• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

The D7100 has landed (1 Viewer)

While F8 focus points have not been supported until the recent FX bodies and now with the D7100, lenses with smaller max apertures will still attempt AF focus on most bodies. Think the Sigma 50-500 and 150-500 @500mm with F6.3 max aperture. I've even use the tape trick on the 150-500 w/TC 1.4x to get it to AF on a D90. So there is some flexibility in AF systems on older bodies, just "officially" less reliable.
 
fugl said:
95% were taken as described, the exceptions being a handful of obvious wide-angle shots & a few close-ups of nests with the 300mm on a tripod. Most with lots of post processing, many heavily cropped & all at 400 ISO.
Click to expand...

fugl,
After a quick look at your photos on Flickr, I must say I'm very impressed if all of those bird images were obtained with nothing more than the D70 and the 300 f/4 AFS. Your gallery makes me feel silly for upgrading my D70 twice already. Meanwhile you were obviously birding a lot more than I ...and building a collection of photos that puts me to shame! ;) --Dave
 
The attached pic was taken with the D7000, 300mm f2.8 and 2x Mk2 converter at ISO 2800 (through a double-glazed window).
I can't imagine that the D7100 will produce results that are inferior to this.
 

Attachments

  • BF Woodpigeon.jpg
    BF Woodpigeon.jpg
    285.4 KB · Views: 204
apbarr said:
The attached pic was taken with the D7000, 300mm f2.8 and 2x Mk2 converter at ISO 2800 (through a double-glazed window).
I can't imagine that the D7100 will produce results that are inferior to this.
Click to expand...

Wow, I'm sold! What post-processing did you do or is this how it came out of the camera? I am particularly impressed by the absence of noise at such a high ISO rating.
 
apbarr said:
The attached pic was taken with the D7000, 300mm f2.8 and 2x Mk2 converter at ISO 2800 (through a double-glazed window).
I can't imagine that the D7100 will produce results that are inferior to this.
Click to expand...


Very impressive. Don't think my budget will stretch to the f2.8 though. However, I too am sold on the D7100 (pending full reviews)
 
Thanks for the comments, I cropped the image, adjusted the exposure slightly and applied unsharp mask. No noise reduction done. I think the 300mm f4 with 1.7x would give similar results.

I'll post the full untouched image on my Flickr account tomorrow.
 
D7100

Looks like another solid DLSR offering by Nikon. Wud like to try one photographing some birds of prey in flight.
 
apbarr said:
Thanks for the comments, I cropped the image, adjusted the exposure slightly and applied unsharp mask. No noise reduction done. I think the 300mm f4 with 1.7x would give similar results.

I'll post the full untouched image on my Flickr account tomorrow.
Click to expand...

Struggling to upload the full size image to Flickr for some reason:C
 
apbarr said:
Struggling to upload the full size image to Flickr for some reason:C
Click to expand...

Looking forward to seeing it. If you are up-loading it as maximum-quality jpeg (as the pixel-peeper in me hopes) it should be a very large file indeed. Maybe that's why Flickr is cutting up rough?
 
fugl said:
Looking forward to seeing it. If you are up-loading it as maximum-quality jpeg (as the pixel-peeper in me hopes) it should be a very large file indeed. Maybe that's why Flickr is cutting up rough?
Click to expand...

Finally managed to upload successfully at full size and max. resolution. I've also uploaded a photo of a Rook using the 300mm f4 plus 1.7x at ISO 5600. Processed in Photoshop
 
Last edited:
apbarr said:
Finally managed to upload successfully at full size and max. resolution. I've also uploaded a photo of a Rook using the 300mm f4 plus 1.7x at ISO 5600. Processed in Photoshop
Click to expand...

Just finished pixel-peeping the 2 photos; many thanks for uploading them. Very impressive indeed, both of them. The Rook definitely sets at rest any doubts about the sharpness of the 1.7 TC!
 
RJM said:
It seems the JPEG Fine Large buffer is 33 frames and 73 frames in 1.3 crop DX mode. FPS also seems to be slightly throttled if you choose 14-bit processing. Unlike the AF modules in the latest FX cameras, only the single centerpoint is F8 compatible.
Click to expand...

But what is the D7100 buffer in NEF (raw)
Also the frame rate is only 6fps .......Im going to wait 'till end of year to see if a D400 appears , it might just have 8-9fps and a decent buffer.

The D7100 looks good but its not quite there. Give it till june / july and the price will drop to about £900 . If the D400 does not appear by late summer I might have to have a D7100.
 
QUOTE
For those who want more, we'll have to wait and see whether the D400 transpires - and where there is smoke - there is a fire.[/QUOTE]

The D400 will have to be a great pro DX body to compete with the Canon 7D Mk111.
Like many people I will have to just put up with what Nikon comes up with because I am so heavily invested in Nikon Lenses I cant change back to Canon.

I feel disappointed with Nikon at the moment , they have great Full frame bodies ( I have a D3 ) and the D300s, although its a good body is overdue a revamp.
 
Nikon D7100

Looks like a solid Canon 7D rival, Nikon could sell a lot of these and looking at the specs, looks like a suitable camera for birders!
 
My D7100 is scheduled to arrive tomorrow--can't wait! My husband gets my D7000. As I see the crop factor, there actually is an advantage with regard to the increased image size which the crop factor produces. Here is my reasoning"

The D7100 has 24mp pixels, and the DX sensor is 384 mm2 (24mm x 16mm), so the pixel density is .0625 mp per mm2 (24mp/384mm2). In the crop mode, the sensor size is reduced to 216 mm2 (24mm x 16mm), so the total number of pixels in the crop mode is 216mm2 in crop mode/384mm2 in regular DX=.56 x 24mp total = 13.4 mp in crop mode. While the total number of pixels is reduced by 56% to 13.4 mp in the crop mode, the pixel density remains almost the same at .0620 mp per mm2, since 13.4 mp/216 mm2 = .0620. Rounding must account for the slight difference in density, as the two densities have to be the same. So, if my Nikon 300mm f2.8 lens becomes the equivalent of 600mm rather than 450mm as it is in regular DX mode, I may be doing very little cropping in the digital darkroom. I realize that a huge crop is going to create issues, but this pixel density is still 1/3 more dense than my D7000, which has a 16 mp and a pixel density of .047mp/mm2 in DX mode and would have a pixel density of .0416 in crop mode if it had one. In conclusion, I think (and hope) that the generous number of pixels on this sensor, at 24mp, will make major crops, whether done in Photoshop or in the camera possible without serious loss of resolution. We will see.....I will report back with some examples over the weekend after I have had some time with my camera.
 
Warning! This thread is more than 10 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Similar threads

M
Nikon Wins Awards
Replies
2
Views
802
MikeInPA
M
T
Returning land to nature
Replies
2
Views
472
Elkhornsun
E
JTweedie
Girl in Cambodia has died from bird flu
Replies
2
Views
930
HnehpetS
HnehpetS
G
Welcome to 2024 at Camera Land
Replies
0
Views
520
gr8fuldoug
G
G
Black Friday Sale Has Begun
Replies
0
Views
516
gr8fuldoug
G

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top