# D7000 vs D7100



## MitchStrp (Apr 18, 2013)

Really want to pick one of these up but the money is the only issue (isnt it always) I have a buddy of mine who would sell me his for 700 bucks (d7000) or should I save up and just get a new d7100? the only difference I really see is the pixels. are the pixels really going to make that big of a difference between the two bodies? D7100- 24.1 MP and D7000 - 16.2 MP


----------



## orb9220 (Apr 18, 2013)

Too me just don't see the extra premium cash for the D7100 as the D7000 priced new or used is about the best bang for the buck going right now. There will always be a newer Bod around the corner. For me it's getting the best bang/performer which I can use learn and grow into. And cover my needs next 2-3 years while I add and build my complete kit.

And apply the savings for better glass,flash & tripod. But hey that's just me.
.


----------



## MitchStrp (Apr 18, 2013)

Thanks man! Kind of what I was thinking!!


----------



## JBrown (Apr 18, 2013)

I disagree. By what standards do you judge the bang for buck on bodies. The 7100 is a awesome body for the money and worth every bit of 1200. If you want a cheap or older tech body just buy a 3200. Yes there is a premium now, But it will be worth more when you sell.


----------



## MitchStrp (Apr 18, 2013)

I have a 3200 now lol. its out film camera for skateboarding  would just like a higher end DX camera and like the idea of dual sd slots... everything is pretty close to the same on both cameras except the megapixels.


----------



## runnah (Apr 18, 2013)

Meh go with the cheaper option. Megapixels are kind of a moot point after a certain amount, then it just becomes a big dick contest between canon and nikon.

Save yourself the extra money and buy a decent lens or flash.


----------



## MitchStrp (Apr 18, 2013)

well **** if its a big dick contest... i really need to spend some money on this body. :/


----------



## Rafterman (Apr 18, 2013)

If your buddy's D7000 is in nice condition with a low shutter count, it's worth the $700. If it's well-used or beat up a bit, spend $50 more and get a refurbished one from Adorama or someplace. That's where I got mine and it had < 200 actuations on the shutter and looked totally new. Plus, it came with a 90-day warranty, brand new battery, and all accessories.


----------



## SCraig (Apr 18, 2013)

runnah said:


> Meh go with the cheaper option. Megapixels are kind of a moot point after a certain amount, then it just becomes a big dick contest between canon and nikon.
> 
> Save yourself the extra money and buy a decent lens or flash.



As a general statement I disagree.  It depends on what you shoot and how you shoot it.  If one normally finds themselves significantly cropping their images to get to the subject then having additional resolution in the cropped area is certainly an advantage.  For example, if you crop a 24mp image to 50% you still have 12mp in the cropped area whereas if you crop a 16mp image to 50% you only have 8mp or 2/3 the resolution.  That can be significant.


----------



## Rafterman (Apr 18, 2013)

SCraig said:


> For example, if you crop a 24mp image to 50% you still have 12mp in the cropped area whereas if you crop a 16mp image to 50% you only have 8mp or 2/3 the resolution.  That can be significant.



True, but how many people actually print the pictures they take as opposed to just putting them in an online gallery or their Facebook page at 900x600 pixels? I agree with your point (the math doesn't lie), but each person uses their camera in a different way.


----------



## MitchStrp (Apr 18, 2013)

I shoot alot of fish eye and a little wide angle.. very little cropping on my part. I usually try and frame the photo how Id like it to come out and never use the ones that were framed how Id like. Im super picky plus my dad has really instilled that in me.  Im going with the D7000 and going to invest in a Nikkor 70-200 f2.8 after this purchase.


----------



## Derrel (Apr 18, 2013)

I've heard a lot of talk about how much better the D7100 is in terms of HIGH-ISO performance...and have seen some images too...it is a VERY good imager. I looked thru the Ken Rockwell D600 Full-frame vs D7000 vs D7100, three-camera comparison pictures. At VERY large magnifications, the D7000 is shown to be lower-resolution than either the D600 or D7100, both of which appear almost identical. I think a $700 D7000 used from a buddy sounds like a good deal...I dunno...I think that's a decent price, but I am not all that up on used prices on D7000's; I do know that D7100's are about $1199 body-only, so that's a $500 savings, but probably no warranty. Still...seems like a good deal for seven bills.


----------



## TheLost (Apr 19, 2013)

IMHO $700 is a bit high for a used D7000..  A Nikon Refurbished is $744 from Adorama & B&H.  In my area a D7000 with ~10k clicks is going for $600ish.

I always use the refurbished market to judge the price of used gear...  

Refurb D5100 (same sensor as D7000 w/less controlls) = $389! (Amazing deal)
Refurb D3200 w/18-55 (24mp sensor) = $479

So... if your goal is to get a good camera cheap the D5100 is a great option..  If you want a more advanced body the D7000 is the way to go... but make sure you get a good price for it.

If you have the cash for a D7100 then take long 'think' about a Refurbished D600 for $1599.  (unless you want the mythical D400... then you should buy the D7100  )


Just my .002c.


----------



## gregtallica (Apr 19, 2013)

Obviously the newer technology is going to out perform. But people have been making stunning images with the D7000 for years without exceeding the cameras limitations. What I would way into with the extra cash for the 7100 would be these:

1) Do you have the cash? If you can afford it, it will be nicer, there's no question about that. If it's a stretch for the cash... Might as well put that toward glass.

2) Do you really need that many more megapixels? How often do you print billboards and very large posters?

3) Do you need the high ISO? You mentioned skateboarding stuff, typically you're shooting outside in daylight, meaning you're not often gonna stretch your ISO, but if you guys skate at night a lot without a ton of lighting, You might need the extra performance.



edit:

One last thing - in my opinion, it is _well worth_ the extra $$ for the 7000 or 7100 over the D5100. The 5100 is little, lots of menu diving, and after owning a 7000 and having "whenever I want it" acess to the 51, it just feels like a toy in comparison. There are plenty of people who can produce better images with a 5100 than I'll ever make with my 7k, but so what. I love having the bigger camera, the more solid feeling body, and my fingers actually fitting around the grip.


----------



## TheLost (Apr 19, 2013)

gregtallica said:


> Obviously the newer technology is going to out perform. But people have been making stunning images with the D7000 for years without exceeding the cameras limitations.



Come join me one Saturday morning at one of the high school Rugby games around the Salt Lake valley...  I'll show you the difference between the D7000 and the D7100


----------



## gregtallica (Apr 19, 2013)

You're in Salt Lake? I'd actually like that! As long as I'm not recording (finishing up a record with one of my bands).


----------



## TheLost (Apr 19, 2013)

gregtallica said:


> You're in Salt Lake? I'd actually like that! As long as I'm not recording (finishing up a record with one of my bands).


Yup..  (well.. south-west salt lake valley  )...  We have some of the nations highest ranked rugby teams battling it out in our parks each saturday..  My son's team is currently #4 in the nation.  

To take this back on topic... There is a (BIG) difference between the D7100 and D7000.. To some people its not as obvious or important as it is to others


----------



## Rafterman (Apr 19, 2013)

TheLost said:


> There is a (BIG) difference between the D7100 and D7000.. To some people its not as obvious or important as it is to others



Lack of AA filter? Meh. Not that important to me.


----------



## TheLost (Apr 19, 2013)

Rafterman said:


> Lack of AA filter? Meh. Not that important to me.



The AF system from the D4?  I had a D7000 since it came out and the D7100 is faster and more accurate when shooting sports.  The D7100 is amazing focusing in low light...






1/1250 | f/2.8 | 4000 iso | 200mm

Shot in a dark indoor 'field house' at night...  My D7000 struggled at this venue last year.

Better ISO?  My D7100 never had as clean shots @ ISO 4000+

24mp? Crop till you drop... Since i cant afford a 300mm f/2.8 this is a *WIN* for me! 

Body design?  Its more refined then the D7000.  Bigger grip.. better button positions.

Like i said... to some people its features are important... to others not so much... but there are differences.  The D7100 is not just a D7000 with a 24mp sensor.


----------



## goodguy (Apr 19, 2013)

D7000 vs D7100

In Toronto you can get a new D7000 for 799$+Tax, same store sells the D7100 for 1200$ so that 400$ more.

Is the D7100 a better camera ? it sure is and if I didnt have a camera then I would go for the D7100 but if I was really streached for cash the D7000 is an amazing tool and I see no reason not to get it.

If you are short on cash then dont think twice the D7100 is better but its not a revolutionary camera, it does stuff better then the D7K but not by much and I can tell you so far my D7000 just makes me happy like a 3 year old with a new choo choo train.


----------



## MitchStrp (Apr 19, 2013)

Money is super tight!! I make very little to no money in this hobby and im paying for everything out of pocket while juggling college and working for dicks...... sporting goods.  So I ordered a new d7000 for 750.00


----------



## gregtallica (Apr 19, 2013)

Welcome to the family


----------



## goodguy (Apr 19, 2013)

MitchStrp said:


> Money is super tight!! I make very little to no money in this hobby and im paying for everything out of pocket while juggling college and working for dicks...... sporting goods.  So I ordered a new d7000 for 750.00



Congrats, you are going to be amazed how nice this camera really is!!! :hail:


----------



## Nikanon (Apr 19, 2013)

Bought my D7000 last year around this time and I love it! The D7100 sounds like a really nice camera but I will be upgrading to FF so I will pass on it for now.


----------



## SquarePeg (Apr 21, 2013)

MitchStrp said:


> Money is super tight!! I make very little to no money in this hobby and im paying for everything out of pocket while juggling college and working for dicks...... sporting goods.  So I ordered a new d7000 for 750.00



Ive been researching the d7000 and have not seen it new for $750.  Its $744 refurbed on BH website.  Did you order online or purchase in store?  Care to share where you found this deal?


----------



## greybeard (Apr 21, 2013)

I have the d7000 and have no plans in dumping it for a d7100.  With that said, I would go for the d7100 now as I think it is a marginally better camera body.  24mp vs 16mp will give you a bit more room to crop, assuming your lenses are up to it. (jmho)


----------



## TJC (Apr 29, 2013)

Ah the progression of technology! The lure of the new, new thing!

Nikon didn't bring out the 7100 so you could take a better picture. They brought it out because the market demands that they do. Otherwise they get pounded by the Photo media as lagging behind with no new offerings in X period of time. This is why the 7100 is not a ground breaking offering. it is, instead, a slot filler. A parts bin camera. Move this button from here to there, give it a an off the shelf higher MP processor, add 100 to its name and call it done! Yes it is a great camera, but then again, so is the camera it replaces on the shelf, the D7000. Buy the 7000 and use the savings to build your arsenal of lenses.

Nikon's version of bang for the buck, btw, imo is the F100. Yes, there are much more expensive film cameras. They are faster, more of this, better that, more heavy duty something else. And, of course every digital camera is supposedly "better. " But bang for the buck? The F100 is still sought after,what, 15 years after it's release? It has withstood the ultimate test - the test of time.


----------

