- Joined
- Aug 15, 2013
- Messages
- 13,695
- Reaction score
- 3,369
- Location
- SE Michigan
- Can others edit my Photos
- Photos OK to edit
I just look at it like this:
The d7100 is the best overall features in the DX category, including low light (well it is a couple years old now and the d5300 and d3300 are better but still).
When you compare it to FX ... FX & DX are just two different categories and there are various other differences too. "focal length" of lenses, low light, etc.
I think they are two different categories after two different market segments. OF course now Nikon has their new category definitions to further blur it.
But looking at the dxoMark numbers for low light you actually see two different segments. All the FX cameras D810 = 2853, Df = 3279, d700 = 2303, d4S = 3074, d4 = 2965, d3x = 1992 are simply in a different category numerically than the DXs.
I was pessimistic before I bought a d600. But I immediately noticed the differences in low light. My d7000 is closer to the d7100 than it is a d610 if you just look at the numbers. It is what it is.
I think from another thread the d610 is about 1.5 stops faster than the d7000 in low light. I think you gain even more once you add in the higher ISO capabilities.
But the best way to find out is to get one yourself and then compare. I did that in the other thread with the same ISO, aperture and lens and the exposure time of the d7000 was twice that of the d600. and the d7000 dxomark is very close to the d7100. Both the d7000 and d7100 are significantly farther away in the dxomark to the d610.
But it all comes to how you use it and what you can afford.
The d7100 is the best overall features in the DX category, including low light (well it is a couple years old now and the d5300 and d3300 are better but still).
When you compare it to FX ... FX & DX are just two different categories and there are various other differences too. "focal length" of lenses, low light, etc.
I think they are two different categories after two different market segments. OF course now Nikon has their new category definitions to further blur it.
But looking at the dxoMark numbers for low light you actually see two different segments. All the FX cameras D810 = 2853, Df = 3279, d700 = 2303, d4S = 3074, d4 = 2965, d3x = 1992 are simply in a different category numerically than the DXs.
I was pessimistic before I bought a d600. But I immediately noticed the differences in low light. My d7000 is closer to the d7100 than it is a d610 if you just look at the numbers. It is what it is.
I think from another thread the d610 is about 1.5 stops faster than the d7000 in low light. I think you gain even more once you add in the higher ISO capabilities.
But the best way to find out is to get one yourself and then compare. I did that in the other thread with the same ISO, aperture and lens and the exposure time of the d7000 was twice that of the d600. and the d7000 dxomark is very close to the d7100. Both the d7000 and d7100 are significantly farther away in the dxomark to the d610.
But it all comes to how you use it and what you can afford.