there but the ones I know of are either going to be significantly more money than your D7100 or aren't going to significantly reduce your bulk/weight (for example an EM1 with 12-40mm f2.8 and 600-r flash).
Click to expand...

Sat on the armchair this afternoon I was thinking about my post...... what an idiot eh?

I asked how you could take Nikon's 3rd best ever crop sensor dSLR, take all the best bits of it and shrink it into a smaller package. Then, I asked for a couple of stops better IQ.

I bet most people wonder what i've been smoking today..... :exit:

I just wondered whether camera tech had improved in those 4 years........ yes, but maybe not the extent i'd hoped?

I can image that for most general outdoor shooting a M43 rig and f2.8 or f4 mini zoom would suffice for me. But I've realised that in many circumstances that I put my D7100 into, I need those really good lenses, that flash and I need that high ISO capability. All of which comes at a weight/bulk cost.

I probably need to realise too that its taken me almost 6 years to get to a body/lens/flash setup that suits all my shooting. It will be 6 years next month since I bought my first dSLR (D3100 with 18-55).

Move along, nothing to see here......... :withstupid:
 
Zarch said:
I just wondered whether camera tech had improved in those 4 years........ yes, but maybe not the extent i'd hoped?
Click to expand...
The answer is technology hasn't really moved on in 4 years unless you believe camera manufacturers (but they are just trying to sell more cameras by making you think you have to upgrade). The latest Nikon crop camera, D500, is an excellent improvement on the D300 but they are 8 years apart. Going back 4 years to the D7100 it's still a very capable camera. There may have been some minor improvements over the last 4 years but most crop sensors since the d7000 haven't seen much improvement in ISO improvement. Since digital was first released in the early 2000's technology moved quite fast in the first 8-10 years, the last 6-8 years haven't moved as fast and I can't see that changing any time soon.

I know how you feel with weight and size, I was thinking of moving to Olympus m4/3s as the weight and size savings are huge compared to Nikon full frame and long lenses. The problem is I just won't get the same performance and ISO capability that I have now.
 
Zarch said:
I asked how you could take Nikon's 3rd best ever crop sensor dSLR, take all the best bits of it and shrink it into a smaller package. Then, I asked for a couple of stops better IQ.

I just wondered whether camera tech had improved in those 4 years........ yes, but maybe not the extent i'd hoped?

I can image that for most general outdoor shooting a M43 rig and f2.8 or f4 mini zoom would suffice for me. But I've realised that in many circumstances that I put my D7100 into, I need those really good lenses, that flash and I need that high ISO capability. All of which comes at a weight/bulk cost.
Click to expand...

I think you need to try the alternatives and if you do you may be surprised at the quality. One thing I'm impressed with is the quality of modern lenses and of course on mirrorless systems there's no lens micro adjust to worry about, results are consistent and sharpness from wide open can be very good. Of the lenses you have the only one I've had is the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 which I thought was impressive but I think that the mirrorless zooms I have now are a match for it especially at the very widest apertures.

My most recent lens purchase was a Panasonic 14-42mm f3.5-5.6 which came with a camera as a kit zoom and it's impressive from wide open and there's (arguably) few DSLR lenses that you can say that about. I also have the Panasonic 12-35mm f2.8 and it's outstanding and has a surprisingly close minimum focus distance and then there's the primes, they're good :D ISO wise I use my cameras at any ISO up to and including 25,600.

Some may be tempted to think that MFT is too much of a step down from APS-C but I don't think there's much of a gap and I think you need to see the results to judge. Plus there's the APS-C Sony A6xxx line and the Fuji's too. As I said before, that tiny 14-42mm zoom, a fast prime and add a macro and I'd only need another lens about twice a year :D
 
How about an X-T1?
  • Back button focus (i'm just used to that now) Tick
  • Auto-ISO in manual (some may shake their head, but I like this way of shooting) Tick
  • Two dials (makes Auto-ISO work perfectly) Aperture on lens, shutter on dedicated dial, ISO on dedicated dial with an "A" position for Auto on all three.
  • Image quality (So either same or a couple of stops better ISO/low-light would be good. See lens note below why) Tick VG. Very VG.
  • Auto-Focus (Can't recall it ever letting me down) Might want to hand-test to check. It's fine for me, but YMMMV
  • All settings with instant buttons and dials, no hunting in menus. Aperture, Shutter, ISO, Exp Comp (works in Manual), Shooting mode, Focus type all accessible from dedicated dials. I generally only use menus to format the card.
  • Manual focus points on thumb. Don't know about this, but "probably"
In terms of lenses I'm not as zoomy as you so I can't really comment. I love the primes (23 f1.4, 35 f1.4, 56 f1.2) for low light work, but Fuji ISO can be pushed really high without noticeable degradation. It's also more wieldy, smaller, prettier and shinier (in my humble blah blah) than a Nikon. *pitchfork dodge* For me - it's the instant access to all the things I need - aperture, ISO and shutter speed - all there, right in front of me. I've never used on-camera flash (rarely need it with my primes), so can't comment on that either.

There's a jolly nice pair of constant aperture lenses in the Fuji lineup. A 16-55 f2.8 and a 50-140 f2.8 which covers most of your lenses except the ART. If the constant f1.8 across that focal length in a zoom lens is a must-have, then you're SOL with Fuji unless... adapters?

There's also the XT-2 which I assume does all the above with a bigger number and a bigger price tag and probably more... of something... I don't have one. My suggestion : Go to camera shop. Ask to hold XT. Feel warm funny feelings. Give credit card (or go home & buy online). Or - if you're sane, just go and try one out. Take an SD card with you and take some photos at high ISO to get a feel for how far you can push it.
Good luck!
 
woof woof said:
I think you need to try the alternatives and if you do you may be surprised at the quality. One thing I'm impressed with is the quality of modern lenses and of course on mirrorless systems there's no lens micro adjust to worry about, results are consistent and sharpness from wide open can be very good. Of the lenses you have the only one I've had is the Tamron 17-50mm f2.8 which I thought was impressive but I think that the mirrorless zooms I have now are a match for it especially at the very widest apertures.

My most recent lens purchase was a Panasonic 14-42mm f3.5-5.6 which came with a camera as a kit zoom and it's impressive from wide open and there's (arguably) few DSLR lenses that you can say that about. I also have the Panasonic 12-35mm f2.8 and it's outstanding and has a surprisingly close minimum focus distance and then there's the primes, they're good :D ISO wise I use my cameras at any ISO up to and including 25,600.

Some may be tempted to think that MFT is too much of a step down from APS-C but I don't think there's much of a gap and I think you need to see the results to judge. Plus there's the APS-C Sony A6xxx line and the Fuji's too. As I said before, that tiny 14-42mm zoom, a fast prime and add a macro and I'd only need another lens about twice a year :D
Click to expand...
I agree, in terms of IQ there's not a 'lot' in it, but it's AF where mirrorless will let Mick down for some of the environments he shoots in.

I rated my EM5-II highly but I wouldn't use it in dark environments trying to capture moving subjects.
 
Harlequin565 said:
How about an X-T1?
  • Back button focus (i'm just used to that now) Tick
  • Auto-ISO in manual (some may shake their head, but I like this way of shooting) Tick
  • Two dials (makes Auto-ISO work perfectly) Aperture on lens, shutter on dedicated dial, ISO on dedicated dial with an "A" position for Auto on all three.
  • Image quality (So either same or a couple of stops better ISO/low-light would be good. See lens note below why) Tick VG. Very VG.
  • Auto-Focus (Can't recall it ever letting me down) Might want to hand-test to check. It's fine for me, but YMMMV
  • All settings with instant buttons and dials, no hunting in menus. Aperture, Shutter, ISO, Exp Comp (works in Manual), Shooting mode, Focus type all accessible from dedicated dials. I generally only use menus to format the card.
  • Manual focus points on thumb. Don't know about this, but "probably"
In terms of lenses I'm not as zoomy as you so I can't really comment. I love the primes (23 f1.4, 35 f1.4, 56 f1.2) for low light work, but Fuji ISO can be pushed really high without noticeable degradation. It's also more wieldy, smaller, prettier and shinier (in my humble blah blah) than a Nikon. *pitchfork dodge* For me - it's the instant access to all the things I need - aperture, ISO and shutter speed - all there, right in front of me. I've never used on-camera flash (rarely need it with my primes), so can't comment on that either.

There's a jolly nice pair of constant aperture lenses in the Fuji lineup. A 16-55 f2.8 and a 50-140 f2.8 which covers most of your lenses except the ART. If the constant f1.8 across that focal length in a zoom lens is a must-have, then you're SOL with Fuji unless... adapters?

There's also the XT-2 which I assume does all the above with a bigger number and a bigger price tag and probably more... of something... I don't have one. My suggestion : Go to camera shop. Ask to hold XT. Feel warm funny feelings. Give credit card (or go home & buy online). Or - if you're sane, just go and try one out. Take an SD card with you and take some photos at high ISO to get a feel for how far you can push it.
Good luck!
Click to expand...
I also have the XT1 but it doesn't match DSLR AF in the dark and/or with moving subjects. The XT2 is supposed to be a huge step up but the body alone is probably 3 times the price of his D7100.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top