Nikon D7xxx owners thread

northernbiff said:
Sounds like a bargain. I am traveling with work at the weekend so I will be looking in the airport shops for a similar bargain.
Click to expand...

I think it is,best price i can find 1 new is £809 at Park Cameras for a UK model so I'm well happy with my £400 plus saving by going s/h!
It looks brand new to be honest just need the weekend to arrive to put it through it's paces!;)

Good look with your search!:thumbs:
 
cotty332000 said:
I think it is,best price i can find 1 new is £809 at Park Cameras for a UK model so I'm well happy with my £400 plus saving by going s/h!
It looks brand new to be honest just need the weekend to arrive to put it through it's paces!;)

Good look with your search!:thumbs:
Click to expand...

I cant find one locally second hand. I look forward to seeing the result of your new lens on flikr.
 
Guys how good is the AF? I like to shoot Motorsport and I know a lot of people have said that the D300s af with its 51 points would be better but I think he overall D7000 spec would be better for everything else.

I previously used a Sony A77 and was pleased with the results buy I'm not sure how the AF systems compare.
 
Got a reply from Tina at Panamoz, she informed me that the change in price was down to the strength of the pound. I guess it makes sense, annoying as it is!
 
Bloody hell, my long lost brother has turned up.
 
Don't suppose anyone has taken the D7000 with them on holiday? I've got a few weekend breaks planned in Europe and I want to take a camera with me but wondered if a D7000 with a couple of primes (35 & 50/85) would be too much of a bother to carry with me.
 
I took mine on the family holiday to Lanzarote last year!
Put my travel tripod in 1 of the suitcases as well.
Used it round the pool,day trips and at night'
So I would definitely take it!
What's the point in having a fantastic camera and not using it to record your memories!
 
Rather than 2 primes - maybe 1 zoom 18-105 or the std 18-55 - should be doable don't take a grip .
 
chrism_scotland said:
Don't suppose anyone has taken the D7000 with them on holiday? I've got a few weekend breaks planned in Europe and I want to take a camera with me but wondered if a D7000 with a couple of primes (35 & 50/85) would be too much of a bother to carry with me.
Click to expand...

I'll definiately be taking mine to Italy in May and to the Tour de France this year :thumbs:
 
chrism_scotland said:
Don't suppose anyone has taken the D7000 with them on holiday? I've got a few weekend breaks planned in Europe and I want to take a camera with me but wondered if a D7000 with a couple of primes (35 & 50/85) would be too much of a bother to carry with me.
Click to expand...

I'm in St Vincent right now (not the least dangerous part of the world) with my D7000 + battery grip, 18-200, 12-24, 17-50, extension tubes, flash...etc lol. Oh and a small tripod...and gorillapod...and panasonic LX7 :)

I have my full kit (minus lighting and mods) but it's not that much - it fits in my fastpack 250 and for me it's just hand luggage.

Take whatever you think you'll need...just skimp on the clothes lol.

EDIT: having thought about it. I use my LX7 for 90% of the time and my D7000 has seen it's use in getting me a few shots I otherwise wouldn't have had (a pretty cool time lapse yesterday, some macro's of lizards...)
 
Last edited:
cotty332000 said:
I took mine on the family holiday to Lanzarote last year!
Put my travel tripod in 1 of the suitcases as well.
Used it round the pool,day trips and at night'
So I would definitely take it!
What's the point in having a fantastic camera and not using it to record your memories!
Click to expand...

Exactly! Mine goes everywhere with me! Everywhere!

London

River of Gold by Ricardodaforce, on Flickr

Valencia

El Mercat de València by Ricardodaforce, on Flickr

Granada

El Partal HDR by Ricardodaforce, on Flickr

Paris

Luces de Paris by Ricardodaforce, on Flickr

Sevilla

Reflejos de Los Baños de Doña María de Padilla - Explored! Thank you by Ricardodaforce, on Flickr

TAKE IT!
 
Is the Grenada shot from a La Source hotel? Looks just like the St Lucia one...
 
Phil Young said:
I'm in St Vincent right now (not the least dangerous part of the world) with my D7000 + battery grip, 18-200, 12-24, 17-50, extension tubes, flash...etc lol. Oh and a small tripod...and gorillapod...and panasonic LX7 :)
Click to expand...

The Tamron 17-50? Is it the VC or non VC, also do you find the focus ring moving a problem? It's not an issue on 2 of my lenses but a huge problem on my Sigma 70-300. Also does the filter thread rotate?
 
maninsuitcase said:
The Tamron 17-50? Is it the VC or non VC, also do you find the focus ring moving a problem? It's not an issue on 2 of my lenses but a huge problem on my Sigma 70-300. Also does the filter thread rotate?
Click to expand...

It is the Tamron Chris but is a fairly new purchase and I haven't had nearly enough use to comment.

It seems OK the only thing that is a bit annoying is AF success rate wide open is not what I'm used to.
 
Phil Young said:
It is the Tamron Chris but is a fairly new purchase and I haven't had nearly enough use to comment.

It seems OK the only thing that is a bit annoying is AF success rate wide open is not what I'm used to.
Click to expand...

Be interested to hear you're thoughts. I want a better std zoom than my 18-55 but if I have to spend more than the 17-50 Tamron I'll go all out and get either a 24-120 f4 VR nikon or the 24-70 f2.8 VC Tamron. While a 17-55 2.8 would be the ideal the price isn't justifiable when those other 2 can be had new for not that much more than the used DX lens.
 
maninsuitcase said:
Be interested to hear you're thoughts. I want a better std zoom than my 18-55 but if I have to spend more than the 17-50 Tamron I'll go all out and get either a 24-120 f4 VR nikon or the 24-70 f2.8 VC Tamron. While a 17-55 2.8 would be the ideal the price isn't justifiable when those other 2 can be had new for not that much more than the used DX lens.
Click to expand...

The only thing you'll noticeably gain is the extra light and bokeh (which is not to be sniffed at!).

The 18-55 is a stupidly sharp lens, great VR and put up in competition with any lens for IQ will hold it's own.

Only upgrade if you need the constant f2.8 :)

I think rather than spend £800 on a 24/120 I'd get a used 28-105mm for a little over £100 which has a 1:2 macro and is only f4.5 at the tele end. A belter of a lens for a silly price.
 
Phil Young said:
The only thing you'll noticeably gain is the extra light and bokeh (which is not to be sniffed at!).

The 18-55 is a stupidly sharp lens, great VR and put up in competition with any lens for IQ will hold it's own.

Only upgrade if you need the constant f2.8 :)

I think rather than spend £800 on a 24/120 I'd get a used 28-105mm for a little over £100 which has a 1:2 macro and is only f4.5 at the tele end. A belter of a lens for a silly price.
Click to expand...

Haha, I have the mk1 non vr 18-55 and a VR one. The rotating lens element means I can't use filters (so I haven't bought any yet) and the build is starting to get to me now it's on my D7000.

General use would be the dreaded everyday lens, so kids, out and about holidays etc and also falling back to wide angle for landscapes on the rare occasions I get a chance. The last bit means I want reasonable corner performance at the widest but I can stop down to get that at f8-11 ish. Usable MF is useful here and non-rotating front element is essential.

Essentially I want something to cover wide ish to short tele ish, the 24-70 range or similar should probably do me. f4 will be fine I suspect, VR nice but not essential. The 28-105 is probably not quite wide enough and would mean a 12-24 or something would be needed occasionally but not often enough to justify paying for it.

Another option is an 18-70 lens but these are all pretty old now, but they go for about £90 MPB in EXC+ condition so the price is nice. Though a 24-something stabilised means no need to upgrade for many years to come.
 
maninsuitcase said:
Haha, I have the mk1 non vr 18-55 and a VR one. The rotating lens element means I can't use filters (so I haven't bought any yet) and the build is starting to get to me now it's on my D7000.

General use would be the dreaded everyday lens, so kids, out and about holidays etc and also falling back to wide angle for landscapes on the rare occasions I get a chance. The last bit means I want reasonable corner performance at the widest but I can stop down to get that at f8-11 ish. Usable MF is useful here and non-rotating front element is essential.

Essentially I want something to cover wide ish to short tele ish, the 24-70 range or similar should probably do me. f4 will be fine I suspect, VR nice but not essential. The 28-105 is probably not quite wide enough and would mean a 12-24 or something would be needed occasionally but not often enough to justify paying for it.

Another option is an 18-70 lens but these are all pretty old now, but they go for about £90 MPB in EXC+ condition so the price is nice. Though a 24-something stabilised means no need to upgrade for many years to come.
Click to expand...

Oh didn't realise you had the non-vr version!

Well I have decided! I'm not going to get a use out of this Tamron, I'll be selling soon in order to fun a macro again. Look out in the classifieds if you want it! :)
 
Phil Young said:
Oh didn't realise you had the non-vr version!

Well I have decided! I'm not going to get a use out of this Tamron, I'll be selling soon in order to fun a macro again. Look out in the classifieds if you want it! :)
Click to expand...

Well I have both, but the fact you're not overly fussed with it puts me off. That and the more I research the 17-50 the more mixed the reviews seem. Maybe I should just go for a 24-something and have done. On an entirely unrelated note, does anyone what to buy all my stuff?
 
Phil Young said:
Oh didn't realise you had the non-vr version!

Well I have decided! I'm not going to get a use out of this Tamron, I'll be selling soon in order to fun a macro again. Look out in the classifieds if you want it! :)
Click to expand...

What macro you looking at Phil ? I'm just waiting on a 102mm 2.8 vr Nikon

correction thats a 105mm Nikon- tricky beast according to some - changes from 1;2 to 1;1 at some point during focussing.
 
Last edited:
chrism_scotland said:
Thanks folks I've just not been sure if I wanted to lug a D7000 and was looking at an XPro1 but having played with them side by side the weight is more in the Nikon but size wise there's not all that much in it with a 35mm on both!
Click to expand...

Lumix LX7!
 
chrism_scotland said:
Don't suppose anyone has taken the D7000 with them on holiday? I've got a few weekend breaks planned in Europe and I want to take a camera with me but wondered if a D7000 with a couple of primes (35 & 50/85) would be too much of a bother to carry with me.
Click to expand...

I have mine dangling by my side on a Black Rapid strap with my 24-70 as a walkabout...I often forget that it is there, very comfortable not in the way, and always on the ready...
 
mikeysaling said:
What macro you looking at Phil ? I'm just waiting on a 102mm 2.8 vr Nikon

correction thats a 105mm Nikon- tricky beast according to some - changes from 1;2 to 1;1 at some point during focussing.
Click to expand...

I had that it was superb. If my bonus at the end of the month is as healthy as it should be I may well indulge in it again :)

I do fancy the 150mm OS sigma though...
 
Had the D7000 for a week or so now and I've noticed that I seem to have what appears to be a technique issue - at least I assume it to be.

When I shoot with my favourite lens - 35mm 1.8 prime - the pictures are tending to come out just a little soft. If I shoot with my second favourite lens - the 55-200 3.5-5.6 - the pictures are razor sharp. Using autofocus in both cases - no sharpness issues if I'm manually focussing.

Is it the weight of the body causing my hands to shake slightly? Previously I've only been used to d5100 or Sony A350, so there is a bit of a weight difference. I can only imagine that the physically bigger lens with the 200mm is allowing me to brace better.

For comparison purposes with the same 35mm lens on a d5100 I was able to shoot handheld reliably at anything up to 1/4''. It must be me and not the autofocus is it's just one lens, right?
 
HWest said:
Had the D7000 for a week or so now and I've noticed that I seem to have what appears to be a technique issue - at least I assume it to be.

When I shoot with my favourite lens - 35mm 1.8 prime - the pictures are tending to come out just a little soft. If I shoot with my second favourite lens - the 55-200 3.5-5.6 - the pictures are razor sharp. Using autofocus in both cases - no sharpness issues if I'm manually focussing.

Is it the weight of the body causing my hands to shake slightly? Previously I've only been used to d5100 or Sony A350, so there is a bit of a weight difference. I can only imagine that the physically bigger lens with the 200mm is allowing me to brace better.

For comparison purposes with the same 35mm lens on a d5100 I was able to shoot handheld reliably at anything up to 1/4''. It must be me and not the autofocus is it's just one lens, right?
Click to expand...

Welcome to the D7000's "great" AF system :)

We've all had issues with it I'm sure lol.

As above, just adjust your AF and save it to that lens.
 
HWest said:
Had the D7000 for a week or so now and I've noticed that I seem to have what appears to be a technique issue - at least I assume it to be.

When I shoot with my favourite lens - 35mm 1.8 prime - the pictures are tending to come out just a little soft. If I shoot with my second favourite lens - the 55-200 3.5-5.6 - the pictures are razor sharp. Using autofocus in both cases - no sharpness issues if I'm manually focussing.

Is it the weight of the body causing my hands to shake slightly? Previously I've only been used to d5100 or Sony A350, so there is a bit of a weight difference. I can only imagine that the physically bigger lens with the 200mm is allowing me to brace better.

For comparison purposes with the same 35mm lens on a d5100 I was able to shoot handheld reliably at anything up to 1/4''. It must be me and not the autofocus is it's just one lens, right?
Click to expand...

I had the same issue with the 35mm. I think I adjusted mine to about -14 but it maybe be different with yours. I used an AF chart I found on google.
 
cheers for the heads up, also helped me resolve the same issue!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top