# D7000 or D5100



## EchoingWhisper (Aug 16, 2011)

Would you choose
1. Nikon D7000 with kit lens (18-105mm)
OR
2. Nikon D5100 with kit lens (18-55mm) and another lens (around $300)?


----------



## Stradawhovious (Aug 16, 2011)

D7000. 

Hands down. 

If for nothing else, the internal focus motor alone makes the 7000 win out over the 5100.

Not to mention 2 card slots, weather sealing, faster fps, faster max shutter speed, etc. etc. etc.


----------



## EchoingWhisper (Aug 16, 2011)

Even with another lens, the D7000 is better?


----------



## cameleon (Aug 16, 2011)

D7000 and a prime or the 18-55.


----------



## PhotoWrangler (Aug 16, 2011)

Double post.... http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/digital-discussion-q/253769-d7000-d5100.html


----------



## Stradawhovious (Aug 16, 2011)

EchoingWhisper said:


> Even with another lens, the D7000 is better?



Why buy the kitv lens?  For the same price as the kit you can get the D7000 with a 50mm 1.8, a 135mm 2.8 AI and an older AF midrange zoom.

Personally after using the 18-105 lens for a week I couldn't wait to get rid of it.  I traded it even up for a 185mm AF 2.8, a 28-70 3.5 and one other lens that excapes me right now, and couldn't be happier with the trade.


----------



## Overread (Aug 16, 2011)

*Moving to Nikon Subsection*
Echoing - I've also removed your repeat thread as we don't need two on the same subject


----------



## EchoingWhisper (Aug 16, 2011)

Overread said:


> *Moving to Nikon Subsection*
> Echoing - I've also removed your repeat thread as we don't need two on the same subject



Where are we supposed to post this type of thread actually? I see so many sub-forums, Digital Q&A, Beginner's, Nikon's, I don't really know where to post.


----------



## EchoingWhisper (Aug 16, 2011)

Oh, if I were to buy D7000, what lens should I choose? Should I buy the kit lens then swap it with another lens or just buy a $250 lens? I actually prefer zoom lens though.


----------



## Overread (Aug 16, 2011)

Aye I can sympathise - as this is tech talk putting it in the Photography Equipment & Products: News & Reviews section would be valid or in the Nikon section I've put it in, since its focused purely on nikon camera gear not an overall approach. 

Digital Q&A has always confused me a little as to what is meant to go in there


----------



## EchoingWhisper (Aug 16, 2011)

Next thing I am considering is price. If I am a beginner, although I have been reading forums and guides and all for almost a year, is D7000 necessary?


----------



## EchoingWhisper (Aug 16, 2011)

Overread said:


> Aye I can sympathise - as this is tech talk putting it in the Photography Equipment & Products: News & Reviews section would be valid or in the Nikon section I've put it in, since its focused purely on nikon camera gear not an overall approach.
> 
> Digital Q&A has always confused me a little as to what is meant to go in there



I think some sub-forums should be removed to avoid confusion. If not, you guys should just combine similar sub-forums and allow viewers to filter them if they want to. If sub-forums were combined, I would really read all posts.


----------



## EchoingWhisper (Aug 16, 2011)

No replies?  This is also a reason why I don't like so many sub-forums.


----------



## Overread (Aug 16, 2011)

Slow down there  can take time for many threads to get replies - plus don't overly worry about subforums too much since a good majority of our more established members surf the site on new posts rather than reading through all the subsections.


----------



## EPPhoto (Aug 16, 2011)

D7000, that's a no brainer!


----------



## 2WheelPhoto (Aug 16, 2011)

Dare you to do research such as type "comparison d7000 d5100" in a search tool and see if it outputs useful info


----------



## RRRoger (Aug 16, 2011)

I have both.
I prefer the D5100 for travel, hikes, and Video
The D7000 is much better for Event Photography, especially action.


----------



## D-B-J (Aug 16, 2011)

RRRoger said:


> I have both.
> I prefer the D5100 for travel, hikes, and Video
> The D7000 is much better for Event Photography, especially action.



Why?  The D7000 isn't that much bigger, and it is a whole lot more camera.


----------



## Kerbouchard (Aug 16, 2011)

D90, 18-105 VR, 70-300 VR, an SB600, and a 5 in 1 reflector kit.  You can pick up that entire kit for what the D7000 plus 18-105 goes for.  The d7000 just simply isn't that much better of a camera.  If you just want new, go with the d7000.  If you want the best value, go with a used D90.

IMO, the only people who should buy a D5100 are those that never plan to learn anything about photography, plan on leaving one lens on it, and using it as a big P&S.

Just my .02.


----------



## D-B-J (Aug 16, 2011)

Kerbouchard said:


> D90, 18-105 VR, 70-300 VR, an SB600, and a 5 in 1 reflector kit.  You can pick up that entire kit for what the D7000 plus 18-105 goes for.  The d7000 just simply isn't that much better of a camera.  If you just want new, go with the d7000.  If you want the best value, go with a used D90.
> 
> IMO, the only people who should buy a D5100 are those that never plan to learn anything about photography, plan on leaving one lens on it, and using it as a big P&S.
> 
> Just my .02.



I disagree with you here.  Not on the d90 suggestions, as i think that is a worthwhile kit for a beginner (and money well spent) to learn about a DSLR, and the lenses cover a wide range.


However, the D7000 is a whole lot more camera than the D90. 


D7000--16.2 Mpeg, Expeed 2 Image Processor, Native ISO (without boost) is 100-6400, Boost to 25,600, 39 AF Focus Points, 100% Viewfinder Coverage, MAx Shutter, 1/8000th, 6fps, 1080p Video, Weather Sealing (Well, weather and dust resistant).  

D90--12.3 Mpeg, Expeed Image Processor, Native ISO (without boost) 200-3200, Boost to 6400, 11 AF Focus Points, 96% Viewfinder Coverage, Max Shutter 1/4000th, 4.5fps, 720p Video, No Weather Sealing.


IMO, the D7000 far outshoots the D90.  I have used both, and it is obvious, once you pick up the D7000, it is a better camera by far.


----------



## RRRoger (Aug 16, 2011)

D-B-J said:


> RRRoger said:
> 
> 
> > I have both.
> ...


When I went down to my camera store to pick up a second D7000 for my EVENT Photography, 
they lined up a 3100, 5100, and 7000
I came home with a D5100 instead.
The articulating LCD is much better than I expected and very valuable for Video. 
You can also zoom in on an object and check your focus when taking stills.
The 1080 Video at 30fps was the clincher.
Later I zoomed in on my big monitor and my landscape pictures seemed a little better quality (newer technology) to me.

For those that don't like this explanation, I later bought a second D7000 anyway for my Events. 
Not having a lock on the multiselector was the main reason.


----------



## RRRoger (Aug 16, 2011)

IMO said:
			
		

> I totally disagree.
> Because the D5100 is much harder to use properly than the D90 or D7000.
> I shoot in aperture mode not automatic
> If you want a camera to set up like a P&S get a D3100 instead.


----------



## Kerbouchard (Aug 16, 2011)

I know the differences and I've also used both.  I felt the D7000 as an upgrade/replacement was kind of a disappointment.  I just don't think it's a good value, especially for a beginner on a budget.

In any case, everybody is certainly entitled to their own opinion.  That's why Nikon/Canon/etc make so many different models of cameras at different price points.  What I posted was just my opinion.  Definitely not intended to be the end all/be all.



D-B-J said:


> Kerbouchard said:
> 
> 
> > D90, 18-105 VR, 70-300 VR, an SB600, and a 5 in 1 reflector kit.  You can pick up that entire kit for what the D7000 plus 18-105 goes for.  The d7000 just simply isn't that much better of a camera.  If you just want new, go with the d7000.  If you want the best value, go with a used D90.
> ...


----------



## D-B-J (Aug 16, 2011)

Kerbouchard said:


> I know the differences and I've also used both.  I felt the D7000 as an upgrade/replacement was kind of a disappointment.  I just don't think it's a good value, especially for a beginner on a budget.
> 
> In any case, everybody is certainly entitled to their own opinion.  That's why Nikon/Canon/etc make so many different models of cameras at different price points.  What I posted was just my opinion.  Definitely not intended to be the end all/be all.
> 
> ...



And i as well. To each his own, sir.


----------



## EchoingWhisper (Aug 16, 2011)

Here is a link to a more detailed thread of my choosings:
http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/photography-equipment-products-news-reviews/253847-what-lens-what-dslr.html


----------



## Kerbouchard (Aug 16, 2011)

Out of curiosity, if you had no gear at all and wouldn't be able to add anything for a while, which would you rather have?  A d7000 and a kit lens or the kit that I outlined?



D-B-J said:


> Kerbouchard said:
> 
> 
> > I know the differences and I've also used both.  I felt the D7000 as an upgrade/replacement was kind of a disappointment.  I just don't think it's a good value, especially for a beginner on a budget.
> ...


----------



## 2WheelPhoto (Aug 16, 2011)




----------



## RRRoger (Aug 16, 2011)

Kerbouchard said:


> Out of curiosity, if you had no gear at all and wouldn't be able to add anything for a while, which would you rather have?  A d7000 and a kit lens or the kit that I outlined?
> 
> It really depends on what you are going to use the camera for.
> If I could only have one camera, I would choose the D7000


----------



## jritz (Aug 17, 2011)

RRRoger said:


> D-B-J said:
> 
> 
> > RRRoger said:
> ...



The d7000 has the zoom in to lock on focus on stills as well as long as you are in live view.  The d7000 also has 1080 at 30 frames as well....


----------



## ZapoTeX (Aug 17, 2011)

Consider the D90. It's got double LCD and double wheel, just like the D7000.

What the D7000 gives you on top of what the D90 gives you is:

1) More resolution (but do you really need more than 12 MP?)
2) Better AF (it can be useful for action shooting, such as sports or flying birds)
3) Slightly better behavior in low light

But all this comes at the cost of 400 USD or so.

Ciao!


----------



## EchoingWhisper (Aug 17, 2011)

ZapoTeX said:


> Consider the D90. It's got double LCD and double wheel, just like the D7000.
> 
> What the D7000 gives you on top of what the D90 gives you is:
> 
> ...



I'd go for a D5100 rather than a D90. Price is about the same, image quality is much better and so on.


----------



## RRRoger (Aug 17, 2011)

[/QUOTE]

.  The d7000 also has 1080 at 30 frames as well....[/QUOTE]

Since when?

Mine does not and if they have issued a 3rd firmware, open source, or crack I would like to know about it.


----------



## Ginu (Aug 17, 2011)

D7000 hands down. I guess it all depends on the budget but If I would be to start again, I'd go for a D7000 with an 18-200 VRII.

After a while I would check to see what focal length gets used the most and I would upgrade the lens around that.

Just my 2c and I have a D90 with 18-200 VR, 70-300VR, 24-80 AF and a 50mm f1.8. For me the 18-200 seems to sit on the body 99% of the time even though I'm sacrificing quite a bit by using this lens.


----------



## Ginu (Aug 17, 2011)

RRRoger said:


> Since when?
> 
> Mine does not and if they have issued a 3rd firmware, open source, or crack I would like to know about it.




Correct me if I'm wrong but I think the D7000 can do 24fps @1080...

Another thing I dont quite understand is why do people look to buy a DSLR based on the movie capabilities and features... Primary feature of a DSLR is taking pictures, so that's what the buyer should look into... I know there are some advantages in shooting video with a DSLR but again for the average person I really don't think this should be the main focus.


----------



## Kerbouchard (Aug 17, 2011)

EchoingWhisper said:


> I'd go for a D5100 rather than a D90. Price is about the same, image quality is much better and so on.


This made me LOL


----------



## jritz (Aug 17, 2011)

Sorry my bad its does not have 30fps I was thinking of the 5d I shoot most of my video stuff on.  While 30fps is nice, I much prefer the 24fps for it's cinematic like qualities, that is unless you are producing for broadcast.


----------



## RRRoger (Aug 17, 2011)

[/QUOTE]

I'd go for a D5100 rather than a D90. Price is about the same, image quality is much better and so on.[/QUOTE]

There are lots of advantages to the D5100 over the D90, but
I can think of three good reasons to get a D90 instead.
1. Much easier to learn and use.
2. Much more forgiving Sensor (higher resolution shows movement and user error more better).
3. Much larger lens selection. (except it seems all new Nikkors are now AF-S)


----------



## MarkCSmith (Aug 17, 2011)

EchoingWhisper said:


> Next thing I am considering is price. If I am a beginner, although I have been reading forums and guides and all for almost a year, is D7000 necessary?



If one of your concerns is whether or not you'll ever use the D7000 to it's full capabilities, save your money and go for the D5100. Sounds like photography is just a hobby for you and you probably wouldn't ever notice the 5100's shortcomings compared to the D7000. 

If you turn out to enjoy photography and want to invest more in it, you'll likely want to make your next body a full-frame.


----------



## D-B-J (Aug 17, 2011)

Kerbouchard said:


> Out of curiosity, if you had no gear at all and wouldn't be able to add anything for a while, which would you rather have?  A d7000 and a kit lens or the kit that I outlined?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



The kit. Easily.  I'd limit my creativity if i was flashless.


----------



## Kerbouchard (Aug 17, 2011)

D-B-J said:


> Kerbouchard said:
> 
> 
> > Out of curiosity, if you had no gear at all and wouldn't be able to add anything for a while, which would you rather have?  A d7000 and a kit lens or the kit that I outlined?
> ...



To be fair, I'm not hating on the D7000...at least not really.  I had a D90 and when the D7000 was released I just didn't think it was enough to warrant the upgrade.  

I wanted to go with the D700 replacement but got tired of waiting, so went with the D700 instead.  My point being, what I was looking for in an upgrade wasn't really offered in the D7000 so I have kind of discounted it altogether.  I should be better about clarifying my points to make sure people understand that it wasn't a good path for me, but might be for their purposes.  Obviously, everybody's requirements and budgets are a bit different.

Also, to be fair, since I got my D700, the only time I have taken my D90 out of the bag was when I actually took it out of the bag and put it on a shelf.


----------



## EchoingWhisper (Oct 10, 2011)

Again, I'm down to this problem again, the D5100 is cheaper than the D7000 almost by one time now here. Hard decision.


----------



## andrewleephoto (Oct 10, 2011)

My friend started out with a d5100 and he says it's not enough for him after about 2 weeks... Get the d7000 and save yourself some money because you would want to upgrade too!


----------



## MTVision (Oct 10, 2011)

I'm happy with the d5100. I'll probably upgrade some day but not for a long time. Go with whatever fits your budget and works for you. The d5100 isn't a horrible camera


----------



## EchoingWhisper (Oct 10, 2011)

Thanks everyone. lol. Hard decision again.


----------



## RRRoger (Oct 10, 2011)

I have both.

I prefer the D5100 for Trips, hikes, and Video.
The articulating LCD is very nice.

I use my D7000 for Event Photography.
With two card slots, more controls, etc. It is better for action.


----------



## sm4him (Oct 10, 2011)

What do you plan to do with the camera? It sounds like you're just learning, but do you know enough about photography to know whether you want to become really serious about it, or just take nice photographs?

I have a D5100, just got it a couple months ago, and it's my first-ever DSLR. I picked it because: a) it was the best I could afford and b) my sister also has a Nikon and we'll be able to exchange some lenses.  Had I been able to afford it, I would have bought the D7000, because I already know that I am interested in taking my photography to new levels.

BUT--I've been doing photography, as a hobby, for over 30 years now.  I was pretty serious about when I started, but then time, career and CHILDREN distracted me, and it became more of a past-time than a hobby; in the last 5-10 years, I've become more and more serious about it.  
I don't really aspire to being a "professional" photographer.  But on the other hand, I definitely want to do more than just take nice photos. I've sold some of my work; I've won a few contests, here and there.  And that was with a point-and-shoot.  My aspirations for the DSLR are simply to make even better photos, sell a few more of them (not looking to make a fortune, just maybe offset the cost of the occasional new lens, etc), win some more photo contests (there's money to be made here, too, but mostly I do it because it makes me happy to know someone else liked my photography, too), and branch out and try NEW things (I tend to be drawn to nature photography, but just went and did my first ever portrait photo-shoot).

My point is, when I decided to step into the DSLR world, I already had a sense of  what I want to DO with my photography. Eventually, I'll upgrade, but I  think the D5100, with some better lenses as I can afford them, will  serve my purposes for at least a couple of years.


----------



## Hambone (Oct 10, 2011)

I own both. And I also own a few AF lenses, which will not focus on the 5100. Bottom line - the D7000 is worth the extra money.


----------



## tevo (Oct 10, 2011)

D7000 , no contest. You will accumulate lenses over time, better off starting with an amazing camera body and a good all-around lens as opposed to a decent camera body with 2 lenses.


----------

