# D-7000 vs D610



## pumpercaptain (Apr 15, 2014)

Trying to decide if I want to invest in a 610 and break thru to FX or stay with my 7000 a bit longer...  I have a number of lenses that will work in the FX format...  would like to hear from those that have went from all DX to FX and how the 610 measuers up.  I think the D-800 is a bit more than I need...  Also, camera shop has a "refurbished" 610.  Are the refurbs worth looking at or not?


Thanks!!!


----------



## Braineack (Apr 15, 2014)

The D610 is essentially the D7000 with a much better image sensor. But, you're not getting the extra benefits the D7100 and/or D800 can bring you.


----------



## astroNikon (Apr 15, 2014)

I have a d7000 and a d600
They're both great cameras if you ask me.
My use of them have essentially migrated into a niche of their own.  
I use the d7000 for sports, outdoor extra reach situations & testing and the d600 for everything else - landscape, nature, indoor, studio type shooting.

as soon as the weather breaks for good, I'll be testing them against each other on photos of Jupiter/ Saturn and seeing if the crop w/extra reach is better than cropping on the full sensor & color, low light.

The d600 looks like the d7000 body, just a tad bigger and heavier.  It's nice to have essentially the same layout between two cameras.

and a refurb'd unit is good too. You get a limited warranty and a lower price.  My d600 I bought refurb'd


----------



## 412 Burgh (Apr 15, 2014)

Braineack said:


> The D610 is essentially the D7000 with a much better image sensor. But, you're not getting the extra benefits the D7100 and/or D800 can bring you.



Can you please expand upon this? What does the D7100 have in comparison to the D800?


----------



## runnah (Apr 15, 2014)

The only bad things ive heard about the d610 is that the AF system leave a lot to be desired and the video is pretty bad. Other than that it's a great camera.


----------



## Braineack (Apr 15, 2014)

412 Burgh said:


> Braineack said:
> 
> 
> > The D610 is essentially the D7000 with a much better image sensor. But, you're not getting the extra benefits the D7100 and/or D800 can bring you.
> ...




They both have the better AF system and shutter and a few extra features I can't think of off hand.


----------



## IronMaskDuval (Apr 15, 2014)

Braineack said:


> They both have the better AF system and shutter and a few extra features I can't think of off hand.


they also lack aa which gives the 7100 and 800 a sharper image


----------



## Braineack (Apr 15, 2014)

If you get the D800e.


----------



## IronMaskDuval (Apr 15, 2014)

Bah, here http://www.nphotomag.com/2013/02/21/nikon-d7100-vs-d7000-13-things-you-need-to-know/


----------



## astroNikon (Apr 15, 2014)

Are we bashing the 7000 again ?  It was a great specifications camera when it came out, and that hasn't changed.  The d7100 just happens to be a better specifications camera built upon the winning formula of the 7000.  The 7000 still takes great photos as does the 600.

yes ppl complain about the smallish 39 AF field of the 6x0 as it's essentially the same one as found in the 7000.  But for the price of the 6x0 versus other FF cameras, you can't beat it (a used, older d700 though is also a good option).

In a few years everyone will be bashing the 7100 as it lacks compared to the 7200.


----------



## Braineack (Apr 15, 2014)

astroNikon said:


> Are we bashing the 7000 again ?



it's only bashing when you point out features or lack-there-of from Canons.


----------



## bigal1000 (Apr 15, 2014)

I just bought a D610 and it blows the D7000 IQ out of the water,but I'm not saying the D7000 is not a bad DX for what it does !!!!!!!


----------



## IronMaskDuval (Apr 15, 2014)

bigal1000 said:


> I just bought a D610 and it blows the D7000 out of the water,but I'm not saying the D7000 is not a bad DX camera. !!!!!!!




why would you put your 7000 in the water?


----------



## bigal1000 (Apr 15, 2014)

IronMaskDuval said:


> Braineack said:
> 
> 
> > They both have the better AF system and shutter and a few extra features I can't think of off hand.
> ...



I owned a D7100 and could see no better IQ without the AA but that's my opinion !!


----------



## astroNikon (Apr 15, 2014)

IronMaskDuval said:


> Braineack said:
> 
> 
> > They both have the better AF system and shutter and a few extra features I can't think of off hand.
> ...



They also are higher MP - 7100 is 24mp and the 800/e is 36mp, newer Expeed image processor, etc which also help with the sharper image.


----------



## runnah (Apr 15, 2014)

bigal1000 said:


> runnah said:
> 
> 
> > The only bad things ive heard about the d610 is that the AF system leave a lot to be desired and the video is pretty bad. Other than that it's a great camera.
> ...




Yawn, that diatribe is tired. 

BTW, are you "Big Gal", "Bi Gal" or "Big Al"?


----------



## bigal1000 (Apr 15, 2014)

astroNikon said:


> Are we bashing the 7000 again ? It was a great specifications camera when it came out, and that hasn't changed. The d7100 just happens to be a better specifications camera built upon the winning formula of the 7000. The 7000 still takes great photos as does the 600.
> 
> yes ppl complain about the smallish 39 AF field of the 6x0 as it's essentially the same one as found in the 7000. But for the price of the 6x0 versus other FF cameras, you can't beat it (a used, older d700 though is also a good option).
> 
> In a few years everyone will be bashing the 7100 as it lacks compared to the 7200.



Well said sir !!!!!!!!!!


----------



## pumpercaptain (Apr 15, 2014)

Wasn't trying to stir the pot by anymeans...  still fairly new here... local camera shop has as refurbed 610 I am going to look at, and just wanted some advice/opinions on it or maybe go another route.  I think the 800 is too much money for now... been wanting to get FX for sometime...   doesn't the 800 and 610 have some of the same features and sensors etc.?    Was thinking there would be a noticable diff in picture quality between the 7000 and 610...


----------



## astroNikon (Apr 15, 2014)

If you want to go FullFrame and have limited funds, it's either the d600, d610 or the older d700 (which is a great pro body camera).
I'm not good enough to recommending putting your money into the 6x0 from the 7000 series just because.
You'll kinda know if the 7000 is holding you back in certain regards.


----------



## coastalconn (Apr 15, 2014)

I'm just a birder, but I would rather have a DX camera plus $1000 in lenses vs a FX camera and a kit lens.  I thought the D600 was very good and enjoyed using it for the 2 weeks I didn't have the D7100, but too many people bicker about gear instead of skills. I also found the pixel density of the D600 to be much more forgiving and and sloppy techniques didn't show as much.  Just my humble opinion...


----------



## Designer (Apr 15, 2014)

I don't own either one, but I like the idea of getting a refurbished camera at a substantial discount.  Is the warranty from the shop or is it from Nikon?


----------



## coastalconn (Apr 15, 2014)

Designer said:


> I don't own either one, but I like the idea of getting a refurbished camera at a substantial discount.  Is the warranty from the shop or is it from Nikon?



If anyone is going to buy a Refurb, buy it from Cameta Camera.  They have a 1 year warranty on refurb Nikons and ALL warranty work is done at Nikon Melville for the year...


----------



## IronMaskDuval (Apr 15, 2014)

coastalconn said:


> Designer said:
> 
> 
> > I don't own either one, but I like the idea of getting a refurbished camera at a substantial discount.  Is the warranty from the shop or is it from Nikon?
> ...



I just went on cameta's site and did their, which camera is right for you and got the one I have as my most recommended 

It's destiny :albino:


----------



## Braineack (Apr 15, 2014)

my refurb'd D600 came from Cameta but only a had the typical Nikon 90-day refurb'd warranty card with it.


----------



## KmH (Apr 15, 2014)

A note about Nikon's low-pass or AA filters.

Each camera model has a low-pass filter designed for just that camera model.
Consequently how much the low pass filter does or does not soften focus varies by Nikon camera model.

These days Nikon is installing 1 of 2 kinds of low pass filter- the older version that helped control moiré, and the new version that does not control moiré.

So there is a trade-off.
The new low-pass filter does not degrade image sharpness the way the older low-pass filter did, but with the new low-pass filter moiré can now be a problem.



> AA Filters and the Sharpness of your Photos - PhotographyTalk
> . . . Of course, with every pro comes a con. The bad things about AA filters is that they reduce the sharpness of your photo every so slightly. The camera can not filter out what parts of the scene are creating moiré patterns and which are not, so it can't selectively fix those areas. Instead it affects the whole image meaning that you will lose some detail due to the blurring effects of the AA filter. So while fixing the unwanted parts of the image, it also affects those that don't need to be fixed also. . .
> . . . Perhaps one of the biggest problems with moiré is that it cannot be easily fixed during post-processing. There are several software programs available that have different algorithms for compensating for moiré, but since the patterns are so random these tools may not be able to fix the problem in every scene. . .
> . . . Just remember that, even though your optical resolution will increase, once this filter is taken out it will be difficult to remove any moiré problems you come across.


----------



## KmH (Apr 15, 2014)

Braineack said:


> my refurb'd D600 came from Cameta but only a had the typical Nikon 90-day refurb'd warranty card with it.


At the end of the 90 days
Cameta warranties your camera (same terms as in the Nikon warranty) for the remaining 275 days of the year.

Once the Nikon 90 day warranty ends, you send the camera to Cameta, Cameta sends it to Nikon and pays Nikon whatever the repair costs.


----------



## coastalconn (Apr 15, 2014)

Braineack said:


> my refurb'd D600 came from Cameta but only a had the typical Nikon 90-day refurb'd warranty card with it.


Yup the first 90 days you send it to Nikon, the balance of the year you send it to Cameta and they drive it the few miles to Nikon.. That is why I buy from Cameta....


----------



## Braineack (Apr 15, 2014)

coastalconn said:


> Braineack said:
> 
> 
> > my refurb'd D600 came from Cameta but only a had the typical Nikon 90-day refurb'd warranty card with it.
> ...



aw, those guys: so sweet.  thanks for info.  I still need to send mine in for a free shutter replacement.


----------



## astroNikon (Apr 15, 2014)

coastalconn said:


> I'm just a birder, but I would rather have a DX camera plus $1000 in lenses vs a FX camera and a kit lens.  I thought the D600 was very good and enjoyed using it for the 2 weeks I didn't have the D7100, but too many people bicker about gear instead of skills. I also found the pixel density of the D600 to be much more forgiving and and sloppy techniques didn't show as much.  Just my humble opinion...



Bingo :thumbup:
in post 3 I mentioned I use my DX for sports / long reach and my FX for other things.
Love them both so far, and they were affordable at their price points.

Initially I debated going to a 7100 to replace the 7000.  But in the end I added the 600 and use them both for different things.


----------



## cgw (Apr 15, 2014)

I'd wear the D7000 out and see where Nikon is in 12-18 months. For my $, refurbs have to be a great deal cheaper than new to compensate for the reduced warranty coverage and uncertainty about their mileage and prior condition. I'd stay away from a refurbed D600.


----------



## Braineack (Apr 15, 2014)

cgw said:


> I'd stay away from a refurbed D600.



Good thing he's looking at a refurb'd D610.

Why stay away from the D600?


----------



## ekonom (Apr 15, 2014)

I prefer the D7000


----------



## Braineack (Apr 15, 2014)

Why do you prefer the D7000 over the D610?


----------



## bigal1000 (Apr 15, 2014)

runnah said:


> bigal1000 said:
> 
> 
> > runnah said:
> ...


As is your post very tiresome with no actual photo knowledge other than what some one else as said about something you know nothing about that I can see !!!!!!!!!!!!!  by the name is none of your business !!!


----------



## Derrel (Apr 15, 2014)

pumpercaptain said:


> Wasn't trying to stir the pot by anymeans...  still fairly new here... local camera shop has as refurbed 610 I am going to look at, and just wanted some advice/opinions on it or maybe go another route.  I think the 800 is too much money for now... been wanting to get FX for sometime...   doesn't the 800 and 610 have some of the same features and sensors etc.?    Was thinking there would be a noticable diff in picture quality between the 7000 and 610...



I personally prefer full-frame for the way is interacts with LENSES that I own and use!!! For me, the way actual LENSES work on a FF or "FX" camera, as Nikon calls them, is the big draw of FX. The 24 is a wide lens; 28 is a NICE wide; 35mm is a nice, semi-wide, USEFUL indoors!!!! The 50mm is USEFUL, indoors!!! On DX, the 50mm is very "tight" indoors, in normal homes and offices and normal rooms. On FX, an 85mm is a nice, useful easily-used short telephoto.

On FX using an 85mm lens, an 8.5 foot tall field of view is obtained at 20 feet. On DX, the same field of view with the same 85mm lens requires the camera to be about 34 feet distant--for the same field of view BUUUUUUUUT--with MUCH deeper depth of field, and a much more-recongnizable background, due to 1) the camera-to-subject distance and 2) the smaller capture format.

For "PEOPLE WORK", like portraits of 1 and 2 people, and so on, I prefer FX. FOR "telephoto reach", I prefer DX.

SO, you'll see birders and sports shooters who LOVE what the smaller capture format DX cameras bring to the game. And you will see "people" photogs who prefer FX most of the time.


----------



## astroNikon (Apr 15, 2014)

Derrel said:


> pumpercaptain said:
> 
> 
> > Wasn't trying to stir the pot by anymeans...  still fairly new here... local camera shop has as refurbed 610 I am going to look at, and just wanted some advice/opinions on it or maybe go another route.  I think the 800 is too much money for now... been wanting to get FX for sometime...   doesn't the 800 and 610 have some of the same features and sensors etc.?    Was thinking there would be a noticable diff in picture quality between the 7000 and 610...
> ...



You actually make me want to try my FX for sports to get less depth of field ... hmmm ... might want that 400mm anyways


----------



## SEMiller (Apr 15, 2014)

IronMaskDuval said:


> why would you put your 7000 in the water?



How else ya gonna blow it out of the water if it's not in the water in the first place?


----------



## Derrel (Apr 15, 2014)

At a lot of sporting events where you have access, a 300mm prime on DX is "too tight"...too restrictive of an angle of view to get much except, tightly-cropped, footless participants...I do not mean when shooting from the grandstands, but when you're ON the sidelines, or down on the infield at a track meet, a 300mm prime is often TOO narrow angle to show a lot of things except little "snippets" and "tightly-framed" stuff. *400mm on FX is pretty useful, astro!!!*

As to FX and blowing out the background...that's one of the differences between FX and APS-C that is a difference. Now that we have high-resolution FX cameras (24 and 36 MP models), it's pretty feasible to CROP images and still get a pretty darned good image. Things have really changed since a Nikon crop-body was a 2.7 MP D1 or D1h, or a 5.4 MP D1x, or a 4.2 MP D2h...those older crop-body cameras did not allow much post-capture cropping. Today, we have 16- and 24-MP crop bodies, and 12, 24, and 25 MP FX Nikons available, in used and or new models.

24MP FX has astoundingly good image quality in a D3x or a D600 or a D610. And the D800 and D800e at 36MP are, some experts say, the best d-slr imagers ever made.


----------



## astroNikon (Apr 15, 2014)

Derrel said:


> At a lot of sporting events where you have access, a 300mm prime on DX is "too tight"...too restrictive of an angle of view to get much except, tightly-cropped, footless participants...I do not mean when shooting from the grandstands, but when you're ON the sidelines, or down on the infield at a track meet, a 300mm prime is often TOO narrow angle to show a lot of things except little "snippets" and "tightly-framed" stuff. *400mm on FX is pretty useful, astro!!!*
> 
> As to FX and blowing out the background...that's one of the differences between FX and APS-C that is a difference. Now that we have high-resolution FX cameras (24 and 36 MP models), it's pretty feasible to CROP images and still get a pretty darned good image. Things have really changed since a Nikon crop-body was a 2.7 MP D1 or D1h, or a 5.4 MP D1x, or a 4.2 MP D2h...those older crop-body cameras did not allow much post-capture cropping. Today, we have 16- and 24-MP crop bodies, and 12, 24, and 25 MP FX Nikons available, in used and or new models.
> 
> 24MP FX has astoundingly good image quality in a D3x or a D600 or a D610. And the D800 and D800e at 36MP are, some experts say, the best d-slr imagers ever made.


I'll guess I'll have to do a test run on my d600 with my 80-200/2.8 for the next kids soccer.
with my DX I did have to move way back from the sidelines to get good shots of the players going for a goal on my side of the field.  For corner shots I thought of my FX as I had to quickly move back.
So .. next game I'll bring my d600 & 80-200.  I'll bring my 75-300 to test too.

just wish the team didn't use a bright neon green jersey .. yikes.


----------



## cgw (Apr 15, 2014)

Braineack said:


> cgw said:
> 
> 
> > I'd stay away from a refurbed D600.
> ...


----------



## Braineack (Apr 15, 2014)

cgw said:


> Braineack said:
> 
> 
> > cgw said:
> ...


----------



## astroNikon (Apr 15, 2014)

cgw said:


> Braineack said:
> 
> 
> > cgw said:
> ...


----------



## hamlet (Apr 15, 2014)

I am also still thinking about upgrading from my first dslr. I'm not impressed with the benifits i'd gain from the current Nikon lineup, but any higher model id buy would definitely be a huge upgrade. If i were you, then i would just go for the camera that i have the most lenses for. So if all you have are lenses meant for crop sensors, then the choice is obvious, likewise is it if you have full frame lenses.


----------



## jaomul (Apr 16, 2014)

There are so many comparisons between the d600/610 and d7000/7100. An awful lot say the 7100 has this, the 600 does not have that etc. The physical size and internal workings of these models may be similar but it basically comes down to the fullframe vs crop again. I dont think there is to much point saying the D7100 has more features than the 610, but I think a lot of comparison questions are simply asked because they look so alike. It's likely hard for some to drop twice the price on a camera that doesn't look twice the price


----------



## Braineack (Apr 16, 2014)

jaomul said:


> I dont think there is to much point saying the D7100 has more features than the 610, but I think a lot of comparison questions are simply asked because they look so alike. It's likely hard for some to drop twice the price on a camera that doesn't look twice the price



You could say the same thing about the difference between the D610 and D800 where the main difference between the two is the sensor, shutter, AF system, and full magnesium frame and costs just about the twice the price...


----------



## astroNikon (Apr 16, 2014)

for most people, all dSLRs look alike

for more involved people,
all the 3x00 look alike
the 5x00 look alike
the 7x00 and 6x0 look alike

add a battery grip and the 7x00, 6x0 and 8x0 look alike

for the much more in-tune people, they all look different, especially noting the model number designation on the front  

and i'm excluding the 50,70,90, 100, 200, 300 models which all kinda look the same  

The BIGGEST difference between the 7x00 and the 6x0 is the jump from crop to full frame.
I would guess you get more people jumping from the 7x00 to 6x0 than from lower models to FF


----------



## jaomul (Apr 16, 2014)

Braineack said:


> jaomul said:
> 
> 
> > I dont think there is to much point saying the D7100 has more features than the 610, but I think a lot of comparison questions are simply asked because they look so alike. It's likely hard for some to drop twice the price on a camera that doesn't look twice the price
> ...


This wasn't a shot at people who compare the cameras. What I meant is that the fact they look so similar is a reason I think they are compared so much. Most know why they want a fufullframe 610 and not a 7100 or vice versa. I think if the 7100 looked more like a d300s there would be less comparison questions about these models. This is just a hypothetical thought, it means nothing really


----------



## astroNikon (Apr 16, 2014)

Nikon seemed to have designed it that way, making the 7x00 and 6x0 similar in layout.  It's an easy step forward into FF without having to relearn button placement et all.

I'll tell you one thing .. it certainly is convenient when I switch from the 7000 to the 600.  Sometimes I can't tell the difference until I feel the RightHand top 2 fingers - the little wedge between the fingers is much more pronounced/larger on the 600.

Since I use the same lenses, and one has 2 batteries and the other 1 (varies which one has 2 dependent upon what I'm doing), both have grips, the weight difference I can't use to differentiate them.

But the 600 has gotten me a little lazy.  I do not pay attention to my left hand anymore and I find myself changing the camera PASM settings on the 7000 much more frequently by accident.  The 600 has a push button lock on the auto, PASM dial whereas the 7000 does not.

Though the 600 (without lens) I have to shove into my Nikon backpack.  The 7000 easily fits into the camera opening even with a small lens on it.


----------



## jaomul (Apr 16, 2014)

I'd say alright the fact they are so similar is definitely a bonus for those that use both


----------



## astroNikon (Apr 16, 2014)

jaomul said:


> I'd say alright the fact they are so similar is definitely a bonus for those that use both


not just someone that uses both

but it makes the transition only a matter of $$$ and one does not have to relearn button placement and the menu is very similar

Through truthfully, I loved the button placement of the d700 for WB, ISO


----------

