# Nikon d7100 vs Nikon d600



## Dominik

So I have lost any hope or patience for a Nikon d400 release in the summer. I need an upgrade for school and I am wondering if I should go for the d7100 or the d600. Sadly for the d600 I can only afford dx at the moment but I read that the dx mode on the d600 is really good! If I can afford the lenses I will buy them without a doubt! I shoot almost everything, but my favourite to shoot are concerts, skateboarding, landscape and night time! I need a reason why to pick which camera not just a "d7100 because it is newer" or "d600 because its fx" I want a description. 

Thank you!

Checkout my site: DominikMPhoto on deviantART


----------



## Mach0

The AF in the d7100 is awesome.


----------



## Dominik

So I have read but the AF isn't what is going to sell me. I'm coming from a camera with no AF in it at all so either way it'll be a big step up for me


----------



## TheLost

Dominik said:


> So I have read but the AF isn't what is going to sell me. I'm coming from a camera with no AF in it at all so either way it'll be a big step up for me



Then why do you want a D400?  

Just get the D600... it sounds like your mind is already made up.  A refurb D600 is only $400 more then a D7100.


----------



## Dominik

TheLost said:


> Dominik said:
> 
> 
> 
> So I have read but the AF isn't what is going to sell me. I'm coming from a camera with no AF in it at all so either way it'll be a big step up for me
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Then why do you want a D400?
> 
> Just get the D600... it sounds like your mind is already made up.  A refurb D600 is only $400 more then a D7100.
Click to expand...


I love the perks of the d300s and I was hoping that it would continue. The high fps for a dx, the build of the camera was amazing in my opinion. I'm trying to see if it is actually worth getting the d600


----------



## Mach0

Dominik said:


> I love the perks of the d300s and I was hoping that it would continue. The high fps for a dx, the build of the camera was amazing in my opinion. I'm trying to see if it is actually worth getting the d600



Have you considered a the d700 then?  Only downside is that you can't crop like the 24 mp resolution images.


----------



## TheLost

Dominik said:


> So I have read but the AF isn't what is going to sell me. I'm coming from a camera with no AF in it at all so either way it'll be a big step up for me





Dominik said:


> I love the perks of the d300s and I was hoping that it would continue. The high fps for a dx, the build of the camera was amazing in my opinion. I'm trying to see if it is actually worth getting the d600



A high FPS does you no good if your auto focus cant keep up... 

The D7100 can do 100 images @ 7fps in 1.3x crop (15mp) in JPG mode before the buffer gets full (using Sandisk Extreme Pro UHS-1 cards).... That's ~15 seconds continuous shooting.

The D7100 and D600 are built 'almost' the same...  The D7100 has better weather sealing.. but they are very similar in the materials used on the body. I doubt Nikon will ever build a body like the D300 again. (DX or FX).


----------



## goodguy

I would go for the D600, in low light high ISO the D600 just blows the D7100 or any other crop sensor camera out of the water, saying that the D7100 is an awesome camera but still I would go with the D600 in a heart beat!


----------



## Vtec44

I'd go for the D600 over the D7100 because I love the shallow DOF, wide angle FOV, and great high ISO noise.


----------



## Derrel

I think the D400 could be introduced in April, 2013. And if not this month, then SOON. I do think NIkon will introduce a D400, possibly this summer. It will need to have very good specifications in order to out-spec the D7100: faster frame rate, better buffer, more-rugged build, bigger,brighter viewfinder, better video set, and in all, just be the entry-level "pro" camera for NPS membership qualification.

Now,like TheLost says, a refurb D600 is only $400 more than a D7100. If you are buying some kind of stop--gap camera, some kind of a lesser-of-two-eveils kind of camera, one oy really are not 100% committed to, then by all means buy a refurb,so you lose less when you unload it in four or six months.

I dunno...the D7100 seems likie a nice APS-C camera, but no, it is NOT like a D300s in many ways. But still--wow..what an amazing camera for $1199...


----------



## goodguy

I might be forced to eat my hat (if I had one) if Nikon will introduce a new D400 in few days but my feeling is that the D7100 is so packed with goodies so to offer enough for the sport photography fans and the regular photographer.
Yes the D7100 cant offer what the D300s can in some ways but its just my personal feelings that Nikon will not make a D400, days will tell.

Still I would go with the D600 in a heart beat.


----------



## frommrstomommy

Well, I just ordered a D600.. soo there's that. lol It made no sense to me not to go full frame if I was going to spend a bunch of money. Didn't want to be kicking myself in a few months for not, so I did.


----------



## goodguy

frommrstomommy said:


> Well, I just ordered a D600.. soo there's that. lol It made no sense to me not to go full frame if I was going to spend a bunch of money. Didn't want to be kicking myself in a few months for not, so I did.



I think you did the right thing and I think now I am suffering from serious FF envy LOL

Enjoy your new camera


----------



## deutsh

Listen to me carfuly.... if ...if you can purchase D800 E version ...you win ..belive me .
If not than D800 ....if not D600 .if not ...then dont  purchase any of D7000 or D7100 D5200 or others .
Remember D800 E +af-s 24-70mm f/2.8 thats the perfect couple


----------



## PropilotBW

deutsh said:


> Listen to me carfuly.... if ...if you can purchase D800 E version ...you win ..belive me .
> If not than D800 ....if not D600 .if not ...then dont  purchase any of D7000 or D7100 D5200 or others .
> Remember D800 E +af-s 24-70mm f/2.8 thats the perfect couple



Thats only a difference of $1000 from what the OP wanted...but who's counting.  $1700 more than the 7100.  Doesn't seem practical, or helpful.


----------



## deutsh

PropilotBW said:


> Thats only a difference of $1000 from what the OP wanted...but who's counting.  $1700 more than the 7100.  Doesn't seem practical, or helpful.



I just want him to do not blame himself if he buy the elementary equipment   like d7000 etc.
Belive me D800E +the monster 24-70mm f/2.8 the ultimate couple.
And its caost 5000$ cam+lens


----------



## jaomul

I read a review of the D7100 the other day that said the buffer fills in about a second when shooting high fps in raw. If shooting jpeg it goes to 100.  If one ever needed a reason to not shoot raw that is it. The same review said noise was more apparent than the competition@ iso400. This was only one review but if it is thought the 400 will soon be announced it may be worth it to wait a while


----------



## Benco

jaomul said:


> *I read a review of the D7100 the other day that said the buffer fills in about a second when shooting high fps in raw. If shooting jpeg it goes to 100.*  If one ever needed a reason to not shoot raw that is it. The same review said noise was more apparent than the competition@ iso400. This was only one review but if it is thought the 400 will soon be announced it may be worth it to wait a while



They might have been using a slow card, I've found that on my D7000 it makes no odds if you're shooting in raw or JPG, the buffer fills just the same and the frame rate drops just when the spec says it will. With a fast card the limiting step is the number of images that can be processed by the camera, if it's a slower card then the write speed could be what limits it.


----------



## Benco

deutsh said:


> PropilotBW said:
> 
> 
> 
> Thats only a difference of $1000 from what the OP wanted...but who's counting.  $1700 more than the 7100.  Doesn't seem practical, or helpful.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I just want him to do not blame himself if he buy the elementary equipment   like d7000 etc.
> Belive me D800E +the monster 24-70mm f/2.8 the ultimate couple.
> And its caost 5000$ cam+lens
Click to expand...


It'd be nice but that's not much help if it's beyond budget, you're not likely to blame yourself for being prudent and not putting yourself in the red. Sure the D7000 and D7100 are not even close to the D800E but they're still perfectly good cameras.


----------



## 480sparky

deutsh said:


> ........Remember D800 E +af-s 24-70mm f/2.8 thats the perfect couple



Poor advice IMHO.  That combo may be best _for you_, but is a bad choice for many others.


----------



## jaomul

Benco said:


> jaomul said:
> 
> 
> 
> *I read a review of the D7100 the other day that said the buffer fills in about a second when shooting high fps in raw. If shooting jpeg it goes to 100.*  If one ever needed a reason to not shoot raw that is it. The same review said noise was more apparent than the competition@ iso400. This was only one review but if it is thought the 400 will soon be announced it may be worth it to wait a while
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They might have been using a slow card, I've found that on my D7000 it makes no odds if you're shooting in raw or JPG, the buffer fills just the same and the frame rate drops just when the spec says it will. With a fast card the limiting step is the number of images that can be processed by the camera, if it's a slower card then the write speed could be what limits it.
Click to expand...

Raw having more info than jpeg normally fills camera buffers faster. Your experience is unusual I think


----------



## Benco

jaomul said:


> Benco said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> jaomul said:
> 
> 
> 
> *I read a review of the D7100 the other day that said the buffer fills in about a second when shooting high fps in raw. If shooting jpeg it goes to 100.*  If one ever needed a reason to not shoot raw that is it. The same review said noise was more apparent than the competition@ iso400. This was only one review but if it is thought the 400 will soon be announced it may be worth it to wait a while
> 
> 
> 
> 
> They might have been using a slow card, I've found that on my D7000 it makes no odds if you're shooting in raw or JPG, the buffer fills just the same and the frame rate drops just when the spec says it will. With a fast card the limiting step is the number of images that can be processed by the camera, if it's a slower card then the write speed could be what limits it.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Raw having more info than jpeg normally fills camera buffers faster. Your experience is unusual I think
Click to expand...



Ahh, I understood that the buffer was effectively a processing limitation rather than just a block of memory, thanks for putting me right. 

It is odd, I can only speak for my camera but it's certainly the case with that. Seven frames at maximum speed and that's it, no matter what you're shooting in. I don't find it a problem, up till now I've never required it to do than more than 3 or 4 in a burst anyway. I'll look into it though.


----------



## deutsh

480sparky said:


> Poor advice IMHO.  That combo may be best for you, but is a bad choice for many others.



I know be cause of the zoom are not long .
But it's the Choice for pro


----------



## Benco

deutsh said:


> 480sparky said:
> 
> 
> 
> Poor advice IMHO.  That combo may be best for you, but is a bad choice for many others.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I know be cause of the zoom are not long .
> But it's the Choice for pro
Click to expand...


That's a bit simplistic, how can one camera and lens be the 'choice for pro'? 

...or do you mean the choice to look like a pro?


----------



## deutsh

Benco said:


> That's a bit simplistic, how can one camera and lens be the 'choice for pro'?
> 
> ...or do you mean the choice to look like a pro?



Listen ... .purchase a AF-S 24-70mm f/2.8 and test it then you will discover why it's for pro ......besides ...the pro lenses are 12-24 mm f/2.8 ,24-70 f/2.8 and 70-200mm f/2.8 .If you have them all you are the winner ....belive me.
And the lens af-s 24-70mm f/2.8 is the ultimate ...i said ultimate  sharpness zoom ever.


----------



## deutsh

No for D7100 D7000 D5200 D5000 D3100 or like ....(the junk)


----------



## Benco

Whatever.


----------



## Derrel

Thom Hogan wrote a commentary on this very choice--D7100 vs D600,on April 23,2013. Thom Hogan's Nikon Camera, DSLR, Lens, Flash, and Book site

After another three weeks or so, this will be off the front page, and moved into the archived stories slot. WELL worth reading if one is interested in learning some of the major differences between these two fine cameras.


----------



## Vtec44

deutsh said:


> Listen ... .purchase a AF-S 24-70mm f/2.8 and test it then you will discover why it's for pro ......



I have it.  It makes me a pro instantly.  True story!


----------



## PropilotBW

[/QUOTE]
 .If you have them all you are the winner ....belive me.
 .[/QUOTE]


Winner of what?  I am not following.  What will I win?


----------



## deutsh

.If you have them all you are the winner ....belive me.
.[/QUOTE]

Winner of what?  I am not following.  What will I win?[/QUOTE]

Winner of  the ultimate sharp pro looking photos with(sharp in center and edge ,no distortion ,in low light satuation you can take photos,and various lenses between ultra wide ,standard and zoom) If he get (nikon D800E+12-24 mm f/2.8,24-70mm f/2.8,70-200mm f/2.8) and them all are cost 7000$.and thats is all.


----------



## Benco

deutsh said:


> .If you have them all you are the winner ....belive me.
> 
> Winner of what?  I am not following.  What will I win?
> 
> *Winner of  the ultimate sharp pro looking photos with(sharp in center and edge ,no distortion ,in low light satuation you can take photos,*and various lenses between ultra wide ,standard and zoom)If he get (nikon D800E+12-24 mm f/2.8,24-70mm f/2.8,70-200mm f/2.8) and them all are cost 7000$.and thats is all.



That's down to the lenses, put fast glass on one of the 'junk' cameras and you can get all that.


----------



## 480sparky

deutsh said:


> Winner of  the ultimate sharp* pro looking photos* with(sharp in center and edge ,no distortion ,in low light satuation you can take photos,and various lenses between ultra wide ,standard and zoom) If he get (nikon D800E+12-24 mm f/2.8,24-70mm f/2.8,70-200mm f/2.8) and them all are cost 7000$.and thats is all.



And if your budget is $1000........ all that top-shelf hardware is as useful as a wad of used chewing gum.

BTW, owning a Trinity does _not_ give you '*pro looking photos*'.


----------



## o hey tyler

deutsh said:


> Winner of  the ultimate sharp pro looking photos with(sharp in center and edge ,no distortion ,in low light satuation you can take photos,and various lenses between ultra wide ,standard and zoom) If he get (nikon D800E+12-24 mm f/2.8,24-70mm f/2.8,70-200mm f/2.8) and them all are cost 7000$.and thats is all.



Psssst! Your limited photographic and optical knowledge is showing!


----------



## gryffinwings

480sparky said:


> deutsh said:
> 
> 
> 
> Winner of  the ultimate sharp* pro looking photos* with(sharp in center and edge ,no distortion ,in low light satuation you can take photos,and various lenses between ultra wide ,standard and zoom) If he get (nikon D800E+12-24 mm f/2.8,24-70mm f/2.8,70-200mm f/2.8) and them all are cost 7000$.and thats is all.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> And if your budget is $1000........ all that top-shelf hardware is as useful as a wad of used chewing gum.
> 
> BTW, owning a Trinity does _not_ give you '*pro looking photos*'.
Click to expand...


Of course we know technique is what matters. But it certainly helps to have not only good gear but the right gear for the job.


----------



## 480sparky

gryffinwings said:


> Of course we know technique is what matters. But it certainly helps to have not only good gear but the right gear for the job.



I guess anyone who doesn't own a D800E and a trinity will forever be relegated to being a rank amateur.  Sorry, Canon. You lose, Pentax. Nice try, Olympus. Adios, Minolta. Tough luck Leica. Better luck next time, Sony. Why bother, Panasonic? 


















Oh, and how does one put film into a D800E?  
	

	
	
		
		

		
			








.


----------



## deutsh

o hey tyler said:


> Psssst! Your limited photographic and optical knowledge is showing!



My photographic knowledge is limited ?
Ok let me ask you: WHY 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 11.1x zoom is cost 650$.and 24-70mm f/2.8 3x zoom cost 2000$ WWWHHHYY. Why the D4 cost 6000$just the body .that first and second did your knowledge know there are a medium format cameras like hasslblad and its cost 20000$ just for body why . Ask any pro "why you use D3x ,D4, Mamya or hasslblad? Why you dont use The junk D7000 . He will tell you my knowlege is limited.


----------



## o hey tyler

deutsh said:


> My photographic knowledge is limited ?
> Ok let me ask you: WHY 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 11.1x zoom is cost 650$.and 24-70mm f/2.8 3x zoom cost 2000$ WWWHHHYY. Why the D4 cost 6000$just the body .that first and second did your knowledge know there are a medium format cameras like hasslblad and its cost 20000$ just for body why . Ask any pro "why you use D3x ,D4, Mamya or hasslblad? Why you dont use The junk D7000 . He will tell you my knowlege is limited.



Because you think buying an expensive camera and expensive lenses makes you an instant pro. Coupled with the fact that you didn't seem to be aware that corner to corner sharpness was a property of the lens and not the body. 

You realize that photography is mostly about talent and vision and not so much about getting "god mode" in terms of equipment, right? It doesn't seem like you do.

PS, yes my "knowledge knew" about digital medium format cameras and digital backs for film cameras. Lawl seriously bro?


----------



## runnah

Everyone knows the better the gear the better the photographer.

It's like science or something.


----------



## o hey tyler

runnah said:


> Everyone knows the better the gear the better the photographer.
> 
> It's like science or something.



The last time I got involved with science, I was promised cake.

I never got the aforementioned cake. :-(


----------



## 480sparky

deutsh said:


> .......... Why you dont use The junk D7000 .......



Would you care to tell me which of the images I've posted here were taken with a crappy D600, a POS D60 and a junk D7000?  
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




BTW, where's all YOUR 'pro looking photos'?


----------



## sandollars

deutsh said:


> o hey tyler said:
> 
> 
> 
> Psssst! Your limited photographic and optical knowledge is showing!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My photographic knowledge is limited ?
> Ok let me ask you: WHY 18-200mm f/3.5-5.6 11.1x zoom is cost 650$.and 24-70mm f/2.8 3x zoom cost 2000$ WWWHHHYY. Why the D4 cost 6000$just the body .that first and second did your knowledge know there are a medium format cameras like hasslblad and its cost 20000$ just for body why . Ask any pro "why you use D3x ,D4, Mamya or hasslblad? Why you dont use The junk D7000 . He will tell you my knowlege is limited.
Click to expand...


Wow,  Don't look now but your ignorance needs to be tucked in before you trip on it and hurt yourself...  :Joker: 

A D7000 is far from junk...  Some of my best shots came out of that body..  In fact, I won 10 grand on a seascape photo taken with a D7000 and a Nikkor 18-200 DX.  No FX and no trinity involved.  Anyone who calls a D7000 junk is just simply being an elitist.  Of course, this is just MHO...


----------



## manicmike

.If you have them all you are the winner ....belive me.
 .[/QUOTE]


Winner of what?  I am not following.  What will I win?[/QUOTE]

The internet sir. That's what you win.


----------



## PropilotBW

deutsh said:


> .If you have them all you are the winner ....belive me.
> .



Winner of what?  I am not following.  What will I win?[/QUOTE]

Winner of  the ultimate sharp pro looking photos with(sharp in center and edge ,no distortion ,in low light satuation you can take photos,and various lenses between ultra wide ,standard and zoom) If he get (nikon D800E+12-24 mm f/2.8,24-70mm f/2.8,70-200mm f/2.8) and them all are cost 7000$.and that is all.[/QUOTE]

Well, not all of us have oil money.  
You look at any Pro's bag.  I guarantee their other camera is a D7000 or equivalent Canon model.


----------



## deutsh

o hey tyler said:


> Because you think buying an expensive camera and expensive lenses makes you an instant pro. Coupled with the fact that you didn't seem to be aware that corner to corner sharpness was a property of the lens and not the body.
> 
> You realize that photography is mostly about talent and vision and not so much about getting "god mode" in terms of equipment, right? It doesn't seem like you do.
> 
> PS, yes my "knowledge knew" about digital medium format cameras and digital backs for film cameras. Lawl seriously bro?



I know  the skill play great part in any  proficiency.but the great equi.can help the professionals to get no limits.
And one of my life rules is "The Expensive thinks mean great beneft" .


----------



## deutsh

sandollars said:


> Wow,  Don't look now but your ignorance needs to be tucked in before you trip on it and hurt yourself...  :Joker:
> 
> A D7000 is far from junk...  Some of my best shots came out of that body..  In fact, I won 10 grand on a seascape photo taken with a D7000 and a Nikkor 18-200 DX.  No FX and no trinity involved.  Anyone who calls a D7000 junk is just simply being an elitist.  Of course, this is just MHO...



Ok D7000 far of junk then why its cost 1200$ and D800 cost 3000$


----------



## Benco

deutsh said:


> o hey tyler said:
> 
> 
> 
> Because you think buying an expensive camera and expensive lenses makes you an instant pro. Coupled with the fact that you didn't seem to be aware that corner to corner sharpness was a property of the lens and not the body.
> 
> You realize that photography is mostly about talent and vision and not so much about getting "god mode" in terms of equipment, right? It doesn't seem like you do.
> 
> PS, yes my "knowledge knew" about digital medium format cameras and digital backs for film cameras. Lawl seriously bro?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I know  the skill play great part in any  proficiency.but the great equi.can help the professionals to get no limits.
> And one of my life rules is "The Expensive thinks mean great beneft" .
Click to expand...


Any chance of us seeing the great benefit you get from your expensive gear?


----------



## Benco

deutsh said:


> sandollars said:
> 
> 
> 
> Wow,  Don't look now but your ignorance needs to be tucked in before you trip on it and hurt yourself...  :Joker:
> 
> A D7000 is far from junk...  Some of my best shots came out of that body..  In fact, I won 10 grand on a seascape photo taken with a D7000 and a Nikkor 18-200 DX.  No FX and no trinity involved.  Anyone who calls a D7000 junk is just simply being an elitist.  Of course, this is just MHO...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Ok D7000 far of junk then why its cost 1200$ and D800 cost 3000$
Click to expand...


Have you ever used a D7000?


----------



## deutsh

480sparky said:


> Would you care to tell me which of the images I've posted here were taken with a crappy D600, a POS D60 and a junk D7000?
> 
> BTW, where's all YOUR 'pro looking photos'?



Iknow the junk body and fast lens make great results .but great budy make your skill with no limits


----------



## deutsh

Dominik said:


> So I have lost any hope or patience for a Nikon d400 release in the summer. I need an upgrade for school and I am wondering if I should go for the d7100 or the d600. Sadly for the d600 I can only afford dx at the moment but I read that the dx mode on the d600 is really good! If I can afford the lenses I will buy them without a doubt! I shoot almost everything, but my favourite to shoot are concerts, skateboarding, landscape and night time! I need a reason why to pick which camera not just a "d7100 because it is newer" or "d600 because its fx" I want a description.
> 
> Thank
> Listen get d600 and dont get D7000 .its simple


----------



## 480sparky

deutsh said:


> 480sparky said:
> 
> 
> 
> Would you care to tell me which of the images I've posted here were taken with a crappy D600, a POS D60 and a junk D7000?
> 
> BTW, where's all YOUR 'pro looking photos'?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Iknow the junk body and fast lens make great results .but great budy make your skill with no limits
Click to expand...


But I didn't use a fast lens.  I used a* kit *lens.  You keep spewing nonsense that you must spend a lot of money in order to take 'pro looking photos'.



You seem to be doing a lot of back-pedaling and and side-stepping now.

So I'll just say it for the benefit of those who've made it this far:  *PLEASE DON'T FEED THE TROLL ANY MORE!*


----------



## Benco

480sparky said:


> So I'll just say it for the benefit of those who've made it this far:  *PLEASE DON'T FEED THE TROLL ANY MORE!*



I agree, I'm not going to place any more wear and tear on my (no doubt piece of junk) keyboard by arguing with him.


----------



## deutsh

Benco said:


> Have you ever used a D7000?



No ------but the low level cameras like coolpix p100 is better than sony dsc-s750.
All of them are "aim and shot "type .but the p100 are great in every thinks .


----------



## deutsh

480sparky said:


> But I didn't use a fast lens.  I used a kit lens.  You keep spewing nonsense that you must spend a lot of money in order to take 'pro looking photos'.
> 
> You seem to be doing a lot of back-pedaling and and side-stepping now.
> 
> So I'll just say it for the benefit of those who've made it this far:  PLEASE DON'T FEED THE TROLL ANY MORE!



Well   nikon  comany are stop the line of D800 and D4 because they discover that D7000 have every thing the pro needs.


----------



## o hey tyler

deutsh said:


> I know  the skill play great part in any  proficiency.but the great equi.can help the professionals to get no limits.
> And one of my life rules is "The Expensive thinks mean great beneft" .



You're a fool. Consider quitting photography.


----------



## greybeard

Nikon D7100 vs D600: how do you choose? | N-Photo
Nikon D600, D7100 and D7000 Comparison


Looks to me like there is very little IQ difference at low ISO (100-400) however, 800 and beyond, the D600 has about a 1.5 stop edge.  D7100 has more focus points and more fps.  Movies are about the same.  D7100 goes 1/8000 vs 1/4000 for the D600.  It really depends on what is most important to you.


----------



## Vtec44

deutsh said:


> Well   nikon  comany are stop the line of D800 and D4 because they discover that D7000 have every thing the pro needs.



I have the D7000, D600, and D800.  There are pros and cons to each model, that's why I keep my D7000 and have over 75k clicks on it.  A FF camera doesn't make it automatically better than a DX camera because your shooting style plays an important part in picking a camera.  I'd love to see your work.

Guess which camera these were shot in


----------



## TruckerDave

Vtec44 said:


> I have the D7000, D600, and D800.  There are pros and cons to each model, that's why I keep my D7000 and have over 75k clicks on it.  A FF camera doesn't make it automatically better than a DX camera because your shooting style plays an important part in picking a camera.  I'd love to see your work.
> 
> Guess which camera these were shot in



I dont really care what camera you used...the ladies are all HOT.


----------



## TruckerDave

480sparky said:


> But I didn't use a fast lens.  I used a kit lens.  You keep spewing nonsense that you must spend a lot of money in order to take 'pro looking photos'.
> 
> You seem to be doing a lot of back-pedaling and and side-stepping now.
> 
> So I'll just say it for the benefit of those who've made it this far:  PLEASE DON'T FEED THE TROLL ANY MORE!



This is the same poster who had a Nazi avitar.....he lost all credibility me at that point. He could say water is wet and I would not listen to him.


----------



## ratssass

...and had he used spellcheck,it's spelled douche'


----------



## Vtec44

TruckerDave said:


> I dont really care what camera you used...the ladies are all HOT.



They help me to get over my junk cammera.


----------



## deutsh

Hi everyone .this  reply is the last to me in this forum because i unacceptable to majority of this forum.
maybe because misunderstand me .lets me tell all somethings:
1- I am not nazi . I just found that flag in wikipedia and i use it without knowlege .
2-I am troll? why.. did you know why? ,becaue my think is conflict with yours ,and that's unfair.
3-I want from the administrator to delet my acount directly.
I am sory to everyone... indeed,and I want  forgiveness from all.
with thanks


----------



## Dominik

To everyone who stayed within topic of "d600 vs d7100" thank you so much! 

To everyone who didn't that was an interesting argument, but please stay on topic it means a lot to me!

Do not bring the d800 into this because that is out of my range and I am not interested it. FPS means a lot to me and that is what the d800 lacks. It's a beautiful camera, but not for me. And do not call the d7000 or the d7100 junk because it is a DX camera or because it is cheaper than an FX camera... I think the d7100 is a beautiful camera and same with the d600 and that is my problem right now. I still have no idea to what I should get! Or should I wait in hope of any new releases by the end of the summer time?

Thank you everyone for your input it means a lot to me!

Check out my photographs at: DominikMPhoto on deviantART


----------

