5100D vs 7000D vs 300s

paulraymond

TPF Noob!
Joined
Feb 29, 2012
Messages
8
Reaction score
1
Location
Italy
Can others edit my Photos
Photos NOT OK to edit
Hello Everyone,

Thanks for having me and I'm new to photography...
I'm also currently interested in purchasing one of the 3 listed above and I'm having difficulties.
Basically, I live in Europe and want to start taking "action shots" of my favorite Champions League matches (soccer matches).
I spoken with professional photographers (I'm not a professional) and they suggest the Nikon 300s but it's quite expensive and since I'm not an expert, I'm thinking of going with the 7000D because it's got the best of 5100D, but not so far distant from the 300s..
What do you think??

I'm focusing primary on the camera, the lens would be a different discussion..
 
minor correction, its D-then the number, other designation related to canon bodies (i.d. 7d, 60d, 50d, etc :) )

Since 300s is out side of your price range, d7000 is the better way to go.
For me, besides the build quality of the camera (which d7000 is better then d5100) and af-motor (which d7000 has and not sure on d5100) very important aspect is control. d7k has command and sub command dial (one in the front for the index/middle finger and one in the back for the thumb). D5100 has only one dial. For me, this extra second that I need to spend on adjusting settings could mean a shot that I need vs a shot that I lost. Its about control.
As for IQ - on computer you won't see much of a difference at lower ISOs (to about 800). Above that d7000 is superior. Its AF speed is more efficient then of d5100's.

Since you mentioned d300s,
Few disadvantages when comparing to d7000
No AF while in video,
Less in-camera editing/filters.

Advantages: better build.

Controversy: when printing images at ISOs above 800, larger then 16x20, IQ is similar to lower ISOs. However, on d7000 (and this is the controversy) image quality subsides.
I don't own d7000 but number of my colleagues do. From what I've seen of their prints, as well as discussing with labs and members here, there's a mix of reaction as to whether or not large prints at higher ISOs loose quality. Some people will swear with foam at their mouth that there is loss is quality. Others will swear that there isn't. I've seen both cases to be true - from different people. I can only guess that it depends on specific model you get. For me, sine large portion of my work is studio work or imitating studio conditions at different locations, such inconsistent feedback is enough to stay away from d7000. On the same note, if I needed RIGHT HERE RIGHT NOW a camera body with af video, 2 cards, more cheese/creative in-camera editing, higher ISO not being a tremendous issue and UNDER $1200 USD, then D7000 would by my choice.

Good Luck
 
I enjoyed the controversy part of your reply:

Since my main intention to take "actions shots" of my favorite soccer games, I will be outside...
However, I fear that most of the games will be at night with low ambient light but there will be stadium lights, which means perhaps I may have to go above 800 ISO (correct me if I'm wrong).. but, I don't feel as if I'll have to go way beyond 800, so I don't know how much IQ I'll lose if that's the case..

The other uses for the camera will be during the daytime for sure, I don't think I'll use the camera that much during the evening, besides the soccer matches..

paulraymond




 
Well, 800, is't a problem. Again, the controversy is printing those images in large sizes. The prints are saw were shot at 1600. One looked great and another looked (less great). Both were printed in the same lab. But think ISO 1600 (see in the dark type of a thing :lmao:).
 
Hey guys! Not trying to hijack the thread but I'm shopping for a similar camera. I just wanted to throw this out there.
Since the technology is so fluid - does it make sense to get the 5100 and a couple of lenses (50mm and maybe the 18-200 VR)? I know many people are polarized buy the Ken Rockwell site but he this the camera will get pretty close results to the 7000.

Then in a few years, if needed, maybe pick up a better body? Can these Nikon lenses be used on the 5100 series up to the 700 series? Thanks in advance.
 
Lenses you're describing can be used on higher end bodies.
18-200 is an amazing lens. I've used it both for personal reasons and professional. It has limitations in which image quality can be sacrificed but staying w/in those parameters isn't an issue.
the only thing about using dx lens on fx body is that you loose the resolution of the fx body you're using (i.e. d700 goes from 12mp to about 6). THUS if you're printing 20x30 its a problem from 6mp but 16x24 isn't :)
 
Lenses you're describing can be used on higher end bodies.
18-200 is an amazing lens. I've used it both for personal reasons and professional. It has limitations in which image quality can be sacrificed but staying w/in those parameters isn't an issue.
the only thing about using dx lens on fx body is that you loose the resolution of the fx body you're using (i.e. d700 goes from 12mp to about 6). THUS if you're printing 20x30 its a problem from 6mp but 16x24 isn't :)

Do the d7000 lenses swap with the D700 and D80 etc?
 
YES,
but
If it is a dx lens, on dx body (d7000) you'll get full resolution of the sensor. If you're using a dx lens on fx body(d700), you're loosing part of the sensor, HOWEVER, you maintain image quality. For example, I can use 18-200 on d7000 at iso 3200 and then place the same lens on d700 at iso 3200 - given all other conditions the same, image quality will be the better on Fx b/c of the engineering of the sensor, but the lens performance (sharpness, clarity) would be nearly identical. Another difference that would be different is field of view. Here's an image from wikipedia that shows differences of field of view http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/95/SensorSizes.svg dx/fx/med format/ 4/3, etc.
 
I heard that Nikon is going to upgrade the D7000 is this correct?? or just a rumor??
If so, when is it coming out..

paulraymond
 
Who knows... :)
d7000 is relatively new model, I don't seem them upgrading it in the next year or so. However, upgrade for d300/d300s, I believe is the next one to come.
 
Back to the "controversy" regarding the D7000 and large prints:
Even if it's true, I wouldn't be concerned at all about that, considering this is, evidently, your first DSLR.
Since you've already said that the 300s is out of your budget, and you're choosing between the D7000 and the D5100, the controversy is a non-issue. You'll definitely get as good or better prints from the D7000 as you will from the D5100.

I have the D5100 and I love it. The major *con*, and really the ONLY thing that makes me wish I'd gotten the D7000, is the lack of an internal motor. That means you have to either buy the more expensive AF-S lenses for the D5100 or you have to manually focus with the other lenses. Vision problems make that a bit difficult for me sometimes, though I do still manage it when necessary.

My understanding is that the D7000 will perform better in low light too (compared to the 5100); no personal experience with that, just what I've heard.

If you can afford it, and are absolutely certain photography is something you're going to take the CONSIDERABLE time it requires to really learn it, then get the D7000 and a couple of good quality lenses. Honestly, you'll end up saving enough on two AF lenses versus their AF-S counterparts, that you'll make up the higher cost of the D7000 body. If I'd realized that at the beginning, I would have gone with the D7000.

BUT, if you do end up with the D5100, as long as you've got a quality lens or two, you'll be quite happy with it. I don't plan to upgrade anytime in the near future (unless a deal I can't resist comes along). ;)
 
minor correction, its D-then the number, other designation related to canon bodies (i.d. 7d, 60d, 50d, etc :) )

Since 300s is out side of your price range, d7000 is the better way to go.
For me, besides the build quality of the camera (which d7000 is better then d5100) and af-motor (which d7000 has and not sure on d5100) very important aspect is control. d7k has command and sub command dial (one in the front for the index/middle finger and one in the back for the thumb). D5100 has only one dial. For me, this extra second that I need to spend on adjusting settings could mean a shot that I need vs a shot that I lost. Its about control.
As for IQ - on computer you won't see much of a difference at lower ISOs (to about 800). Above that d7000 is superior. Its AF speed is more efficient then of d5100's.

Since you mentioned d300s,
Few disadvantages when comparing to d7000
No AF while in video,
Less in-camera editing/filters.

Advantages: better build.

Controversy: when printing images at ISOs above 800, larger then 16x20, IQ is similar to lower ISOs. However, on d7000 (and this is the controversy) image quality subsides.
I don't own d7000 but number of my colleagues do. From what I've seen of their prints, as well as discussing with labs and members here, there's a mix of reaction as to whether or not large prints at higher ISOs loose quality. Some people will swear with foam at their mouth that there is loss is quality. Others will swear that there isn't. I've seen both cases to be true - from different people. I can only guess that it depends on specific model you get. For me, sine large portion of my work is studio work or imitating studio conditions at different locations, such inconsistent feedback is enough to stay away from d7000. On the same note, if I needed RIGHT HERE RIGHT NOW a camera body with af video, 2 cards, more cheese/creative in-camera editing, higher ISO not being a tremendous issue and UNDER $1200 USD, then D7000 would by my choice.

Good Luck

Woah? They have the same sensor dude. Check DxOMark's score before making assumptions.
 
didn't invest the time to read all posts, but I too am considering this and when stacked side by side the d700 seems to be not only a better deal but a better performer than the d300s???? I guess I'm after a d7000 since Nikon let me down with the d800.


Hello Everyone,

Thanks for having me and I'm new to photography...
I'm also currently interested in purchasing one of the 3 listed above and I'm having difficulties.
Basically, I live in Europe and want to start taking "action shots" of my favorite Champions League matches (soccer matches).
I spoken with professional photographers (I'm not a professional) and they suggest the Nikon 300s but it's quite expensive and since I'm not an expert, I'm thinking of going with the 7000D because it's got the best of 5100D, but not so far distant from the 300s..
What do you think??

I'm focusing primary on the camera, the lens would be a different discussion..
 

Most reactions

New Topics

Back
Top