nikonboy Loc: Apple Valley, MN and Pine Island, Florida

Wildlife is the main subject of my photography. I have some good lenses that give fine images with a D300, including the 200-400mm f4 VR. Generally I find that one cannot be too close to wildlife in natural settings, with few exceptions. Because of that, I find that the DX sensors with a 1.5x crop factor give a marked advantage in this type of photography. If you could pick only one of two different cameras, the Nikon D7100 with the 24-megapixel DX sensor, or the D800 with the 36-megapixel FX sensor, which would it be? The D800 has a DX setting with 15.3 megapixels of its sensor being used. Based on numbers alone it would appear the D7100 has the advantage in resolution of about 9 megapixels, comparing the DX formats. I realize the D800 excels in low light conditions and has great dynamic range, but will those features outweigh those 9 megapixels of the D7100? Would you use the full frame of the D800 instead of the DX crop mode it has?

If money is not a big object, and wildlife is the main subject, which would you choose? Are there factors I have not considered? Theoretical considerations are certainly appreciated, but I am hoping that someone with both of those cameras might weigh in with personal experience as well. Thanks.

Erik_H Loc: Denham Springs, Louisiana

The D7100 has a higher burst rate (6 fps compared with 4). If the slower rate is not an issue for you, I'd suggest the D800. Sure, you're only getting 15.3 mp in DX mode, but the pixels are bigger, giving you a better image. You may also factor in what glass you have now, whether or not you already have any FX glass to utilize the D800 to it's full potential or plan to buy some in the future.

Acountry330 Loc: Dothan,Ala USA

I have a D-7000 and a D-800. I use both for wildlife with my Sigma 150-500. The D7000 images with it's crop are a little bigger, but the D-800 with it's 36 megapixels allows just as good if mot better crop, and the resolution is a little better.

MT Shooter Loc: Montana

I shoot primarily wildlife and the D800E is my workhorse. But I always carry a D7100 for those times I need that 1.5x crop facttor with my 600 or 800mm lenses.

amehta Loc: Boston

The DX crop factor is not real magnification, it is "digital magnification" which happens when the image is viewed at the same size as a FX image.

I think there are two conditions: cropping at or smaller than DX or having an image larger than DX. For the second case, obviously the D800 wins. For smaller than DX, there are two issues: pixel density differences and whether those differences matter. Basically the D7100 pixels have a 22% higher linear density than the D800. I don't think that is generally significant, it's the difference between a 20x30" print and a 24x36" print.

My simple suggestion is, if money is not a major factor, get the D800 because it has advantages when you can fill the frame, and the disadvantages when you can't fill the frame are pretty small.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

The D7100 has a pixel dimension of 3.9µ, and the D800 is 4.88µ - you are not going to see than much of a difference. The D7100 has a larger pixel count in native mode than the D800 in crop mode, so, theoretically you have more flexibility when it comes to cropping and/or max print size.

Shooting in DX mode on a D800 has only one benefit - to increase the frame rate with a battery grip to 5.5 fps. In the process you will give up substantial image quality. Better to take the full image and crop accordingly.

The image quality in low light might be substantially better with the D800, especially if you downsample to 12 mp, which would give it a noise characteristic similar to a D3S. You can downsample the D7100 as well, but the results would not be as good.

The image quality is good on the 7100, but it is significantly better on the D800/D800E, but only if you get the best lenses. Getting a D800 and a 28-300 would not be a great choice.

cmc4214 Loc: S.W. Pennsylvania

Unless you are printing HUGE you probably won't be able to tell difference between 15 or 24 mp

joer Loc: Colorado/Illinois

I use both the D800E and D7100. Overall the E is far better than the D7100 on almost all counts. The only disadvantage is the frame rate and that only matters some times, if at all.

You will get a better looking image from the E even when cropped to the size of the D7100 or greater.

The only reason to shoot the D800/E in the DX mode is for a slight increase in frame rate or if the computer struggles with the large files. There is a big disadvantage in doing so because it makes framing more critical, which can be critical with wildlife.

There is no difference between the DX mode and cropping to the same size and the latter provides more flexibility in framing an image. DX mode is for those who don't process at all and use their images straight from the camera.

Without a doubt if money is no object get the D800/E. I have learned that when having both the D7100 is superfluous.

Fishnwish

The D7100 has more pixels per square millimeter of sensor surface than the D800/e, thus higher resolution. The D7100 also has higher FPS making it the clear choice for wildlife in my house. There's one other rule to follow... Don't worry about the camera, invest in glass which the D7100 will save you $1900 to do so with over the D800/e. Again, D7100 clear choice at my house.
Good Luck!

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

I just sold my D700 with battery grip which shoots at 8 fps, and replaced it with a second D800. After shooting wildlife, sports and birds in flight, etc. - all the things the D800 is not supposed to do very well. The results - more keepers, and unequaled image quality, even after crops.

The big problem with the D7100 for sports or action is its tiny buffer size - unless you only shoot jpg, which doesn't work for me. You will only get about 12 shots before it drops down to 1 fps, until the buffer clears.

The D700 was a bit better - shooting at 8 fps I could get off about 18-20 shots before filling the buffer.

In my opinion the D7100 is NOT a good choice for wildlife and sports - the D3, D3S, and D700 with battery grip are all much better. BTW, the D3S gives you 9fps and the bufffer is about 40 shots.

Pixel density is not equivalent to resolution. The D800 has 7,360 x 4,912, while the D7100 only has 6000 x 4000.

For the record, a 24x36 print viewed at 45" (considered optimal) only needs a resolution of 80 ppi for decent print quality. So, doing the math - the DX crop on the D800 ( 4,800 x 3,200) would give a 24x36 print a resolution of 133 ppi, which would be more than enough for a sharp looking print. As the print size increases, the ppi required drops, but only if you factor in viewing distance. This is directly related to, and limited by, human visual acuity - any additional resolution is wasted, unless you are showing these images to photographers, who tend to look at 48x72 inch prints at a distance of 12 inches.

AlisonT Loc: Louisa, Virginia

I had a D200 and recently replaced it with a D7000. I like the D7000 much better because of the difference in weight. When doing wildlife I end up carrying my camera for distances and I also end up holding it ready to shoot for more time, waiting for the right shot. The weight makes a huge difference especially when you put a heavy zoom lens on.

MtnMan Loc: ID

I went through that dilemma about a year ago and went for a refurbished D800. I am very happy with the choice for several reasons and unhappy for one reason.

I had a D7000 at the time I changed.

I usually shoot wildlife in RAW with the DX mode using a Sigma 150-500. The reason to use DX mode is that otherwise the RAW files on the D800 are ginormous. Why waste storage space on stuff you know you are going to crop out anyway?

The thing I don't like about the D800 is that it does not have an infrared input and the attachment for a remote release totally sucks. It is a screw connection and you can't get your fingers around the collar of the device to work the thread. It is always a pain to take on and off...which I do frequently when photographing wildlife and moving the tripod. (For landscape I now use deleayed release instead...but that doesn't work so hot for wildlife).

If I were to get another camera for wildlife it would be a D5300. In addition to more pixels on target it has infrared release, weighs about 1/4 the D800...a consideration when using humongous lenses like the Sigma 150-500, and I found many uses for the articulated screen on my D5100.

nikonboy Loc: Apple Valley, MN and Pine Island, Florida

The image quality in low light might be substantially better with the D800, especially if you downsample to 12 mp, which would give it a noise characteristic similar to a D3S. You can downsample the D7100 as well, but the results would not be as good.

I'm afraid I don't know what you mean by "downsampling." How does one do that?

nikonboy Loc: Apple Valley, MN and Pine Island, Florida

What great information I am getting here. Many things I had not known or considered!

gessman Loc: Colorado

Not meaning to seem sexist here but it might be beneficial regarding your comments were you to point out that you are female and indicate some level of weight to size ratio between you and your camera gear. Like Shirley and several others, Gene/Jean for instance, Allison is usually/often a feminine name but not always so your comments become critical whether you are a 100 female or a 200 male.

It is also noteworthy that, according to your website which is very appealing, your wildlife shots seem to mostly involve wildlife sitting still which is not something for which one would normally best require or desire one kind of camera over another.