Nikon D7100 vs nikon D700 (Internet is more confusing)

[astroNikon]

... i think it has been discussed a 100000 times about focus problems on the D7000.

FWIW, I never had a focusing problem with my d7000. I did have issues with certain lenses that created focusing issues in certain situations such as the Nikon 70-300vrii

 

[sleist]

I own both the D700 and D7100. They are both fine up to ISO 1600. How big do you plan on printing? That would help determine if 12MP is enough for you. If I were buying FX today, I would get a more recent camera, even though in some ways the feature set is a step down from the D700. The D700 has a very strong anti aliasing filter and requires some sharpening on all images. The D7100 has no anti aliasing filter and generally only requires output sharpening. The D700 is not sharper than the D7100. The D700 is more forgiving of less perfect technique due to the low pixel density. This may make it seem sharper to some photographers.

 

[pixmedic]

I got my second d600 from Henrys in Canada for $900 with a 90 day warrantee and 5200 shutter count.
It's in EX condition

 

[enerlevel]

thanks for the reply,
i do not plan to print , its just for memories and family photoes , however i do have a good eye and also very fussy when it comes to my pics. to be honest, 12 mp is good enough for me. and i mostly use it for family group pics so always end up with the need of high iso and usually f6 or higher.
still confused if d7100 downsized to 12mp is = as good as D700 at 12mp.

btw the lens which i have are
24-85VR and
80-200 f2.8

for lenswise i can get Fx no problem.

 

[qleak]

the difference between the D700 and D600 is about £300. for that price i can upgrade my lens hahaha... so yes it is a big difference in price between the D700/D7100 and D600.
i tried to scale down images of D7000 to 12Mp. and even 5Mp. and i am not impressed. its not as sharp as i would want it plus most of the pics are just out of focus... i think it has been discussed a 100000 times about focus problems on the D7000.

strange the d600 is cheaper than the d7100 on amazon.co.uk

 

[Derrel]

strange the d600 is cheaper than the d7100 on amazon.co.uk

Maybe not...Amazon is home to many low-ballers...dealers that will take less money than others are willing to accept...Amazon is sort of an "aggregator site" for dealers...so the low-ballers float up to the top and are readily visible. Also, the D600 has a bad reputation with shutters that are self-shredding and which crap out, as well as the well-known oil-flinging issue...and of course, the D600>D610 replacement program for lemons...the D7100 has a good reputation, while the D600 has been hurt pretty badly by problems that thousands and thousands of units have had.

 

[cgw]

And then Amazon.ca also sells merch on its own. They're listed as an authorized Nikon dealer by Nikon Canada and are apparently allowed to sell below the MAP other dealers can't undercut. During the past holiday sale frenzy, they moved D7100 bodies for C$850 for week--a good $100+ under the lowest prices elsewhere.

 

[enerlevel]

Not sure about Amazon but all shops and sites I checked locally, are selling the D600/D610 at a higher price than the D7100 or D700. I brought them cheap when all the oil dust issue was at its peak... Now that people know about the free replacement and repair program, looks like the prices have gone up again...

 

[raventepes]

The D7100 is a great body. It's been my workhorse for a while now. Would I take it over a D700? You bet! The D700 is an older body. There's nothing wrong with having an older camera if that's all you need, but if you're as finicky about IQ as you say you are, the smarter choice would be to get either a D750 or a D610 and downsample the resolution, assuming you're fine just shooting JPEG's. Choosing one of these two bodies would also make the most sense since you have FX lenses, and while DX will accept those lenses, the angle of view changes. Shooting at 24mm on a DX body with an FX lens irritates me, and I'll assume I'm not alone in that. You just can't really do wide angle. Farther out (your 80-200) is ok. That's where you want the crop factor.

Just my opinion, at any rate.

 

[Solarflare]

The D700, D600 and D7100 are all wildly different cameras.

The D700 is the pro camera of old, a smaller D3, which was the first full frame camera of Nikon, with the same sensor. That means the D700 has the best controls and build quality (the D3 would still be an upgrade even over that, though). However, back then DSLRs didnt have video - I think the Nikon D90 was the first DSLR with video ?!?

The D7100 is an APS-C camera. It has a top notch Autofocus, just like the D700, but otherwise its very much a D600 in build and interface. As an APS-C camera, the sensor is small (24x16mm vs 36x24mm for full frame), which means all focal lengths get a crop factor - a 200mm lens on an APS-C sensor gets the same field of view as a 300mm lens on a full frame sensor. This makes this camera predestined for Wildlife, where you can never have enough range.

The D600 is an entry level full frame camera. It has the same resolution as the D7100, but with a more than twice as large sensor area.

Glas for FX is a LOT more expensive than for DX. But theres also a LOT more choices, and you'll get quite a bit more image quality for you extra money, too.

 

[enerlevel]

a friend of mine deals in cameras, so lately i tested 3 cameras in order to see which performs better for me. the setups were
1) Nikon D700 * Sigma 24-70 f2.8 HSM
2) Canon 6D * 24-70 f2.8 MK I
3) Fujifilm XT1 * 35mm f1.4

i tested the pics @ 20,000 iso and 4000 iso. the canon and nikon were raw but converted with zero editing. while the fujifilm was jpeg because it doesnt shoot 20,000 at raw. the shots were in my living room with yellow light. what i noticed was

1) the D700 shots were all yellowish. i think the auto white balance didnt do a good job. the 6D and XT1 had the same temp.
2) iso 20,000 D700 had plenty of colour noise. 6D was sharp with small grains and the xt1 had some banding noise in the blacks.
3) iso 4,000 the D700 was the sharpest. then was 6D folllowed by XT1.

the Xt1 being an APS-C did a great job. its better than the D7000 for sure!!!. however i dont think it can still compete with the Full Frame cameras.

 

[enerlevel]

 

[enerlevel]

 

[Designer]

Your examples are not telling us much.

The EXIFs have been stripped, there is no identifying text with the photos, but even if I follow your listing in the previous post, the one that shows the most yellow is not the D700. Using "auto WB" is bound to show differences.

Too many variables in the mix.

 

[enerlevel]

the ones which are yellow are from the D700 these are not scientific test but just normal ISO matched , Aperture matched , Same lightning test. there are many variables in the pics , but just a basic idea of hyow these cameras perform in real life tests.