# Informations before buying a new D7000



## Bedo (Apr 24, 2012)

Hi all,

I'm new to this forum :mrgreen:

I would like to buy a new (my first!) DSLR. I decided for a Nikon. So I searched a lot of information about D5100 and D90. The first one looks a bit "too entry level" for me, while the D90 is quite old (but still valid). I decided that maybe it would be a good idea to spend a bit more and get a D7000 (2010-2011 as release year, right?).

I've just seen that Nikon released the new D3200 (24 MP). So I have some questions:

Should I wait because a new model is coming out to replace the D7000?
I'm from Europe and I've found the D7000 at 1200 with a 18-105mm VR lens (which is a 27-155mm right?). Is this a good price? And: is this a good "starting" lens? I've read that its maximum aperture is f/3.5-5.6. Can I use it to obtain a nice background lens blur effect (depth of field)? Do you suggest any different starting-versatile lens?
Any answer to these questions/opinion/suggestion is really appreciated. 

Thank you
​


----------



## KmH (Apr 24, 2012)

Nikon D7000 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A new model of any camera is always in the wings. The time frame between the D3100 and D3200 was August 19, 2010 to a week ago, or 19 months, about typical for entry-level caDSLR cameras.

Since the D7000 was launched September 15, 2010, and it is also an entry-level DSLR, it's about due. $1200 Euro is about right for a new D7000 and 18-105 Nikon kit lens.

Several factors beside thes lens determine if a photo will have a shallow DoF, or not. http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/depth-of-field.htm


----------



## Infinite_Day (Apr 24, 2012)

Also, the 18-105 is a DX lens and behaves as such on a DX body (i.e. all the bodies you listed). Only lenses designed for FX or 35mm will have a longer effective focal length on a DX body.


----------



## LizardKing (Apr 24, 2012)

I bought the D7000 as my first DSLR about 6-7 months ago, and couldn't be happier! I think it's the best option if you have the money. 
Now, if I were to buy it now, I'd probably save more money and wait to buy the D800... It's just so much more. But maybe a little too much for the first DSLR... who knows jaja

One thing for sure: if you buy it, you won't regret it. :thumbup:

About the lens, I think it's a good start and probably the aperture won't be the problem. I believe the real difference is in the quality of the lens. So, again, if possible aim to a better lens... maybe in FX format.
If not possible, then I think the kit lens is a great start 



Infinite_Day said:


> Also, the 18-105 is a DX lens and behaves as such on a DX body (i.e. all the bodies you listed). Only lenses designed for FX or 35mm will have a longer effective focal length on a DX body.



Is this right? I thought no matter what type of lens you had, if the camera was DX, then that was it... or are there like 3 different 'sizes' of formats ?


----------



## Mach0 (Apr 24, 2012)

LizardKing said:
			
		

> About the lens, I think it's a good start and probably the aperture won't be the problem. I believe the real difference is in the quality of the lens. So, again, if possible aim to a better lens... maybe in FX format.
> If not possible, then I think the kit lens is a great start
> 
> Is this right? I thought no matter what type of lens you had, if the camera was DX, then that was it... or are there like 3 different 'sizes' of formats ?




There's DX and FX(35mm). DX lenses are designed for the smaller sensor. Both can be interchanged but if you use a DX lens on fx or 35 body, you aren't using the full sensor.


----------



## vipgraphx (Apr 24, 2012)

I would never give the advice to any person who is starting out to buy a full frame pro body camera. Unless they have the money to buy pro lenses and take an immediate course on how to use the camera. There is a huge difference with the D90-D5100-D3200 -D7000 to the D800. The average person would be lost and sink very fast. 

I would reccomend the D7000. It will still be superior to the D3200. It is has a metal shell and weather sealed. It will perform better in low light and probably has way more features than the D3200. It also has 1080p video ( i never used) It will allow you do use way more lenses than the D3200 and D5100. Its bigger and feels better in the hand and it still has auto and user controls incase you are not sure what settings to use in A-P-S or M modes. The 16mp is enough for any person these days. The average joe does not print huge pictures so 24mp I don't see being that much better and would rather have more of a prosumer camera like the D7000. If the D7000 does get a replacement I don't think it will be a huge difference. Subtle changes maybe but nothing I would wait for if I was going to buy one. 

I would however choose the D7000 over the D90 any day.

Good luck


----------



## dayvidtang (Apr 24, 2012)

Infinite_Day said:


> Also, the 18-105 is a DX lens and behaves as such on a DX body (i.e. all the bodies you listed). Only lenses designed for FX or 35mm will have a longer effective focal length on a DX body.





LizardKing said:


> Is this right? I thought no matter what type of lens you had, if the camera was DX, then that was it... or are there like 3 different 'sizes' of formats ?



I'm confused now... I thought that due to the cropped sensor, a DX lens with a focal range of 35mm would effectively have a focal range of ~52mm on a DX body? From what you said, a DX lens with a focal range of 35mm will still have a focal range of 35mm


----------



## IgsEMT (Apr 24, 2012)

Question 2 part 1:  18-105 - lovely lens. it hangs on my d90 99% of the time adding sb600 and/or sb800 and 50mm to that combo is my go-to kit for anything I'd like to do that isn't work related. Work bodies/lenses/flashes are different and better quality but for running around w/ kids in the park d90 w/18-105 is MORE then enough.

Question 2 part 2: you can have the fastest lenses in the world but if you don't know how to use them, it'll be meaningless. About 2yrs ago for a period of 2 months, nearly every week someone was asking for a CC of an image that was taken w/ a wide open lens and the person couldn't figure out why it looked so soft or out of focus or why the pro they've been trying to imitate is successful and they are not. Point is, photography is WAY more then lenses, lighting is just as important if not more important. As a newcomer into this world, buy your camera, lens and a flash. Learn how to use them all and only when you feel that you pushed your lens to its limits (of optimal quality) you should look into another lens. One of my colleagues is shooting weddings with D300 + 18-200. He loves the zoom capabilities of that lens, shoots b/n f/7.1 to f/11 and adjust lighting accordingly: that's his style, that is what his clientele expect from him and he doesn't feel the need to upgrade. His clients also don't print anything larger then 16x20 and that's where that lens begins to loose its ability to perform... Point is again, learn and know your equipment. After that there will be time when you'll say I WISH I had the capabilities to open wider b/c of  _____ ______ ______ and that is when you'll purchase additional lens.


Good Luck


----------



## Infinite_Day (Apr 25, 2012)

dayvidtang said:


> Infinite_Day said:
> 
> 
> > Also, the 18-105 is a DX lens and behaves as such on a DX body (i.e. all the bodies you listed). Only lenses designed for FX or 35mm will have a longer effective focal length on a DX body.
> ...



A lens that specifically says "DX" on it will give you the focal length that is written on the lens when used on a body with a "DX" sensor. If you put a DX lens on an FX body it will work but you will typically get vignetting becuase the lens is designed such that it works with the smaller DX sensor and thus may not be able to project an image circle that will cover an entire FX sensor. An FX lens projects a larger image circle so that it can cover 35mm film or an FX sensor. If you use a non-DX specific lens on a DX sensor body the sensor is only picking up a smaller portion of the image the lens can project and is thus providing you with a "cropped" image from what the lens is actually producing at a give focal length. That is why you will get an image with an effectively longer focal length. It's not that the lens is truly any longer - it's that you're basically starting with a cropped image to begin with. At least, that's how I understand it. Hopefully that made sense to you.


----------



## Bedo (Apr 25, 2012)

Ok, thank you for your tips. :mrgreen:



> If the D7000 does get a replacement I don't think it will be a huge difference. Subtle changes maybe but nothing I would wait for if I was going to buy one.



But the D7000 maybe become very cheaper, right? So my final question is: should I wait 1-2 month because there is a high probability to see a replacement for the D7000 or maybe nothing will happen because a new DSLR hast just been released?


Another question: what lens do you suggest as an alternative starting lens to the DX 18-105 mm?


----------



## jriepe (Apr 25, 2012)

Infinite_Day said:


> Also, the 18-105 is a DX lens and behaves as such on a DX body (i.e. all the bodies you listed). Only lenses designed for FX or 35mm will have a longer effective focal length on a DX body.




I've read and always thought that the FOV on a cropped sensor camera is the same with a DX or FX lens but now you are saying the exact opposite so will others please chime in to let me know which is which?  Thank you.

Jerry


----------



## StandingBear1983 (Apr 25, 2012)

in a few months the D7100 will come out (or D8000) and the D400, you can wait a few months and buy one of them already, if your so close to the release . but i also would go for the D7000 if you cant wait and have lens already specially old ones without the motor, if not, the D5100 has the same sensor and its more comfy for video.


----------



## analog.universe (Apr 25, 2012)

Infinite_Day said:


> Also, the 18-105 is a DX lens and behaves as such on a DX body (i.e. all the bodies you listed). Only lenses designed for FX or 35mm will have a longer effective focal length on a DX body.



This is wrong unfortunately.

The focal length printed on the lens (specified in mm), is a characteristic of the optical geometry, and is true no matter what format it is mounted to or designed for.  A 35mm DX lens on DX body produces the exact same image as a 35mm FX lens on a DX body.  A 35mm DX lens on an FX body produces the exact same image as a region cropped from the center of a 35mm FX lens on an FX body.

So, if you have a crop sensor camera, everytime you see 24mm or 35mm or whatever printed on a lens, it will always look the same, whether that lens is for DX, FX, or medium format.  Every focal length on a DX body gets you a 1.5-1.6x narrower angle of view than that same focal length would on FX, no matter what format the lens was designed for.


----------



## Bedo (Apr 25, 2012)

Is D5100 better then D7000 to shot videos?


----------



## KmH (Apr 25, 2012)

No.


----------



## Yantropov (Apr 25, 2012)

The only thing the D5100 has over the D7000 for video is that you can move the LCD screen.


----------



## LizardKing (Apr 25, 2012)

Bedo said:


> Another question: what lens do you suggest as an alternative starting lens to the DX 18-105 mm?



It's really hard to answer your question. I remember asking the same one when I was looking to buy my first camera and lenses, and the truth is you'll have to figure out by yourself what's the best lens for *you*. It depends on so many things... Starting with your budget, the camera, your plans for upgrade in the future, what kind of photography you'll be doing most, other secundary uses you can think of... If you're looking to buy just one lens, I wouldn't recommend starting with a prime, so just look for the different options Nikon offers in zooms. You should also check Tamron and Sigma, too.

I ended up buying this one and think it's a great lens. Maybe not good for low-light conditions w/o a tripod, but the D7000 works really great with high ISOs so that shouldn't be a problem.

edit: Once you do some research, people here can help you make the final decision... But you need to show them a couple of models or at least explain a little bit more your needs 

Regards,
*LizardKing*


----------



## Infinite_Day (Apr 26, 2012)

analog.universe said:


> Infinite_Day said:
> 
> 
> > Also, the 18-105 is a DX lens and behaves as such on a DX body (i.e. all the bodies you listed). Only lenses designed for FX or 35mm will have a longer effective focal length on a DX body.
> ...



Which is essentially what I explained on my follow-up post. I should have said "perceived" instead of "effective" I guess. I was just trying to make it easier to understand.


----------



## StandingBear1983 (Apr 26, 2012)

Yantropov said:


> The only thing the D5100 has over the D7000 for video is that you can move the LCD screen.



Correct, another difference, D7000 has the motor = you can use all lenses, not only the new AF-S lenses. and its built better.


----------



## Bedo (May 5, 2012)

Ok I decided to buy a D7000.I would like your opinion about this lenses:1) 18-105 VR f3.5-5.6 Or 2) 18-55 VR + 75-300 VR. Do you suggest to invest more money and get 2 lenses? What about the second choice for portraits? A friend of mine told me that a lot of portraits are made using about 65 as focal length... Consider that I have no other lenses. Any opinion is really appreciated. Thank you


----------



## IByte (May 5, 2012)

35mm 1.8 or 50mm 1.8 are pretty good for the money.  Having said that you will not regret buying the d7000.


----------



## Erik638 (May 5, 2012)

I bought my camera w/ kit lens 18-105 and thought it was a good lens to learn on and still put it on my camera when I will be asking others to take pictures with my camera. I next bought a used 50mm 1.8 for 90 dollars off Craig's list. From that moment I was hooked on fast glass. I then bought 24-70 & 70-200. The 24-70 basically lives on my camera with the 70-200 coming on for kids sports and a occasional portrait. 

So my rambling answer will depend on your budget. 

Low budget- 18-105 w/ a used 50. F1.8 prime

Medium budget - third party 24-70 2.8 (like the range on dx many people will say its to long on dx) or Nikon 24-120 f4

No budget - Nikon 24-70 f2.8


----------



## Bedo (May 5, 2012)

I was thinking about:
18-105mm f/3.5-5.6

OR
.
70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 and 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6
With choice 2) I will lose the range from 55mm to 70mm. Is this a problem for portraits? 

With choice 1), what about the future? What can I buy in the future to reach 300mm?



> Medium budget - third party 24-70 2.8 (like the range on dx many people will say its to long on dx)



What does the end sentence mean?


----------



## Bedo (May 13, 2012)

Ok I've just purchased a new D7000 + 18-105mm VR + a 55-300mm VR + 4GB Lexar Premium card.

Should I need some extra-accessories, just to start? A cleaning kit (any suggestions?). An UV-filter? A lens hood? Another SDHC?​


----------



## Infinite_Day (May 13, 2012)

You're going to want another, larger SDHC or SDXC card. THe D7000 has two slots and I keep one 8gb and one 16gb in it and I wish I could steal the other 16gb that's in my wife's point and shoot for video. You won't get a ton of RAW photos on a 4gb card. Both lenses should have a hood with them. Giottos makes a good basic cleaning kit with an air blaster. You may want to look into a second battery as well.


----------



## Patriot (May 13, 2012)

I have a 32gb card and a 8gb...as soon as the store get more 32gb in stock im getting it. Those two will hold me over for a very long time.


----------



## Bedo (Jun 2, 2012)

I've started using my new D7000 and I like it a lot! 

However it is really, really heavy!!


----------



## Onbird (Jan 6, 2013)

Bedo said:
			
		

> I've started using my new D7000 and I like it a lot!
> 
> However it is really, really heavy!!



Really, it's not heavy at all. Perhaps you are used to a P&S.. I believe the internal frame is made of magnesium for sturdy use in the field like the PRO cameras.

It really a great camera..

--John

Happy Shooting


----------



## KmH (Jan 6, 2013)

The D7000 has a magnesium top and back plate. The rest of the chassis is plastic.



> http://www.nikonusa.com/en/Nikon-Products/Product/Digital-SLR-Cameras/25468/D7000.html
> *Compact but durable with magnesium-alloy top and rear covers,..*




FWIW, the D7000's magnesium plates (or a full magnesium chassis like Nikon's prosumer and pro grade cameras have) are mainly there to aid heat dissipation and to block outside RF interference.


----------



## Vautrin (Jan 6, 2013)

vipgraphx said:


> I would never give the advice to any person who is starting out to buy a full frame pro body camera. Unless they have the money to buy pro lenses and take an immediate course on how to use the camera. There is a huge difference with the D90-D5100-D3200 -D7000 to the D800. The average person would be lost and sink very fast.
> 
> I would reccomend the D7000. It will still be superior to the D3200. It is has a metal shell and weather sealed. It will perform better in low light and probably has way more features than the D3200. It also has 1080p video ( i never used) It will allow you do use way more lenses than the D3200 and D5100. Its bigger and feels better in the hand and it still has auto and user controls incase you are not sure what settings to use in A-P-S or M modes. The 16mp is enough for any person these days. The average joe does not print huge pictures so 24mp I don't see being that much better and would rather have more of a prosumer camera like the D7000. If the D7000 does get a replacement I don't think it will be a huge difference. Subtle changes maybe but nothing I would wait for if I was going to buy one.
> 
> ...



So this is kind of a complicated question.

On the one hand, if you went out and bought the best lens + body you can, you will take longer to upgrade.  So, if you get a D3200, maybe in a few months or a year you'll be buying a new body (and definitely some new lenses), but if you really go all out and go with the best options ahead of time, you'll have plenty of room to grow.

This being said, most people won't know what they really like to shoot right off the bat.  Or they'll grow as a photographer.  So if you were to go out, buy the best equipment you can afford, I can't guarantee you that you won't end up wanting different equipment.

In addition, the D3200 is very "n00b oriented" and there will be modes to make it really easy to shoot with, even if you have never held a camera before.

However, a high end camera won't have a "portrait mode" -- it'll expect you to figure out exactly what you want.

So, with that said, I tend to think if you go for a D3200 and get a nice lens (FX if you can afford it) you'll have a great halfway point.  You'll have a lens you can grow with and use on bigger bodies, but at the same time won't be stuck before you actually know what you want to shoot

Hope that makes sense


----------



## Yantropov (Jan 6, 2013)

Onbird said:


> Bedo said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



It can get heavy with my 70-200 VRII attached to it...


----------

