Why Nikon must kill the D7100

[astroNikon]

I didn't say I wouldn't go fx. I just say I would be stupid. And I never said I was smart. Think I would rather have something smaller than larger though carrying around gear isn't that fun..

What I meant is that buying a FF camera is a foolish decision for most amateurs these days, but they just do not want to hear the truth. Having said that I too would not say I would never go FF. But just like you I know it would be quite stupid. Luckily one thing stops me - size and weight. Even a prosumer DX like D7100 feels ridiculously big and heavy in my hands, never mind FF.

I hear ya. I don't like carrying around my 7100 either which is why I usually don't. I like something to go WITH whatever activities I am doing not something I am lugging around Becoming the activity just in itself. I still usually use a bridge camera. I mean if the 7100 goes out it goes out with 3 lenses because I have been stuck before not having the right lens for the right thing so I drag three now with me. so I am carrying 3 lenses and the camera in the bag plus whatever else. it isn't like it is this great portable option to lug around. And often I leave it in the car somewhere and just take the camera and a lens. still not some great portable option. I still like my bridge camera. no lenses to carry, less than half the weight and if it is broken or stolen I am only out a few hundred not a few grand so less worries.

I don't really understand this.
It's like all or nothing.

I take my d7000 to alot of places. I take ONE kit lens (18-105) and I take off the Grip.
makes it smaller though not as small as a bridge camera, or mirrorless, but at least I don't have to buy another camera.

With my d600 .. when it goes places I do take other lenses to compensate for what ever I'm going to. Unless it's something specific like a soccer game. Then I take ONE lens - like the 70-300 or 80-200. If I've going out on a photo trip then I take my camera bag.

If I take neither , then I have my iPhone.

There's no reason one can't go light just to have a camera by your side. It just depends what you think "light" is.

I also bought ONLY FX glass after the kit lens with my d7000. Some ppl say when you switch over to FX you have to get rid of all your lenses .. that's only if you bought DX specific lenses to begin with.

I have a large list of lenses that I've bought kept/sold over the last 2 years. They were all FX lenses
The one advantage to going with a d90/d7000 or higher is the in body focus motor. You can buy older AF-D screw focus lenses. People seem to forget about that as that also keeps costs way lower and actually pays for the better body after just one or two lenses.

 

[sashbar]

I regret going FX. Especially in tricky situations where I can shoot at f/4 in non-existent light with high ISO and still get amazing images.

Wow. I am still looking for my first image that I could call "amazing".

 

[JacaRanda]

I regret going FX. Especially in tricky situations where I can shoot at f/4 in non-existent light with high ISO and still get amazing images.

Wow. I am still looking for my first image that I could call "amazing".

I was thinking the SAME thing and would love to see some.

 

[astroNikon]

I regret going FX. Especially in tricky situations where I can shoot at f/4 in non-existent light with high ISO and still get amazing images.

Wow. I am still looking for my first image that I could call "amazing".

I'm still waiting for "the truth"

 

[astroNikon]

I regret going FX. Especially in tricky situations where I can shoot at f/4 in non-existent light with high ISO and still get amazing images.

Wow. I am still looking for my first image that I could call "amazing".

I was thinking the SAME thing and would love to see it.

it's basically the low light advantage you get from a FF camera versus crop.
My FF is so much better in low light, it's not even close even with the same lens.

 

[JacaRanda]

I regret going FX. Especially in tricky situations where I can shoot at f/4 in non-existent light with high ISO and still get amazing images.

Wow. I am still looking for my first image that I could call "amazing".

I was thinking the SAME thing and would love to see it.

it's basically the low light advantage you get from a FF camera versus crop.
My FF is so much better in low light, it's not even close even with the same lens.

For instance like a d7100 vs d610?

 

[astroNikon]

yup like my d7000 vs my d600 --> Question to those who moved from crop sensor to full frame camera-low light Perf | Photography Forum

 

[Vince.1551]

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.

I'm stupid should have just stick to my phone camera ...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[astroNikon]

Under nicely light conditions it really doesn't matter.
when it gets darker then you start seeing the differences.

I use my d7000 alot, except when it's dark. Then the d600 comes out to play.

On the extremes ... and I mean the extremes, the d7000 simply cannot get a shot at all whereas the d600 can capture an image.

And as it gets darker without a flash (kids soccer games with no lights), the d600 would win too as it has a higher usable ISO than my d7000.

I have both and have been using both, with the same lenses. So to me it's obvious.

 

[astroNikon]

4k .. 10k

also as an Economist I bought AF-D lenses. Why buy the most modern, most expensive pro lenses available ?

one doesn't have to do that.
As an amateur the old sub $300 35-70/2.8 is a great lens. No reason to buy the $1400+ 24-70/2.8 if you don't need it. Just the price difference helps you nearly move up to a FF camera.
or 80-200/2.8 (various versions from a couple hundred to about $700) versus the 70-200/2.8 at $1500+ ??

And using the money argument .. why buy a d7100 anyways ? What's wrong with a d7000?

Using the financial argument you can drive down the total cost quite quickly depending upon your requirements.

A d7000 with a 24-85/2.8-4 and 80-200/2.8 is about $1500 and gives you great focal range and some great glass.

It's all down to what someone can afford, what price points they want to afford, whether they want new or used equipment, and what they'll balance out to make their overall decision.

You don't need $4,000 or $10,000.

 

[astroNikon]

but price is still king

d3300 with 18-55 and 55-200 kit is $615
d5300 18-55 / 55-220 is $997
d7100 18-55 / 55-300 bundle thing $1,685
not similar bundle on BestBuy for a d610 ..

most people would opt for the low cost option

 

[Vince.1551]

I supposed everyone make their choices based on their own expectations and needs at that moment so technically there's no right or wrong, to each his own. Just enjoy shooting


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Braineack]

An amazing image doesn't have to be good.

 

[JacaRanda]

yup like my d7000 vs my d600 --> Question to those who moved from crop sensor to full frame camera-low light Perf | Photography Forum

Sort of like that, but maybe more from the D7100 instead of the D7000.

 

[astroNikon]

yup like my d7000 vs my d600 --> Question to those who moved from crop sensor to full frame camera-low light Perf | Photography Forum

Sort of like that, but maybe more from the D7100 instead of the D7000.

Send me a d7100 and I'll run a test.
The price difference of a new d7100 vs used d600 wasn't much so i made the jump

on snapsort.com
a lower noise at high ISO
has the d7000 at 1,167
the d7100 at 1,256
and d600/d610 at 2,980

The d7000 is only 89 off the d7100 versus to the d610 of 1,724 higher
So I think it's still a valid comparison d7000 v d600