Had my gear stolen so starting over... Conflicted

slackercruster · Jul 31, 2012

So sorry, can't advise.

But good luck with restoring gear.

KmH · Jul 31, 2012

Solarflare said:
The D7000 will have been replaced by the D600, most likely, this autuum.

Two years ago, everyone said the D7000 would replace the D90, which didn't happen.

Nikon has 2 entry-level tiers (compact and regular), and they sell way more entry-level cameras than the combined sales of prosumer and pro grade cameras.

Seems like Nikon may be adding a new, additional entry-level tier - full frame entry level.

pixmedic · Jul 31, 2012

I really dont understand why someone would think that nikon producing an affordable entry level FX camera would mean they are trying to completely undercut their DX camera line. they are two different animals. People that like using a DX body (like me and my wife) aren't likely to change to FX just because a FX camera is close to the same price range. ('cause we aren't, and will get a D7000 eventually, or whatever the new DX body is) it WILL however, allow people that have been wanting to go FX to do so without dropping 3-5k on a body. I have no doubt that Nikon will continue producing and upgrading DX body's. In fact, I think you will see the opposite happen, like what they are doing with the D7000. you will most likely see Nikon bridge the gap a little more by giving their top end DX line better features and a better build quality, making their better DX body a little closer to the "pro" line. Just a hunch though.

Derrel · Jul 31, 2012

o hey tyler said:
I don't know why you think that an APS-C DSLR is going to be replaced by a full frame camera.

Well, the flagship Nikon D2x and D2Xs models, both APS-C cameras, with 1.5x FOV factors AND 2.0x FOV at 8.2 FPS one-button shift were replaced by...the full frame D3,D3s,and D3x cameras, also with multi-format one-button shift. So...there is precedent for Nikon to do exactly that: to REPLACE an APS-C camera model with a full-frame camera.

Second, this seems to be the time. Nikon's new $699 D3200 has a 24MP sensor, and that's in a cheap, pentamirror body. Some day Canon APS-C will catch up in MP count to the cheapest Nikon d-slr. Currently, Nikon has a 36MP D800 and D800e pair, at $3,000 entry price, while the Canon 5D-Mark III is priced at $3,500, with a weaker sensor, and much lower MP count and lower resolution. The Nikonrumours site has shown images of a Nikon D600 that looks VERY MUCH like a D90-class camera; meaning, a TOP-level "enthusiast" class body. Rumors from people like Nikon guru and author of 16 Nikon guidebooks, Thom Hogan, have for months now, been filled with articles on how the newly-reformed Nikon Corporation is apparently planning to transition the top-level "enthusiast" body from APS-C and to full frame. Nikon fired the majority of its older executives a few years back, and the newer,much younger executives have gotten Nikon into "warrior" mode.

So, yeah...it's probably a number of things that have been covered in the press that follows the Nikon community on a daily basis and has for ten years...those people have been telling us that the top-lvbel Nikon "enthusiast"camera is going to be FF. And, uh, Nikon's brand new "economy" 50mm f/1.8 AF-S G Aspherical normal lens, their ultra-high performance 85mm f/1.8 AF-S G tele, and their new high-speed 28mm f/1.8 wide-angle G-series lens, and their release of the patent for their new 24-85 full-frame zoom...Nikon has been releasing all-new, very high-quality full-frame lenses priced at wayyyyyy less than HALF of the prices of their "pro" primes and zooms. So, yeah...when Nikon publicly stated, "The Nikon D7000 is not the D90's replacement camera," they meant exactly that. THe D7000 is not, and has never been, NIkon's "replacement" for their top-level "enthusiast" body...the D7000 is the high-end consumer body.

I myself have been anticipating a D600 at $1599 to $1899. For about six months now. Based on Thom Hogans multiple write-ups,and his extensive analysis of the camera business, and on the Nikon RUmors website reports, and now, the $699, 24-megapixel D3200. It's a pretty fair bet that the top-level enthusiast body from Nikon is about to go FF---the same,exact way that Canon made the transition to FF in its 5D some years back: take an enthusiast-level body, put a good FF sensor in it, and sell it at several thousand dollars less than the pro-level FF offering.

pixmedic · Jul 31, 2012

Derrel said:
o hey tyler said:

I don't know why you think that an APS-C DSLR is going to be replaced by a full frame camera.

Click to expand...

Well, the flagship Nikon D2x and D2Xs models, both APS-C cameras, with 1.5x FOV factors AND 2.0x FOV at 8.2 FPS one-button shift were replaced by...the full frame D3,D3s,and D3x cameras, also with multi-format one-button shift. So...there is precedent for Nikon to do exactly that: to REPLACE an APS-C camera model with a full-frame camera.

Second, this seems to be the time. Nikon's new $699 D3200 has a 24MP sensor, and that's in a cheap, pentamirror body. Some day Canon APS-C will catch up in MP count to the cheapest Nikon d-slr. Currently, Nikon has a 36MP D800 and D800e pair, at $3,000 entry price, while the Canon 5D-Mark III is priced at $3,500, with a weaker sensor, and much lower MP count and lower resolution. The Nikonrumours site has shown images of a Nikon D600 that looks VERY MUCH like a D90-class camera; meaning, a TOP-level "enthusiast" class body. Rumors from people like Nikon guru and author of 16 Nikon guidebooks, Thom Hogan, have for months now, been filled with articles on how the newly-reformed Nikon Corporation is apparently planning to transition the top-level "enthusiast" body from APS-C and to full frame. Nikon fired the majority of its older executives a few years back, and the newer,much younger executives have gotten Nikon into "warrior" mode.

So, yeah...it's probably a number of things that have been covered in the press that follows the Nikon community on a daily basis and has for ten years...those people have been telling us that the top-lvbel Nikon "enthusiast"camera is going to be FF. And, uh, Nikon's brand new "economy" 50mm f/1.8 AF-S G Aspherical normal lens, their ultra-high performance 85mm f/1.8 AF-S G tele, and their new high-speed 28mm f/1.8 wide-angle G-series lens, and their release of the patent for their new 24-85 full-frame zoom...Nikon has been releasing all-new, very high-quality full-frame lenses priced at wayyyyyy less than HALF of the prices of their "pro" primes and zooms. So, yeah...when Nikon publicly stated, "The Nikon D7000 is not the D90's replacement camera," they meant exactly that. THe D7000 is not, and has never been, NIkon's "replacement" for their top-level "enthusiast" body...the D7000 is the high-end consumer body.

I myself have been anticipating a D600 at $1599 to $1899. For about six months now. Based on Thom Hogans multiple write-ups,and his extensive analysis of the camera business, and on the Nikon RUmors website reports, and now, the $699, 24-megapixel D3200. It's a pretty fair bet that the top-level enthusiast body from Nikon is about to go FF---the same,exact way that Canon made the transition to FF in its 5D some years back: take an enthusiast-level body, put a good FF sensor in it, and sell it at several thousand dollars less than the pro-level FF offering.

well, that goes back to KmH's post.. Its not like nikon is going to stop producing DX cameras. they are just going to market in an affordable entry level FF camera.
Its not a replacement, its just an affordable consumer option for people wanting to go FF. I think its great, and I expect that nikon will continue to make improvements to their DX line as well.

Derrel · Jul 31, 2012

Nikon Corporation released an official statement that said the D7000 was NOT the D90's replacement. As Thom Hogan wrote earlier this month, Nikon's newest official statements on lenses emphasize their compatibility with "FX Nikons". He specifically has mentioned this idea: that Nikon plans to transition from DX to FX cameras in some segments of the market. Canon did it with the 5D...they moved the high-end enthusiast shooters "upward", from the APS-C 20D and 30D models to the 5D full-frame. The wedding/event/people photography segment embraced the 5D. A lower-cost Nikon FF would probably be a good seller for Nikon. Beginners and consumers will not need or want FF; already, Nikon's 32 MP D3200 has won a major marketplace "battle" in The Megapixel War that Canon embraced for a decade. Consumers want more and more and more MP's...more-experienced, serious enthusiasts want...FF...and Nikon has already built a good collection of NEWER lenses with higher MTF and better designs than the "old" just-below-pro lens lineup.

sovietdoc · Jul 31, 2012

1. D600 won't replace D7000. They are different types of cameras aimed at different things. The stats have been out for the D600 and I don't see how it would replace D7000 completely.

2. Nikon's colors do suck. I've always thought that it was me because I shoot with Canon and pretty much everybody I know shoots Nikon so I must be biased. But apparently I am not the only one who has noticed this.

Dao · Jul 31, 2012

I do not think Nikon plan to destroy the DX market with the lower end FF body especially when baby Nikons are the one that sells and make money. But I am sure it will affect the Canon 5D MKII (still available new) and the 5D classic (used) market.

sovietdoc · Jul 31, 2012

Well, the flagship Nikon D2x and D2Xs models, both APS-C cameras, with 1.5x FOV factors AND 2.0x FOV at 8.2 FPS one-button shift were replaced by...the full frame D3,D3s,and D3x cameras, also with multi-format one-button shift. So...there is precedent for Nikon to do exactly that: to REPLACE an APS-C camera model with a full-frame camera.

This is because those the top of the line flagships have always been aimed at the sports photojournalists. At the time, they couldn't make a FF body with 8.2 fps because the cameras didn't have the processing power, so they made them APS-C. Canon has done the same thing with 1D Mark IV and then moving onto 1D X. Why do you think D800 doesn't shoot at 8 fps? They just didn't want it that fast? B.S. Because they didn't have a processor/flash memory capable of handling 36 megapixels at 8 fps.

Second, this seems to be the time. Nikon's new $699 D3200 has a 24MP sensor, and that's in a cheap, pentamirror body. Some day Canon APS-C will catch up in MP count to the cheapest Nikon d-slr. Currently, Nikon has a 36MP D800 and D800e pair, at $3,000 entry price, while the Canon 5D-Mark III is priced at $3,500, with a weaker sensor, and much lower MP count and lower resolution.

Now, a few months after the hype has gone away, saying 5D III costs $3500 is like looking up MSRP on Sigma's lenses on their own site. 5D III is still selling 200 bucks higher than D800, and the same price as D800E but you're no longer paying that much of a premium. Now, obviously the resolution is lower but where does it come from that the sensor is weaker? As I seem to recall the D800 stats off with some nice DR at low ISO but Canon quickly passes it and then keep on going with better DR all the way up to 12800 or even 25k. Plus in many 5d3 vs d800 reviews it's been stated that you can recover more highlights from 5d3 than from D800. Most people agree that between the two there is no clear winner, it's interesting how you're dismissing one to have significantly inferior sensor than the other although it all depends on the way you look at it.

The Nikonrumours site has shown images of a Nikon D600 that looks VERY MUCH like a D90-class camera; meaning, a TOP-level "enthusiast" class body. Rumors from people like Nikon guru and author of 16 Nikon guidebooks, Thom Hogan, have for months now, been filled with articles on how the newly-reformed Nikon Corporation is apparently planning to transition the top-level "enthusiast" body from APS-C and to full frame. Nikon fired the majority of its older executives a few years back, and the newer,much younger executives have gotten Nikon into "warrior" mode.

I hope with this "Warrior" mode Nikon will have more things in store for us than silly yellow logos with "I am BIG" and " I am FAT" written on it. If they heat up the competition, this can only be good for both Light and the Dark sides.

So, yeah...it's probably a number of things that have been covered in the press that follows the Nikon community on a daily basis and has for ten years...those people have been telling us that the top-lvbel Nikon "enthusiast"camera is going to be FF. And, uh, Nikon's brand new "economy" 50mm f/1.8 AF-S G Aspherical normal lens, their ultra-high performance 85mm f/1.8 AF-S G tele, and their new high-speed 28mm f/1.8 wide-angle G-series lens, and their release of the patent for their new 24-85 full-frame zoom...Nikon has been releasing all-new, very high-quality full-frame lenses priced at wayyyyyy less than HALF of the prices of their "pro" primes and zooms. So, yeah...when Nikon publicly stated, "The Nikon D7000 is not the D90's replacement camera," they meant exactly that. THe D7000 is not, and has never been, NIkon's "replacement" for their top-level "enthusiast" body...the D7000 is the high-end consumer body.

I've also noticed the preparing for cheap FF because of the lenses, that's why D600 wasn't much of a surprise for me. I don't think D600 will replace D7000. D600 will sit up top as the cheapest FF for enthusiasts and D7000 or whatever the successor will still be the king of APS-C.

I myself have been anticipating a D600 at $1599 to $1899. For about six months now. Based on Thom Hogans multiple write-ups,and his extensive analysis of the camera business, and on the Nikon RUmors website reports, and now, the $699, 24-megapixel D3200. It's a pretty fair bet that the top-level enthusiast body from Nikon is about to go FF---the same,exact way that Canon made the transition to FF in its 5D some years back: take an enthusiast-level body, put a good FF sensor in it, and sell it at several thousand dollars less than the pro-level FF offering.

I think that pricing projection is reasonable considering the rumors that Canon will sell their entry FF at 2 grand. For some reason, recently, canon always sells their stuff at a higher price premium. As a concept, a "cheap" FF camera is very good especially if the price is right. It actually makes purchasing D800 or 5D3 a lot harder because lets face it, the number one reason people bought the cameras such as those was because they were cheaper full frames than D4/1D X. I am not saying D800 or 5d3 in particular, I am just using them as an example. There are 5D II's and D700's out there.

Derrel · Jul 31, 2012

sovietdoc said:
2. Nikon's colors do suck. I've always thought that it was me because I shoot with Canon and pretty much everybody I know shoots Nikon so I must be biased. But apparently I am not the only one who has noticed this.

TPF member Aleksandras Babicus and his grown daughter Irina Belcikova shoot Nikon full-frame, D3 and D3s series, last time I checked…and their color is superb.
I consider these two shooters to be two of the world's BEST PJ-style wedding 'togs…

Menin

About 65% of the shooters for Sports Illustrated now shoot the Nikon D3-series, and now the D4…and the color at SI on-line and in-print looks superb week after week, under all sorts of craptastic lighting. Weird how none of the pictures on the website OR in the magazine look bad. Huh...weird how they manage to get great color from a "brand" that "sucks".

Huh...one would think that the Canon pictures would always just JUMP OUT and delight the viewer, while the sucky Nikon images would make you want to vomit. And yet...that doesn't actually happen...huh... Oh and BTW, the Lakers suck; Chevy sucks; Windows sucks: The Yankees suck; Pepsi sucks, and of course, The Raiders suck. Simple really!

sovietdoc · Jul 31, 2012

Derrel said:
Oh and BTW, the Lakers suck; Chevy sucks; Windows sucks: The Yankees suck; Pepsi sucks, and of course, The Raiders suck. Simple really!

You got it

Except Windows doesn't suck but Mac does!

I wasn't trying to start another "Canon vs Nikon" argument. I was just surprised that someone else has noticed the same thing I did. Maybe this isn't true at all if you try to measure it with a universal stick, but to me their colors always looked kinda artificial. Just my personal opinion. Actually I don't usually use SwitchFX's terms like "suck" or "crap" as obviously people make amazing images with either brand, I just quoted what he said to reply to that in the same tone

Of course, now it's very difficult to determine almost anything regarding to the real image as 99.99% of all shots are PP'd.

Ballistics · Jul 31, 2012

I was always under the impression that the colors were the result of post-processing, no matter what camera it came from.

Zzang · Aug 1, 2012

Seems my thread has went a bit far left field.

So explain to me why the 7D is more "pro" than D7000... I am completely baffled by that.

My understand has been that Nikons generally have a better build quality?

I have owned a 7D... It was the camera that was stole and three lenses. But, after much research, I went with the D7000 to replace.

Still haven't opened it because I am using my backup camera - Canon 40D atm...

Honestly? I picked up the 7000 because it was almost 700 dollars less new than a 7D with respectable if not on par or better than the 7D.

So again, someone explain to me how someone could say the 7D is more "pro" (which I find the word "pro" incredibly overused).

As far as D90... Might not have been a replacement, but I still think the 7000 is a much better camera.

I am still on the fence though.

ANDS! · Aug 1, 2012

So again, someone explain to me how someone could say the 7D is more "pro" (which I find the word "pro" incredibly overused).

I've seen the 7D most commonly compared to the D300/D300s, which a lot (A LOT) of people use who are making their money doing photography. It's the first camera in Nikon's lineup that LOOKS like it's a pro. The others are a bit too small (size wise, not performance). The D7000 is (size wise) comparable to the D90, which is didn't "replace", but really it sits somewhere between it and the D300s. I remember when I got my D300 (after owning a D50 and a D80), my first thought was - "Damn. . .now THIS is a camera!"

My opinion - stick with the 7D. It's what you know. And it's obvious what you love (since you're tentative about cheating with the D7000).