D7000 vs D3100

[Char]

I currently have a D50 and I believe it is time for an upgrade.

The main reason I am upgrading is because my D50 has had a use of over 3 years and there is some significant wear in the motor and other parts of the camera.
Another reason is that I want a better auto focus system. The one in the D50 is okay but I would prefer a system with more options.
Also, my camera seems to be having a variety of problems when it comes to autofocusing.

I have read some things about the D3100's Live View Mode and some issues focusing without this mode on. As well as issues regarding the Auto Focus
system in the D7000 and a menu option called Fine-Tune which has me a bit off. I would highly appreciate if someone can shed any light on these two issues, especially with the D7000.

The next camera I purchase will be used for my work on product photography and studio portraiture. My gear includes a Nikon 18-55 AF-S and Nikon 70-300 AF.

Cheers!

 

[Msteelio91]

I have a D7k and I never had a problem with the focus. Some experienced an issue where you had to "fine tune" the autofocus using that menu. If you do, it's easy and there are detailed videos showing how to do it.

Like this one...

Again, I have a D7000 and never had any issues. It's been through hell too and keeps on clickn'.

 

[jaomul]

The d7000 is a substantial upgrade from the d50. The d3100 is newer than the d50 and likely better, but nikon did start using third party sensors a few years ago and this helped increase dynamic range and iso performance, hence giving overall better image quality. the d7000 has this sensor, the d3100 has the older (good, but not as good) sensor.

The d7000 has a very good focus system with many points and a few cross points. It is a good choice

 

[pixmedic]

the D50 has a built in focus motor, which the D3100 does not. If you have AF or AF-D lenses, they will not autofocus on the D3100.
that might be a consideration as well, as the D7000 has a built in motor.

 

[goodguy]

I had the Nikon D7000 and I had very bad time with it having constant back focusing problems.
No matter what I did problem was never fully resulved that that included trip to Nikon service and fine tuning all my lenses.
What has resolved this problem was getting rid of it and getting my beloved D7100

D3100 is an old camera, if you are super tight on money and cant afford a better camera then I guess it will do but seriously just a bit more and you can already get the Nikon D3200 and just a bit more the D5200 which is a fantastic camera which I personally would preffer over the Nikon D7000
If you can afford the D5200 then thats the camera I recommend for you to get, if not then the D3200

 

[SCraig]

Personally I'd never recommend a 3xxx or 5xxx series body over a 7xxx series body. There are many things the 7xxx series has going for it that make it a far better body.

 

[robbins.photo]

A lot would depend on your current lens lineup. If you have lenses that have built in focus motors (AF-S G Series) then the D5200 would be an excellent choice, it's a great value for the money. The only downside is it doesn't have the focus motor built into the body so if you already have a fair amount of lenses without focus motors built into them you'd have to replace them or use them as manual focus only, which might make the 5200 less attractive as a purchase.

There were some D7000 users who reported back focusing issues, from the research I did it seemed to be more common on the early releases than on later releases of the model. The D7000 will have the built in focus motor, if I were going to purchase one myself I would probably get one refurbished from a reliable source such as KEH Camera, Adorama, B&H, etc - so that if you do have any issues at all it can be returned or replaced. I doubt you'd run into any issues on a refurbished model, but just for piece of mind if I were going to purchase a D7000 that's the route I would recommend.

The other possibility to look at would be perhaps a used D300, it wouldn't have quite the resolution of the D7000 or D5200 but it would give you the built in focus motor on a very solidly built, reliable body - just keep in mind if you don't purchase the S variant it will use CF cards rather than SD Cards. The S variant will actually use both, but it generally goes for as much or more as the D7000 does so that is something to keep in mind when you start looking.

Hope that helps.

 

[bigal1000]

Get a D7000 if you can't afford a D7100 I had a D7100 it's way better, but that's only my opinion !!!

 

[astroNikon]

The AF options, from what I've read, are vastly different too from the 7000 to the 3100.
IF you really get into portraiture I recommend the 7000 controls over the 3100
The 7000 (from what I've read in that past of the 3100 manual) just gives you alot of total control for really specific photography such as what you want to do.

 

[JoeW]

The D3100 and D7000 are substantially different cameras. If you go hold them both, they will probably seem like they're even different brands.

1. D3100 has no AF motor in the body. It's smaller and lighter. Many lens won't work with it for AF purposes unless they have a motor in the lens.

2. D7000 has a substantially better ISO range. D7000 has twice the FPS capability of the D3000. D7000 has a faster shutter speed capability and range. It has two SD card slots (so you've got a backup or can shoot and store in both RAW and Jpeg).

3. Regarding focus, the D7000 has 39 focus points vs. 11 for the D3100. Yes, if you don't take some time to learn how to use the camera, the AF will take an adjustment. Frankly, I don't have any problems with it at all.

Now it just sounds like I've made the case for getting the D7000. I mean nothing of the sort. Be clear about what it is you want to shoot and then get a camera that fits those needs. Buying the "best" camera for most people is usually about buying the most technology they can afford--and that's stupid. Buy a camera that fits your needs (and your likely future needs).

 

[bigal1000]

The D3100 and D7000 are substantially different cameras. If you go hold them both, they will probably seem like they're even different brands.

1. D3100 has no AF motor in the body. It's smaller and lighter. Many lens won't work with it for AF purposes unless they have a motor in the lens.

2. D7000 has a substantially better ISO range. D7000 has twice the FPS capability of the D3000. D7000 has a faster shutter speed capability and range. It has two SD card slots (so you've got a backup or can shoot and store in both RAW and Jpeg).

3. Regarding focus, the D7000 has 39 focus points vs. 11 for the D3100. Yes, if you don't take some time to learn how to use the camera, the AF will take an adjustment. Frankly, I don't have any problems with it at all.

Now it just sounds like I've made the case for getting the D7000. I mean nothing of the sort. Be clear about what it is you want to shoot and then get a camera that fits those needs. Buying the "best" camera for most people is usually about buying the most technology they can afford--and that's stupid. Buy a camera that fits your needs (and your likely future needs).

How do they get what they need if they can't afford it? I'd like a D4s it will meet all my needs but it cost too much for me I'm retired now, so I bought a D610 I could afford that. Sometimes you just can't get what you need !!!!!

 

[pixmedic]

you cant always get what you want.
but if you try sometimes, you just might find,
you get what you need.

 

[JoeW]

The D3100 and D7000 are substantially different cameras. If you go hold them both, they will probably seem like they're even different brands.

1. D3100 has no AF motor in the body. It's smaller and lighter. Many lens won't work with it for AF purposes unless they have a motor in the lens.

2. D7000 has a substantially better ISO range. D7000 has twice the FPS capability of the D3000. D7000 has a faster shutter speed capability and range. It has two SD card slots (so you've got a backup or can shoot and store in both RAW and Jpeg).

3. Regarding focus, the D7000 has 39 focus points vs. 11 for the D3100. Yes, if you don't take some time to learn how to use the camera, the AF will take an adjustment. Frankly, I don't have any problems with it at all.

Now it just sounds like I've made the case for getting the D7000. I mean nothing of the sort. Be clear about what it is you want to shoot and then get a camera that fits those needs. Buying the "best" camera for most people is usually about buying the most technology they can afford--and that's stupid. Buy a camera that fits your needs (and your likely future needs).

How do they get what they need if they can't afford it? I'd like a D4s it will meet all my needs but it cost too much for me I'm retired now, so I bought a D610 I could afford that. Sometimes you just can't get what you need !!!!!

I'm unclear what you mean in responding to my post. The OP specifically mentioned the D3100 and the D7000 as the two bodies being considered. So I compared them. Are you arguing that the OP can't afford the D7000?

Unless I have a clearer idea of what you're responding to in my post....
...I can't get no, satisfaction.

 

[robbins.photo]

The D3100 and D7000 are substantially different cameras. If you go hold them both, they will probably seem like they're even different brands.

1. D3100 has no AF motor in the body. It's smaller and lighter. Many lens won't work with it for AF purposes unless they have a motor in the lens.

2. D7000 has a substantially better ISO range. D7000 has twice the FPS capability of the D3000. D7000 has a faster shutter speed capability and range. It has two SD card slots (so you've got a backup or can shoot and store in both RAW and Jpeg).

3. Regarding focus, the D7000 has 39 focus points vs. 11 for the D3100. Yes, if you don't take some time to learn how to use the camera, the AF will take an adjustment. Frankly, I don't have any problems with it at all.

Now it just sounds like I've made the case for getting the D7000. I mean nothing of the sort. Be clear about what it is you want to shoot and then get a camera that fits those needs. Buying the "best" camera for most people is usually about buying the most technology they can afford--and that's stupid. Buy a camera that fits your needs (and your likely future needs).

How do they get what they need if they can't afford it? I'd like a D4s it will meet all my needs but it cost too much for me I'm retired now, so I bought a D610 I could afford that. Sometimes you just can't get what you need !!!!!

I'm unclear what you mean in responding to my post. The OP specifically mentioned the D3100 and the D7000 as the two bodies being considered. So I compared them. Are you arguing that the OP can't afford the D7000?

Unless I have a clearer idea of what you're responding to in my post....
...I can't get no, satisfaction.

Wow guys. Ok, everybody calm down. If you need to just go running for the shelter of a mother's little helper. Remember, it's only Rock and Roll, but I like it. No need to get the Ventilator blues, I mean after all as tears go by she is still a rainbow, right?

 

[astroNikon]

Yup, the OP asked for 2 specific bodies where the d7000 is twice the amount of the d3100.
and alot of "quick access" functionality between the two.
It's kinda an odd comparison considering the price structure of each one, and other options out there.