Nikon D7100

Discussion in 'Shiny Things' started by NikonsAndVStroms, Feb 24, 2013.

  1. NikonsAndVStroms

    NikonsAndVStroms Beastly Photographer

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2007
    Oddometer:
    41,603
    Location:
    The Hub of the Universe
    This looks to be an interesting camera, Nikon is making it their top of the line DX body so for ~1200 dollars it has:

    D300's AF with updated software from the D4

    The shutter from the D300 and increased weather sealing to supposedly get it to the 300's level.

    24MP sensor.

    No AA filter! The D800E has its canceled out but here it's nothing.

    6 FPS, 7FPS in a 1.3x crop mode (which makes it roughly a 2.0 crop factor @ 15.4 MP).

    1080P 30 FPS 1080i 60 FPS

    I've got some unique needs for a camera but I'll share my thoughts since some will cross over.

    The first is cost, not only is it a ton cheaper than the D600 the downside of needing DX lenses isn't so bad. On the used market their value has tanked thanks to FX so you can get a D7100 with 2 really good DX lenses for the price of just the D600.

    Keeping that 51 point AF is key, I love it on my D700, and here it covers most of the frame.

    A huge thing is how much this adds to the usability of my lenses. My 70-210 can be a 420 @ over 15MP! And it offers a 2.8 telephoto option for me. Right now the 70-200 is too heavy but Sigma made a 50-150 that's roughly the same weight as my 70-210 F4

    Now 2 things that I need to wait to find out about, 1 is the actual resolution the sensor gets. Without an AA filter it has a good chance for it to be better than the D600. And high ISO performance, if they get it within a stop of the D700 (when down sampled, I don't care as much about pixel peeping) I'd be happy.

    Overall the D800 likely would still be a better camera for me, but at well under half the cost this little guy might not be giving up much.
    #1
  2. 68deluxe

    68deluxe Long timer

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2003
    Oddometer:
    14,983
    Location:
    Phoenix AZ
    :lurk
    #2
  3. nachtflug

    nachtflug infidel

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2002
    Oddometer:
    46,986
    Location:
    Harrys place
    apples - oranges?

    isn't the lure of the D800 the huge mpix for those who want the big picture?
    #3
  4. 68deluxe

    68deluxe Long timer

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2003
    Oddometer:
    14,983
    Location:
    Phoenix AZ
    IIRC the huge files on the D800 are a negative for the action shots if you are in burst mode taking RAW shots. I have read so much this past week on the 7100, 600 and 800 I am getting the pro's/cons mixed up.
    #4
  5. Sylvia

    Sylvia vir sapit qui pauca loqui

    Joined:
    May 24, 2006
    Oddometer:
    3,671
    Location:
    taking pics
    They are all good. The 7100 is a really nice little camera. It can be used to gain professional results, as can the 600 and the 800.

    Buy what you need or want and take photos. :lol3
    #5
  6. NikonsAndVStroms

    NikonsAndVStroms Beastly Photographer

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2007
    Oddometer:
    41,603
    Location:
    The Hub of the Universe
    Neither are ideal for it, the D800 does at full resolution 4 FPS and fills up after 17 shots. It'll do ~6FPS in DX mode @ ~15MP, not sure how big the buffer is there but better than 17 shots should be all you need for almost any circumstance.

    D7100 can go 6FPS in DX mode or 7 FPS with the 1.3x crop mode (giving you a 2x crop factor) but the buffer in both is really small, under 10 shots for DX and ~10 for the crop mode. Still that's a respectable burst, just the other cameras spoil you.

    D600 I'm not sure about and I wouldn't have it as my first choice of an action camera due to the small AF coverage.

    What's your final output for these? Are they going to be large prints? Shots for the web? If you don't need the resolution (or video) a used D700 with the grip could be a good option giving you 8FPS.

    Was it you posting about the boat racing and shooting it with the D50? If so the cropped resolution would be a slightly lower at the same focal length (DX mode for the D700 is 5.3 MP, it wont be noticeable) but everything else about the camera will just blow it away.
    #6
  7. 68deluxe

    68deluxe Long timer

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2003
    Oddometer:
    14,983
    Location:
    Phoenix AZ
    That was me. I am going to buy the 70-200 2.8 Nikon lens and was trying to decide on the camera upgrade. I can get $300 off the lens if I buy with a new body before the end of the month. But, I keep finding reviews of the D600, D800 and even D7100 where people are having oil/dust issues on the sensor. My local dealer (Tempe Camera) says the D600's did have some problems but not so much now.
    #7
  8. 68deluxe

    68deluxe Long timer

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2003
    Oddometer:
    14,983
    Location:
    Phoenix AZ
    I just looked at some reviews on Nikon.usa, Amazon, B&H etc. Only a few negatives (1 or 2 star reviews) about the D7100 and NONE about the D700. Out of @300 D600 reviews there are about 50 1 star ratings mostly for the sensor. There are about the same amount of bad ratings for the D800 but they are split between the sensor and auto-focus problems, something about the left points not working. The search continues.

    Edit. I found a used D700 at B&H with 5,000 pics for $1450. Seems like a good deal.
    #8
  9. NikonsAndVStroms

    NikonsAndVStroms Beastly Photographer

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2007
    Oddometer:
    41,603
    Location:
    The Hub of the Universe
    Not sure what the going rate is but that camera should have tons of life left in it as long as it wasn't abuse for those 5,000 shots. Just had a shoot with mine today and still love it :clap
    #9
  10. 68deluxe

    68deluxe Long timer

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2003
    Oddometer:
    14,983
    Location:
    Phoenix AZ
    It is rated an "8" with dings/scratches. I am 95% leaning to a D7100 with a 70-200 2.8. The rebates would bring the effective price of the new camera down to $899. Lots of reviewers complain about the weight of the D700 but in my opinion that means more metal and a better built camera. Decisions decisions. I took less time to buy my last car. :lol3
    #10
  11. Sylvia

    Sylvia vir sapit qui pauca loqui

    Joined:
    May 24, 2006
    Oddometer:
    3,671
    Location:
    taking pics
    You will not be disappointed with this combination. The 7100 is a step in the right direction, its a magic little camera. The 70-200 is a keeper going forward.

    Good luck with your decision.
    #11
  12. nachtflug

    nachtflug infidel

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2002
    Oddometer:
    46,986
    Location:
    Harrys place
    I was at Budds Creek motocross Saturday and some guy had the new/latest version of the 80-400 lens. I saw some of his pictures on Facebook and they are pretty sweet. I think in hindsight given the brutally strong sun my pictures suffered as I was shooting a lot of wide open F2.8 with the 70-200 which may have been too much light, it was really strong even with a fast shutter. I don't think the 80-400 has the build quality of the 70-200 but it's just a few hundred dollars more and again he's got some killer shots that is one nice lens.
    #12
  13. thumperpilot

    thumperpilot Thumper Pilot

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2007
    Oddometer:
    5,812
    Location:
    Southwest Virginia
    I've run in to that limit with my 7100 a few times already.

    Bike train, warp speed, nut to butt.... camera buffer fills up quick.

    .
    #13
  14. Sylvia

    Sylvia vir sapit qui pauca loqui

    Joined:
    May 24, 2006
    Oddometer:
    3,671
    Location:
    taking pics
    Howdi flug,
    The new 80-400 is getting some really good press. Some are comparing its results to the super tele's :evil At some apertures and distances it does come close in results from what I have seen. It is also apparently very fast to focus, you would have a very versatile beast, hand held and all.
    #14
  15. NikonsAndVStroms

    NikonsAndVStroms Beastly Photographer

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2007
    Oddometer:
    41,603
    Location:
    The Hub of the Universe
    Oh important question I don't know if I asked in the past, what kinda CPU (you can find out the exact model number on windows at least by right clicking "computer" on the start menu and going to properties) does your computer have? 24, and 36 MP images can really do a number on even a good processor.
    #15
  16. nachtflug

    nachtflug infidel

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2002
    Oddometer:
    46,986
    Location:
    Harrys place
    howdy howdy.

    what do you know about the build quality? I believe the 70-200 and the 200 and 300 primes are build to a higher quality of overall construction and materials.

    I'm thinking this lens is not quite in that league but from the pictures that guy got at Budds Creek, who cares!!??
    #16
  17. Sylvia

    Sylvia vir sapit qui pauca loqui

    Joined:
    May 24, 2006
    Oddometer:
    3,671
    Location:
    taking pics
    No the guy from buds appears to be shooting a 300/2.8 canon for the majority of the action shots. The 80-400 can only compete on the long end (400) at 7.1 ish and above anyway from all reports.

    The 70-200 will be the same as the 80-400, make no mistake. Neither are in the big prime arena.

    The superteles are in a league of their own. Go pick one up, nuff said.

    Good luck sorting it out Scotty. :lol3
    #17
  18. NikonsAndVStroms

    NikonsAndVStroms Beastly Photographer

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2007
    Oddometer:
    41,603
    Location:
    The Hub of the Universe
    I finally tested one out and tried out 2 main things:

    1) There were some rumblings on forums about compatibility issues with older 3rd party lenses, I have a bunch from the early-mid 2000's and they all AF'd fine on it.

    2) High ISO, I know for studio work it'll do the job so this was the area I was concerned about and the verdict is that especially in Hi 1.0/2.0 (ISO 12,800/25,600) it actually does better than the D700. I didn't pixel peep, instead I took 2 photos at the same settings with equivalent focal lengths and zoomed into the same areas to fill the screen equally. The D7100 had much finer noise making for finer details and there was no real "ugly" noise on either. An added benefit is I saw no banding on the D7100's Hi 2.0 setting. And I tried running both through my lightroom settings for B&W concert/event work and the D7100 again came out ahead.

    The only really annoying thing is coming from a Fuji S5/D700 combo that I've been using for years and years now is getting used to the lack of physical controls, but that's a minor issue.

    And one thing for anyone thinking of a new body with this many MP to do before buying is take home some RAW files and run them through your normal processing methods. The D800 pretty much eliminated itself from the running since I'd need a new computer and I'm hoping to hold off a little longer to get a bigger jump in performance, the D7100 still has a bit of lag but it's not horrible. Just to give an idea of what I'm using for a CPU (and it was CPU limited, I could see that spike as it changed settings) it's a Intel Xeon w3540 which is a 2.93 GHz chip from 2010, not the top of the line from that era but not far off.
    #18
  19. NikonsAndVStroms

    NikonsAndVStroms Beastly Photographer

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2007
    Oddometer:
    41,603
    Location:
    The Hub of the Universe
    And I bought it :evil

    It was supposed to come in next week, but I got it yesterday right before a show so that was the perfect time to test it out.....just I don't have much in the way of SD cards. Which is the first thing about this camera, buy a fast SD card :nod it's needed! I was on a class 10 16GB I use on my Nikon P300 and it was fine for single images but just couldn't hack it with bursts.

    Now for how it shoots, and the answer is :clap:clap:clap

    Handling:
    I was using it side by side with a D700 (which is considered an amazing camera in how it functions so I'm using a really high benchmark) switching between the bodies was no big issue at all, I was shooting manually so the only thing I had to remember was the button on the back you press for ISO instead of on top....and really those multi-use buttons are the only thing that is much of an annoyance VS the larger Nikon bodies I'm used to. The viewfinder is also really big for DX and bright, I'm sure it isn't as big as my D700 but it wasn't so small that I really noticed it so that's saying something. Also in some circumstances its' much quieter shutter sound is really nice. People have said the AF is not to the level of the other 51 point systems but in this experience (which was low light) again there was no real noticeable difference. And that's why I went for the D7100 over the D600, I really need that dynamic range and resolution at base ISO (shooting white on white is a bit challenging) for studio work but for everything else I'd like it to be closer to my D700 so I don't have to think as much when picking up the other body.

    Image Quality:
    I was shooting ISO 3,200-25,600 and it was up there or bettered the D700. The only thing it didn't seem to handle as well were brightly lit reds, though those are always a pain. Going through lightroom zoomed out they look a little crisper than equivalent D700 images (100% there is more noise but with twice the MP it ends up being a good bit finer). And when you do zoom in especially ISO 6,400 and below it's :eek1 at all the detail that's there. Just a side note, this is pretty damn amazing, it's a smaller sensor with twice the MP, what a difference 5 years in technology can make.

    The pics from this show aren't too ADV friendly especially above the basement but I have a regular concert on Sunday which if my 64 GB card comes in I plan to shoot exclusively with the D7100 and I'll show the results.
    #19
  20. SnowMule

    SnowMule [angry moth noises]

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2009
    Oddometer:
    19,013
    Location:
    I LIVE IN A GIANT BUCKET
    Awesome.

    Once I fill in my glass collection a little better, a 2nd body is certainly on the list... this looks like a great body.
    #20