# What do the pro's think?



## RockstarPhotography (Mar 9, 2011)

I've been looking at the d7000 for some time now.  That consumer body is really what is driving me toward another d300.  Just wondering if some of the more avid shooters on here actually think the d7000 is a pro-grade camera.  I'm not talking about full frame here, believe it or not, there are plenty of pros that don't shoot with the full frames. I am just wondering, for those of you that shoot with a 300 or 300s, if something happened to your body you have now, would you buy another 300 or go with the 7000.


----------



## Formatted (Mar 10, 2011)

> d7000 is a pro-grade camera



Lacks weather sealing and for thats a deal breaker.

If you want to shoot in a studio why get the D7000 get the D700. So no I don't think the D7000 is a "pro-grade" camera.

Having said that why does it matter? The D7000 is a good camera, some would call it a great camera. It takes pictures and the person behind it is more important...


----------



## cnutco (Mar 10, 2011)

I think I would replace my D300 with a D300s if needed soon.  Although, I am waiting to replace my D90 with Nikon's new release...

I guess it depends on what they release...


----------



## KmH (Mar 10, 2011)

Formatted said:


> > d7000 is a pro-grade camera
> 
> 
> 
> Lacks weather sealing and for thats a deal breaker.


From NikonUSA.com: D7000 from Nikon



> Compact but durable with magnesium-alloy top and rear covers*, superior weather and dust seals,* and a 150,000 cycle-rated shutter system providing reliable operation


 
The D7000 is redefining the top of the entry-level market segment, but is still an entry-level camera, not pro.

There will be other new Nikon's launched this year like the D400(?), the D800(?), and the D4.

Cameras launched a couple years or more back, cannot be compared with cameras launched recently. The technological improvements just advance to quickly.


----------



## flea77 (Mar 10, 2011)

Formatted is right, it is what you do with the camera that matters. The D7000 is light years better in performance than a D2, and it was a "pro" camera. It has better features for me than a D300 or D300s (low light primarily). Get the camera that 1) you can afford, 2) does the job you need it to do, the rest is all a bunch of people yapping on message boards.

Allan


----------



## RockstarPhotography (Mar 10, 2011)

My biggest dilemma is that I busted my d300 so i'm using my backup d3000 and the lowlight performance in that camera is horrible.  I like the 7000 from what i've read but the non weather sealed body scares me away.  I did like my 300, but since nikon may be releasing a replacement for it I hate to pull the trigger on a new one, but I can't keep shooting with my backup in these low light conditions.  Soooooooo.....:gah:


----------



## flea77 (Mar 10, 2011)

Ummmm, look up dude, Keith quoted from the Nikon website showing you the D7000 HAS weatherseals.

Allan


----------



## RockstarPhotography (Mar 10, 2011)

flea77 said:


> Ummmm, look up dude, Keith quoted from the Nikon website showing you the D7000 HAS weatherseals.
> 
> Allan



I know, it's not just the weathersealing (thats just what I say).  Its the whole magnesium (i think thats right), larger body.  I'm 6'2" and 200lbs.  I can easily palm a basketball, The larger body feels much nicer in my hands.  

But I shoot in sooooooo much low light!!!!

I'm thinking of trying to pick up a used d300 until nikon releases the replacement, but even used ones are going for the price of 7000's, plus I need a grip with my large banana hands.


----------



## flea77 (Mar 10, 2011)

The D7000 has a mg body as well. True, it is slightly smaller than the D300. If you really do that much low light why not pick up a D7000, then when you get the D400 or whatever sell the D300 and move the D7000 to the backup body?

Allan


----------



## RockstarPhotography (Mar 10, 2011)

I don't have a d300 anymore, it committed suicide off a 3rd story balcony.  Funds are going to be tight to buy one body then another one, but I'll probably have to go that route. I appreciate the input.


----------



## KmH (Mar 11, 2011)

flea77 said:


> The D7000 has a mg body as well....


The D7000 does not have a Mg alloy body. It only has a Mg alloy top and rear panel. Most of the body is plastic, like where the lens mount attaches.

Here is a couple photos of it: 
http://scr3.golem.de/screenshots/1009/Nikon-D7000/thumb480/D7000_Mgbody_1.jpg

http://scr3.golem.de/screenshots/1009/Nikon-D7000/thumb480/D7000_Mgbody_2.jpg


----------



## flea77 (Mar 11, 2011)

Funny, you say it does not have a mg body, yet your links point to images titled Mgbody_1.jpg and Mgbody_2.jpg. If you go to the Nikon site and look at the pictures of the D300s body, you will note that it is not 100% mg either, although it has more than the D7000. So since the D300s is not 100% mg, do we say it does not have a mg body?

Next you say that "most of the body is plastic". Yet looking at the images you provided 100% of the top and back are mg, as well as part of the frame for the front (note in picture 2 that you can see the front main piece through the hole for the screen, on picture 1 you can see part of it to the left of the lens mount area). I would say this is a substantial amount of the frame. As much as the D300s? No. But at exactly what percentage of mg does a camera have to have before it "has a mg body"?

This is like the whole weathersealed argument. Is the D7000 AS weathersealed as the D300s? No. Does it HAVE weathersealing? Yes. Then again the D300s is not AS weathersealed as a D3s, which is not AS weathersealed as a Nikonos. 

Allan


----------



## KmH (Mar 11, 2011)

I didn't name the image files.

Way more than 1/2, and the lens mount needs to be metal too, like the D300/D300s.


----------



## flea77 (Mar 11, 2011)

Well we will have to agree to disagree then. To me, 100% of the top, 100% of the rear, and a front plate is way more than half since that only leaves part of the front and the bottom. The lens mount is metal then plastic then metal, which until my lens falls off is fine with me.

Allan


----------



## Formatted (Mar 12, 2011)

Don't forget that the platforms that hold the camera parts inside the camera are not magnesium in the D7000. Where as in my D700 and D3s they are.

So the D7000 does not have a full mg body. KMH is right.


----------



## xjoewhitex (Mar 12, 2011)

I really don't know what you guys are planning to do with your cameras but these full mg body's are a bit of overkill for me its not like im going to go around tossing my camera. But maybe thats just me not really understanding the reasoning behind the 1/2- full mg body's. But the body is weather sealed probably just as much as your old d300, it may not be able to take a hammer to the front but im sure it will give you alot better results. And low light, is amazing


----------



## PhotoWrangler (Mar 12, 2011)

KmH said:


> There will be other new Nikon's launched this year like the D400(?), the D800(?), and the D4.



Where have you heard if the D800 and when is it supposed to launch? I've been holding out on the D700 because of this rumor.


----------



## RockstarPhotography (Mar 12, 2011)

ChristopherCoy said:


> KmH said:
> 
> 
> > There will be other new Nikon's launched this year like the D400(?), the D800(?), and the D4.
> ...



I'm pretty sure its just an assumption going by nikon's past history of when they launch new camera's.


----------



## KmH (Mar 12, 2011)

xjoewhitex said:


> I really don't know what you guys are planning to do with your cameras but these full mg body's are a bit of overkill for me its not like im going to go around tossing my camera. But maybe thats just me not really understanding the reasoning behind the 1/2- full mg body's.


Durability is part of it. But unlike plastic, a Mg alloy body provides much better heat dissipation properties which are more important than durability issues. Unlike plastic, a full Mg alloy body also provides shielding of the electronics from various unwanted electromagnetic waves.


----------



## KmH (Mar 12, 2011)

ChristopherCoy said:


> KmH said:
> 
> 
> > There will be other new Nikon's launched this year like the D400(?), the D800(?), and the D4.
> ...


It's due based on historic Nikon product cycles. Nikon doesn't pre-announce new gear. The D700 was launched 7/1/08, and hasn't been upgraded in almost 3 years.

The D300 was launched 8/23/07 but got an update (to the D300s) that launched on 7/30/09 not quite 23 months after the initial launch of the D300.

Even the flagship D3 (also launched 8/23/07 ) got refreshed as the D3x 12/1/08 and as the D3s 10/14/09.

Right now the D700 is Nikon's oldest, least up-to-date design. That sure doesn't make it obsolete, and it has a great ISO range for it's price regardless what the D800(?) winds up having.


----------



## GeneralBenson (Mar 15, 2011)

xjoewhitex said:


> I really don't know what you guys are planning to do with your cameras but these full mg body's are a bit of overkill for me its not like im going to go around tossing my camera. But maybe thats just me not really understanding the reasoning behind the 1/2- full mg body's. But the body is weather sealed probably just as much as your old d300, it may not be able to take a hammer to the front but im sure it will give you alot better results. And low light, is amazing


 
Use them professionally is what I plan to do with my cameras. And while you may not need durability above what available from the D7000, some do. A large part of being a 'professional camera", is being able to put up with the abuse of professional use. In the last two years, my cameras have been in the desert, in the snow, in the heat, in the cold, dropped on rocks, dropped in the snow, fallen off the roof of a driving car in a lowepro toploader case, knocked off a desk onto a concrete floor, scraped and smashed into the sides of cliffs, hit full-on by a ocean wave strong enough to knock me over, exposed to days of blowing sand and spraying salt water, clamped to the front bumper of a car, clamped to the roof of a VW bus during a rainstorm, and so on. I shoot with the Pentax K-7 and K-5 (which shares the same sensor as the D7000). 

Now, I'm not trying start a brand war or argue about what is better than what. The D7000 is great in a lot of ways. But since Nikon doesn't seem to want to release any information about the specifics of the weather sealing, so it leads me to believe that there isn't much to talk about. You know if it was worth bragging about, they would be. The Pentax K-7/5 body has 77 seals, at every possible seam, button or opening. The other day, when buttons started sticking down from too much salt water spray, I rinsed it off under the faucet, and it is fine now. Try that with a D7000. I was shooting a whitewater kayak competition, and I was laying on a rock on the edge of the rapids, with my camera inches off the water, where it was continually getting hit with splashes and the occasion wave that would beak over it. Afterwards, I was talking to a guy who was pissed that his D3 stopped working after "barely even getting splashed".  

The two times that I've signicantly dropped my cameras, they landed lens first. The time off that car, was in a lowepro bag, but it was still hard enough to bend the UV fileter ring, and the lens filter ring that it was screwed into; and it introduced enough play into the lens zom and focus, that eventually lead to the failure of that lens. The other time, if was off a desk, and landed landed lens first, on the lens cap and backwards lens hood. Both lens cap and lens hood were shattered, but the lens hood was ok. In both cases, the camera was totally fine. That kind of shock to a polycarbonate lens mount (like the D7000) would almost certainly cause it to break. That's the major difference between the D7000, and a truly 'pro' build quality. The K-5 has a fully mag alloy chassis, including the lens mount, and so do most truly pro bodies. The lens mount is one of the most susceptible parts of a camera when dropped. Losing a lens from a drop is bad enough, but losing your camera too just sucks. And if you're a pro on an assignment, having gear that won't fail is just about as important as any other aspect of a camera. Now, not all areas of professional photography are as abusive. But a surprisingly many are. Adventure photography has lots of built in abuses. But more often than not, it all just comes down to being in a hurry, and not having the time to be nice to your gear. Most areas of pro shooting have opportunities for a knocked over camera, an dropped camera bag, a rain storm or spilled drink, and so forth. 

The D7000 is a great camera in many respects, but I don't think it lives up to the term 'professional'. I don't really like Nikon's marketing approach on this camera. It's obvious that there is a very large group of advanced amateur users these days who are looking to move up into professionalism, and Nikon clearly has them pegged with this camera. But what I don't like is that, in my opinion, Nikon is deliberately trying to fool them into buying the D7000 as their "pro" camera. They put just enough mag alloy to call it a mag alloy body, and just enough weather seals to call it weather sealed. But in reality, compared to other pro bodies pro bodies, it is no where close to weather sealed or rugged. In my opinion, there is no such thing as kind of weathersealed. It's like locking the front and back doors to your house, but leaving all the windows open. Sure, maybe your house is locked, but there's still plenty of ways for a theif to get in. And once they're in, it doesn't matter how locked the front door was.

The D7000 is still a great camera, and for people who mostly don't need to worry about wrecking their camera, or who aren't typically in situation where a camera going down would be a major issue, then it can be really great. I think the most important thing is to know what you're getting into. I think the most dangerous thing with the D7000 would be to put to much faith in the weathersealing or the build. Knowing that it has some weathersealing, and some mag alloy protection is good, but also understanding that it is far different from being fully sealed or fully mag alloy. That way, you can just be smart about what you subject your camera to, and avoid it going down from something that could have been avoided.


----------

