Nikon D5300 Vrs Nikon D7100

chad

chad

Suspended / Banned
Messages
391
Edit My Images
No
Good evening.

Hope you all had a good Christmas and hoot you all have a happy new year.

I have been in and out of the hobby for years.

Last time about 4 years ago I shot with canon 7d.

But now I'm looking at coming back into it. But not put as much money into it.

So approximately the cost difference between the D5300 and the D7100. Is about £250 approximately.

Now is it really worth the extra £250? Yes it has a few extra focal points and a bit more user friendly.

But has some one used both? How much of a benefit is the D7100 going to be?

Just looking for some realistic advice from people who have used them.

Thank you so much in advance for any help an assistance.

Jamie
 
My money would go on a used D7000, they are sub £350 nowadays and a fantastic body - I actually prefer the 16mp images to the 24mp ones in anything other than excellent light with excellent lenses.

The D7100 gives you more MP, better AF (although there's nothing wrong with the D7000 here) and weather proofing but that's about it. Depends on what you need there.

Alternatively, if you can live with the smaller body with less controls then the D5200 is basically the same as the D5300 but cheaper so you could put some extra money into a good lens (no point in having 24mp if you don't have good lenses).
 
Thanks ok so in your opinion you get better quality with 16mp than 24mp?

The reason I was looking at the 24mp I like to print images at 12 x 16 plus so I thought the extra would benefit me hear?

Thanks for your help it's appreciated this digital is relatively new to me.

As I originally came from black and white film.
 
In reality 6mp is enough to print 12x16 at decent quality and most people really don't need any more that 12mp but that's not how it's marketed. In my opinion 16mp is more than enough.

What's more important to the image is the quality of the lens so I would try and put some money that way. Sure, 24mp is nice to have but if your lens can't resolve it then what's the point?

A lot of this is based on pixel peeping at 100% which lots of people (on here) are prone to do, if you don't do this then you won't see a difference in the quality of your prints, so again, why 24mp?
 
There is no dispute that the D7100 is better BUT as an overall package a cheaper body with a better lens will give you better images than the expensive body with cheap lens.

I guess it depends on the available budget.
 
Ok please bare with me as I'm newish.

And thank you for your help I am taking it seriously.

I got told and researched that to print you need to hit close to the 300dpi mark?

I know you can resample using photoshop but you can lose quality?

Hence the 24mp I was looking at?

Now I do understand and appreciate about decent glass.

I have not looked into glass yet.

As need to get the body sorted.

What is nikon version to canon L

Any recommendations on a decent glass to start with please??

Thank you your a great help
 
As you have previously used Canon but are now considering a Nikon, you don't appear to be wedded to one make.

If you are set on a Nikon, that is fine. I can't imagine anyone, including me, suggesting they make anything other than very good cameras, but have you looked at a second hand Pentax K5? Wex have a few ranging from about £230 to £330.

Am I biased? Yes, a fair bit, as I have one, but I think a K5 is worth looking at.

Dave
 
There isn't a direct equivalent to L glass although the posh Nikon lenses have a gold ring at the end. Thing is, you don't need 'GR' glass to get great quality lenses for a cropped body Nikon. A common first 'upgrade' lens is the 35mm f/1.8 prime lens which will resolve to 24mp. Another alternative is to get the Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 which is much better than the Nikon kit lenses. A good Nikon standard zoom is their 16-85mm which is nice and sharp but lacks the constant f/2.8 of the Tamron.

Yes, 300dpi is the reference but it depends a lot on your viewing distance (and if you study it under a loupe) and also how good your dpi are - it is only a measure of how many pixels you have and not how well those pixels are resolved. I've heard it say a few times that good lenses are more important than megapixels when it comes to printing big. I don't print that big that often an when I do it tends to be canvas which reps out the quality anyway...

edit: yep, the Pentax cameras are very nice indeed - very high spec for the price compared to Canon and Nikon too.
 
Thanks I'll have a look at the Pentax.

I sold all my canon gear. So starting afresh.

I know there are good and bad points about every make and some of it "kind of" irrelevant.

But it seams that nikon are cheaper than canon and a better spec. But that's only on spesififecation

I'm trying to keep every thing to under £800
I know it will go up in time but initially.

I was looking at the d3200 then the 5300 now the d7100.

It's a bit like a car to much choice.
 
I have both cameras.I bought the D7100 first as I do motorsport and need the crop for reach.I then bought the D5300 for the flip out screen so I could use wide angles on/low to the ground and over peoples heads ect.Both are 24mp and produce the same quality image. The D7100 has built in focus motor so lenses without motors can be used for auto focus.The D5300 does not have a motor in it so cannot focus lens in auto focus unless the lens has a motor in it. If you need a faster camera to operate then maybe the D7100 would suit more.It depends on what type of photography you do.No one camera will do everything to the best.
 
To be honest I have no particular subject I like Motorsport and pictures of buildings and city's.

But have done trains as I practically live on the great central railway Loughborough.

Want to go to an air show this year too.

So it's very varied and I'm on a budget. So I know I am not going to meet all needs and need to compromise but just need to get a reasonable set up at my budget to the best of it.

I in no rush I'm keeping my eye on the for sale section hence why I looked into the D7100.

Or I'll see how cheap they are at the NEC show.
 
Thanks yes I did see the hdew deal.
But it will be at least the end of the month before I can get one.

So this time is to do the research.

It's interesting to hear the 140 is better than the 105? Apart from the extra range.

Can some one explain why cameras with high MP struggle with curtain lenses please?
 
Basically a lens only has a certain amount of resolution and often in high MP cameras the sensor has a higher resolution than the lens (defined by the size of the photosites on the sensor), this means the ultimate performance is limited by the lens. This doesn't really make any difference at all if you print and view the pictures at the same size but if you are prone to pixel peeping at 100% (or printing the size of a house) then you will see the difference.

The better the lens the less of an issue this is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top