Jump to content
Rocha

Nikon announces the D7100

Recommended Posts

It's ridiculous DSLR's don't have GPS and WiFi

Very true John, I think they are just saving it for a trump card when they can't think of much else to add on, the NEX has it....why have an add on? A lot of their money is made on add ons I guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What does everyone think about the 1.3x crop mode? It gives 15.3 megapixel resolution, so not far from that of the D7000, and the focus points fill the entire frame.

 

I am also disappointed in the lack of a pro-level body. The D7000 feels (and is) very flimsy compared to the D800.

 

I still agree with Thom Hogan that there is room for a D400/9000 (?). Specs will probably include stuff that we underwater types don't use a lot (wifi and GPS for example). Native maximum ISO on the D7100 is 6400, so I think with some clever sensor developments there is room there too.

 

Unless my D7000 was falling apart, I would be tempted to wait...

 

Adam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The on the go live view white balance may come in handy too?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The on the go live view white balance may come in handy too?

 

I agree that the LV Spot White Balance will be a great addition when shooting video u/w with the D7100. It's a pain at the mo, so much so that I very rarely shoot video u/w. This will effectively give a one-touch WB.

 

From dpreview:

"New in the D7100 is a 'spot white balance' feature, which allows you to set white balance when shooting in live view mode quickly and easy, by simply selecting an area of the scene from which to take the reading. This promises to be much easier than the conventional Nikon approach to setting custom white balance, which is far from intuitive, to say the least..."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My question (and I understand that the issues of professionals are not mine):

 

I am an old D-300 shooter and probably more of the target of Nikon for underwater users of this camera (if they care about underwater photographers at all).

 

The plusses:

1-More megapixels

2-Like the 1.3 crop but really why not just crop?

3-May actually be Ok taking video with one touch white balance

4-Better all round sensor

 

Don't care

1-Build quality. I don't use my underwater camera out of the housing

2-Dx vs FX is a tradeoff. I am mostly a macro shooter but would like the flexibility of a FX/DX combo

 

Negatives

1-I have a prefectly good Seatool housing for my D-300 and 2 perfectly good D-300 cameras.

 

So, in reality, only diving 15-18 diving days a year 30-45 dives, how much better pictures will I really get?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice...any idea what the strobe sync speed is? Hope I am asking that right. Right now, my D90 is 1/200. How fast is the D7100?

 

And which companies are looking at housing this new model? I have been trying to decide about moving up to the D800 and this looks like a good option.

 

So, a question that comes up for me...D800 or check out this new D7100?

 

Happy diving - Pam

Edited by DiverPam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pam, I think the Sync speed is the same as the D7000. 1/250 by default, but can be changed to 1/320.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My question (and I understand that the issues of professionals are not mine):

 

So, in reality, only diving 15-18 diving days a year 30-45 dives, how much better pictures will I really get?

 

I guess there is merit in being one camera behind the pros if it is just a hobby...hence I am shopping for a good second hand housing as opposed to paying top dollar for something while it is the next best thing. I totally agree with you, I think I can improve my images better through practise than by using a better camera....I would like TTL inmy setup though...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It looks like this may be the upgrade from a D90....

 

However, I do not see an ability to manually raise/ lower the flash. Anyone else notice this? (Of course I realize all we have seen are previews of pre-release versions)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Larger buffer, high iso-low light, more fps at 14 or 16 bit, 1/500 flash sync and an AF on button would be ideal.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More from Thom....

 

"As a middle-class DX-format D-SLR." Well, apparently the Japanese disagree with the American Nikon marketers. The previous quote is from the US site, this quote is from the Japanese site. So who are we to believe?

 

I haven't given up hope yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really wish Nikon would rev the D300, but its been six years and nothing but crickets. The "S" version was not a big enough upgrade to even consider. Since the price point on a D400 or whatever would be very close to the D600, I don't see them doing it. As a matter of fact, I'm certain we are maybe a year away at most from seeing a $1500 price point FX from Nikon. U/W photogs and wildlife photographers are the only ones who will pick a high end DX over a FX model.

A year ago a high end DX would have been successful, but after the D600/D800 releases, a model in the $1800-2000 range cuts the pie too thin.

I know Thom has said several times he thinks a D400 is in the works, but he has been forecasting it for over two years -- wishful thinking I believe. I bought the D7000 because I got tired of waiting for Nikon to rev the D300.

The D7100 is a nice iteration. It's just not compelling enough to make me want to buy yet another housing. I went from the D300 (not the "S" model) to the D7000 and honestly it is just not that different. A bit smaller, a bit more resolution, a bit better IQ at high ISO. But I do miss the pro features on my D300 and if I upgrade it makes more monetary sense to get the D800; the body is pricier, but housing cost is pretty close and the D800 at this point looks to be more future proof than the D7100.

Edited by johnspierce

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What does everyone think about the 1.3x crop mode?

 

I agree with TomR - it is nice in theory - but in practice it isn't much use (except for non-cropping competition photographers) like the DX crop on the FX bodies.

 

Alex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think this is great news for those wanting to get a First camera in a D7000 at a lower price or have a backup for their first D7000. 24 megapixels just seems like overkill in a DX camera.

 

Tom

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is being reported that the new sensor will provide better detail, no? Therefore, if I crop 50% to 12MP I should have a better picture than a native D-300 shot as long as I have clear water, no? Being further away I have more flexibility in strobe placement, no? I also can simply keep my focus point in the center and crop later to get the presentation I want, no? In addition edge diffraction will be minimized, No?

 

I other words, if I simply give up some outdated idea that 1:1 and "composed in the camera" is importent, I should be able to get a better shot whith this camera than my old D-300. Or am i kidding myself?

 

Regards,

 

Tom

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My question would be D7100 or D800? With the specs on this camera - what does everyone think about the difference? If you were getting ready to upgrade, what would you consider with this new camera coming out. I know part of this discussion will be FX versus DX. And I really like my Tokina. Thoughts......

 

Pam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally for me, although this new DX camera really does excite me I'm even more interested in what could come out in the

next tier, that is of course if it(D400/D9000) comes out. As another D90 user I've been more than happy to stick with that camera

as my skills progress, I am after all not a pro. It always has made sense to me to wait two generations before upgrading.

 

DX as a format really suits me. As I dive basically 100% of the time in temperate waters I shoot mostly macro. Also topside

my main interest in photography is nature, with birds being my most common subject. As such the 1.3 crop of this new

camera has added interest for me. I like how they have made it a super imposed frame for that crop rather than the tighter

viewfinder image of the D800 on DX mode. I guess there is a technical reason that is so?

 

If I went to FX I too would miss the 10-17, even though I hardly use it in home waters :pardon:

 

To upgrade from the D90 to D800, for me would mean

1- a much more expensive body upgrade,

2- a more expensive housing upgrade,

3- new lens required,

4- some of my lens would become obsolete or less useful.

 

As a hobbyist on a tight budget there is simply no incentive.

 

Cheers,

Jim.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My question would be D7100 or D800? With the specs on this camera - what does everyone think about the difference? If you were getting ready to upgrade, what would you consider with this new camera coming out. I know part of this discussion will be FX versus DX. And I really like my Tokina. Thoughts......

 

Pam

I can't really think of a single advantage of a 36MP FX camera over a 24MP DX camera as an underwater diving camera. it will be interesting to see how low light etc compares Then you add in all the reasons Jim mentions and I think a 24MP DX camera is going to be a better choice for most photography situations given lens choices etc. If you stay with DX, you will see similar quality to the D800, without having to make a single lens / port adjustment.

The D800 has the small advantage that you effectively can shoot 36MP FX, or 24MP DX - either by letting the camera crop, or cropping manually in post, so it provides some leeway to 'throw away some pixels'. The D800 is a better studio camera, but in my opinion the D7100 is a better underwater and general wildlife camera; I think it's just a pity that Nikon have not yet produced a real pro level DX camera yet to really replace the D300 with high frame rate, large buffer etc. What's so frustrating is you know they have the technology, it's just a matter of combining it in one camera.

Edited by loftus
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Loftus - Thanks for the feedback. I notice that you have both the D800 and D7000. Which one do you use most underwater? And why? Do you think these comparisons will hold up with the new D7100?

 

This camera is shaping up to be a great choice based on what we are reading - especially if you like the DX format.

 

Pam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eventually finding the time while i relax, and having a deluged look at the spec etc. 1/250 flash shutter speed? Is that right? Wasn't the 7000 and 300 1/320? A bit shit that its the same as an Olympus mirrorless if so.

Also noticed wireless was listed as built in, whereas it was referred to the wu-1a was needed?

With the removal of the low pass filter does that mean that everyone who spent a fortune on the d800 (no E) is a bit pissed off that theyve rightly accepted that after their "experiment" of giving 2 "options" with the 800 they were right to remove to.

 

I'll still have one tho, sold my d90 housing last may, spoilt 2 planned trips already, be good to get back in the game

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Loftus - Thanks for the feedback. I notice that you have both the D800 and D7000. Which one do you use most underwater? And why? Do you think these comparisons will hold up with the new D7100?

 

This camera is shaping up to be a great choice based on what we are reading - especially if you like the DX format.

 

Pam

Hi Pam,

I personally use the D800 mostly, but that's specifically because I shoot mostly pool studio and large animal wide angle, and more importantly my daughter has the D7000 most of the time. (She's a marine science undergrad at University of Miami.) I rarely, if ever, shoot macro. I just think DX is overall more versatile for a wide range of shooting situations. The high MP of the D800 has advantages for a more limited set of situations only.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

D800 would only ever be suited to wreck divers, get as close as you want with no harm of scaring any wildlife.

 

What do people think about the crop feature for macro work, giving the opportunity to using a 60mm in a similar way to a 105mm? Would this work?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Intrigued by the 1.3 crop that you can turn on. Just because that would give you a 14mb file instead of a 24mb file. I doubt Iwould use this feture underwater, but msy use it for xmas pictures eith my family or b day parties. I mean, who needs 24mb for this. Would also be interesting for sports shootingas well.

 

I was hoping that it shot 1080p @ 60fps instead of 1080i

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It looks like a decent iteration. It will undoubtedly have a higher quality sensor than the D7000 and the body is a bit more robust. Better video. It feels like Nikon just realized they needed to bump megapixel again but they are still ignoring the high-end DX user in my opinion. Glad they finally added the weather resistant body.

 

It is *not* a full on replacement for the D300s. It's a shame that Nikon has still left off features I had on my 2007 D300.

 

- Same stupid left hand dial to let me select "landscape" or "portrait". Really? That's flagship? I'd rather have the old WB/ISO buttons from the D300

- 51 autofocus points? Yes, that's nice, but it's a shame the D7100 is essentially getting the same focus system I had on the D300 6 years ago - shouldn't it be even better?

- Dual SD cards? Compact Flash is still faster. I'm betting the D7100 will still have a small buffer and will stop shooting at the most inopportune time.

- Where's the DX primes? Or anything cool and new in DX lenses?

 

Please don't misunderstand; this is definitely a better body than the existing D7000 and a very nice evolution. But it also shows me that Nikon wants to move the former D300 user off to FX just like I said in a thread about 3 months ago -- I predicted back then Nikon would never release a D400 but would instead make the next rev of the D7000 it's new top of the line DX.

 

For an underwater photographer who currently has a D7000, does this make you want to iterate and buy yet another $2500, (sorry, $3000-$3300) housing for what is essentially a megapixel increase or does this make you want to jump to FX? Is this a good enough iteration to keep people from jumping to Olympus OM-D which is much cheaper and has a better lens selection?

 

At least Nikon has finally told us the D400 is not to be...

 

Cheers,

JP

 

I don't know that the D400 is truly not to be, the below link is mildly encouraging, I can't figure any better reason to limit the buffer as they did than their wanting to provide a compelling point of differentiation with an upcoming pro-dx to squeeze a few more bucks out of folks.

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3387936#forum-post-50901841

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sponsors

Advertisements



×
×
  • Create New...