Why Nikon must kill the D7100

[StandingBear1983]

I bought the D610 over the D7100 mainly because of the viewfinder, the viewfinder on the D610 is better even then the D810's when it comes to eye relief if your waring glasses (also if your not), 17mm on the D810 vs 21mm on the D610...and the fact that its FX and has less noise on higher ISO. - so if there is a difference between the two its the bigger viewfinder...which for me is a big deal (have a few manual nikkor lenses).

 

[jaomul]

In my opinion the d7100 isn't to good for its price as OP stated. It's nikons top crop at the moment and is not small money.

Compare similar priced Sony/Canon/Pentax cameras. The Nikon (Toshiba) Sensor may be a great imager, but the cameras specs aren't better than competitors. They are all similar in there relevant class. The d7100 has a craps buffer though

 

[sashbar]

Still the D7100 keeps a lot of potential Nikon customer away from FX bodies.

I would disagree with that. It is like saying a god hatchback prevents people from buying a large family car. These are just different formats. If you need a family car you do not care if hatchbacks are good or bad. You just need more space. Same with FX v DX. If you need a FF for your photography?, then a DX range is quite irrelevant. If you do not need FF, then having a good DX lineup is great. If you do not know what you need and try to buy as expensive a camera as you can afford, then.. well..

 

[TheFantasticG]

I wouldn't doubt within five years Nikon killing off the DX line and making the CX line the companion to the FX line. Just guessing really but it wouldn't surprise me if they did. I mean, they do make a lot more money off of FX.


Sent from my iPhone using Telekenisisisisis

 

[hamlet]

If they want to give folks more megapixels, then they will be compelled by physics to offer bigger sensors. The denser that sensor becomes, the faster diffraction is going to start taking place. I personally wouldn't buy a crop sensor beyond 24mp. The little 18-55 nikon kit lens cant even perform at its best, because of diffraction. Nikon needs to get their ducks in a row.

 

[Solarflare]

Haha funny thread !


If anyone here actually would plan to go FX - please remember that its not just the body. Its also good lenses. I spent ~5k€ on my D600, 28mm f1.8, 50mm f1.8, 70-200mm f4 VR, 16-35mm f4 VR. Thats the kind of number you might look at ! Makes the price for the body look less relevant, doesnt it ?


We are currently in an economic crisis. People in general have less money. That means shrinking markets. Thus its a consumer market - the producers have to tempt us with better and better products in order to still get sales.

Thats also why you might still be able to buy a new D3100, even if that model is quite old now (I havent recently checked if they are STILL around, but they might well be).

I think the D7100 is a too good camera for the price it sells for, I think it stops people from upgrading to FX because they just dont feel the need to,

Why, yes, the D7100 is great !

But Nikon kills DX simply by avoiding giving DX users a good selection of DX lenses.

And the D7100, while being close to, well, "perfect" in every other way, is sadly intentionally crippled by giving it a too small buffer.

One camera for me is all I need, if I had an FX I wouldnt touch a DX anymore, just my character.

I kept my D5100 as backup. And I indeed had need of it, once, so it was a good thing I did !

And once I have the D750, the D600 will be an even sweeter backup - same lenses, same memory cards, same batteries, same sensor size, same resolution ! And, most importantly, less lens changes, too.

They are different beasts. DX is preferred for sports and birding, FX for most other things.
If you shoot everything and can afford both, it's the way to go.

Birding certainly, yes, because you can never have enough reach for that. Sports in good light, but otherwise not so much. And in either case, with the D7100, you have the problem of the smallish buffer.

how much does an FX sensor cost again ?

Nobody knows for sure ... except people who work in that industry. But its probably around a couple hundred bucks. And once you spend this much on the sensor alone, of course you want the surroundings to be of compareable quality as well. Thats why "full frame" is so expensive.

Is Nikon going to answer the 7D Mark II?

Many people hope so. And it looks likely - doesnt it ? Though at this juncture they could just release a D7200 with
+ increased buffer, maybe also higher fps
+ WiFi (for which a full metal body is a problem, so that works out nicely), maybe also GPS
+ the new AF of the D750, with face detection and -3 EV. Maybe also a "focus on closest" option.
+ the new metering mode (highlight metering).
+ the flipscreen of the D750 (or even better a D5x00 style flipscreen, x in the range 1..3, the D5000 one sucked)
+ possibly a newer sensor (since the D5300 already has an upgrade over the D7100/D5200 - so its very likely), maybe even the 28 Megapixel one of the Samsung NX ? As this one seems to be uber.
+ AF-ON button (seems to be the main request by people used to bigger bodies)
+ couple more U<n> modes
+ Better one-hand-only ergonomics, like Canon has them

 

[astroNikon]

All good info.
But my transition to FX was not as expensive.
My first body was a d7000. One reason was for AF-D lenses versus higher cost AF-S lenses.
Those purchases right there saved me more than the additional cost of the d7000 body versus the d5x00 body.
The 50mm 1.8 AF-D at $100 versus $200
24-85/2.8-4 at I think $230, 24mm AF-D under $200 vs $1400
80-200 vs 70-200 at $700 vs $1400
The list goes on and on and on.

So it also depends upon your selection of lenses. With bodies with an inbody focus motor your options expand greatly and you can get much less costly AF-D lenses for AutoFocus.

So overall, the move to FF or upper end DX can be cheaper than lower end DX.

 

[bribrius]

I am with the economics crowd. Not only do many not have the funds to spend that much on gear, they don't really have the need. A lot of people have more camera than they actually need now. Non pros walking around with ten k in equipment or more..

you have to find someone with not just the money to drop, but also the will to do it. Most wont even put up the three or four k for a 7100 with lenses. They don't really have the need or desire. Now... if you get to some of the yuppies they will drop ten k just to have nice photos on their facebook page.
All in how you see it.
The idea of pushing people to fx isn't very realistic, imo. As the bottom end cameras are usually enough to satisfy the majority of users. As stated the 7100 is for the "serious enthusiasts" (basically people with money to blow that love photography) and when you go up from there you are either in that top percent of serious users with money to blow or the pro section.
The average American at least, is probably still only spending three hundred or less on a camera, even if they have the money to go fx they don't have the inclination or care too. If I go fx, the main reason will be because I AM STUPID. And have nothing better to do than worry about low light photography in my barely paying non pro world.

 

[JacaRanda]

I am with the economics crowd. Not only do many not have the funds to spend that much on gear, they don't really have the need. A lot of people have more camera than they actually need now. Non pros walking around with ten k in equipment or more..

you have to find someone with not just the money to drop, but also the will to do it. Most wont even put up the three or four k for a 7100 with lenses. They don't really have the need or desire. Now... if you get to some of the yuppies they will drop ten k just to have nice photos on their facebook page.
All in how you see it.
The idea of pushing people to fx isn't very realistic, imo. As the bottom end cameras are usually enough to satisfy the majority of users. As stated the 7100 is for the "serious enthusiasts" (basically people with money to blow that love photography) and when you go up from there you are either in that top percent of serious users with money to blow or the pro section.
The average American at least, is probably still only spending three hundred or less on a camera, even if they have the money to go fx they don't have the inclination or care too. If I go fx, the main reason will be because I AM STUPID. And have nothing better to do than worry about low light photography in my barely paying non pro world.

AMEN!

 

[TheLost]

I am with the economics crowd. Not only do many not have the funds to spend that much on gear, they don't really have the need. A lot of people have more camera than they actually need now. Non pros walking around with ten k in equipment or more..

ou have to find someone with not just the money to drop, but also the will to do it. Most wont even put up the three or four k for a 7100 with lenses. They don't really have the need or desire. Now... if you get to some of the yuppies they will drop ten k just to have nice photos on their facebook page.

This is not a 'modern' issue...

In 1972 the Nikon F2 sold for ~$390US (w/50mm prime). That was a huge chunk of money back then yet lots of non-pro's plunked down their hard earned cash to buy one. (~$2,400 in todays money.. roughly the price of a D750 with 50mm).

All in how you see it.
The idea of pushing people to fx isn't very realistic, imo. As the bottom end cameras are usually enough to satisfy the majority of users. As stated the 7100 is for the "serious enthusiasts" (basically people with money to blow that love photography) and when you go up from there you are either in that top percent of serious users with money to blow or the pro section.

Not true at all... I know LOTS of people that have saved up and bought the D7100 because its the best DX body that meets their needs. Fast Auto-Focus, Great in low light, Weather sealed...

These people don't have 'money to blow'.

They want a picture of their daughter playing water polo and their last camera died due to the vast humidity in most indoor pools. Or a student who is taking pictures for the yearbook and needs a good low light camera.

There are people who see value in spending a little more to get the best... and the D7100 is currently the best Nikon DX body.

The average American at least, is probably still only spending three hundred or less on a camera, even if they have the money to go fx they don't have the inclination or care too. If I go fx, the main reason will be because I AM STUPID. And have nothing better to do than worry about low light photography in my barely paying non pro world.

The average American doesn't need a camera. Most need nothing more then the $800+ camera they carry around in their pockets (AKA.. smart phone).

I don't need a sports car.. I don't even drive it to work most days. But i WANT ONE because its fun.

I don't need a FX body.. I'm getting one because i find photography FUN and ENJOYABLE. Call me stupid if you want... but keep your Elio (Elio Motors: Ultra High Mileage Vehicle ) and D3x00 out of the fast lane so you don't slow down the rest of us

 

[bribrius]

lol. I am not rocket scientist but if sales are decreasing http://www.cipa.jp/stats/documents/e/dw-201407_e.pdf
year over year I would guess that the lower priced models would be pushed more as talking people into buying the higher priced models isn't working. And it still means the lower priced models have to be good enough (and compact enough) to make people want them over using their iPhone. Perhaps they were bringing out the lower end fx bodies to kind of talk people into it. And it isn't working? I would expect at some point the fx line would return to the pro or nearly pro only and the lower end line become consumer only and the middle ground would be somewhat lost. They are still looking for the few hundred dollar mark to attract the average consumer and still make them worth buying over using their phone.

I am with the economics crowd. Not only do many not have the funds to spend that much on gear, they don't really have the need. A lot of people have more camera than they actually need now. Non pros walking around with ten k in equipment or more..

ou have to find someone with not just the money to drop, but also the will to do it. Most wont even put up the three or four k for a 7100 with lenses. They don't really have the need or desire. Now... if you get to some of the yuppies they will drop ten k just to have nice photos on their facebook page.

This is not a 'modern' issue...

In 1972 the Nikon F2 sold for ~$390US (w/50mm prime). That was a huge chunk of money back then yet lots of non-pro's plunked down their hard earned cash to buy one. (~$2,400 in todays money.. roughly the price of a D750 with 50mm).

All in how you see it.
The idea of pushing people to fx isn't very realistic, imo. As the bottom end cameras are usually enough to satisfy the majority of users. As stated the 7100 is for the "serious enthusiasts" (basically people with money to blow that love photography) and when you go up from there you are either in that top percent of serious users with money to blow or the pro section.

Not true at all... I know LOTS of people that have saved up and bought the D7100 because its the best DX body that meets their needs. Fast Auto-Focus, Great in low light, Weather sealed...

These people don't have 'money to blow'.

They want a picture of their daughter playing water polo and their last camera died due to the vast humidity in most indoor pools. Or a student who is taking pictures for the yearbook and needs a good low light camera.

There are people who see value in spending a little more to get the best... and the D7100 is currently the best Nikon DX body.

The average American at least, is probably still only spending three hundred or less on a camera, even if they have the money to go fx they don't have the inclination or care too. If I go fx, the main reason will be because I AM STUPID. And have nothing better to do than worry about low light photography in my barely paying non pro world.

The average American doesn't need a camera. Most need nothing more then the $800+ camera they carry around in their pockets (AKA.. smart phone).

I don't need a sports car.. I don't even drive it to work most days. But i WANT ONE because its fun.

I don't need a FX body.. I'm getting one because i find photography FUN and ENJOYABLE. Call me stupid if you want... but keep your Elio (Elio Motors: Ultra High Mileage Vehicle ) and D3x00 out of the fast lane so you don't slow down the rest of us

just admit it is primarily a product of consumerism. One puppet sees another puppet bought one and so it goes.....
course sales seem to be declining year after year. so maybe the puppets are copying different puppets now. I venture to bet a large amount of camera purchases are immediate gratification anyway, rather than need or much thought. But back to the topic line, they lowered body prices and came out with entry level fx for a reason. sales are still down. So much for pushing anyone into fx they are still trying to get them to buy the low and middle range cameras. you can see the market steadily shrinking (course photography for the last ten years or so has been more of a fad anyway)

 

[sashbar]

If I go fx, the main reason will be because I AM STUPID. And have nothing better to do than worry about low light photography in my barely paying non pro world.

This is THE TRUTH that most people simply do not want to hear.

 

[JacaRanda]

If I go fx, the main reason will be because I AM STUPID. And have nothing better to do than worry about low light photography in my barely paying non pro world.

This is THE TRUTH that most people simply do not want to hear.

Ouch!

 

[sashbar]

If I go fx, the main reason will be because I AM STUPID. And have nothing better to do than worry about low light photography in my barely paying non pro world.

This is THE TRUTH that most people simply do not want to hear.

Ouch!

Well, not being an English speaker I am allowed a little controversy am I ?

 

[JacaRanda]

If I go fx, the main reason will be because I AM STUPID. And have nothing better to do than worry about low light photography in my barely paying non pro world.

This is THE TRUTH that most people simply do not want to hear.

Ouch!

Well, not being an English speaker I am allowed a little controversy am I ?

As long as you abide by forum rules JOIN THE PARTY