# Buyers Remorse D5100



## Ballistics (Jun 16, 2011)

Last Thursday I purchased my D5100 and while I love this camera... based on my research I have come to the conclusion that the D7000 is a more cost efficient  purchase. I payed $930 after tax for my D5100, where the D7000 would have been $1466 after tax. So for the extra $536 I get a better lens, and a better camera which I feel like I won't grow out of for a long time. Plus the fact that the body has an AF Motor giving me the ability to buy cheaper lenses or used ones with out focus motors making it more cost efficient (to my knowledge anyway). Having said that I do need your help on making this decision.

Should I return the D5100 for the D7000?
Is the 18-105mm lens a complete replacement of the 18-55mm?
Does the lack of HDR in the D7000 make a difference?

-Or-

Should I just stick with my D5100?
Would I even notice the difference in cameras? 

I am taking photography classes in college that are dedicated to Photography Majors this coming fall and spring (Majoring in Comp Science) which is why I am thinking this way. I figure if I am going to learn all about the camera and how to use it maybe I should buy something that I won't grow out of.

*Edit: I purchased the D7000 body. *


----------



## ImKosher (Jun 16, 2011)

The camera is expensive cause it's hot off the press.  I just purchased the D5000 which was only $600.  The functionality was the same and i felt I could sacrifice the steep price for the older model.  If your willing to dish out an extra $500 to $600 I would just get the D7000.


----------



## Ballistics (Jun 16, 2011)

ImKosher said:


> The camera is expensive cause it's hot off the press.  I just purchased the D5000 which was only $600.  The functionality was the same and i felt I could sacrifice the steep price for the older model.  If your willing to dish out an extra $500 to $600 I would just get the D7000.



Is it a worthy upgrade though? I want something that I won't outgrow for years. It doesn't have to be the D7000 either.


----------



## mrpink (Jun 16, 2011)

Get the D7k.  It is well worth the $$.





p!nK


----------



## 2WheelPhoto (Jun 16, 2011)

I just sold my D5000 for the D7000. Although I enjoyed my D5000, my new camera has better handling of low light, off-cam flash control, has the auto focus motor, 2 card slots, a battery that lasts forever, better viewfinder, bigger/clearer viewing screen, and a host of other stuff I enjoy.  Plus instead of being lost in menu's there are button features and an LCD on top. I doubt you will regret the step up.

On a side note, I didn't buy the kit lens I can't comment on it. I did sell my 18-55mm with my D5000.


----------



## Ballistics (Jun 16, 2011)

mrpink said:


> Get the D7k.  It is well worth the $$.



I'm figuring with the focus motor alone and the better lens it is worth the $530.


----------



## Vtec44 (Jun 16, 2011)

Four major points why I picked the D7000 over D5100.  

1.  100% view finder.
2.  Auto-focus motor (some of my lenses don't have focus motor).
3.  Flash commander function.
4. Two SD card slots.

However, the D90 is closer to the D7000 and you can get it for cheaper.


----------



## Ballistics (Jun 16, 2011)

2WheelPhoto said:


> I just sold my D5000 for the D7000. Although I enjoyed my D5000, my new camera has better handling of low light, off-cam flash control, has the auto focus motor, 2 card slots, a battery that lasts forever, better viewfinder, bigger/clearer viewing screen, and a host of other stuff I enjoy.  Plus instead of being lost in menu's there are button features and an LCD on top. I doubt you will regret the step up.
> 
> On a side note, I didn't buy the kit lens I can't comment on it. I did sell my 18-55mm with my D5000.



Which lens did you pick up?


----------



## Ballistics (Jun 16, 2011)

Vtec44 said:


> Three major points why I picked the D7000 over D5100.
> 
> 1.  100% view finder.
> 2.  Auto-focus motor (some of my lenses don't have focus motor).
> ...



The D90 body is only 800, should I have bought the D90 over the D5100?


----------



## Vtec44 (Jun 16, 2011)

Ballistics said:


> Vtec44 said:
> 
> 
> > Three major points why I picked the D7000 over D5100.
> ...



Then you'll lose the 100% view finder and it has only 1 SD card slot, among other features. So you'll have to decide for yourself if that's good enough.


----------



## NikonME (Jun 16, 2011)

Ballistics said:


> mrpink said:
> 
> 
> > Get the D7k.  It is well worth the $$.
> ...



Maybe you should go to a camera shop and get a D7000 in your hands and see how it feels. In the end, the D7000 is obviously a better camera. Some stores will give you 15 to 30 days to return your camera. So return yours, get a D7000. You can always return the D7000 if your not happy with it.

The D5100 is all I need. I am happy with it. If I decide a few years down the road to get the D7000, or maybe D7100 , I will just give the D5100 to my wife or resell it. DSLRs seem to hold their value pretty good.


----------



## ImKosher (Jun 16, 2011)

It would be nice if I could have gotten the d7000.  I'm broke so I have to start somewhere, and that's the d5000....I'll have my pro level in time....


----------



## sanderso (Jun 16, 2011)

Ballistics said:


> 2WheelPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > I just sold my D5000 for the D7000. Although I enjoyed my D5000, my new camera has better handling of low light, off-cam flash control, has the auto focus motor, 2 card slots, a battery that lasts forever, better viewfinder, bigger/clearer viewing screen, and a host of other stuff I enjoy.  Plus instead of being lost in menu's there are button features and an LCD on top. I doubt you will regret the step up.
> ...



I have and use the kit lens.  I find it's a very convenient walking around lens and it nicely fills a gap in my other glass.  That said, there is a lot of distortion in horizon shots taken at 18mm.  Without Lightroom to correct it, I couldn't recommend the lens.  

The D7000 body has been terrific and am a very happy camper.  I upgraded from a D70s.


----------



## Ballistics (Jun 16, 2011)

sanderso said:


> Ballistics said:
> 
> 
> > 2WheelPhoto said:
> ...



Is the 18-105mm lens a complete replacement of the 18-55mm?


----------



## sanderso (Jun 16, 2011)

Ballistics said:


> sanderso said:
> 
> 
> > Ballistics said:
> ...



Can't speak to the 18-55.  For me, I like shooting more stuff at 105, so if I didn't have the kit lens, I'd resort to pulling out the 70-300 before grabbing an 18-55.


----------



## Ballistics (Jun 16, 2011)

Don't get me wrong, I don't think the D5100 is a bad camera at all. In fact I think it is awesome. BUT price wise, it isn't cost effective. For example, the 50mm 1.8G is $220 while the 50mm 1.8D is $130. After I buy 2 AF-S lenses, I am already in the D7000 territory. I think I am going to go with the D7000.


----------



## adversus (Jun 16, 2011)

I sold my D5000 on Craigslist and bought a D7000 body only.  I think the D7k is Nikon's finest camera that covers a good range from serious hobbyist to professional (I've seen pro-shots with the D7k, as a tool it's just as capable).  If you get one, aside from jumping to full frame I imagine it will last you a long, long time.


----------



## NikonME (Jun 16, 2011)

Seems like a good plan. Like I said, you can always return it if you're not satisfied.


----------



## Netskimmer (Jun 16, 2011)

I originally bought the D5100 w/kit lens but after having it for about a month I returned it and ordered the D7k (body only) and my Tamron 17-50mm. I like the handling and button layout of the D7k better and haven't regretted my decision. The only things I miss would be the built in HDR witch is a minor thing because software is supoosed to do it better and the flip out screen.


----------



## NikonME (Jun 16, 2011)

I shoot over my head at times, so the flip out screen was a purchasing factor for me. Hopefully if/when they update the D7000 (D7100?) they will add that feature.


----------



## BJF (Jun 16, 2011)

If you have no problem with the budget, return D5100 and go for D7000. Without built-in motor, you will find limit on lenses use with your D5100. Here you are two links for your reference.

Nikon D5100

Nikon D7000


----------



## Ballistics (Jun 16, 2011)

I appreciate everyones insight and non trolling point of views. Thank you all.


----------



## Ballistics (Jun 16, 2011)

The lack of a flip out screen definitely hurts. I really like it.


----------



## Derrel (Jun 16, 2011)

My wife bought a used D90 for $550 about two months ago...seems like a lot of camera for five bills...


----------



## orb9220 (Jun 16, 2011)

Yep if D7000 really stretching the wallet then a D90 is still a fine performer. And one that a person to grow into instead of out of like with the entry level cameras.
.


----------



## Raian-san (Jun 16, 2011)

I would go with the D7000, it's something you wont' have to upgrade for a long time. If not I rather have the D90 over the D5100 and put the extra money on some lens or flash.


----------



## KmH (Jun 16, 2011)

Ballistics said:


> Plus the fact that the body has an AF Motor giving me the ability to buy cheaper lenses or used ones with out focus motors making it more cost efficient (to my knowledge anyway).


Here is a list of 64 Nikon, 51 Sigma, 15 Tamron, and 2 Tokina lenses that will AF on a D5100: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Nikon_compatible_lenses_with_integrated_autofocus-motor

All AF lenses without focus motors in them are not cheap. There are a couple, like the AF 50 mm f/1.8D - nifty fifty, and the poor image quality AF 70-300 mm, but only a couple.

Here are some AF lenses:

$744 - Nikon 24-85mm f/2.8-4.0D IF AF Zoom Nikkor Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras 

$509 - Nikon 85mm f/1.8D AF Nikkor Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras 

$1339 - Nikon 85mm f/1.4D AF Nikkor Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras

$1224 - Nikon 80-200mm f/2.8D ED AF Zoom Nikkor Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras 

$370 - Nikon 35mm f/2D AF Wide-Angle Nikkor Lens for Nikon 35mm and Digital SLR Cameras

$389 - [/url=Nikon]Amazon.com: Nikon 24mm f/2.8D AF Nikkor Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras: Camera & Photo 24mm f/2.8D AF Nikkor Lens for Nikon Digital SLR Cameras[/url] 

Check out all of the lenses Nikon currently offers here: Camera Lenses | All NIKKOR Lenses for Digital SLR Cameras| Nikon


----------



## Ballistics (Jun 16, 2011)

KmH said:


> Ballistics said:
> 
> 
> > Plus the fact that the body has an AF Motor giving me the ability to buy cheaper lenses or used ones with out focus motors making it more cost efficient (to my knowledge anyway).
> ...



I have to say, you are by far one of my favorite posters on this board. I don't want to sound like a kiss ass, but your posts are generally informative, to the point and elitist free. 

I know lenses are expensive, but for the few days of researching I feel safe to assume that a body with an AF motor equates to a cheaper cost of ownership. Especially since there are more used lenses out there without AF motors built in. Feel free to correct me, but this is what I have taken away from what I have seen.


----------



## Kerbouchard (Jun 16, 2011)

Ballistics said:


> Don't get me wrong, I don't think the D5100 is a bad camera at all. In fact I think it is awesome. BUT price wise, it isn't cost effective. For example, the 50mm 1.8G is $220 while the 50mm 1.8D is $130. After I buy 2 AF-S lenses, I am already in the D7000 territory. I think I am going to go with the D7000.


Hmm, where have I heard that before?


----------



## Ballistics (Jun 16, 2011)

Kerbouchard said:


> Ballistics said:
> 
> 
> > Don't get me wrong, I don't think the D5100 is a bad camera at all. In fact I think it is awesome. BUT price wise, it isn't cost effective. For example, the 50mm 1.8G is $220 while the 50mm 1.8D is $130. After I buy 2 AF-S lenses, I am already in the D7000 territory. I think I am going to go with the D7000.
> ...



I know I know. But Originally my budget was a lot smaller, and as of recent started to grow. I guess I can thank my federal grant of $7300 for the school year =]


----------



## Kerbouchard (Jun 16, 2011)

If I were you, I would still pick up the D90 with kit lens(18-105), a 50mm 1.8, an SB600 and maybe a 5 in 1 reflector.  That would be a great kit to learn on until you find where you really want your bells and whistles to be.

Oh, and photography budgets have a way of doing that...growing way larger than we had ever thought possible.


----------



## Raian-san (Jun 16, 2011)

Ballistics said:


> Kerbouchard said:
> 
> 
> > Ballistics said:
> ...



Then what are you waiting for? Order the D7k right now! Lol j/p

I remember I was in your shoe last year when I bought the D5000, and regretted it. Returned it and took a hundred dollar hit. Found a brand new D90 kit for $960 on craigslist. At the time, the D90 was $1200 for the kit everywhere else. I was much happier with the D90. I'm the type that always find an excuse to upgrade and I know for sure with the D5000, I would want something more later on. 

GL with your decision.


----------



## Ballistics (Jun 16, 2011)

Kerbouchard said:


> If I were you, I would still pick up the D90 with kit lens(18-105), a 50mm 1.8, an SB600 and maybe a 5 in 1 reflector.  That would be a great kit to learn on until you find where you really want your bells and whistles to be.
> 
> Oh, and photography budgets have a way of doing that...growing way larger than we had ever thought possible.



Im going with the D7000 only because I am going through best buy. 18 mo interest free is pretty nice =]


----------



## Kstorm (Jun 16, 2011)

I went the Best Buy way as well, and haven't regretted getting the D7000 at all!


----------



## Ballistics (Jun 16, 2011)

Kstorm said:


> I went the Best Buy way as well, and haven't regretted getting the D7000 at all!



I cant see how you could lol. Fortunately Best Buy gives a 10% military discount on non sale items


----------



## Ballistics (Jun 17, 2011)

Question for everyone:

Should I buy the body only and maybe a fixed focal lens? Or is the 18-105mm worth the extra 300?


----------



## Kerbouchard (Jun 17, 2011)

The 18-105 is a pretty versatile lens, but for the same price, you could pick up a used 35-70 2.8 and I think that would be the better buy.


----------



## Ballistics (Jun 17, 2011)

Kerbouchard said:


> The 18-105 is a pretty versatile lens, but for the same price, you could pick up a used 35-70 2.8 and I think that would be the better buy.



Now I ask the question, are all lense equal at the same millimeter taking away the factor of the aperture? Is the 70mm the same on the 35-70 as it is 18-105mm?


----------



## Kerbouchard (Jun 17, 2011)

It is the same field of view, but contrast, distortion, colors, sharpness, etc are all different from model to model, and sometimes from lens to lens.


----------



## Ballistics (Jun 18, 2011)

Kerbouchard said:


> It is the same field of view, but contrast, distortion, colors, sharpness, etc are all different from model to model, and sometimes from lens to lens.



I gotcha.


----------



## Nikon_Dude (Jun 18, 2011)

I bought a d5000, that was all I could afford. I regret not saving some more and getting the d90. Getting the 80-200mm f2.8 over the 70-200mm f2.8 alone saves a bundle of money.


----------



## joealcantar (Jun 18, 2011)

Basically like anything else , if it does not feel right don't do it.  Get your camera that you want before it is too late to return it.  If you buy it at the same place for the most part they will wave any restocking fee if any etc. 
-
Shoot well, Joe


----------



## Ballistics (Jun 18, 2011)

I think I am going to go with buying an 18-55mm VR AND a 55mm-200mm lens VR along with the D7000 body. Does that sound sensible?

It comes out to be $10 more then just the 18-105 lens.


----------



## orb9220 (Jun 18, 2011)

It is a good compromise if wanting to cover the maximum range to 200mm and a good basic kit.
My 55-200vr is my choice for main walkabout lens the last year with over 1700+ images and is the Best Bang for the Buck zoom in that range. Tho later on may want to upgrade to a more capable and faster zoom. Or you may find you prefer the lower ranges and seldom shoot above 100mm. Then you have minimal investment on a lens range that doesn't fit your needs.

So in a nutshell yep a good two lens setup that will allow you to shoot and learn and define your style and needs. And don't hesitate to add a 35mm or 50mm f1.8 to your kit. As they are cheap and everyone should have one or two in their kit. As will open even more possibilities and help you define your style of shooting. 
.


----------



## Ballistics (Jun 18, 2011)

orb9220 said:


> It is a good compromise if wanting to cover the maximum range to 200mm and a good basic kit.
> My 55-200vr is my choice for main walkabout lens the last year with over 1700+ images and is the Best Bang for the Buck zoom in that range. Tho later on may want to upgrade to a more capable and faster zoom. Or you may find you prefer the lower ranges and seldom shoot above 100mm. Then you have minimal investment on a lens range that doesn't fit your needs.
> 
> So in a nutshell yep a good two lens setup that will allow you to shoot and learn and define your style and needs. And don't hesitate to add a 35mm or 50mm f1.8 to your kit. As they are cheap and everyone should have one or two in their kit. As will open even more possibilities and help you define your style of shooting.
> .



I actually wrote that I was going to be picking up a 50mm 1.8D in the fall but then decided to omit that. They are only $99 refurbished and I feel like it is a must have according to my research.


----------



## orb9220 (Jun 18, 2011)

Yep the 50mm is a good addition tho find a tad tight for indoor or cramp spaces and a 35mm may be more usable depending on need and style. Tho a tad more spendy.
.


----------



## Ballistics (Jun 20, 2011)

Where can I find a list of AF-D lenses?


----------



## 2WheelPhoto (Jun 20, 2011)

google will give you many lists of NIKKOR lens of every kind Nikon Lenses


----------



## jaomul (Jun 20, 2011)

Just bear in mind there is always a better camera than the one you have (well we all think that way anyhow). Will you be buying lenses without motors, if not could you trade up just your lens for the bigger kit. I read the equipment section a bit, but think once you decide and buy a camera or lens reviews of newer more expensive kit only frustrates.


----------



## SabrinaO (Jun 20, 2011)

Is the d7000 full frame??


----------



## Kerbouchard (Jun 20, 2011)

SabrinaO said:


> Is the d7000 full frame??


 No.


----------



## NikonME (Jun 21, 2011)

They can't release the D7100 fast enough for me.  - I want a D7000 with HDR and flip out lcd.


----------



## Netskimmer (Jun 21, 2011)

NikonME said:


> They can't release the D7100 fast enough for me.  - I want a D7000 with HDR and flip out lcd.



These are the only two features that I miss about the D5100.


----------



## NikonME (Jun 23, 2011)

Netskimmer said:


> NikonME said:
> 
> 
> > They can't release the D7100 fast enough for me.  - I want a D7000 with HDR and flip out lcd.
> ...



That's why I am going to use the D5100 until they come put with the D7100.


----------



## Kerbouchard (Jun 23, 2011)

NikonME said:


> They can't release the D7100 fast enough for me.  - I want a D7000 with HDR and flip out lcd.



Strangely enough, I wouldn't buy a DSLR with a flip out lcd.  Not only is not a feature I need, but it would be a deal breaker for me.  Just the thought of my new camera bumping up against something and the LCD flying off my camera is enough for me to pass on any offerings from Nikon that have that 'feature'.


----------



## Netskimmer (Jun 23, 2011)

If I remember correctly the LCD was attached well. I think you could also flip the screen around and 'close' it so I looks just like the fixed screen on other cameras. Another cool feature of the flip out screen is that if it is closed while the screen is facing you the back acts as a shield to protect the screen.


----------



## Kerbouchard (Jun 23, 2011)

Netskimmer said:


> If I remember correctly the LCD was attached well. I think you could also flip the screen around and 'close' it so I looks just like the fixed screen on other cameras. Another cool feature of the flip out screen is that if it is closed while the screen is facing you the back acts as a shield to protect the screen.


I know...and I've actually read that the ability to flip it around so that the LCD is not visible can actually protect the screen in harsh circumstances.  I won't say it is rational of me to be scared of the flip out screen, but I am, and I go by the old Engineering logic...any part that moves is a part that can break.


----------



## Netskimmer (Jun 23, 2011)

Kerbouchard said:


> Netskimmer said:
> 
> 
> > If I remember correctly the LCD was attached well. I think you could also flip the screen around and 'close' it so I looks just like the fixed screen on other cameras. Another cool feature of the flip out screen is that if it is closed while the screen is facing you the back acts as a shield to protect the screen.
> ...



Sounds like fair logic to me. I only use my LCD for navigating the settings/menus. I think I have only taken 1 or 2 shots with it. I find the more familiar I become with the viewfinder HUD and the little digital control panel, the less interested I am in the live view function, though I'm sure it has it's advantages.


----------



## o hey tyler (Jun 23, 2011)

NikonME said:


> Netskimmer said:
> 
> 
> > NikonME said:
> ...



You know that you can do HDR photography without it "built in" to the camera, right? All you have to do is change the exposure manually while on a tripod and take your shots.


----------



## NikonME (Jun 23, 2011)

o hey tyler said:


> You know that you can do HDR photography without it "built in" to the camera, right? All you have to do is change the exposure manually while on a tripod and take your shots.



Yes, I did know that. But the auto HDR can be set and forgotten. I do appreciate the tip though.


----------



## 2WheelPhoto (Jun 23, 2011)

NikonME said:


> They can't release the D7100 fast enough for me.  - I want a D7000 with HDR and flip out lcd.



My instructor said the software for *HDR software that comes in cams *is next to worthless compared to PP HDR software It has no flexibility for controls and its a gimmicky seller to the point and shoot crowd.  Perhaps she's mistaken though, maybe someone can chime in.


----------



## NikonME (Jun 23, 2011)

Kerbouchard said:


> I go by the old Engineering logic...any part that moves is a part that can break.



My grandfather used to say the same thing. "The more moving parts, the more risk of failure", but if I used that logic I wouldn't use a camera at all.. or my laptop.. and I wouldn't dare get near an automobile. You already stated it was an unlogical fear, and that it was just your preference, so I do respect your opinion.

For me, I don't use the flip out screen much. I do love that I can flip my screen around and leave it protected. This is how my camera is stored and carried. There are times, like two days ago, when I wanted to get a photograph, but I needed to lay on the ground and reach out around a small tree to get the shot. The tree was on the very edge of a ledge with a 100ft drop, so I could not just walk around it. There are also times when I wanted to take a scenic shot or an animal in the wild, but I have had to shoot over some brush or shrubs. It is indeed a handy feature. When you are not using it, you close it. Even if you close it so the screen is facing you. It is nestled into a framed ridge. It's not going to move or break unless you are running through the woods or drop it on the ground with the screen open. It's a lot more solid than you would expect.


----------



## NikonME (Jun 23, 2011)

2WheelPhoto said:


> My instructor said the software for *HDR software that comes in cams *is next to worthless compared to PP HDR software It has no flexibility for controls and its a gimmicky seller to the point and shoot crowd.  Perhaps she's mistaken though, maybe someone can chime in.



With all due respect, I think your instructor is mistaken.

HDR mode automatically captures two shots, with the first intentionally underexposed by anywhere from 0.5 to 1.5 stops, and the second overexposed by the same amount, for a total difference between shots of 1 to 3 EV. Mid-tone information is used from both images, while highlight information is taken from the underexposed shot, and shadow information from the overexposed shot. The result is saved as a single image with increased dynamic range.


----------



## 2WheelPhoto (Jun 23, 2011)

NikonME said:


> 2WheelPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > My instructor said the software for *HDR software that comes in cams *is next to worthless compared to PP HDR software It has no flexibility for controls and its a gimmicky seller to the point and shoot crowd.  Perhaps she's mistaken though, maybe someone can chime in.
> ...



Yea, thats as far as software in the cams go that have the built in is the point. Not much control over how much and tone mapping, exposure, mid point, etc etc from the cam itself. I set the D7000 up to shoot my 3 bracketed (for HDR shots) then post process them into HDR on a computer. The D7000 can be set up to shoot 9 total with the options buttons.


----------



## NikonME (Jun 23, 2011)

The point of the onboard HDR is that every photograph I take has more dynamic range, which means I have more option/control in PP, for each and every photo I take. How is that a gimmick?


----------



## 2WheelPhoto (Jun 23, 2011)

One source tells me it uses only two total pics, another tells me its frenching with the ISO values too, etc.  If you shoot 9 bracketed shots out of that same cam and deliver them to Photomatix you'll have over 100 times the flexibility as the menus on that cam can deliver for higher dynamic range.  Isn't that obvious?


----------



## Ballistics (Jun 23, 2011)

I just ordered my D7000 body yesterday from BB. I got it for $1055 before tax. Its on back order so I have to wait a couple weeks, but that's ok because I wont be picking up lenses until then.  A portion of my book stipend came and after I bought my books I had left over exactly what I needed to upgrade to the D7000.

I'm going to start off with the 18-55mm VR, the 55-200mm VR, and a 50mm 1.8D. As for flashes, I am clueless... so I need to do a ton of research on that. Is there any other accessory that is necessary that I should know about?


----------



## 2WheelPhoto (Jun 23, 2011)

Ballistics said:


> I just ordered my D7000 body yesterday from BB. I got it for $1055 before tax. Its on back order so I have to wait a couple weeks, but that's ok because I wont be picking up lenses until then.  A portion of my book stipend came and after I bought my books I had left over exactly what I needed to upgrade to the D7000.
> 
> I'm going to start off with the 18-55mm VR, the 55-200mm VR, and a 50mm 1.8D. As for flashes, I am clueless... so I need to do a ton of research on that. Is there any other accessory that is necessary that I should know about?



Congrats!  I use a SB-600 flash, the new version is SB-700.   The D7000 will fire flashes remotely (OCF) from its pop up flash. But I found thats not a good solution in sun for fill flash and stuff. After some advice from others on the forum I ended up buying some pocket wizards a guy was selling on the cheap on craigslist, that checkmated the issue.


----------



## NikonME (Jun 23, 2011)

2WheelPhoto said:


> One source tells me it uses only two total pics, another tells me its frenching with the ISO values too, etc.  If you shoot 9 bracketed shots out of that same cam and deliver them to Photomatix you'll have over 100 times the flexibility as the menus on that cam can deliver for higher dynamic range.  Isn't that obvious?



The point I am making is that the onboard HDR works fine for what anyone who is buying a beginner level Nikon will need. It's automatic and doesn't require any extra effort. You just take a picture and you automagically have more dynamic range. To call that a gimmick because there are other, possibly better ways of doing it, is like saying a chevy car is a gimmick because it's not a BMW.

With that said, the onboard HDR is not the selling factor that makes me want to wait for the D7100, it's the flip lcd. The HDR is just another feature I will use if it has it, which is very likely that it will.


----------



## NikonME (Jun 23, 2011)

Ballistics said:


> I just ordered my D7000 body yesterday from BB. I got it for $1055 before tax. Its on back order so I have to wait a couple weeks, but that's ok because I wont be picking up lenses until then.  A portion of my book stipend came and after I bought my books I had left over exactly what I needed to upgrade to the D7000.
> 
> I'm going to start off with the 18-55mm VR, the 55-200mm VR, and a 50mm 1.8D. As for flashes, I am clueless... so I need to do a ton of research on that. Is there any other accessory that is necessary that I should know about?



Awesome man. I'd check on the 55-200mm VR. I read that it was a better choice to get the 55-300mm VR. I know I like mine.


----------



## orb9220 (Jun 23, 2011)

NikonME said:


> Ballistics said:
> 
> 
> > I just ordered my D7000 body yesterday from BB. I got it for $1055 before tax. Its on back order so I have to wait a couple weeks, but that's ok because I wont be picking up lenses until then.  A portion of my book stipend came and after I bought my books I had left over exactly what I needed to upgrade to the D7000.
> ...



Well the 55-300vr may be the better choice for needing 300mm and paying another $115 more for it. But at under $200 and being a lot smaller,lighter and compact the 55-200vr is my great walk around lens and covers 90% of my walkabout general shooting needs.

But if wanting the 300mm for wildlife and sports,etc.. I would opt for the 70-300vr as has faster AF and more consistent lock than the 55-300vr tho optically it's a great zoom but has a tendency to AF slower and more hunting focus.
.


----------



## NikonME (Jun 23, 2011)

orb9220 said:


> Well the 55-300vr may be the better choice for needing 300mm and paying another $115 more for it. But at under $200 and being a lot smaller,lighter and compact the 55-200vr is my great walk around lens and covers 90% of my walkabout general shooting needs.
> 
> But if wanting the 300mm for wildlife and sports,etc.. I would opt for the 70-300vr as has faster AF and more consistent lock than the 55-300vr tho optically it's a great zoom but has a tendency to AF slower and more hunting focus.
> .



Don't get me wrong. I am not saying anything bad about the 55-200mm. I never tried it. I was just stating I saw a lot of bad reviews when I was looking, so I purchased the 55-300mm and it works great for me.


----------



## Ballistics (Jun 23, 2011)

Im buying all refurbished lenses... The 55-200mm VR is only 150. But I will look into the 55-300mm VR...


----------



## 2WheelPhoto (Jun 23, 2011)

Ballistics said:


> Im buying all refurbished lenses... The 55-200mm VR is only 150. But I will look into the 55-300mm VR...



I bought this 55-200 used.  Not that these are great pics or anything close to great but you can see the clarity. I took them recently with a kenko extension tube and the lens:


----------



## djacobox372 (Jun 23, 2011)

I'd return it and buy the d7000.The lens options on the d7000 will open up a world of possibilities, it's not just the af motor, you can also use nikons older, and amazing, manual focus glass on the d7000 with full metering.


----------



## 2WheelPhoto (Jun 23, 2011)

djacobox372 said:


> I'd* return it and buy the d7000*.The lens options on the d7000 will open up a world of possibilities, it's not just the af motor, you can also use nikons older, and amazing, manual focus glass on the d7000 with full metering.


----------



## Ballistics (Jun 24, 2011)

djacobox372 said:


> I'd return it and buy the d7000.The lens options on the d7000 will open up a world of possibilities, it's not just the af motor, you can also use nikons older, and amazing, manual focus glass on the d7000 with full metering.



I already bought it lol.


----------



## mark755 (Jun 25, 2011)

I'm in the same boat as the OP. I bought my D5100 a couple of weeks ago and so far, I love it. I also bought the 70-300VR (which was discounted by $200 since I bought it together w/ the camera. I also bought a 16-85mm and a 35mm 1.8 a week later (both are much better than the kit lens).

This is my first dslr and I'm also wondering if I should return the D5100 and get the D7000. The camera will be used for family and travel photos and IQ is a priority. The D5100 seemed like the ideal choice since it has the IQ of the D7000. I'd be willing to pay a little more for the 7000, but only if there's a real benefit. Dslrs seem to have a a useful life of, maybe, 4-5 years before you'll want to upgrade due to tech advances (film slr's used to last forever). I always buy inexpensive laptops for this reason and this logic also applies to dslrs, to a degree. 

In comparing the two. the D5100's lighter weight and smaller body is good for travel, and the swing out display can be useful.

The D7000's larger viewfinder would be great. 

More autofocus points and faster burst speed are probably moderately useful at best.

AF fine tuning - could be useful if any lenses are miscalibrated (my current lenses seem fine).

Extra buttons. This would be nice. OTOH, I'm already used to the 5100's settings and can change things pretty quickly. I have the Fn set to ISO, which is just like having an ISO button.

Built in AF motor - I doubt I'll be buying more lenses, except for maybe a Tokina 11-16 or 12-24. So, this would only be of value only if I get the 11-16, or another ultra wide with no motor of its own.

Magnesium body and weather sealing - nice to have, but the likely benefit, given my needs, is just having a camera that feels like it's of higher quality, which it is.

Flash commander capability - not of much use to me, as most of my photos are outdoors or can be handled by a single camera-mounted speedlight.

So, right now, I'm thinking it makes sense to stick with the 5100. If I were an aspiring pro, sure, the 7000 is the way to go. For an average user though, there's less of a benefit. I don't want to "cheap out" and regret it later. If I've missed any good reasons to go for the 7000, please chime in.


----------



## Ballistics (Jun 25, 2011)

mark755 said:


> I'm in the same boat as the OP. I bought my D5100 a couple of weeks ago and so far, I love it. I also bought the 70-300VR (which was discounted by $200 since I bought it together w/ the camera. I also bought a 16-85mm and a 35mm 1.8 a week later (both are much better than the kit lens).
> 
> This is my first dslr and I'm also wondering if I should return the D5100 and get the D7000. The camera will be used for family and travel photos and IQ is a priority. The D5100 seemed like the ideal choice since it has the IQ of the D7000. I'd be willing to pay a little more for the 7000, but only if there's a real benefit. Dslrs seem to have a a useful life of, maybe, 4-5 years before you'll want to upgrade due to tech advances (film slr's used to last forever). I always buy inexpensive laptops for this reason and this logic also applies to dslrs, to a degree.
> 
> ...



Since you already bought lenses, obviously there is no point in buying a D7000. 

But Heres why I returned the D5100 and bought a D7000.

I paid 943 for the D5100 kit.  (On sale so Bestbuy coupon I had would not work)
I paid 1147 for the D7000 body. (Bestbuy coupon)

After a 50mm 1.8D (refurbished) The D7000 comes to 1255. 
After a 50mm 1.8G(refurb not available) the D5100 comes to 1190.
After an 18-55mm (refurb) the D7000 comes to 1350.

So just with the AF motor in the body alone... The D7000 cost me only 160 more. (prices are after tax where applicable).

So for $200 +/- more depending on your area, the D7000 not only is the better option, but makes the D5100 seem over priced.  

The size comparison is negligible to me. But this is relative to the person. The extra 200 grams didn't really make a difference to me nor did the extra 2cm.

Obviously the D7000 isn't the camera _for you_. But it seems like you minimize and oversimplify the usefulness of the options the upgraded camera has, to make your choice make more sense. I don't know, just seems a bit biased to me. I will say however, that maybe a D3100 seems like it would have suited you just as fine and you could save a lot of money. 

I am not an aspiring pro, and what the D7000 does is what I need. My 2 cents.


----------



## orb9220 (Jun 25, 2011)

_"Obviously the D7000 isn't the camera for you. But it seems like  you minimize and oversimplify the usefulness of the options the upgraded  camera has, to make your choice make more sense."_

+1 to Ballistics! as that is the impression I got from it. And for me the found the exact opposite. As Bigger & Brighter Viewfinder makes it easier to compose a shot. Now with dedicated controls can make changes on the fly without my eye leaving the viewfinder to have to menu dig missing the shot. And yes faster AF is more significant than credit was given for all kinds of subjects. And built in motor and metering Ai or Ais or fine-tune lenses a great feature to have. 4 years now and have had many lenses and few I foresaw when I started in photography. And grew out of my entry camera less than a year. So always recommend one to grow into instead of out of.

If it works for you mark755 and you are happy with it. Then great and hope it keeps you click'in! But for many I see them returning or selling their entry cams first year due to lack of features & controls of the more capable cameras.
.


----------



## mark755 (Jun 25, 2011)

Guys, I wasn't trying to downplay the value of the 7000's features. I just meant that those features might not be that useful to me. I just read KR's reviews of both cameras and I'm now leaning more towards the D7000, as he pointed out some of the subtleties not mentioned in other reviews. It's a good camera to grow into, even though I might not use all of the features. The bigger viewfinder, better AF system and build quality probably justify the $350 price difference. And if I ever want to get more prime lenses, the old Nikkors are superior to today's DX lenses, not to mention cheaper.

I've never read about anyone regretting buying a camera more advanced than their experience level...it's always that they outgrew a camera too quickly.


----------



## Ballistics (Jun 25, 2011)

mark755 said:


> Guys, I wasn't trying to downplay the value of the 7000's features. I just meant that those features might not be that useful to me. I just read KR's reviews of both cameras and I'm now leaning more towards the D7000, as he pointed out some of the subtleties not mentioned in other reviews. It's a good camera to grow into, even though I might not use all of the features. The bigger viewfinder, better AF system and build quality probably justify the $350 price difference. And if I ever want to get more prime lenses, the old Nikkors are superior to today's DX lenses, not to mention cheaper.
> 
> I've never read about anyone regretting buying a camera more advanced than their experience level...it's always that they outgrew a camera too quickly.



Don't get me wrong, as I have said in this thread multiple times, the D5100 is a GREAT camera. BUT, It is not priced properly IMHO. In the 2 weeks that I had it, I learned a truck load. But I also learned that I would out grow it in a matter of months.

If you arent in need of the AF system then stick with the D5100. But just for the fact that I am picking up the 50mm prime lens - makes the extra features and the AF motor beyond worth it. 1 more AF lens and the D7000 becomes cheaper to own and completely makes the D5100 obsolete.


----------



## jdag (Jun 26, 2011)

If you are having buyer's remorse today...think about how much "pain" you'll be feeling in a month (once the return period ends).  Go get the D7000!

To mark755...you'd have the D7000 with a heck of a set of lenses.

WARNING: I have a reputation for emjoying spending other peoples' money.


----------



## mark755 (Jun 26, 2011)

Thanks guys. While the 7000 is tempting. I've decided to keep my 5000. It meets my needs for the foreseeable future and I don't think I'll outgrow it within the next 3-4 years. If I do, I'll give it to a family member and upgrade to a D7200, D400 or whatever. I'll also be traveling and hiking with it and the D5100's weight and size matter more to me. I can use the money saved to buy an ultrawide or a flash.


----------



## Ballistics (Jun 27, 2011)

jdag said:


> If you are having buyer's remorse today...think about how much "pain" you'll be feeling in a month (once the return period ends).  Go get the D7000!
> 
> To mark755...you'd have the D7000 with a heck of a set of lenses.
> 
> WARNING: I have a reputation for emjoying spending other peoples' money.



Read the very bottom of the first post.


----------



## kiddingme (Jun 30, 2011)

Netskimmer said:


> If I remember correctly the LCD was attached well. I think you could also flip the screen around and 'close' it so I looks just like the fixed screen on other cameras. Another cool feature of the flip out screen is that if it is closed while the screen is facing you the back acts as a shield to protect the screen.



I saw that as well and thought it's a great idea except...my understanding is that you must go through menu options to make some setting changes, which means you must rotate the screen back around everytime you wanted to make those changes.  The menu to change settings is what makes me consider the D90 over the D5100 (don't think I can quite justify the cost of D7000 at this point, although I have done it many times in my mind!  Getting into DSLR has been the greatest budget creep I've ever experienced!)


----------



## Ballistics (Jun 30, 2011)

kiddingme said:


> Netskimmer said:
> 
> 
> > If I remember correctly the LCD was attached well. I think you could also flip the screen around and 'close' it so I looks just like the fixed screen on other cameras. Another cool feature of the flip out screen is that if it is closed while the screen is facing you the back acts as a shield to protect the screen.
> ...



I'm having difficulty understanding what you mean. Are you saying that when open, the LCD screen cannot utilize certain options? Because if so, that isn't the case at all. The LCD works the same in every angle. Also, as I have stated, once lenses come into play... the D5100 becomes the obsolete and more expensive option.


----------



## Kerbouchard (Jun 30, 2011)

I think he is saying that he likes the feature of being able to put the screen facing inwards to protect it, but not the idea of having to pull it out every time he wants to change a setting.


----------



## Ballistics (Jun 30, 2011)

Kerbouchard said:


> I think he is saying that he likes the feature of being able to put the screen facing inwards to protect it, but not the idea of having to pull it out every time he wants to change a setting.



Ohhh yeah that would be the case, _however_, you can open it like a book so you don't have to flip it. I just kept it that way for that purpose.


----------



## Crece (Aug 11, 2011)

I realize that this is an old thread but it is very relevant to me as I just purchased the D5100 at the beginning of July and ordered the D7000 last night. I am about two weeks past the return option but I finally accepted the fact that the D7000 is a better choice for me. Having said that I must emphasize that this is purely a personal preference and I love the D5100. As an advanced amateur/enthusiast it did not take long for me to realize the limitations imposed by having to delve into the menu to overide some settings, especially in bright outdoor light. My plan is to use both cameras and decide later whether to keep them both or sell the D5100. And no, this is definitely outside of my intended budget but I believe that both cameras will hold their value for the forseable future and I need to determine if there are any situations where the D5100 may be more convenient. BTW, My first camera was a flea market, screw mount Pentax 35mm and I used slide film to hone my skills so I realize the folly of trying to save few bucks especially since I do own a few older Nikon lenses. Again, I love the D5100 so I expect that I will love the D7000 even more. Its just a matter of where you are in your photographic journey and how you use or would like to use your camera. Some people just want good pictures, some want to push the limits of their equipment. I tend to fall into the later category.


----------



## Ballistics (Aug 11, 2011)

If you love the D5100, then you will be IN love with the D7000. They have the same sensor, and that is where the similarities end. The only thing that I miss from the D5100 is the atriculated screen. Some people consider that a "gimmick" while I consider it a must have. But that is something small to get over compared to what you get. Enjoy your new camera.


----------



## Netskimmer (Aug 11, 2011)

Ballistics said:


> If you love the D5100, then you will be IN love with the D7000. They have the same sensor, and that is where the similarities end. The only thing that I miss from the D5100 is the atriculated screen. Some people consider that a "gimmick" while I consider it a must have. But that is something small to get over compared to what you get. Enjoy your new camera.



I agree, I have had the D7000 for over 2 months (returned a D5100) and have not regretted my decision once.


----------



## cameleon (Aug 12, 2011)

I don't even own the D7000 and I love it!!


----------



## NikonME (Aug 12, 2011)

Ballistics said:


> If you love the D5100, then you will be IN love with the D7000. They have the same sensor, and that is where the similarities end. The only thing that I miss from the D5100 is the atriculated screen. Some people consider that a "gimmick" while I consider it a must have. But that is something small to get over compared to what you get. Enjoy your new camera.



I agree. The articulated lcd would be nice for shooting over a crowd, or to get a better shot low ground shot without having to actually get on your belly.


----------



## Mesoam (Aug 12, 2011)

great thread, I've been looking at the D7k for a while to replace my aging D50


----------



## Dun_Properly (Aug 16, 2011)

Ballistics said:


> If you love the D5100, then you will be IN love with the D7000. They have the same sensor, and that is where the similarities end. The only thing that I miss from the D5100 is the atriculated screen. Some people consider that a "gimmick" while I consider it a must have. But that is something small to get over compared to what you get. Enjoy your new camera.



Hey, I am new to the forum and this is my first post.  I am in a similar buying situation as you were and will probably pull the trigger on a D7000.  I believe in learning from OTHERS mistakes, hehe. 

Anywho, I keep seeing people mentioning the "D7100" having an articulated screen, but how will this not cause the left column of buttons to be removed?  Isn't this one of the main advantages of the D7000 over the D5100?  If this isn't an issue, then when is the 7100 slated to be announced?  I have a few months before I "need" a camera and would like to get the articulated screen with the D7000's capabilities.

Thanks in advance.


----------



## Ballistics (Aug 16, 2011)

Dun_Properly said:


> Ballistics said:
> 
> 
> > If you love the D5100, then you will be IN love with the D7000. They have the same sensor, and that is where the similarities end. The only thing that I miss from the D5100 is the atriculated screen. Some people consider that a "gimmick" while I consider it a must have. But that is something small to get over compared to what you get. Enjoy your new camera.
> ...



You will read a lot of rumors that will be based on pure speculation. I'm not an engineer, but an atriculated screen would be impossible with the current layout. Even if you have a downward atriculated screen, it could interfere with the tripod it is mounted on. The D7100 is not scheduled to be announced for sometime. The D7000 was just released 10 months ago so there probably wont be an announcement until next summer.


----------



## Dun_Properly (Aug 16, 2011)

Ballistics said:


> You will read a lot of rumors that will be based on pure speculation. I'm not an engineer, but an atriculated screen would be impossible with the current layout. Even if you have a downward atriculated screen, it could interfere with the tripod it is mounted on. The D7100 is not scheduled to be announced for sometime. The D7000 was just released 10 months ago so there probably wont be an announcement until next summer.



Thanks for the reply.  I won't wait around for it then.  

I just recently started looking into the latest camera technology, but from reading this thread I got the impression that the articulated screen was a given for the next generation of the D7000.  I was just curious how it would be laid out.


----------



## Ballistics (Aug 16, 2011)

While the atriculated screen is a nice touch, it's not a deal breaker. Especially since you can simply purchase a cheap field monitor that would be far more useful than the atriculated screen.

Amazon.com: LILLIPUT 668GL-70NP/H/Y 7" on-camera Field HD Monitor for DSLR with HDMI Ypbpr and Composite Input: Electronics


----------



## Ballistics (Aug 18, 2011)

Ballistics said:


> Dun_Properly said:
> 
> 
> > Ballistics said:
> ...



Actually, the D5000 has the downward atriculated screen so this would be the only way a D7100 would work.


----------



## Photo Lady (Dec 22, 2013)

Ballistics said:


> Don't get me wrong, I don't think the D5100 is a bad camera at all. In fact I think it is awesome. BUT price wise, it isn't cost effective. For example, the 50mm 1.8G is $220 while the 50mm 1.8D is $130. After I buy 2 AF-S lenses, I am already in the D7000 territory. I think I am going to go with the D7000.


I agree


----------

