Need advice on first DSLR, preferably weather sealed

[robbins.photo]

I am brand new to cameras. I do a lot of outdoor activities (hunting, fishing, camping, hiking, canoe trips, etc) and I would like something I can take with me. I would like something weather sealed so I don't have to worry about an occasional splash or light drizzle while outdoors. I also want something I can grow into because I have been wanting to get into photography for a few years; I am tired of using my point and shoot or phone. Do yall have any recommendations? I have looked at the Pentax K30 and Nikon D7000 online. Still trying to learn all this terminology and how they rate cameras, but I feel like the Nikon would be a better route since there is more lenses and accessories available. I will probably go with a kit to start off and learn, then get more lenses later on. Any insight would be appreciated, thanks.

Nikon D7000 vs Pentax K-30 - Our Analysis

Well I guess I have a slightly different take on the subject. In the interest of offering a full disclaimer, I use a Nikon D5100 myself and I love it. That having been said, my two questions for you are as follows: Do you think you'll be wanting to add extra lenses and such down the line like a good telephoto, etc - in other words do you think this is a hobby that will really grow on you are do you think the standard lens will suit your needs just fine without further upgrades?

My second, and the most important question I think, is are you planning on buying new/refurbished from a shop or online store, or are you looking at picking stuff up used from a source like Ebay?

That's probably the most important question of the two really. Now from the sounds of things really either camera would work fine for what your looking to do, but if your looking at buying additional lenses later on I'd have to give the Nikon the edge in this category because you'll have a lot more options available. The weather sealed will be a little more expensive, so it's something to consider.

The big question though really is are you looking at new/refurb or used. If your plan is to buy used equipment, definitely get the Nikon. Don't get me wrong, Pentax makes a fine camera, but finding used accessories/lenses for them is generally a little harder than coming across used Nikon or Canon gear. You'll stand a much better chance of getting good deals on used equipment and lenses for the Nikon simply because there is just so much more of it available than there is for Pentax.

Now, that having been said - again both cameras would probably do the job for you nicely so neither would be a bad choice. I just always suggest people consider long term before making this kind of purchase.

 

[Coasty]

I would look more at the Nikon D7100.
Its more modern then the D7000 and as far as I know has a better weather sealing then the D7000.
According to Nikon the weather sealing on the D7100 is same as o the D800 which is Nikon pro camera.
The D7100 is also overall more modern and a step up from the D7000.

I have compared my D7000 to the D7100 many times and have yet to find an area on the D7000 that is not just as weather sealed as the D7100. In my opinion, the comparison to the D800’s weather sealing is just marketing by Nikon. The D7100 is a great camera, and an improvement on the D7000, but the D7000 is far from being sent to the trash heap of camera history.

In regards to weather sealing, I can go by what Nikon say.
I don't have the means or will to compare the 2 cameras weather sealing capabilities.
If you choose to believe or not believe that is your choice.
I never said the D7000 is incompitant, its a good solid camera.
Buying the D7K or D7100 is a matter of 2 things...............

1.Can I afford the roughly 200$ difference between the 2 cameras
2.Is the difference between the 2 cameras worth the extra 200$

If 200$ will make it or break it and you simply cant afford the 200$ then by all means the D7K is good.
If you have 200$ and is ok with buying older generation, less modern camera which while is still good but isn't as good as the D7100 then get the D7K.

I don't think if you own the D7K then you should upgrade to the D7100 but if you are about to buy a new camera I don't see the logic in getting the D7000.
That's the way I see it and obviously everybody has the right to their opinion, I always go for the best I can get for my money, that's my attitude and philosophy in life.
If I can get a Golf over a Fiesta then I will squeeze my wallet and get a Golf, if I can get a Golf with 1.4L or 1.6L then I will do my best to get the 1.6L

So what I am saying is that to each his own and as a past owner of a D7K I know what a great camera it is and agree its far from being rubbish but I still personally would advise people to get the D7100 over it.

I wasn’t attacking you or the D7100. I was just pointing out that the 7K and 7100 have the same weather sealing. Nikon says a lot of stuff to promote sales, and comparing the 7100 to the golden D800 was one of those things.

I happened to purchase a second D7000 after the 7100’s came out because #1 the savings was about $500.00, #2 Nikon, in their infinite wisdom, didn’t want the MB-D11 to fit the new camera, so I would have had to get a new battery grip as well. And #3, I was afraid of possible oil issues with the 7100 reminding me of the old saying “a camera in the hand is worth two in the shop” or something like that.

In hindsight, autofocus at f8 and 51 focus points would have been sweet.

 

[robbins.photo]

I have compared my D7000 to the D7100 many times and have yet to find an area on the D7000 that is not just as weather sealed as the D7100. In my opinion, the comparison to the D800’s weather sealing is just marketing by Nikon. The D7100 is a great camera, and an improvement on the D7000, but the D7000 is far from being sent to the trash heap of camera history.

In regards to weather sealing, I can go by what Nikon say.
I don't have the means or will to compare the 2 cameras weather sealing capabilities.
If you choose to believe or not believe that is your choice.
I never said the D7000 is incompitant, its a good solid camera.
Buying the D7K or D7100 is a matter of 2 things...............

1.Can I afford the roughly 200$ difference between the 2 cameras
2.Is the difference between the 2 cameras worth the extra 200$

If 200$ will make it or break it and you simply cant afford the 200$ then by all means the D7K is good.
If you have 200$ and is ok with buying older generation, less modern camera which while is still good but isn't as good as the D7100 then get the D7K.

I don't think if you own the D7K then you should upgrade to the D7100 but if you are about to buy a new camera I don't see the logic in getting the D7000.
That's the way I see it and obviously everybody has the right to their opinion, I always go for the best I can get for my money, that's my attitude and philosophy in life.
If I can get a Golf over a Fiesta then I will squeeze my wallet and get a Golf, if I can get a Golf with 1.4L or 1.6L then I will do my best to get the 1.6L

So what I am saying is that to each his own and as a past owner of a D7K I know what a great camera it is and agree its far from being rubbish but I still personally would advise people to get the D7100 over it.

I wasn’t attacking you or the D7100. I was just pointing out that the 7K and 7100 have the same weather sealing. Nikon says a lot of stuff to promote sales, and comparing the 7100 to the golden D800 was one of those things.

I happened to purchase a second D7000 after the 7100’s came out because #1 the savings was about $500.00, #2 Nikon, in their infinite wisdom, didn’t want the MB-D11 to fit the new camera, so I would have had to get a new battery grip as well. And #3, I was afraid of possible oil issues with the 7100 reminding me of the old saying “a camera in the hand is worth two in the shop” or something like that.

In hindsight, autofocus at f8 and 51 focus points would have been sweet.

You were attacking the D7000! You brute.. you absolute brute! That's it, I'm off to have a good cry. Lol

 

[goodguy]

[
I wasn’t attacking you or the D7100. I was just pointing out that the 7K and 7100 have the same weather sealing. Nikon says a lot of stuff to promote sales, and comparing the 7100 to the golden D800 was one of those things.

I happened to purchase a second D7000 after the 7100’s came out because #1 the savings was about $500.00, #2 Nikon, in their infinite wisdom, didn’t want the MB-D11 to fit the new camera, so I would have had to get a new battery grip as well. And #3, I was afraid of possible oil issues with the 7100 reminding me of the old saying “a camera in the hand is worth two in the shop” or something like that.

In hindsight, autofocus at f8 and 51 focus points would have been sweet.

I know you werent and sorry if it seamed like I came too strong, I simply found some people here (very,very few) tend to take what some say and turn it into something they never meant so I tried to express what I think stressing the point that this is my view and my view only.
I owned the D7000 for over 6 months and I had a bit of a love/anger relations with it because of its well known back focus issue so I try not to warn people of this issue as its not too common but I think the D7100 has (as far as a I know) a better track record being more reliable (in my experience for at least).
To be honest if not for the weather sealing issue I actually would have suggested the D5200 over the D7000.

In any case it looks to me like the OP has his mind set to get the D7000 and I am pretty sure he will be very happy with it

 

[TheLost]

I have used my D7000 (and now D7100) in heavy rain and snow. I've banged it into bleachers, dropped it accidentally and have been hit on the sidelines by large high school lineman.. It's a very well-built camera (and the D7100 is even better)...

However... I never take a DSLR hiking, camping or snowboarding any more. It's big.. its heavy.. the lenses are big and heavy.

Don't let a camera ruin your fun.. something like this (water prof to ~50ft.. shock proof.. freeze proof) would be more appropriate:
Nikon 1 AW1 | Waterproof, Shockproof, Freezeproof Advanced Camera with Interchangeable Lenses

 

[rjackh]

Yes, I think this is a hobby I will get into and buy more lenses and accessories for. No, I don't think I want to buy used equipment. Hadn't ever considered buying a refurbished body. Is this common practice?

I agree on the 7100 over the 7000 if I have the funds. I try to buy once cry once on big purchases like this. Not much sense in getting the dated equipment if I can afford the latest and greatest.

I said that about the 18-200 because I read this review here:
Nikon 18-200mm
I know that its a few years old, but it still made it seem like a great kit lens. Maybe I could get a refurbished body, then get one or two lenses to start? Any recommendations?

 

[robbins.photo]

Yes, I think this is a hobby I will get into and buy more lenses and accessories for. No, I don't think I want to buy used equipment. Hadn't ever considered buying a refurbished body. Is this common practice?

I agree on the 7100 over the 7000 if I have the funds. I try to buy once cry once on big purchases like this. Not much sense in getting the dated equipment if I can afford the latest and greatest.

I said that about the 18-200 because I read this review here:
Nikon 18-200mm
I know that its a few years old, but it still made it seem like a great kit lens. Maybe I could get a refurbished body, then get one or two lenses to start? Any recommendations?

Well the principle of latest and greatest idea is a sound one, to a certain extent. However when purchasing a DSLR you need to consider that you actually have two components in play, the camera body and the lens. While a more advanced camera body will have more features, it is really what type of lenses you have that will normally have the biggest impact on your final images. So generally what I recommend is that you sit down and make a wish list of what your doing with your camera and what features are most important to you, find the best bang for your buck in a camera body that meets those needs, and save the rest of your budget for good glass.

As to specific lens recommendations, as a general rule the shorter a focal length the lens covers, the better/sharper your final images will be - however it also means you'll need to carry more lenses to cover additional focal lengths so it is a trade off. Myself I use a Nikon 70-300 mm about 95% of the time, I mostly do wildlife photography and I find the lens ideal for this purpose. My next lens will most likely be a 50 mm prime for when I need to shoot something closer in than my zoom allows. But really you'll need to figure out what you think you'll be taking pictures of most often and about how far away you'll be from your subject to get a good idea as to what sort of lenses will benefit you most.

 

[Tailgunner]

Nikon D7000 DSLR Camera with NIKKOR 18-200mm DX VR II Lens 13019
This really has caught my eye. The 18-200 seems to be a great versatile kit lens to start with. What do yall think?

This would make a good intro into DSLR photography in my opinion. The D7000 is an excellent camera and can handle a lot of the outdoors abuse you've mentioned above. Al though I would consider a camera rain coat for down pours. Now a lot of people knock the Nikon 18-200 VR for not having the highest of quality photos but it's not designed for professional photography. It's more for all around general use lens. I personally have one and it makes chasing the family around a lot easier. So I have no problem suggesting this lens to anyone looking for a good all around lens.

My only thoughts is you could probably pick up a refurbished D7000 and used 18-200mm for $1,000 and pick up a refurbished D7100 and used 18-200mm around $1400.

 

[goodguy]

You know I think the D7100 is the better choice, if you buy a camera once in every few years then you want to buy the best you can get and not an older generation as good as it is.
I have learned in the past getting what I really want even if its more expensive is worth the investment, I found if I buy something that suits my needs but not what I really want will really effect my joy from this device and at the end of the day I will get what I really want and what I bought to compensate what I wanted at the first place is sold and I lost money at the process but again this is my look on things.

Well in regards to used equipment, all my lenses are used.
From my experience the lenses are sturdy devices that can handle a lot of abuse and still keep going so the risk in buying a used one is small.
On the other hand buying a used camera, I wouldnt but thats my look of it.
I see a camera as a high precision tool that can break very easily so the risk in my eyes is high and so I like my cameras to be new.
Saying that I bought a brand spanking new D7000 less then a year ago and the bloody camera never worked 100% fine even after I sent it to Nikon so buying new is not promising you to get a good camera.

Pesronally I wouldnt get the 18-200mm lens, its an ok lens but its a compromise between image quality and comfort of use.
I rather have the 18-105mm VR + 70-300mm VR lenses which might not have the comfort of using one lens but on the other hand the pictures they produce are better and you are covering a bigger focal length.