Nikon D7100 Vs. D600

D7100 Vs. D600


  • Total voters
    15

timarp000

TPF Noob!
Joined
Sep 17, 2012
Messages
222
Reaction score
13
Location
India
What are the Pros and Cons of each DSLR? I mainly take photos of Wildlife, Macro and Landscapes. My Budget is $2000-2500. I cant go any higher. Which camera would be better for me?

This is what Ive found out.

DX-

Pros
  • Longer Magnification i.e, 300mm is 450mm
  • Less Cost
  • Sensor utilizes the 'sweet spot' of the lens

Cons
  • More Noise at High ISO
  • Less Dynamic Range
  • Less wide angle

FX -

Pros
  • Less noise at high ISO
  • More dynamic Range
  • Wider Angle of view

Cons
  • High Cost
  • Less reach
 
I think you got most of the facts except the D7100 dynamic range is just as good as the D600

I just bought the D7100 and I didnt get the D600 because of one reason................I couldnt afford the D600.
All my lenses are FX so thats not the problem, I needed to add close to 1000$ and I just didnt have the money.

I say if you can afford the D600 then get it.
If not the d7100 is an AWESOME camera!!!

So in a way this is a win/win situation because both cameras are top notch machines, you just need to decided what you want.
 
Correct me if I'm wrong but the D600 comes with a DX Mode. (It drops the MP down to I think 10mp in DX mode though). So you could switch to DX mode to give you that extra reach.

Anyhow, I faced this question my self and opted for the D7100. I was looking at a $400 difference and at the time really didn't see the benefits to justify it. So I bought the D7100 and applied the difference towards a used Nikon 17-55mm 2.8.
 
Some of your DX "Cons" list are inaccurate, either completely, or partially. Most noise at high ISO cleans up very nicely in Photoshop, provided you aren't going above 6400. It really is pretty minimal. As far as "Less wide angle", that really just isn't noticeably true. Nikon have their 10-24mm ultra-wide for DX, Tokina have (A lens I love!!) 11-16mm ultra-wide. honestly, I prefer the Tokina over the Nikon in this rare case. The Tokina is slightly sharper and it's colour rendition seems a bit more punchier. Some argue that the Tokina's zoom range could be better, but realistically, all I'd want out of it that it doesn't do, is drop down to 10mm, rather than 11, but I suppose it was set as a 11-16 for cost reasons or something. At any rate though, even if you need that extra 1mm, just take a step back!

My advice is start with a DX body and use FX lenses when possible. Lens-wise, I'd look at the Tokina Pro II 11-16, or Nikon 10-24, for ultra-wide. Nikon 16-85 for wide to short telephoto, the (FX) 70-300 for telephoto, and whichever macro suits your needs. I actually like the 18-105 kit lens for general walkaround.
 
  • Longer Magnification i.e, 300mm is 450mm
Not true. 300mm will always be 300mm. A crop sensor body gives the FIELD OF VIEW of a longer lens, not the magnification. It is no different than if you took the image into an editor and cropped off part of it. The magnification did NOT change, only how much of the image you now see is different.

It is frequently advantageous when comparing a full-frame sensor and a crop-sensor OF THE SAME RESOLUTION since the crop-sensor will have more resolution in that smaller area. Optically, however, the magnification did not change at all.
 
Some of your DX "Cons" list are inaccurate, either completely, or partially. Most noise at high ISO cleans up very nicely in Photoshop, provided you aren't going above 6400. It really is pretty minimal. As far as "Less wide angle", that really just isn't noticeably true. Nikon have their 10-24mm ultra-wide for DX, Tokina have (A lens I love!!) 11-16mm ultra-wide. honestly, I prefer the Tokina over the Nikon in this rare case. The Tokina is slightly sharper and it's colour rendition seems a bit more punchier. Some argue that the Tokina's zoom range could be better, but realistically, all I'd want out of it that it doesn't do, is drop down to 10mm, rather than 11, but I suppose it was set as a 11-16 for cost reasons or something. At any rate though, even if you need that extra 1mm, just take a step back!

My advice is start with a DX body and use FX lenses when possible. Lens-wise, I'd look at the Tokina Pro II 11-16, or Nikon 10-24, for ultra-wide. Nikon 16-85 for wide to short telephoto, the (FX) 70-300 for telephoto, and whichever macro suits your needs. I actually like the 18-105 kit lens for general walkaround.
I already have a D40x. Ive been using it for 3-4 years. Its dying and noise performance is bad. So i need to upgrade. Do I go full frame or crop?
 
The Only reason im considering the D600 is the better noise performance! Can someone send me samples? Between the two. Or links where i can find them?
 
The Only reason im considering the D600 is the better noise performance! Can someone send me samples? Between the two. Or links where i can find them?
I have both the D7000 and D600, on the D7000 I can get to around ISO 1000 before the noise becomes noticeable. The D600 can get closer to ISO 3200.

Here's a 1:1 photo that I shot at ISO 3200.
http://www.thephotoforum.com/forum/...y/318715-nikon-d600-low-noise-impressive.html


Wish you had a similar shot with the D700 to compare.
 
I have to decide between the longer 'reach' i get with a DX or the better noise performance on the D600. If I can get up to ISO 3200 on the D7100 and get good shots, i will buy that. If not it will be hard for me to decide
 
You can never go wrong with Full Frame!...Especially with Nikon since you can shoot DX mode to get the longer reach. Even if the D600 only has 10MP in DX mode, youll still get some awesome images just as long as you have good glass.. it should be no-brainer. Full frame is the way to go!:band:
 
Can anyone post a Image from the D7100 with ISO 3200 and ISO 6400?
 
I have to decide between the longer 'reach' i get with a DX or the better noise performance on the D600. If I can get up to ISO 3200 on the D7100 and get good shots, i will buy that. If not it will be hard for me to decide
FYI DX just gives you the perception of extra reach. FX has higher resolution so you can crop to DX and not suffer any loss of quality.
http://ksqphotography.files.wordpress.com/2011/05/sample-photo-with-fx-dx-overlay3.jpg

Can anyone post a Image from the D7100 with ISO 3200 and ISO 6400?
I can try and get some from both my D7000 and D600 this weekend.
 
In my humble opinion, being a birder, I would pick a crop sensor and better glass every time. Since you are on a limited budget can you afford a D600 and really good glass? I'm still shooting my lowly D300 and I picked up 2 stops with my Tokina 300 F2.8. What are you planning on shooting that 3200 is so critical, just curious?
 

Most reactions

Back
Top