Is the d7100 work the extra £200-£250 over the d7000 ?

damianmkv

damianmkv

Uh oh, a fruit basket!
Suspended / Banned
Messages
6,254
Edit My Images
Yes
I will shortly be upgrading my d3100 and have been aiming for the d7100. But then I look at the d7000 which is considerably cheaper - around £ 500 new or less than £400 used and wonder if its a "better" option.

I'm really torn - I've had my camera for 3 years now so won't be in a position to change body again for quite a while and therefore must make the right decision. On paper, everything points to the d7100 and its a newer model too.

My lenses are 35mm f1.8, tamron 17-50 VC, Sigma 10-20 and a 70-300VR so am not in need of new glass.

Thanks for any guidance...
 
Well it really depends if you need the mega pixels, as that's about all there is between them, I was tempted to sell my D7000 and upgrade to D7100 but tbh the only upgrade from D7000 is D610 to make it an actual upgrade if that makes sense, I'd say if you can better spend the money on something else then no reason not to get a D7000.
 
Well, the buffer on the 7k was terrible and the 71k is slower. That would put me off for a start.
 
I don't need the MP, no. I shoot cars ( stationary and drag racing ) so buffer speed would be good. Battery life is better on the d7000 too.

What about low light performance ? I guess there's nothing much between the 2 ?

And is the additional 1.3 crop just a gimmick ?

Sorry for the questions but I'm not that technically minded yet
 
"The23rdman, post: 5944299, member: 18684"]Well, the buffer on the 7k was terrible and the 71k is slower. That would put me off for a start.
Click to expand...

Lol, I've just been watching a video on YouTube comparing the 7000 to the 90 and he pribably took 50-60 shots before it used the buffer up... how many shots do you want to take?? :lol:
 
Well the battery is excellent, no denying that, I had D3100 before and D7000 battery last maybe 3 times longer, it will easily shoot 1000+ shots on one charge under the right conditions/usage, iso I guess the D7100 will edge the D7000 a bit, buffer don't know much about, I know if setup right it will keep shooting in jpeg fine, depends if you like to shoot raw files or can live with jpeg for action shots, if so buffer will be fine as the quality settings for basic small jpeg will let the file size grow to what it needs and is really useful for sports I guess,

1.3 Crop is a gimmick but then again it has the extra mega pixels so it's not so much gimmick but will produce better looking cropped shots than D7000.
 
minnnt said:
Lol, I've just been watching a video on YouTube comparing the 7000 to the 90 and he pribably took 50-60 shots before it used the buffer up... how many shots do you want to take?? :lol:
Click to expand...

On lowest quality jpeg maybe but the D7k won't come close to that with RAW files. Mileage may vary slightly with different sd cards but don't expect much more than 10 in RAW before everything stops dead while it clears the buffer.
 
TAT2 said:
On lowest quality jpeg maybe but the D7k won't come close to that with RAW files. Mileage may vary slightly with different sd cards but don't expect much more than 10 in RAW before everything stops dead while it clears the buffer.
Click to expand...
But is that not a trait of all high mega pixel camera's when shooting raw, is that not why most sports are shot using jpeg, well I thought they were
 
If you wanted to shoot motorsport with a DX body in reasonably good light, a D300s might be a better bet. It's going to have better AF, a better buffer and be more suited to tasks like that.
 
been there done that etc. and after two completely s***e d7100 bodies in 9 weeks i got a full refund and changed back to canon ,.on both bodies once they got to around a 3000 shot shutter count the menu system,display ,and metering all went tits up .bitterly disappointed .totally gutted as i sold a perfectly good d7000 and d300s to fund what i though was a top dollar camera with two year warranty .
 
freecom2 said:
If you wanted to shoot motorsport with a DX body in reasonably good light, a D300s might be a better bet. It's going to have better AF, a better buffer and be more suited to tasks like that.
Click to expand...
i would most definitely go along with this statement
 
I think you have to be clear on how the buffer may affect you. The D7100 is worse than the D7000, you'll get about one second burst from the D7100 if using raw, more of using jpeg I'd guess around 5 or 6 seconds with jpeg fine ... If you don't use burst shooting then the buffer is irrelevant. Other than the MP size (24 vs 16) the other significant improvement in the D7100 is the 51 point af that also allows f8 on the central points - this is of far more interest to me than a buffer but your needs may be different to mine. Having owned the D7000 I can say that it was an excellent camera, if I go back to a crop body (which I'm considering just now) then I'd get the D7100 but wouldn't be disappointed with a D7000 either. I'd skip the D300 as for me the improvements in IQ on the D7000/71000 are more important than the lovely build and full metal jacket that is the D300 and a usable buffer. Like I said, your needs most likely will be different.
 
I don't think the d300s is for me. My Motorsport is limited to drag racing, which is weather limited of course. Much more shots are taken at car meets ( which are dark )

So, I really want something that will have good detail for some macro, good low light performance, good colour reproduction.

It's just of old vs current debate in my head....
 
The cliNcher for me was the 5-frame bracket option over 3 offered by the 7k, but then I bought it mainly for HDR...
 
freecom2 said:
If you wanted to shoot motorsport with a DX body in reasonably good light, a D300s might be a better bet. It's going to have better AF, a better buffer and be more suited to tasks like that.
Click to expand...

Actually ypu are wrong there, the D7100 AF is far superior
 
Gremlin said:
Actually ypu are wrong there, the D7100 AF is far superior
Click to expand...

My post was in reference to D7000 vs. D300s, which are more similarly matched for used prices than the D7100 vs. D300s.

Additionally, the D7100 uses a slightly tweaked version of the same AF module (Multi-CAM 3500DX) that was in the D300s. Real-world performance is better, but far superior might be pushing it a tad!
 
Well talking from 1st hand experience all I can say is the D7100 AF system is better, especially in the low light situation the OP is talking about :shrug:
 
minnnt said:
Lol, I've just been watching a video on YouTube comparing the 7000 to the 90 and he pribably took 50-60 shots before it used the buffer up... how many shots do you want to take?? :lol:
Click to expand...
Try it shooting RAW.
 
I did own a D7k, but shooting kids was impossible even with the fastest cards. I missed so many key shots waiting for the bloody buffer to clear. The other issue was that as a left eye dominant shooter back button focus was very uncomfortable. My thumb was sticking in my eye!
 
I recently shot a wedding with my D7000 and a borrowed D7100 and the buffer on the D7100 drove me nuts, it was taking ages and there was such a lag before getting the preview up on the LCD. I can't comment on the AF as I was just using single point on both cameras and had no issues.
The only positive on the D7100 was the improved LCD when you eventually got the preview up!
 
So d7000 wins in the value for money stakes ?
 
damianmkv said:
So d7000 wins in the value for money stakes ?
Click to expand...
Yeah for sure, it's got to be best value out there imo, the only thing I would consider a true upgrade from a D7000 would be either full frame camera or if they had put in a touch screen and wi-fi and gps into the D7100.

But coming from a D3100 both will be a big step up, the 100% viewfinder is much better in the D7000, twin sd slots is a big plus and twin command dials are great.

Up to you really which way you go, I'd say go for the D7100 if you have enough money.
 
I don't have the money for the d7100 yet - hopefully I will in January but that why I am interested in people's thoughts as its a lot of money for me
 
Ahh, then get the D7000, that's what I did, don't regret it, could have waited longer and paid more for the D7100 but I figured it's a hobby and not something I am ever going to get paid for, plus I truly think a worth while upgrade would be gps and wi-fi and touch screen in the D7100, it just does not warrant the extra over the D7000 imo, if I was going to spend D7100 money, I would sell everything and buy a Canon 70D.
 
If money is tight the D7000 offers far better value for money

I've also heard a lot of reliability issues with the D7100 so I would definitely buy locally and official UK stock as a mate had a right carry on returning an import for repair

I upgraded from a D3100 and its a great step up with the D7000 which will do me until I go full frame in a couple of years or so

Buy the D7000, its tried, tested and a great DX camera
 
damianmkv said:
I don't have the money for the d7100 yet - hopefully I will in January but that why I am interested in people's thoughts as its a lot of money for me
Click to expand...


Whereabouts in Surrey are you ?
If you want hands on experience with a D7100 I'm in sussex, just the other side of Guildford
 
A second-hand, as-new D7000 is an absolute bargain at the moment, one of the best steals out there. They're great cameras, unless you have the performance demands of a pro.

The D7100 is tempting, but it won't be vastly superior, and you can spend your £400 spare change on a nice tripod, or whatever takes your fancy!
 
Gremlin said:
Whereabouts in Surrey are you ?
If you want hands on experience with a D7100 I'm in sussex, just the other side of Guildford
Click to expand...

Sorry for the delayed response, the joys of being on the road all day. I'm just the other side of Woking
 
Last edited:
Pablosammy said:
A second-hand, as-new D7000 is an absolute bargain at the moment, one of the best steals out there. They're great cameras, unless you have the performance demands of a pro.

The D7100 is tempting, but it won't be vastly superior, and you can spend your £400 spare change on a nice tripod, or whatever takes your fancy!
Click to expand...

That's the whole dilemma, Sam. I see the price of the d7000 second hand and think that, as it's a hobby, perhaps it's my best bet. ( thinking ....maybe I could get a macro lens to go with it. Hmmmm :help:)
 
If you want to meet up somewhere, drop me a pm I've got a nikon 105 macro lens too :)
Perhaps somewhere like wisley :shrug:
 
damianmkv said:
That's the whole dilemma, Sam. I see the price of the d7000 second hand and think that, as it's a hobby, perhaps it's my best bet. ( thinking ....maybe I could get a macro lens to go with it. Hmmmm :help:)
Click to expand...

That's the way I've gone, after having exactly the same dilemma. It'll be the second D7000 I've owned, as I missed my first one!

The only exception I can see as a hobbyist is if you do a lot of wildlife/sports photography and need the D4's AF system.
 
I had a D7000 and had no end of problems with the AF system, so I jumped to a D7100. For me, it's worth the upgrade for that alone. The build quality of both is excellent.
The AF was the problem, had six friends with the same thing wrong.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top