Is "Semi-Pro" body worth it?

[rmh159]

Thanks Derell, I was waiting for a comment from you. Maybe the d7000 will have a nice rebate in Feb.

It just had one for $300 off. I asked though and the camera store said the D7000 gets rebates often and would likely get another soon.

 

[manicmike]

I dont know about canon, but "semi-pro" for nikon would be the D200, D300, D300s.
D7000 is still entry level despite having many "pro" features.

If the d7000 is entry level, what is the 5100? From what I've read about d7000, it's pretty capable for limited pro work.

The D7000 seems to be favored over the D300 in most online reviews. It's the higher side enthusiasts camera.

 

[pixmedic]

The D7000 seems to be favored over the D300 in most online reviews. It's the higher side enthusiasts camera.

True. But the D300s still has advantages over the D7000 that is appealing to some. Weather sealed, CF and SD card slots, 51 focus and 15 cross type points, higher FPS (more with grip) and the button configuration is more like the pro bodies.

 

[Willieboy]

A client of mine is a professional photographer and he uses the D7000 as his primary camera. He also has a Nikon backup but I don't remember the model number. He also recommends sticking with Nikkor lenses on a Nikon camera.

Good luck.

 

[daarksun]

The 60D isn't considered a semi-pro camera, that starts with the 7D and 5DmkII models. But the image quality would be the tame from the T3i up tot he 7D. If you don't need the pro style features, focus systemsm, build quality, etc, then the 60D would be a great option for what you want to do. Can't go wrong with the Canon, Nikon, Pentax or even Sony model DSLRs. It just depends on what you like and what you want. As for Pro Work, You would think that means the higher end equipment, but there are professional wedding shooter making a living and using T4i's with primes lens and there work is incredible. The line between pro, semi-pro and pro is a fine line anymore. Good luck with whatever route you take. But udating to a newer body you definitely need.

 

[CAlbertson]

What i'm missing = sensor resolution, I have an old old old 6.1 mp. Ability to set w/b manually and fine tune. solid build quality (metal.)
I shoot predominantly in manual and bulb, use bracketing and mirror lock up. Don't care for facial recognition, in house hdr or simular but if it's on there i may use it from time to time.
high fps would be great for some of my action shots.
I like the d7000 and 60d, and have read arts. and comparisons. I want to make the jump up in price is worth it.

So you have 6 mp and need more. First figure out how many more you need.
6 mp means there are 3000 x 2000 pixels. If you need to double the resolution then you need 6000 x 4000 or a 24 mp sensor.

You say you think about this like an engineer, well then you know that resolution is proportional to the square root of the pixel count. What this mens is that going from 6mp to 12 mp gets you only 1.4 times the resolution which is hardy much at all, not even a 50% boost. You will need to go with a 24 mp sensor to see a big, noticeable, difference.

I just moved frm a 6 mp Nikon D50 to a larger "semi-pro" and what I gained was a much faster handling camera with buttons to control what was in a menu. I also got much larger raw format files. Nikon uses compressed raw in their consumer line and uncompressed in the others, this mmake the files 2X larger and then more pixels maes them even larger. But this is a good thing

 

[bratkinson]

6.1MP what?

In short, since you're looking for a body-only upgrade, you will have to stay with the same brand to use your existing lens(es).

In my case, I had an 8mp Canon 30D and went to am 18mp 60D primarily to get more pixels. I also liked the flip-out screen like I had on two earlier Canon G-series point-and-shoots. The added pixels got me more cropping 'head room' that I needed. It also improved the IQ of the photos. ALthough the IQ improved going from 8 to 18 megapixels, I had a bigger IQ jump when I switched to Canon L lenses.

As for the 'need' for a metal body, the 60D has a plastic body. While some may 'pooh-pooh' plastic bodies, the savings in weight is noticable and so far, I've never had any problem with plastic body cameras. Even the plastic Canon A1100 we use at work gets handled by various co-workers and has been dropped a couple of times and the only visible damage on it is a cracked LCD.

 

[BobSaget]

[
So you have 6 mp and need more. First figure out how many more you need.
6 mp means there are 3000 x 2000 pixels. If you need to double the resolution then you need 6000 x 4000 or a 24 mp sensor.

You say you think about this like an engineer, well then you know that resolution is proportional to the square root of the pixel count. What this mens is that going from 6mp to 12 mp gets you only 1.4 times the resolution which is hardy much at all, not even a 50% boost. You will need to go with a 24 mp sensor to see a big, noticeable, difference.

I'm not understanding this. 6000 x 4000 has 4 times the area of 3000 x 2000. a 12mp sensor would be roughly 4200 x 2800 which would be 1.5x in height and 1.5x in width giving you twice the area of the 6mp sensor. Am I wrong in relating resolution to the area of the sensor's plane?

 

[greybeard]

To the OP, the only way to tell is to handle the various models you are thinking about. Nikon's lower tier entry level have a much lower build quality feel than the upper tier D90 and D7000. I used a D5100 for about a year before I got my D7000. The image quality between the 2 is the same but the handling and focusing is much better with the D7000. The D7K also has the commander feature with the popup flash that is very useful if you want to do off camera TTL flash.

 

[BobSaget]

[
So you have 6 mp and need more. First figure out how many more you need.
6 mp means there are 3000 x 2000 pixels. If you need to double the resolution then you need 6000 x 4000 or a 24 mp sensor.

You say you think about this like an engineer, well then you know that resolution is proportional to the square root of the pixel count. What this mens is that going from 6mp to 12 mp gets you only 1.4 times the resolution which is hardy much at all, not even a 50% boost. You will need to go with a 24 mp sensor to see a big, noticeable, difference.

I'm not understanding this. 6000 x 4000 has 4 times the area of 3000 x 2000. a 12mp sensor would be roughly 4200 x 2800 which would be 1.5x in height and 1.5x in width giving you twice the area of the 6mp sensor. Am I wrong in relating resolution to the area of the sensor's plane?

^^ Can anyone help me with this? ^^

 

[Derrel]

Yes, Bob, your ideas on sensor size and resolution are not quite right...it does take a 4-fold increase in megapixel count in order to get "double" the resolution. Anyway...having owned a 6.1 MP d-slr, an 8.2 MP, and a 12.2 and 12.8 and now a 24 MP d-slr, some with APS-C sensors, two with FF sized sensors, I can tell you this: the difference between a 6.1 MP and an 8.2 MP APS-C sensor is not that much, at all, and is almost indistinguishable.

A 12.2 MP APS-C sensor (like a D2x or a D300 or D300s) has MORE resolving power than a 6.1 MP camera, and the difference is pretty obvious.

A 12.8 MP full-frame sensor is even better in image "quality". A 24 MP full-frame sensor is **noticeably better** in image detail than a 12 or 12.8 MP sensor, of either APS-C or full-frame size.The

The images from the Nikon D3x at 24 megapixels, or images from the Canon 5D-II or 5D-III in the 21 to 22 MP zone, are also superb on people. Just beautiful images! The 36 megapixel images from the NIkon D800 or D800e have a ridiculous amount of detail!!!

If you want very HIGH megapixel count, affordably, the Nikon D3200 and D5200 both have a 24 MP, AS-C sensor, and are low-cost bodies.

 

[unpopular]

^^^ because physical pixel count is not the same as optical resolution.

 

[BobSaget]

Thanks for the replies. I've thrown out the idea of the 60d. I haven't really liked what Ive seen in reviews. I've added Pentax's K5 into the mix with the d7000 based on the fact that I own several k mount lenses including a 10-17 smc pentax da. I like the fact it's weather sealed and has a full metal body.

 

[Derrel]

Thanks for the replies. I've thrown out the idea of the 60d. I haven't really liked what Ive seen in reviews. I've added Pentax's K5 into the mix with the d7000 based on the fact that I own several k mount lenses including a 10-17 smc pentax da. I like the fact it's weather sealed and has a full metal body.

Ohhh--that 10-17 Pentax is a VERY interesting optic!!!! Kind of wish I had a camera that could use that specific lens. I read the dPreview review of the Pentax K-5,and must agree; it appears to be a very worthy camera. Pentax might actually be the company that has the absolute BEST selection of lenses optimized for APS-C sensor use.

 

[Solarflare]

Thats not so surprising considering they dont have any full frame digital cameras at all yet.