# D7000 or D7100??



## lfoush (Nov 19, 2013)

I am wanting an upgrade from my D3100 and I don't know which if these  cameras would be the smartest upgrade. I definitely want the capability  to shoot higher quality photos in lower light, as well as the built in  AF motor. I rarely shoot video so the video factor isn't going to play  in much. Is it worth it to go ahead and spend the extra cash and upgrade  to the D7100? Also, should I sell my D3100 body AND it's kit lens and  get a either the D7000 or D7100 with a new kit lens??


----------



## astroNikon (Nov 19, 2013)

look at the primary differences between the d7000 and d7100  - the first thing is the 16mp versus 24mp
then, larger screen, better ISO, better resolution, more focus points 51 v 39 & cross type 15 v 9, etc
Which would you prefer ?
and what is your budget.

But I think after you get the dx00 you'll find out you may not use your d3100 much.  But if you can hold on to it after getting a d7x00 then you might as well hold it and then compare yourself and determine whether to keep it or not.


----------



## globeglimpser (Nov 19, 2013)

The main difference is the D4 focus system on the D7100 which alone is worth saving up a little more for. Also, whilst more pixels is not vital, it doesn't hurt when low light performance is maintained. Finally, no AA screen in the D7100. No question here, save extra and buy the D7100.

However, having said that, I would not upgrade the camera whilst I still had kit lenses. Glass first. Heck I have an entry D5100 which is still great. All my money has gone onto my 28 prime, 50 prime, 16-35 and soon an 85. Once I get the 70-200 (Tamron) I will finally buy a new body.


----------



## robbins.photo (Nov 19, 2013)

astroNikon said:


> look at the primary differences between the d7000 and d7100 - the first thing is the 16mp versus 24mp
> then, larger screen, better ISO, better resolution, more focus points 51 v 39 & cross type 15 v 9, etc
> Which would you prefer ?
> and what is your budget.
> ...



What I would recommend is this, take a look at the current prices you can get a D7000 and a D7100 for and what sort of deals are out there.  Check both for the camera with a lens, and prices on just the body.  Then you'll have an idea as to how much you'll need to spend for each.  Start with the D7000, body only, which is going to be the lowest price - and determine if the difference between that and the D7100 is really worth the advantages the D7100 will give you (primarly the better autofocusing system and better boost ISO).  That will let you make a decision as to which camera.

Then take a look at the prices with the kit lens, and ask yourself is the price difference between the body only and the price with the kit lens really worth the lens it's bundled with?  Keep in mind you already have a lens you can use on hand, so determine if you are really going to need the lens now and if the kit price is really a good deal for you at this moment.


----------



## astroNikon (Nov 19, 2013)

OP is also after a focus motor, so not sure if OP already has AF or AF-D lenses.

I've bought all AF-D lenses and in order to do that, and use AF, I needed the d7000's built in focus motor first.  
So sometimes a new body is needed before one buys new lenses.  It's all up to the Ops lens strategy.

The money saved on AF-D vs the comparable AF-S/G lenses is astronomical (to my budget).  

But as mentioned, save up a little to get the additional benefits of the d7100.
I've struggled alot on my strategy to upgrade to the d7100 or trying for the d600.  I'm holding off for the d600.


----------



## TheLost (Nov 19, 2013)

Start with the D800... then go backwards until you reach one you can afford..  D800 -> D610 -> D7100 ->D7000


----------



## SnappingShark (Nov 19, 2013)

out of the two you mentioned, I'd go for the D7100, but I am biased because I have one, I loved it, and I am actually selling it with lenses (in the Buy/sell) - but as TheLost mentions, start with something higher, and work back until you find something you can afford which ticks all your boxes


----------



## Derrel (Nov 19, 2013)

Look up Thom Hogan's review of the D7100. He talks some about the D7000 vs D7100 equation. The D7100 is not a slam-dunk buy; for many people, he seems to suggest that the D7000 is a good choice. Honestly, I'm not sure myself is the D7100 is really the right choice for anybody except those who really want the little bit extra that only it has.


----------



## TheLost (Nov 19, 2013)

Having owned the D7000 from the first day it came out to the first day the D7100 came out...  they are two different cameras.

They feel different:  The grip on the D7100 is deeper and wider.  I find it easier to hold the D7100 then the D7000.

The buttons are placed different: Take a look at the back of both.  The D7100 has movie record button moved to the top of the camera.  The AE-L/AF-L button is moved farther to the right on the D7100 (Making AF-ON easier).   The focus selecor lock is moved...  Basically the back of the D7100 is more like the back of the D600/D610.

24mp:  There is a huge difference between 16mp and 24mp when it comes to pixel density.  (cropping, sharpness, 'crisp-ness')

51point AF: The fastest AF system Nikon makes for DX.   Incredibly accurate shooting sports / action.  Makes the D7000 AF feel like a D3100 (or D5200 to be exact  )

Better Build:  The D7000 has a good build quality... The D7100 has an excellent build quality (comparable to the D800).

The only thing the D7000 and D7100 share is the 7 in the name.  The only reason to by the D7000 is because it costs 1/2 the price of the D7100.


----------



## pixmedic (Nov 19, 2013)

I have both the D7000 and the D7100, and while there are definitely features I like better on the D7100, there is really not a tremendous difference between the two cameras when it comes to the end product. 

24 -vs- 16 MP. ok fine, if you are convinced that more is always better, then sure. but, how much cropping are you going to do that you will really notice a difference?
if you do a LOT of heavy cropping, you might actually need the extra MP's, otherwise, I think you will find the IQ of both camera pretty similar. 
the lack of the AA filter on the D7100 was big news, but I do not personally think it is such a huge game changer that the D7100 becomes a "must have" over the D7000.

51 -vs 39 AF points. same principle as the MP really. is 51 points technically better? yea. are you going to suddenly get shots you were never able to get before? probably not.  I mostly shoot single point focus so the differences were negligible. you do get more points to choose from, and a better area AF spread. the D7100 AF system IS an improvement over the D7000, but again, I don't consider it to be some monumental super upgrade. 

Misc. button placements. eh, its pretty much the same deal anytime you get a new body. there always seems to be SOMETHING that gets moved around. easy enough to adjust to with a little practice. 

the D7100 is built a little better, it feels a little heftier, and does have some decent upgrades from the D7000. I would certainly never put anyone off of buying one, I love mine. that being said, I don't really think there is a HUGE difference between the two cameras.  neither does a few review sites. 

Snapsort 
DxOMark

both of those review sites placed the D7000 and D7100 pretty close, and while the D7100 rated slightly higher on both places, the D7000 was not very far behind. 
this only matters of course, if you care about what review and comparison  sites have to say.  I like to use them just for comparing specs and features.
Both cameras are a pretty good upgrade to your D3100, and the built in focus motor in either camera will open up a lot of older AF and AF-D pro glass at very affordable prices. To ME, the built in focus motor is the most significant upgrade, and the one that will yield you the biggest gains.  the D7000 is selling at some record lows right now with the D7100 and D600 being recently released, so there are some amazing deals to be had on it. 
like wise for the D7100, with a lot of people rushing to go FF with the D600 and D610. It will mostly come down to your budget. If you can find a D7100 for only a little more than you can get a D7000 for, i would say go for it. If you find an amazing deal on a D7000 with low clicks somewhere, i dont think you would be wrong for grabbing it.


----------



## TheLost (Nov 19, 2013)

pixmedic said:


> I have both the D7000 and the D7100, and while there are definitely features I like better on the D7100, there is really not a tremendous difference between the two cameras when it comes to the end product.
> 
> 24 -vs- 16 MP. ok fine, if you are convinced that more is always better, then sure. but, how much cropping are you going to do that you will really notice a difference?
> if you do a LOT of heavy cropping, you might actually need the extra MP's, otherwise, I think you will find the IQ of both camera pretty similar.
> ...



Thank your for summing up my problem with most  D7000 vs. D7100 comparisons.

"Eh.. 39 vs. 51 Af points.. who needs em"
"blah.. 16mp is just like 24mp"
"A camera is a camera is a cramera..."

Based on your comments the OP would be fine with a D5100 (same sensor as the D7000) or D5200 (same Auto Focus system as the D7000)... and its probably true. 

Heck... replace the word 'D7000' in the comments above with 'Canon 70D' and the argument still works.... but it isn't very helpful.

Unlike D3100 -> D3200 or D5100 -> D5200 -> D5200 updates...  The D7000 and D7100 share nothing other then the same battery.


----------



## Tailgunner (Nov 19, 2013)

TheLost said:


> pixmedic said:
> 
> 
> > I have both the D7000 and the D7100, and while there are definitely features I like better on the D7100, there is really not a tremendous difference between the two cameras when it comes to the end product.
> ...



There, I straitened it out a little for you. 

Anyhow, I originally planned on buying a D7000 as an upgrade for my D3100 but the wife got me a D7100 as a gift instead. In my opinion, this really comes down to budget. If you can afford a D7100, I say buy it. If you're on a tighter budget, you really can't go wrong with a D7000. Having upgraded from a D3100 my self to a D7100, I can say you will wished you had done it sooner!


----------



## pixmedic (Nov 19, 2013)

TheLost said:


> pixmedic said:
> 
> 
> > I have both the D7000 and the D7100, and while there are definitely features I like better on the D7100, there is really not a tremendous difference between the two cameras when it comes to the end product.
> ...



I think you obviously did little more than glance at my post, or else you would have written a slightly more intelligent reply to it. 
I believe i was pretty clear in my feelings that the D7100 was an all around better camera than the D7000, but it is NOT a massive upgrade jump as if someone were to go from a D3100 to a D600.  As for your statement about the D5xxx series...this is proof enough that you didnt actually read my post, or you would have noticed the part where I said that the built in AF motor is the most significant upgrade as far as i am concerned. 

just how much better IS the 51 AF points than 39? again, i said it was a better AF system, just not some MASSIVE game changer. 
as for the MP count, once again I stated that the extra MP and lack of AA filter on the D7100 was in fact better, just not the humongous quantum leap that some people seem to feel it is. I actually believe my hypothesis on the comparisons seem to be shard by both snapsort AND DxOmark. (provided you believe those types of sites....which I also previously mentioned)

so...lets recap exactly what i said in my previous post. 
1: the 24mp sensor is better than the 16mp sensor, but you might not notice any HUGE improvements on your final product, unless you crop a lot. not everyone does. 
2: the 51 pt AF system is better than the 39 pt AF system, but it isn't going to magically get you the shots just because you have it. 
3: the built in focus motor in both the D7000 and D7100, in my opinion, is the biggest upgrade over the D3100 in relation to having a much bigger choice of lenses that will AF on the camera. (AF and AF-D lenses)
4: the D7100 is overall a better camera than the D7000, and while I recommend a D7100 if you can budget it in, the D7000 is still a very capable camera. 

soooo....please explain to me where i went wrong? 'cause im just not seeing it. 
overall, I think i made a relatively good comparison of the two cameras. 
also, I never mentioned the D5xxx series simply for the fact that the OP specifically asked about the D7000 and D7100. 
if you don't care about the on board focus motor, the D5200 would certainly be a viable option.


----------



## TheLost (Nov 19, 2013)

pixmedic said:


> soooo....please explain to me where i went wrong? 'cause im just not seeing it.
> overall, I think i made a relatively good comparison of the two cameras.
> also, I never mentioned the D5xxx series simply for the fact that the OP specifically asked about the D7000 and D7100.
> if you don't care about the on board focus motor, the D5200 would certainly be a viable option.



In bold....



pixmedic said:


> 24 -vs- 16 MP. ok fine, if you are convinced that more is always better, then sure. but, how much cropping are you going to do that you will really notice a difference?
> if you do a LOT of heavy cropping, you might actually need the extra MP's, otherwise, I think you will find the IQ of both camera pretty similar.
> the lack of the AA filter on the D7100 was big news, *but I do not personally think it is such a huge game changer that the D7100 becomes a "must have" over the D7000.*
> 
> ...



There is a HUGE difference between the two cameras...   

I spent 3 years (nov 2010 - march 2013) with the D7000 shooting ~1k images each week (indoors and out.. rain, snow & sun).  The D7100 is a completely different beast then the D7000.  

I agree with you that they both take good pictures... and you'd be hard pressed to tell a picture taken with either one.  But that can be said for all of Nikon's DSLR's.  

The D7100 is a more capable camera then the D7000.


----------



## TheLost (Nov 19, 2013)

Tailgunner said:


> TheLost said:
> 
> 
> > Based on your comments the OP would be fine with a D5100 (same sensor as the D7000) or D5200 (same Auto Focus system as the *D7100*)... and its probably true.
> ...



Not true..  The D5200 has the AF system from the D7000... not the D7100.   The only other cameras that have the same AF system as the D7100 are the D4 and D800.


----------



## cgw (Nov 19, 2013)

TheLost said:


> Having owned the D7000 from the first day it came out to the first day the D7100 came out... they are two different cameras.
> 
> They feel different: The grip on the D7100 is deeper and wider. I find it easier to hold the D7100 then the D7000.
> 
> ...



This seems a bit exaggerated. Most informed reviews I've read(e.g., Hogan)stress features and not across-the-board performance as the key differences. Besides, the D7xxx and D6xx platforms share a whole lotta DNA--the old Nikon game. In my market, D7000 bodies are just above C$700, while D7100s are around a grand. Not sure the price spread necessarily delivers "improvement" on that grand a scale.


----------



## pixmedic (Nov 19, 2013)

yea. duh. 
i said the D7100 was a better camera. 
several times. 
however, as you yourself said,  "you'd be hard  pressed to tell a picture taken with either one. " so...if that is indeed true, what is wrong with recommending a D7000?
I actually recommended the D7100, and only suggested getting the D7000 if one was found at a crazy good price with a low shutter count. 

I too have both cameras. I have shot weddings with both camera. portraits with both cameras. Done pretty much the same amount of post work with pictures from both cameras.  I find there is very little that I can do with the D7100 that I cannot also do with the D7000. the D7100 might do everything a little bit better, but that doesnt mean it is necessary to run out and buy the latest and greatest. coming from a D3100, the D7000 will seem like an AMAZING camera.


----------



## Tailgunner (Nov 19, 2013)

TheLost said:


> Tailgunner said:
> 
> 
> > TheLost said:
> ...



Well hell&#8230;I knew that, I think I got 24 MP res mixed with AF sensor&#8230;pay no attention to me lol


----------



## goodguy (Nov 19, 2013)

This question keeps popping up a lot lately this D7000 vs D7100

The differences between the 2 cameras are well known.
Both cameras are good but the D7100 is better.

Is the D7100 worth the extra cash ?

Personal choice, to me the answer is absolutly yes.


Look about it this way, you go to buy a car, you get to choose one of 2 cars, 2012 model or 2013 which is not only a year newer but a different model which is better then last year, there is a price different, obviously the 2012 is cheaper so which would you go for ?

I would go for the newer model and pay the extra cash, its not such a huge price difference to go with the D7100 in my eyes.

As for the lens, if currently you have the 18-55mm then yes I wouldnt keep this lens, I would go for a better lens.
I would buy only the body and get a used lens, for my D7100 I got the 24-85mm VR but you can also get the 18-105mm or 18-140mm or 16-85mm
Lots of good lenses to choose from, I own only FX lenses because I want for my next camera to get a full frame.

Lots of replies to your post, I am eager to see what camera you will choose.

Good luck


----------



## robbins.photo (Nov 19, 2013)

Derrel said:


> Look up Thom Hogan's review of the D7100. He talks some about the D7000 vs D7100 equation. The D7100 is not a slam-dunk buy; for many people, he seems to suggest that the D7000 is a good choice. Honestly, I'm not sure myself is the D7100 is really the right choice for anybody except those who really want the little bit extra that only it has.



Well I've been pretty happy with my D5100 up to this point, would like to have the dual SD cards and the built in focus motor myself, really haven't decided though if the 24 mp sensor and improved autofocus system is really worth the extra few hundred in price difference.  It's a tough call for me personally.  Fortunately though I've got some time to think it over since it will be a while before I can put the money together for the next upgrade.  Got a trip to Times square to pay for, oh.. and three silly hats.  Lol


----------



## goodguy (Nov 19, 2013)

robbins.photo said:


> Well I've been pretty happy with my D5100 up to this point, would like to have the dual SD cards and the built in focus motor myself, really haven't decided though if the 24 mp sensor and improved autofocus system is really worth the extra few hundred in price difference. It's a tough call for me personally. Fortunately though I've got some time to think it over since it will be a while before I can put the money together for the next upgrade. Got a trip to Times square to pay for, oh.. and three silly hats. Lol


The D5100 is a good camera, I wouldnt rush to upgrade it, enjoy it and I have a feeling by the time you will be ready to upgrade other cameras will be around to consider.
I wouldnt rush to get a DX camera, I have a feeling that in time the FX will become more main stream and cheaper to buy.

Time will tell and in the mean time make good of your D5100


----------



## robbins.photo (Nov 19, 2013)

goodguy said:


> robbins.photo said:
> 
> 
> > Well I've been pretty happy with my D5100 up to this point, would like to have the dual SD cards and the built in focus motor myself, really haven't decided though if the 24 mp sensor and improved autofocus system is really worth the extra few hundred in price difference. It's a tough call for me personally. Fortunately though I've got some time to think it over since it will be a while before I can put the money together for the next upgrade. Got a trip to Times square to pay for, oh.. and three silly hats. Lol
> ...



Actually for about 99% of what I do the DX format has advantages over the FX.  I don't really shoot a lot of low light or wide angle stuff so happy as a clam with DX for now.  The 5100 is a good all around camera and for now it's fitting my needs pretty well, doubt I'll upgrade for a while yet and even when I do I'll probably hang onto the 5100 to have as a backup body.  The dual SD card slots would be nice to have, I run a single 64 GB Sandisk Extreme Pro for now and I've got another 16 GB Extreme pro in the bag and so far that's been getting the job done but come summer I'll most likely be extending my zoo walks and other outings so I will probably need another 64 GB card at some point.  Would be nice to be able to just put them both in the camera and forget about it but having to swap them isn't really a major tragedy by any means.

The focus motor is really probably the biggest selling point for me, you can get a lot of the older glass on Ebay dirt cheap and some of it is some really good glass so in the long run that would save some $$$, but for now the two lenses I have seem to suffice so we'll just see what the future holds.  The other possible upgrade path I looked at was the 5300 - the wifi and gps thing would be nice but I think the 7x would probably be a much better route to go once I get to that stage.


----------



## Derrel (Nov 19, 2013)

This thread delivered some CLASSIC "TPF"!!!! Next up: Coke or Pepsi? Followed at 9:00 PM by Ford or Chevy--redheaded stepchild versus rented mule, which one takes a beating better?


----------



## goodguy (Nov 19, 2013)

Derrel said:


> This thread delivered some CLASSIC "TPF"!!!! Next up: Coke or Pepsi? Followed at 9:00 PM by Ford or Chevy--redheaded stepchild versus rented mule, which one takes a beating better?


In my mother tongue there is a funny sketch and a line from it goes (loosely translating it) "They keep asking the same question and we keep answering the same answers" :mrgreen:


----------



## coastalconn (Nov 19, 2013)

I was going to state my opinion, but this is more productive....


----------



## Derrel (Nov 19, 2013)

I'm looking around here...I KNOW that SOMEPLACE around this dump, I've got a nice wooden presentation box, with a set of .58 caliber 1820's flintlock dueling pistols inside of it...


----------



## robbins.photo (Nov 19, 2013)

Derrel said:


> This thread delivered some CLASSIC "TPF"!!!! Next up: Coke or Pepsi? Followed at 9:00 PM by Ford or Chevy--redheaded stepchild versus rented mule, which one takes a beating better?



Redheaded mule...  hmm.. could be the biggest thing since the pet rock!  I like it.. I'm excited to be a part of it.  WTG Derrel, now that's some outside the box thinking there!  Lol


----------



## TheLost (Nov 20, 2013)

The issue here is that the D7000 and D7100 get generalized down to DxOMark scores and general cosmetic similarities.   At that point you might as well be comparing D3200 to the D5300 and the D600.

Its like comparing a Jeep Wrangler, a Toyota Prius and a BMW M3 and saying  "All three will get you to work in the morning on time"... "All 3 have about the same cargo space"..  "All three cars come with 4 tires!"... "When it comes down to it... they are all three the same car".

The D7000 and D7100 have a different body..  
The AF system is different..
The Sensor is different..
The build quality is different..

They both take pictures.


----------



## astroNikon (Nov 20, 2013)

yeah, well, all is good. Except

I want a d7000 with a 24mp sensor.  Call it a d7050 !!



and I want a free upgrade to it


----------



## pixmedic (Nov 20, 2013)

TheLost said:


> The issue here is that the D7000 and D7100 get generalized down to DxOMark scores and general cosmetic similarities.   At that point you might as well be comparing D3200 to the D5300 and the D600.
> 
> Its like comparing a Jeep Wrangler, a Toyota Prius and a BMW M3 and saying  "All three will get you to work in the morning on time"... "All 3 have about the same cargo space"..  "All three cars come with 4 tires!"... "When it comes down to it... they are all three the same car".
> 
> ...



I would probably give similar advice on those cars. 
If you can afford the BMW, get it. 
If not, get the Prius. 
If you own handcuffs and a riding crop, get the jeep.


----------



## TheLost (Nov 20, 2013)

pixmedic said:


> I would probably give similar advice on those cars.
> If you can afford the BMW, get it.
> If not, get the Prius.
> If you own handcuffs and a riding crop, get the jeep.



Maybe something like this.... back in post #6.



TheLost said:


> Start with the D800... then go backwards until you reach one you can afford.. D800 -> D610 -> D7100 -> D7000



.. But what gets my hackles up are these types of posts...



Derrel said:


> ... I'm not sure myself is the D7100 is really the right choice for anybody except those who really want the *little bit extra that only it has*.





pixmedic said:


> ... There is really not a tremendous difference between the two cameras when it comes to the end product.


----------



## pixmedic (Nov 20, 2013)

Why does it bother you?  Its just someones opinion.  You stated yourself that someone probably couldn't tell the difference between photos taken with both cameras. I just see it as a bunch of minor upgrades. I dont see anything that got upgraded in the D7100 that would make a significant difference in someones photography. Except, maybe, if you had a tendency to do heavy cropping.  

While i can understand why you feel i am not giving due credit to an obviously better camera, on the other side of that coin, your posts appear to imply that the D7000 is outdated and useless now that the D7100 is out, and someone would be a fool for buying it. 

I just see the D7000 as a very capable camera, and  a perfectly viable option for someone looking to upgrade their D3100 without dropping $1k+ on a D7100.

If the two cameras were even close to the same price, my opinion would be different.


----------



## TheLost (Nov 20, 2013)

pixmedic said:


> Why does it bother you?  Its just someones opinion.  You stated yourself that someone probably couldn't tell the difference between photos taken with both cameras. I just see it as a bunch of minor upgrades. I dont see anything that got upgraded in the D7100 that would make a significant difference in someones photography. Except, maybe, if you had a tendency to do heavy cropping.



The AF system alone in the D7100 is worth the upgrade.  The AF system in the D7000 was not Nikon's best... very inconsistent and constant back focus.  I spent a year defending the AF on the D7000 until i went back and looked at thousands of my images (taken with 2 separate D7000's).   I then spent a week with a D90 and D300s each and realized how bad the D7000 AF was.   I've now gone through a full Rugby, Indoor Football, PeeWee Football and High School football season with the D7100 and IMHO the AF system is even better then the D300s.

Granted... some people won't notice or won't push the D7000 AF system.   But at some point your going to want to take pictures of your dog.... and you'll wish you had a D7100 



pixmedic said:


> While i can understand why you feel i am not giving due credit to an obviously better camera, on the other side of that coin, your posts appear to imply that the D7000 is outdated and useless now that the D7100 is out, and someone would be a fool for buying it.
> 
> I just see the D7000 as a very capable camera, and  a perfectly viable option for someone looking to upgrade their D3100 without dropping $1k+ on a D7100.
> 
> If the two cameras were even close to the same price, my opinion would be different.



I totally agree... 100%..  However the D7100 is a better camera and if the OP can afford it he/she shouldn't think the D7000 is the same camera.


----------



## pixmedic (Nov 20, 2013)

TheLost said:


> pixmedic said:
> 
> 
> > Why does it bother you?  Its just someones opinion.  You stated yourself that someone probably couldn't tell the difference between photos taken with both cameras. I just see it as a bunch of minor upgrades. I dont see anything that got upgraded in the D7100 that would make a significant difference in someones photography. Except, maybe, if you had a tendency to do heavy cropping.
> ...



I have plenty of pictures i have posted here of my dogs playing at the dog park. Taken with my old D200. And they are pretty darn good.  
I think what is really needed here is for the OP to give us a budget. 
I mean, why go D7100 when for a little more you can get a used D600?
Are we looking at new or used cameras?  I am seeing used D700's now for the same or less than a new D7100. Money might be the deciding factor here.


----------



## astroNikon (Nov 20, 2013)




----------



## TheLost (Nov 20, 2013)

pixmedic said:


> I have plenty of pictures i have posted here of my dogs playing at the dog park. Taken with my old D200. And they are pretty darn good.
> I think what is really needed here is for the OP to give us a budget.
> I mean, why go D7100 when for a little more you can get a used D600?
> Are we looking at new or used cameras?  I am seeing used D700's now for the same or less than a new D7100. Money might be the deciding factor here.



Agreed! but this thread says D7000 or D7100 

... And i was talking about taking pictures of moving things (dogs) with the D7000  ..  They'll all end up like this..
(focus is on #17 but #19 is sharper.... classic D7000 issue... google it)





I have a server full of images like that... from two different D7000s.. one went back to nikon multiple times..

With the D7100 i can nail focus every time (im always amazed how accurate it is)




(focus was set to the QB... and in the image the QB is in focus).

Not great pictures... but they show my point.

[*edit*] for you pixel peepers who want to see how accurate... you can read the "under armour" on the QB's shoes with a f/3.2 DOF slice.
http://www.lostbyte.net/tmp/pixel_peep.jpg


----------



## raventepes (Nov 20, 2013)

pixmedic said:


> I mean, why go D7100 when for a little more you can get a used D600?



This is actually a pretty fair point.. Unless there are specific reasons to stick with a DX sensor, a used D600 would be a good argument versus a new D7100. Of course, it really depends on what's needed by the OP, factoring in what they photograph, weather or not a 39 point AF will suffice, Current lenses, etc. 

Truth be told, if I had the option of either of the two back when I bought my D7100, There's a very real possibility I could have just taken the D600 and sold my DX lenses for some decent FX glass. I sure wouldn't want to be using a D600 in DX mode for too long unless I had no other options.


----------



## pixmedic (Nov 20, 2013)

TheLost said:


> pixmedic said:
> 
> 
> > I have plenty of pictures i have posted here of my dogs playing at the dog park. Taken with my old D200. And they are pretty darn good.
> ...



 I haven't personally experienced focus problems with my D7000, but i am aware of the issue.
I guess budget will really be the determining factor. If the OP can't cough up $1k+ for the d7100, his options will be limited. 

OP... If you are even CLOSE to affording a D7100, save a little more and get it.


----------



## astroNikon (Nov 20, 2013)

raventepes said:


> pixmedic said:
> 
> 
> > I mean, why go D7100 when for a little more you can get a used D600?
> ...



Not to wander from the 7000 v 7100

but doesn't the 600 have the same focusing system as the 7000 ?


----------



## robbins.photo (Nov 20, 2013)

pixmedic said:


> TheLost said:
> 
> 
> > pixmedic said:
> ...



Ok..so what I'm getting out of all of this is that apparently we are no longer planning on storming Castle Derrel with torches and pitchforks.  Great. First the UV Filter Crusades get cancelled, now this... a perfectly good peasent uprising shot straight to hell.


----------



## goodguy (Nov 20, 2013)

raventepes said:


> pixmedic said:
> 
> 
> > I mean, why go D7100 when for a little more you can get a used D600?
> ...


When talking about the D7100 vs D600 there are few ways of looking and I have commented about it in the past.
I think first buying new vs used, you are buying not just a new camera but also a piece of mind, the knowledge your baby is new and virgin and has the warranty to comfort you in case still something goes wrong and that is an important factor to way in when comparing these 2 cameras especially when you know there is some history behind the D600 original design.

In many ways the D600 and D7100 should produce almost same quality of pictures and the only real different is at night where the bigger sensor of the FX body has the advantage.
This of course is a very important factor but when looking at all these issues personally I would go with the new D7100, it really is such a fantastic camera and even in low light it still produces remarkably good pictures.


----------



## pixmedic (Nov 20, 2013)

goodguy said:


> When talking about the D7100 vs D600 there are few ways of looking and I have commented about it in the past.
> I think first buying new vs used, you are buying not just a new camera but also a piece of mind, the knowledge your baby is new and virgin and has the warranty to comfort you in case still something goes wrong and that is an important factor to way in when comparing these 2 cameras especially when you know there is some history behind the D600 original design.
> 
> In many ways the D600 and D7100 should produce almost same quality of pictures and the only real different is at night where the bigger sensor of the FX body has the advantage.
> This of course is a very important factor but when looking at all these issues personally I would go with the new D7100, it really is such a fantastic camera and even in low light it still produces remarkably good pictures.



Eh... 
Virgins are overrated. 
I prefer something slightly used. Already broken in.  At least a couple of actuation's before i get to handle it.

Oh yea.... I prefer used cameras too.


----------



## robbins.photo (Nov 20, 2013)

goodguy said:


> raventepes said:
> 
> 
> > pixmedic said:
> ...



Ok, so crusades are off, peasant uprising cancelled, and now we are sitting around extoling the benefits of virginity.

Man, what a weird cult this turned out to be.. lol


----------



## pixmedic (Nov 20, 2013)

We can return to debating which camera is best for the OP if/when they return with a budget. Or news of a purchase.


----------



## Derrel (Nov 20, 2013)

BestBuy's already advertised Black Friday special of a brand-new Nikon D7000 and a brand-new 18-140mm VR_Nikkor lens for $799 looks like a pretty sweet deal!!! Just sayin...


----------



## goodguy (Nov 20, 2013)

pixmedic said:


> goodguy said:
> 
> 
> > When talking about the D7100 vs D600 there are few ways of looking and I have commented about it in the past.
> ...


:er: Yeah, well, aaaa.................not sure what to say

All right back to cameras, personal preference, in regards to lens I am all for used but in regards to camera I want new.
This is all about a personal comfort zone.



Derrel said:


> BestBuy's already advertised Black Friday special of a brand-new Nikon D7000 and a brand-new 18-140mm VR_Nikkor lens for $799 looks like a pretty sweet deal!!! Just sayin...



This is indeed a good deal, hard to beat that but I (and thats my own personal feeling about it) would rather go for a new D7100 which I think will be around 1000$ and to that I would add a used 18-105mm VR which is around 150$ used.

Again this is my view and what I would do, others might rather go with the cheaper D7000 deal and nothing is wrong with that, I just dont like to buy yesteryears technology even if its still very good.


----------



## JackPhotography1998 (Nov 24, 2013)

I was in the same situation upgrading from my d3100 and I ended up with a D7000 it's a great camera and it performs well in most conditions. But if I had the choice (and if money wasn't a problem like it was) I would get the D7100 simply because it's a newer DSLR but there isn't much difference between the two.

Jack M'crystal Photography


----------



## SCraig (Nov 24, 2013)

JackPhotography1998 said:


> I was in the same situation upgrading from my d3100 and I ended up with a D7000 it's a great camera and it performs well in most conditions. But if I had the choice (and if money wasn't a problem like it was) I would get the D7100 simply because it's a newer DSLR but *there isn't much difference between the two*.



Based on my vast 5-day experience with the D7100 and the fact that I have both a D7000 and a D7100 in my camera bag to compare I would agree with that statement.  The D7100 has a SLIGHT edge in sharpness and a SLIGHT edge in high-ISO performance but it's not Earth-shattering.  There are some minor ergonomic differences between the two that, in my personal opinion, actually give the nod to the D7000.  It is also quite possible that lenses will become the determining factor where sharpness is concerned.  I can see a minor sharpness difference with some of my lenses, but with my Sigma 150-500 there is virtually zero difference.

The D7100 has one advantage over the D7000 that makes it worthwhile to me though:  It is able to flush the shot buffer quicker and maintain shooting at a reduced rate when the shot buffer fills.  With the D7000 I can get about 11 shots (14-bit RAW) in the buffer and it is DONE for about 6 to 8 seconds until the buffer flushes.  The D7100 will slow down significantly when the buffer fills, but it will keep shooting.  That 6 to 8 seconds that the D7000 will not shoot can feel like an eternity sometimes to.  When an Eagle (either a feathered one or one in afterburner) is flying overhead and I'm standing there banging on the shutter release trying to get the damn camera to do SOMETHING it might as well be an hour because in a few seconds the opportunity is gone.  The same thing would be true of action on a race track or a football field or anywhere that the action is fast and unpredictable.  Having that stupid, puny buffer fill and then stand there with a lump of junk in my hands until it flushed is my number one gripe, and really my only gripe, with the D7000.  To me it is a significant problem and one that the D7100 seems to have partially solved so I plan to keep mine for that reason.


----------



## ulrichsd (Nov 25, 2013)

I just upgraded from the D90 to D7000 so that tells you what I would do.  I think you'd be better served spending the extra money on better lenses than the kit lens.


----------

