• 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)

Duke Leto said:
MPE & Swainsons
MPE, I often change between single point AF, 9 or 21 point multipoint depending on a number of factors, subject, contrast, single or multiple subjects etc etc. and my issue isn't directed at just the 7100, the 4, 800 and 600 are the same, I guess I'm just old fashioned. Oh yes I agree with the metering switches as well, forgot about that one
Click to expand...

Yes. While it would be a great feature to have dedicated 9/21/51/3D-51 switch, there is no current camera that has one. Not even D3s/D3x/D800/D4. You always need to use or reassign a function button and use button+wheel to switch between them. I don't personally care and always use 21 mode that gets me most sharp pictures on CAM3500FX cameras.

The only AF-related dedicated switch that D7100 lacks is AF Area selector. I've never understood why would anyone want to select any other AF area mode than dynamic. Especially when using AF-ON technique. There is just not any reason - auto is completely unpredictable and there is very little point to switch between single and multipoint areas in AF-C. Messing with these and accidentaly switch is the best way how to get out of focus pictures. Nikon probably realized that too and killed the switch. Even on the D4 and D800. So this is not D7100 fault. In fact D7100 has extra front button to switch between AF modes that's not present on D300/700/D3.
 
swainsons said:
So, let me ask this, if this camera had a D400 sticker on it and it shot 8fps would everybody have gone AAAAHHHHH WOW AWESOME, or would some still be bleating.

6fps is 1 frame every 0.1666 seconds and 8fps is 1 frame every 0.125 seconds, thats a difference of 0.04 of a second... Seriously...

C'mon guys, give Nikon praise where its due, this is a bloody good piece of kit.

Regards
Click to expand...

I think the question you should ask is "will this camera perform significantly better than the body I have now?"

I suspect for a D90 or older DX body owner the answer is a definite YES. For the D7000 owner the answer is most likely NO as sensor IQ will be practically the same but diffraction might now be noticed at F8 and slower by pixel peepers and croppers. With little IQ improvements over the D7000, the D300s owner is still left in limbo unless video is a big factor.

With almost $1000 between the MSRPs of the D600 and new D7100, I think there is a place for a D400. If you've waited this long...maybe by Sept?
 
Last edited:
I find that on an FX camera using a Nikon prime lens if the image is cluttered and noisy that 21 point AF is often fooled out of focus, especially in low contrast scenes, a swift thumb movement changes that to a single AF point and hey presto all in the world is well again. Only ever use 21point AF for single birds in flight shots. I never said that i switch AF points via the switch.

RJM I think you hit the nail on the head, it's a perception from where you stand and agree that this body is really suitable if you upgrade from a somewhere before a D300 or D7000. I still don't believe Nikon will pit a DX body too close to an FX body
 
Duke Leto said:
...this body is really suitable [only] if you upgrade from a somewhere before a D300 or D7000.
Click to expand...

Really? To me, the D7100 finally looks like a major worthwhile upgrade for anybody with a D300. The main things on paper that are not especially impressive are the 5-6 FPS rate and the buffer only able to hold 6-7 NEF lossless compressed (depending on bit rate 14 vs. 12). For folks who put a high priority on birds in flight, that could be a deal breaker. But otherwise doesn't the D7100 offer a pretty big improvement over the D300 in overall image quality, resolution, high ISO performance? I think the removal of the AA filter may surprise some in terms of how much it improves detail/sharpness wide open. Maybe not; I'll be interested in the first detailed head-to-head comparison of image quality on the D5200 vs. the D7100. Importantly, and unlike the D7000 or any other DX body, the autofocus on the D7100 should be at least equivalent to the D300 and hopefully a bit better ("algorithyms from the D4," better low-light ability, center point functional down to f8). The build is not full alloy like the D300, but it sounds like it is a step in the right direction, hopefully good enough, especially for the price. And then of course there are a host of other minor improvements over the D300 that are less important to me. I have the original D300, so I'm sure I'll appreciate the easier access to Live View, and maybe video sometimes.

--Dave
 
Last edited:
For those who are interested, on Nikon rumours, there is an animation showing the difference in size and location of various buttons etc between D7000 and D7100, well worth a look if you are upgrading.
 
Dave I'll let someone more aware than me correct this but doesn't higher pixel density mean worst noise capabilities? if so why do you state that it's going to be an improvement at higher iso's? the D300 already has f8 capability, higher frame rate with a grip and el4.

Its new and an upgrade to the D7000 but not worthy as a successor to the D300, if you take a look at Nikons website the D300s is listed as a pro body, the d7100 as a consumer body, so from the mouth of Nikon itself..........
 
Steve, the D300/300s do not have an F8-capable focusing point in their AF array and I do think AF will be more accurate and slightly faster with the D7100. However, even D4/D800 users coming from the D700/D3s have not been overwhelmed by the improvement of CAM3500FX.

I also think it has been proven that sensor size, not pixel density, is the dominant factor when high ISO sensor noise is being measured and DxOMark tells us there is only ~1/2 stop of MEASURABLE difference in RAW IQ between a D300s and D7000 now. However, it seems Nikon improved its in-camera JPEG processing with EXPEED 2 and the resulting JPEG output is PERCEIVED to be at least a full stop better in use. So perhaps the EXPEED 3 in this D7100 might tweak the JPEGs a little better.

But given the 24MP D3200/5200 sensors seem to have similar RAW IQ to the D7000 it just seems logical to think the D7100 sensor will not be significantly better as well, even with the the lack of an OLPF. We can assume this because we have already seen with D800/800E and the APS-C Pentax K5II/K5IIs, an IQ difference is barely perceptible without the OLPF.

IMO, gaining perhaps 1 stop overall in still photo performance is still not worth the trade for a D300s owner unless Full HD video has become important. But there are already even better/cheaper cameras for that now anyway.
 
Last edited:
Doesn't do much for me I'm afraid. Buffer is a real deal breaker. When my D300 broke, I bought a used D300s this time last year. At this time I don't regret that decision.

I'm not entirely sure at who this camera is aimed at. The high density sensor without the anti-aliasing filter would be ideal for a landscape photographer but there's only cheap DX zoom options which probably won't do the setup justice. For those who want the ASP-C sensors reach like sports and wildlife photographers, the build and buffer really hamper the camera.
 
May be my understanding but isn't an F8 focussing point a camera that will AF at F8? if so my D300 does focus with an f4 lens + 2x TC connected.
Apologies if I have misunderstood
 
Duke Leto said:
May be my understanding but isn't an F8 focussing point a camera that will AF at F8? if so my D300 does focus with an f4 lens + 2x TC connected.
Apologies if I have misunderstood
Click to expand...

Officially it does not focus, according to Nikon, in the field and under good light it does.

With the new cameras (D7100, D600, D800, D4) Nikon says it focuses, and I assume more work has gone into the software driving all this.

Thats the difference.

Regards
 
The low light AF capability of the D4 is awesome.
Be interesting to see how the D7100 stacks up - it looks like a decent little camera.
It really is a pity that the D600 is hampered by its narrow DX AF system - a broader 51 pt would have made it near perfect.
 
RJM said:
...I also think it has been proven that sensor size, not pixel density, is the dominant factor when high ISO sensor noise is being measured and DxOMark tells us there is only ~1/2 stop of MEASURABLE difference in RAW IQ between a D300s and D7000 now...

But given the 24MP D3200/5200 sensors seem to have similar RAW IQ to the D7000 it just seems logical to think the D7100 sensor will not be significantly better as well, even with the the lack of an OLPF. We can assume this because we have already seen with D800/800E and the APS-C Pentax K5II/K5IIs, an IQ difference is barely perceptible without the OLPF.

IMO, gaining perhaps 1 stop overall in still photo performance is still not worth the trade for a D300s owner unless Full HD video has become important. But there are already even better/cheaper cameras for that now anyway.
Click to expand...

Wow. I really figured that the D7100 would have significantly better image quality than my D300, if for no other reason than the design of the sensor and processor on the D300 are over 5 years old! I knew that increasing pixel density has diminishing returns; it's obvious that they've figured out how to make cheap sensors with lots of MP. But I wanted to believe that especially in high-end SLR's, they were not packing more pixels onto sensors solely to impress consumers who simplistically judge a camera's power by it's megapixels. Without bothering to read or study all the concepts, I just figured in general, sensors and processors have improved in their ability to produce higher resolution and higher quality images at higher ISO settings, with more dynamic range. So, with twice as many pixels and no OLPF, a newer EXPEED 3 processor allowing noise-free images at higher ISO/faster shutter speed, etc., I expected much sharper, bigger images from the D7100.

But you have tempered my expectations. What you said above suggests pixel density counts for almost nothing and the technology advances were really starting to level off 5 years ago.

I'm sure I was giving too much weight to the greater pixel density. I tried to read a little more about it. Man, it quickly becomes technical and confusing. Check out this little discussion on birdphotographers.net, for example. A few things are becoming clear:
  • increased pixel density diminishes high ISO performance
  • increased pixel density causes diffraction to affect image quality at wider apertures
Thanks for helping me learn!

--Dave
 
Last edited:
RJM said:
Certainly the DX lens lineup gets no luv! I can think of only a few that are still capably sharp with the current 24mp DX lineup.
Click to expand...

Would you include the Nikon 10-24 in the "capably sharp" category? I hope so since I bought one not too long ago for use on my D70 and have been very happy with it.
 
I have no practical experience with that lens or current 16MP-24MP DX camera bodies. I only have 3 DX lenses; the Nikon 35mm f1.8, Tokina 11-16 f2.8, and the Nikon 18-200. All my other lenses are FX and my current DX bodies are the 12MP D90 and D300s.

The real lens issue on these 24MP DX bodies is that a lens will be diffraction limited for the pixel peepers and croppers at apertures F8 and slower. And all these relatively slow consumer DX zooms need to be stopped down by 2-3 stops for optimum sharpness putting them at F8 or slower. A DX shooter now needs to upgrade to lenses ~f2.8 or faster if they hope to fully exploit 24MP resolution. No more handholding walkarounds either. A sturdy tripod will be required.
 
Last edited:
RJM said:
The real lens issue on these 24MP DX bodies is that a lens will be diffraction limited for the pixel peepers and croppers at apertures F8 and slower. And all these relatively slow consumer DX zooms need to be stopped down by 2-3 stops for optimum sharpness putting them at F8 or slower. A DX shooter now needs to upgrade to lenses ~f2.8 or faster if they hope to fully exploit 24MP resolution. No more handholding walkarounds either. A sturdy tripod will be required.
Click to expand...

Thanks for that. Following up with another question: all things considered will the Nikon 10-24, hand-held under reasonable lighting conditions & ISO settings & acknowledging that it won't fully exploit the capabilities of the new camera, produce on average better images on the 7100 than on the D70? Or will they be be about the same? In other words what's the practical upshot of what you've just said on a day to day basis?

Photos taken by my main birding lens--the Nikon 300mm f4 prime--I'm sure will
benefit from the new camera body, particularly with a TC, and I will probably buy it for that reason alone.
 
Last edited:
fugl, I don't think my opinion about a lens or camera bodies I have never used can be of much help. This is YOUR ART afterall. Only you can judge what is missing from the pics you are making now and if this camera and that lens solves a photographic issue for you. Every tool should have a purpose.

Anyway, if you are not making large prints or heavy crops, there is no cause to be persnickety about loss of diffraction-related fine detai/micro contrast at all. A D7100 will be a nice upgrade from the D70 and the Nikon 10-24mm is one of the better wide angles. Still would avoid shooting this new body handheld if possible.
 
While the issue of diffraction has been addressed - see Brad Hill - entry 21 Feb: http://www.naturalart.ca/voice/blog.html

I'm not sure how bad it will be - the sample images look pretty good, including this one taken with a 500mm f4.0 at f11: http://photographylife.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/Nikon-D7100-Sample-Image-1.jpg

From their own blurb Nikon has taken the (casual) birder into consideration:
http://www.nikonusa.com/en/Nikon-Products/Product/Digital-SLR-Cameras/1513/D7100.html#!

I think this will be a neat small package, coupled with a 70-200mm f4.0 or 300 f4.0, to take with when you don't want to be burdened.

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.
 
mpe said:
The biggest issue I have with ergonomy of lower class of bodies like D600 or D7100, is that I don't like the position of ISO button. Furthermore, I strongly prefer dedicated switch for metering modes instead of metering button + wheel.
Click to expand...

If you shoot in aperture priority (as most birders seem to) the easy iso button menu option allows the rear wheel to change iso. This works on the D90, D7000 , D800 and D600 and I'm sure will also work on the D7100. Much easeier than using an iso button.

Also Nikons autoiso is so good these days, I must admit I rarely use iso changing manually now.
 
RJM said:
Steve, the D300/300s do not have an F8-capable focusing point in their AF array and I do think AF will be more accurate and slightly faster with the D7100. However, even D4/D800 users coming from the D700/D3s have not been overwhelmed by the improvement of CAM3500FX.

I also think it has been proven that sensor size, not pixel density, is the dominant factor when high ISO sensor noise is being measured and DxOMark tells us there is only ~1/2 stop of MEASURABLE difference in RAW IQ between a D300s and D7000 now. However, it seems Nikon improved its in-camera JPEG processing with EXPEED 2 and the resulting JPEG output is PERCEIVED to be at least a full stop better in use. So perhaps the EXPEED 3 in this D7100 might tweak the JPEGs a little better.

But given the 24MP D3200/5200 sensors seem to have similar RAW IQ to the D7000 it just seems logical to think the D7100 sensor will not be significantly better as well, even with the the lack of an OLPF. We can assume this because we have already seen with D800/800E and the APS-C Pentax K5II/K5IIs, an IQ difference is barely perceptible without the OLPF.

IMO, gaining perhaps 1 stop overall in still photo performance is still not worth the trade for a D300s owner unless Full HD video has become important. But there are already even better/cheaper cameras for that now anyway.
Click to expand...

Rick, you have made no mention of the difference in detail.
the 16 mpx sensor of the D7000 shows more fine detail in every properly exposed image when compared to the D90/D300s 12mpx sensor. And shadow detail is astonishing.

The extra detail from a 36mpx D800 is just amazing and I'm sure the 24mpx D71000 sensor will have similar detail levels. We await the controlled samples.
 
Duke Leto said:
May be my understanding but isn't an F8 focussing point a camera that will AF at F8? if so my D300 does focus with an f4 lens + 2x TC connected.
Apologies if I have misunderstood
Click to expand...

Yes but does it do that in low light and quickly? My D7000 and 300 f4 and 2tc doesn't but my D800 does. I expect the D7100 will also.
 
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
805
MikeInPA
M
T
Returning land to nature
Replies
2
Views
487
Elkhornsun
E
JTweedie
Girl in Cambodia has died from bird flu
Replies
2
Views
931
HnehpetS
HnehpetS
G
Welcome to 2024 at Camera Land
Replies
0
Views
530
gr8fuldoug
G
G
Black Friday Sale Has Begun
Replies
0
Views
521
gr8fuldoug
G

Users who are viewing this thread

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