# Need advice: Torn between Nikon D5100 and D7000



## mscagli1

I've done tons of research on DSLRs and I've narrowed it down to two models: the D5100 and the D7000. I was wondering if any of you fabulous people here might be able to give some advice so I can decide on one model to buy. I've read that they are similar cameras on the surface and have the same sensor, but others say that the build quality/ AF motor/ Dual SD slots/ metering/ AF points/ control dials justify the price point.

Some things to know:

This is my first time buying a DSLR. My old camera was a Fujifilm Point-and-Shoot and I was looking at DSLR to give more control and freedom, and something to grow into as I get better with photography. My goal is to get a body (obviously) with a prime lens (for low light) and a general use lens. I'm not worried about zooms too much.

I know about photography, shutter speed, aperture, ISO, and things like that enough to change the controls and predict what will happens, but I don't know enough to use Manual mode full time. Video is appreciated, but not my primary focus.

I have no previous lenses or flashes, but I think the D700's AF motor and flash capabilities can prove useful in the future.

I have budget of about $1800, counting gift cards and everything. I'm ok with not spending it all on camera hardware and lenses, because I can always throw it into tripods, flashes,and other things. 

I'm one of those people that likes to learn everything about the camera I use.


I've heard that the D7000 is too much camera for a beginner, but I've also heard to buy something you won't outgrow too fast. Bottom line, I don't want to be kicking myself for buying the wrong one and either paying too much or wanting more features. Can anyone help?


----------



## The_Duke

I own the d5100 and if I had the money I would probably gotten a d7000. The second command dial isn't a big deal for me as the one dial I have can control SS, Aperture, and ISO. I will most likely never need to control a flash off-camera and just chose the best lenses I could with the AF-S motor in them. They aren't 1500$ lenses but for the price they are great. But the extra AF points would be nice along with some of the extra external controls. Didn't care for the LCD screen though (I would have rather had more buttons). All in all I spent about 1600$ for the camera, 4 lenses, filters, a bag, and spare battery.


----------



## o hey tyler

The_Duke said:


> I own the d5100 and if I had the money I would probably gotten a d7000. The second command dial isn't a big deal for me as the one dial I have can control SS, Aperture, and ISO.


 
But you cannot control them simultaneously without having to hold a button. Once you go dual command dial, you never go back. 



> I will most likely never need to control a flash off-camera and just chose the best lenses I could with the AF-S motor in them.



CLS is actually a really usable feature that's great even for entry level photographers. Canon has a similar system that was implemented with the 7D. Limiting yourself to only AF lenses also bottlenecks how much money you spend on a lens. Some people might be happy with a 35-70 f/2.8 AF-D on a D7000, and it will autofocus. When you have a D5100, you are limited to AF-S lenses if you want autofocus. 




> They aren't 1500$ lenses but for the price they are great. But the extra AF points would be nice along with some of the extra external controls.



Yes, you are correct. More external controls are great, and very useful. 



> Didn't care for the LCD screen though (I would have rather had more buttons). All in all I spent about 1600$ for the camera, 4 lenses, filters, a bag, and spare battery.



They have the same LCD screen on the back, and the D7k has one on the top as well which is useful. I use the LCD screen on my 5D and 5D Mark II quite regularly. 

In addition to what you mentioned (and were clearly biased by being a D5100 user) the D7000 also has a faster burst rate, more autofocus points, a 100% viewfinder, longer battery life, better dynamic range, and it's weather sealed. 

OP, personally I would get a D7k.


----------



## ratssass

...someone else here said it best....buy a body you can grow into.....i have/love the d7k,but i didn't buy it for video,and i'm sure glad i didn't...


----------



## mscagli1

Right now I'm just trying to think about the philosophy of "buy better glass with a cheap body vs. an expensive body and cheap glass", but also the fact that I could eventually outgrow a body (which is still a considerable investment in my book). Has anyone bought the 5100 and noticed that they wanted more? Or has anyone bought the 7k and thought it wasn't worth the price point? I'm pretty sure I'll be satisfied with either, stepping up from a compact, but I'm thinking for the future and thinking that I might appreciate direct buttons and build quality when I have enough experience to actually get irritated over menu-digging and a plasticky feel. That way, I won't have to get a new body...


----------



## MTVision

o hey tyler said:
			
		

> But you cannot control them simultaneously without having to hold a button. Once you go dual command dial, you never go back.
> 
> CLS is actually a really usable feature that's great even for entry level photographers. Canon has a similar system that was implemented with the 7D. Limiting yourself to only AF lenses also bottlenecks how much money you spend on a lens. Some people might be happy with a 35-70 f/2.8 AF-D on a D7000, and it will autofocus. When you have a D5100, you are limited to AF-S lenses if you want autofocus.
> 
> Yes, you are correct. More external controls are great, and very useful.
> 
> They have the same LCD screen on the back, and the D7k has one on the top as well which is useful. I use the LCD screen on my 5D and 5D Mark II quite regularly.
> 
> In addition to what you mentioned (and were clearly biased by being a D5100 user) the D7000 also has a faster burst rate, more autofocus points, a 100% viewfinder, longer battery life, better dynamic range, and it's weather sealed.
> 
> OP, personally I would get a D7k.



The LCD on the d5100 is a swivel screen. I think that's what he was talking about. 

Op - I have the d5100 and I'd go for the d7000 in a heartbeat.


----------



## photo_joe

If you can afford it go with the D7000, no reason to buy the D5100 and then in six months realize that the D7000 would have been a better choice.  Yes if you buy the D5100 you could buy better glass, but I think having the better body to start with would make it worth waiting for better glass.  I say get the D7000 with the kit lens and pick up a 50mm 1.8 and then get comfortable with the camera and save up for a good telephoto lens.  

What kind of photos would you be looking to take?  As this might also help with the decision, but more than likely I think if you get the D7000 you won't be dissappointed in the least.  

I started with a D60 and within about 3 months I went out and got a D7000 since I wanted the extra features like duel button control and extra focus points.  It's easier to grow into the camera then buy what you think works now and then a short time later you want the bigger camera and realize you have to save for a while to get it.


----------



## Hammbone

I had the same problem and I went with the 5100 just because I found a good deal.


----------



## The_Duke

MTVision said:


> o hey tyler said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But you cannot control them simultaneously without having to hold a button. Once you go dual command dial, you never go back.CLS is actually a really usable feature that's great even for entry level photographers. Canon has a similar system that was implemented with the 7D. Limiting yourself to only AF lenses also bottlenecks how much money you spend on a lens. Some people might be happy with a 35-70 f/2.8 AF-D on a D7000, and it will autofocus. When you have a D5100, you are limited to AF-S lenses if you want autofocus.Yes, you are correct. More external controls are great, and very useful.They have the same LCD screen on the back, and the D7k has one on the top as well which is useful. I use the LCD screen on my 5D and 5D Mark II quite regularly.In addition to what you mentioned (and were clearly biased by being a D5100 user) the D7000 also has a faster burst rate, more autofocus points, a 100% viewfinder, longer battery life, better dynamic range, and it's weather sealed.OP, personally I would get a D7k.
> 
> 
> 
> The LCD on the d5100 is a swivel screen. I think that's what he was talking about. Op - I have the d5100 and I'd go for the d7000 in a heartbeat.
Click to expand...

 @tyler---- you are correct. I would like to have the second dial as I almost always leave the ISO at 100 unless absolutely nessacery. And the LCD screen I was referring to was the one on top. I would get rid of that one for more controls. I really like the switch on the D700 and the D3x to switch AF mode on the fly from area to single point. And yes I am a little biased in that I will deal with the so-called shortcomings of the D5100 for the price difference because I really like all my lenses. All but the macro are af-s and quite sharp ( click on the lenses in my sig to see the Slrgear.com review). I would like more AF points and better battery life and some of the other less talked about features but price was an issue and the D5100 has the same viewscreen, image sensor, and believe me if I could have spent the extra money I would have. Maybe you didn't notice (no disrespect intended) that I voted for the d7000 and that the first line still suggested the d7000 over the d5100 but I still thought it worth mentioning that the d5100 is still a very capable dslr. To the OP: you now have 2 d5100 owners suggesting the d7000 and all your votes are for the d7000. It's all up to you. The 18-105 is a great starting zoom; add a prime and you should be set for a while. In that time invest in a couple of filters and maybe some accessories that you find yourself wanting and start shooting.


----------



## coastalconn

If you can grab a D7000.  Don't be like me.  I started with a D5000.  I loved the IQ, but I quickly learned that I couldn't stand the lack of physical controls.  I also couldn't afford fancy AF-S lenses.  After 6 months I sold it and got a D90.  Still loved the IQ and loved the layout of the camera.  All of a sudden I found myself deeply entrenched with wildlife photography and now I have a D300 for the better af system, high frame rate and build quality beating it around in the woods.  Yes glass is very important, but you have to have a body to meet all of your needs first.  Just my humble opinion....


----------



## djacobox372

If you are looking for the most bang for your Buck the d5100 is the better choice--same sensor for a lot less $.  

That said, if u are the type that would be interested in used glass, the d7000 might be cheaper in the long run due to its ability to meter with classic manual focus lenses along with its af motor.


----------



## mscagli1

As for the pictures I want to take, I'm thinking landscape and low light, but not really night, like sunsets. Also, I take pictures for my robotics team, which is hard to describe, but mostly involves indoor shots, including in a stadium/ gym. The lighting isn't always great, so this is why I was considering a fast prime for less blur. On my old camera, everything blurred because it was too slow. 

How is the kit lens? I heard that kit lenses aren't the best quality, but they're also less expensive too. Is the kit lens a good start, or would it be better to do a body only deal and get a better lens?

Thanks for all the input from everyone. It helps a lot to get real people's opinions and not just look at stats and prices for hours trying to choose. And with 100% of the votes right now, the D7000 looks like an obvious choice.  I found a D7000 with 18-105 lens at two different places(AjRichies and BestPricePhoto) for around $1,120, which is scary low considering B&H and Adorama have it listed at around $1,400. Has anyone shopped at any of these two stores and found that these stores and their prices are legit?


----------



## Solarflare

I choose the D5100 over the D7000 because of the swirvel monitor. I love those.

I didnt knew about the weather sealing of the D7000, though. Thats one of the features I would definitely love to have. Remember, though, that just because your camera is weather sealed doesnt mean your lens is weather sealed as well. You need both and its kind of hard to tell with most lenses if they are.

Otherwise, the D7000 is mostly sturdier, heavier (not a completely good thing, though some love it so the camera is easier to hold still), has more than thus faster controls, has some advanced features like the 1/8000s shutter speed or better flash control, and has a second card slot which should be a standard feature for any serious digital camera (since memory cards are unreliable so you always want a backup).

All in all, you can be happy with both cameras. I know I am with my D5100.


----------



## mscagli1

I've also heard about overexposure problems in the D7000. Can anyone who has a D7000 explain if it has this problem? How noticeable is it?


----------



## o hey tyler

mscagli1 said:
			
		

> I've also heard about overexposure problems in the D7000. Can anyone who has a D7000 explain if it has this problem? How noticeable is it?



It's probably favorable to overexposed slightly if you shoot in RAW. More shadow retention.


----------



## greybeard

The D7000 can be set to point and shoot mode just like the D5100.  It does however have many more professional type features than the D5100 and if you are serious about your photography, you will really appreciate these advanced features later on.  I think the d7000 is worth the extra money.


----------



## nick9

My wife and I are shooting some local motorsports photography. Initially she was going to do it alone so we went with the D7000 for her. We discovered that we would need a second(me), and finances sort of pushed us to the D5100 to save a few bucks. I wish we would have pushed the budget just a little and went with another D7000. Both give great results but the D7000 is so much easier to work with on the fly, with the dual command wheels, and the overall feel is much better as well. We have since purchased a 50mm 1.8d that works well with the D7000 but would be manual focus only with the D5100.
If you can afford the extra money, get the D7000.


----------



## Solarflare

o hey tyler said:


> mscagli1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've also heard about overexposure problems in the D7000. Can anyone who has a D7000 explain if it has this problem? How noticeable is it?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's probably favorable to overexposed slightly if you shoot in RAW. More shadow retention.
Click to expand...

Err ... WHAT ?!?!?!?  Weird logic.

The D5100/D7000 have massive dynamic range reserves at ISO 100 (almost 14 EVs according to DXOMark). So theres a LOT of detail in the shadows that will appear if you shoot in RAW and then overexpose in the software during the JPEG conversion (or even better make HDR image out of it and dont overexpose anything).

However, you can NOT gain the details back you lost by overexposure.

Same for any other camera that allows to shoot in RAW and has some reserves in respect to dynamic range.


----------



## PicMaker

I have just bought a D7000 yesterday. 
I was initially torn between the D5100 which a few weeks ago a friend of mine bought, and the D7000. 
I bit the bullet and went for the more expensive option, although to be perfectly honest with you I could of adapted to the D5100 very well. I am a fan of every single camera in Nikon's line up including the D3100 so if my budget was less, I would have no problem with the lesser price options. 

Both camera's are pretty awesome and there really isn't much you can't do with either. I think the D7000 is a tad more comfortable to hold and I do like the 2 card slots, and 100% viewfinder. But in all fairness to me these are minor although the 2 card slot to many is major and a deal breaker. 
In some initial respects the D7000 is a bit too much camera for me. I like simplicity above anything and the menu can have people asking this and that all day long. The good news though is you can't really make disasterous mistakes that you can't alter in Elements or Lightroom. 

Decent glass on the front and you have a pretty darn good camera with either that is much cleverer than you can ever be....

Good luck with whatever you get and whatever you do get you will not be disappointed.


----------



## sm4him

D7000, hands down.  I had the same choice to make just about a year ago, and chose the D5100. Don't get me wrong--I'm thrilled with my 5100 and I think it performs pretty brilliantly, given its price and entry-level position.  I consider myself a fairly experienced (if mediocre) photographer, but there is still plenty I can improve on before I could really say the D5100 is limiting me.

BUT--if I'd known everything I know now about both cameras, I would have gone for the D7000.  The internal motor, the weather sealing, the af points, the command dials, the overall build quality, the dual card slots, and on and on. NONE of those things seem like a deal-breaker, but all together, I think they really do make it worth the extra price.

If your *primary* reason to consider the D5100 is so you can include "better" glass in your budget, I'd just spring for the D7000 and then start saving more for glass. Fact is, the difference between the two cameras is about $500; that's not going to buy GREAT glass, anyway.  And, I *think* (though others may enlighten me here, this is an uneducated opinion) that the D7000 usually comes with a better kit lens than the D5100 does. For $1800, you should be able to get the D7000, an extra battery and at least one pretty decent lens.  Well, maybe for $2000, anyway.

Either way, once you get either one, you can kiss ALL your spending money goodbye, because you'll want another battery, and a better lens, and a tripod, and a flash, and an even better lens, and a grip, and a really great lens, and....yeah, you get the idea.


----------



## IByte

mscagli1 said:
			
		

> Right now I'm just trying to think about the philosophy of "buy better glass with a cheap body vs. an expensive body and cheap glass", but also the fact that I could eventually outgrow a body (which is still a considerable investment in my book). Has anyone bought the 5100 and noticed that they wanted more? Or has anyone bought the 7k and thought it wasn't worth the price point? I'm pretty sure I'll be satisfied with either, stepping up from a compact, but I'm thinking for the future and thinking that I might appreciate direct buttons and build quality when I have enough experience to actually get irritated over menu-digging and a plasticky feel. That way, I won't have to get a new body...



That's true but the d7k is a great body to start out if you do not plan to go full frame.  Usually if you have the money to buy the body go for it.  Have you felt both bodies yet?


----------



## PicMaker

I'm not sure what's happening at the moment in the UK but you can get the D7000 body only and then buy either the 18-55 or 18-105 kit lenses separately which works out cheaper than if you bought the D7000 and lens as a kit! Weird....


----------



## o hey tyler

Solarflare said:
			
		

> Err ... WHAT ?!?!?!?  Weird logic.
> 
> The D5100/D7000 have massive dynamic range reserves at ISO 100 (almost 14 EVs according to DXOMark). So theres a LOT of detail in the shadows that will appear if you shoot in RAW and then overexpose in the software during the JPEG conversion (or even better make HDR image out of it and dont overexpose anything).
> 
> However, you can NOT gain the details back you lost by overexposure.
> 
> Same for any other camera that allows to shoot in RAW and has some reserves in respect to dynamic range.



Google "Exposing to the right," or ETTR. 

Again, with the whole inaccurate info/not google searching before posting. It never ends.


----------



## fjrabon

Solarflare said:


> o hey tyler said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> mscagli1 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I've also heard about overexposure problems in the D7000. Can anyone who has a D7000 explain if it has this problem? How noticeable is it?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> It's probably favorable to overexposed slightly if you shoot in RAW. More shadow retention.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Err ... WHAT ?!?!?!?  Weird logic.
> 
> The D5100/D7000 have massive dynamic range reserves at ISO 100 (almost 14 EVs according to DXOMark). So theres a LOT of detail in the shadows that will appear if you shoot in RAW and then overexpose in the software during the JPEG conversion (or even better make HDR image out of it and dont overexpose anything).
> 
> However, you can NOT gain the details back you lost by overexposure.
> 
> Same for any other camera that allows to shoot in RAW and has some reserves in respect to dynamic range.
Click to expand...


I think you're confusing blowing out with overexposing.  Overexposing just means brighter than ideally wanted, it doesn't mean the details are gone.  Sure, you don't want to blow detail areas out, because, as you said, they're gone then.  But that's not the same as overexposing, not even close.  If you underexpose and bring up the detail in post, you introduce a _lot _of noise to the image, of the ugly digital kind.  

Now the flip side, and why I don't always love ETTR (and you can find a lot of very good arguments against ETTR), is that shots that were originally overexposed can often lose some contrast and saturation that is difficult to get back via post processing.  At the extremes, that's a trade off you're considering, which would be easier to deal with in post, removing noise, or gaining saturation and contrast?  Which is more important to the image?  

So while, yes, the D7000 has a very large dynamic range, all that dynamic range isn't created equally.  The bits toward the right tend to lose saturation and contrast if you move them back to the left, and the bits toward the left introduce a whole freaking lot of noise if you move them to the right.  

Generally the contrast and saturation effects of the right are more easily dealt with, and less noticeable to begin with, than having to brighten underexposed areas, as even with an amazing anti-noise filter you lose a lot of sharpness in fixing it.  However, for most shots this simply isn't even an issue, as there is no reason at all to underexpose or overexpose the shot to begin with.  If your scene doesn't have detail areas coming near either end of the histogram, there's no reason to underexpose or overexpose (putting aside the argument that ETTR gives the sensor more information, as there's so many arguments pro and con for that side of ETTR, that it will make your head spin, bottom line from what I've read, there are some situations where ETTR helps, some that it perhaps hurts and most in which it does neither, and it always lengthens post time).


----------



## mscagli1

So if I understand correctly, as long as you don't lose data off the end of the histogram, overexposure can be corrected in post-processing without too many problems...? Like I said, I'm still new and constantly learning. I never even thought about that kind of stuff with my point and shoot.

I've handled both bodies and I think the D7000 feels better to me, mostly because of the metal body. I'm pretty much decided on the D7000, so I'm just looking at lens situations. Is the kit lens good for the price, or is there a similar alternative? I was also looking at the 50mm 1.8 or 35mm 1.8. I'll probably look at some other threads, too. Thanks to everyone who has helped out!


----------



## KmH

mscagli1 said:


> So if I understand correctly, as long as you don't lose data off the end of the histogram, overexposure can be corrected in post-processing without too many problems...?


It depends on several factors.

#1 What file type?
#2 What software type is being used to edit the photo?
#3 How much are any of the 3 RGB color channnels overexposed?

If the overexposure has resulted in 100% saturation of any of the 3 RGB color channels, overexposure recovery may be problematic.

If the file is a Raw or TIFF file type some recovery may be possible. If the file type is JPEG some recovery may be possible but it will be substantially less than the recovery possible with a Raw of TIFF file.

If all 3 color channels are 'blown', or maxed out, no exposure recovery is possible regardless the software used. If only 2 of the 3 color channels are blown, a little bit of the lost detail can be recovered if a parametric editing application is used. If only 1 of the 3 color channels is blown, most of the detail can be recovered using a parametric editing application.
http://wwwimages.adobe.com/www.adob...ly/prophotographer/pdfs/pscs3_renderprint.pdf

http://wwwimages.adobe.com/www.adobe.com/content/dam/Adobe/en/products/photoshop/pdfs/linear_gamma.pdf


----------



## Alan92RTTT

I unintentionally tested the "ETTR" limitis of my D5000 a few weeks ago. I had been shooting at night and had the ISO at 3200. The following day I forgot to reset the ISO.....

I downloaded the pics into lightroom and while some were a loss I am getting usable and marginal shots back from more than I would have expected.  I may make a before / after thread.


----------



## mscagli1

Just got home with my new D7000 kit! 
If anyone has any tips, please share! If not, thanks to anyone who helped out!


----------



## photographyfan

I know of several people who are very happy with the D5100, and many others who say the D7000 is it.  I think which one of these is best for you depends on what exactly you are looking for.  You can take a look at d5100 vs d7000 for a clear tabular comparison of various features.  Also, by the way, the D7000 appears to be on sale at Amazon at this time. The camera by itself (without a lens) is available for under a thousand dollars, for only $996.95.  In addition, there are some special promotions offered, which include a 2% back in rewards, and a free 16GB SanDisk memory card.  There is also a 24 month special financing offer available. Sounds like a great deal! So if you are leaning towards the D7000, this is not a bad time to buy it - Amazon.com: Nikon D7000 16.2MP DX-Format CMOS Digital SLR with 3.0-Inch LCD (Body Only): Camera & Photo


----------



## DrHarmony

I have been reading threads for two weeks trying to make this same decision. 
One important thing to take into consideration is the size and weight of the two. 
I have large hands and the d5100 was just too small for me. I returned it after one night of taking it out on the town.
I went back and purchased the d7000. What a huge difference in my hand. I am not regretting paying the extra dollars so far. 
Humming and hawing about these two cameras if you have the money is pointless when you get these two beside each other in person.
I wish I had reached over and picked up the D7000 when I was in the store originally for it would have saved me the hassle of a return.


----------



## IByte

mscagli1 said:


> I've also heard about overexposure problems in the D7000. Can anyone who has a D7000 explain if it has this problem? How noticeable is it?



I have a D7k, and trust me 99% is user error.  With that said, my percentage is going down lol.


----------



## CaptainNapalm

This is a no brainer.  Get the D7000.  At the time when I bought my D5100 a year ago I was convinced that this was the perfect camera for me, unfortunately I outgrew it in a few months and moved onto the D7000 which I'm really happy with now.  Go for the D7000, you'll appreciate all the extras it has to offer over the D5100.


----------



## cgipson1

D7000.. you can't go wrong with it. Far superior in functionality!


----------

