Nikon D7000 versus D7100 (Page 5): Anand, Thanks much for the SB-700 tip - using it as a remote. I'll see what they say in the users manual. :shock:...

FiddleMaker Loc: Merrimac, MA

amehta wrote:

The easiest thing to answer is the smileys. First... (show quote)

Anand, Thanks much for the SB-700 tip - using it as a remote. I'll see what they say in the users manual.

:shock:

Aaron Braganza Loc: Sydney, Australia

amehta wrote:

I think the key to all this is "very little mileage". Just put more mileage on your D7000, and don't worry about the D7100 or a backup.

Great idea, considering the D7200 cannot be too far away from being released. They often say you find a recognizeable difference when you skip a model.
I too use the D7000 as a back up to my D7100

amehta Loc: Boston

FiddleMaker wrote:

Anand, Thanks much for the SB-700 tip - using it as a remote. I'll see what they say in the users manual.

:shock:

If you search for information online, use "Nikon Creative Lighting System".

FiddleMaker Loc: Merrimac, MA

amehta wrote:

If you search for information online, use "Nikon Creative Lighting System".

OK, I will do this now.

(having trouble putting the smilie at the end of my sentence. It jumps down at the beginning of a new line)

amehta Loc: Boston

FiddleMaker wrote:

OK, I will do this now.

(having trouble putting the smilie at the end of my sentence. It jumps down at the beginning of a new line)

Yes, it puts it at the end, I then delete the extra lines sometimes. :-)
But good job with the shock earlier! :lol:

wings42 Loc: San Diego, CA

Aaron Braganza wrote:

Great idea, considering the D7200 cannot be too far away from being released. They often say you find a recognizeable difference when you skip a model.
I too use the D7000 as a back up to my D7100

I use a D5100 to back up my D7000 which is now at Nikon getting serviced. I'd forgotten how good the D5100 is but it's in a different league than the D7000.

An important recognizable difference when the D7200 comes out would be a substantial boost in the D7000's shooting buffer. Trying to rapidly shoot many bird behaviors is often frustrating with the current approx. 6 shot buffer in RAW mode. Recently a full shot buffer made it impossible to take a shot of a lone crow slamming hard into a Red Tailed Hawk on purpose when the hawk refused to get out of the crow's nesting area. I screw up enough on my own and don't need the camera's built in limitations adding to it.

7100addict Loc: Vero Beach, Florida

One thing I've noticed in this thread is it seems most of the people posting are saying you won't notice a difference in the number of increased megapixels in your shots. If that was the only difference in the two bodies, that would probably be very true. But it's not...
The removal of the low pass filter, the newer and better sensor, are just a couple of the improvements not seen in this tread.
I'd been using my D-7000 for quite a while, and had been very pleased. But I have to admit, as soon as I saw the difference in sharpness when my girlfriend bought her D-7100, I was astounded to say the least!!!! Even just loaded onto an Ipad!!!! And she was just using her 18-105 kit lens like me!!!
I thought maybe there was an issue with my 18-105, so we traded lenses back and forth. The results stayed the same. So I used her D-7100 to see if it could be some issue with my technique, but the results were still the same.
I'm sorry if this post in anyway offends anyone. But if you think someone who upgrades from a D-7000 to a D-7100 is not going to see a difference in image quality...well... The bottom line is you are just wrong in your advise. I have numerous friends that have done the same, and they all have had the same results.
Do the upgrade!!!! You won't be sorry!!!!

FiddleMaker Loc: Merrimac, MA

7100addict wrote:

One thing I've noticed in this thread is it seems ... (show quote)

I am glad I read your post. Makes me now rethink what I may do with my D7000. I may just keep it and get a D7100 or go the FX path. But that means all new lenses. "No can do". :lol:

amehta Loc: Boston

FiddleMaker wrote:

I am glad I read your post. Makes me now rethink what I may do with my D7000. I may just keep it and get a D7100 or go the FX path. But that means all new lenses. "No can do". :lol:

Sigh...

:lol:

amehta Loc: Boston

FiddleMaker wrote:

I am glad I read your post. Makes me now rethink what I may do with my D7000. I may just keep it and get a D7100 or go the FX path. But that means all new lenses. "No can do". :lol:

Drive down to Concord, rent the D7100 from LensProToGo, shoot it for 3 days alongside your D7000, then have someone help you set up a "blind" comparison. If you can consistently pick out which camera took the picture (maybe 8 out of 10 times), then get the D7100. Then rent the D800e and do the same thing. :-)

7100addict Loc: Vero Beach, Florida

amehta wrote:

Drive down to Concord, rent the D7100 from LensProToGo, shoot it for 3 days alongside your D7000, then have someone help you set up a "blind" comparison. If you can consistently pick out which camera took the picture (maybe 8 out of 10 times), then get the D7100. Then rent the D800e and do the same thing. :-)

Great idea!!!!
:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

wings42 Loc: San Diego, CA

7100addict wrote:

...
I'm sorry if this post in anyway offends anyone. But if you think someone who upgrades from a D-7000 to a D-7100 is not going to see a difference in image quality...well... The bottom line is you are just wrong in your advise. I have numerous friends that have done the same, and they all have had the same results.
Do the upgrade!!!! You won't be sorry!!!!

Offends? Thank you for your insights and opinions. This thread has been most informative and enlightening, including your post. Still, I'll wait until Nikon makes the shooting buffer much larger. I'd even consider changing to another brand (Sony?) if the D7200 doesn't have a much larger buffer.

amehta Loc: Boston

wings42 wrote:

Offends? Thank you for your insights and opinions. This thread has been most informative and enlightening, including your post. Still, I'll wait until Nikon makes the shooting buffer much larger. I'd even consider changing to another brand (Sony?) if the D7200 doesn't have a much larger buffer.

Different features have different levels of importance for each of us. If your photography involves a lot of high speed continuous shooting, then the D7100 buffer size is a very important consideration. If someone else never shoots high speed continuous, then the buffer size is irrelevant. Neither is right or wrong. Hopefully both can find the camera that suits them. :-)

coco1964 Loc: Winsted Mn

amehta wrote:

Different features have different levels of importance for each of us. If your photography involves a lot of high speed continuous shooting, then the D7100 buffer size is a very important consideration. If someone else never shoots high speed continuous, then the buffer size is irrelevant. Neither is right or wrong. Hopefully both can find the camera that suits them. :-)

I shoot in continuous mode all the time when shooting sports---never a problem with the buffer size!! If you insist (I don't know why) on shooting raw there is your problem!! If you want to take photos of the kids playing sports, or any photo and want to make prints larger than 20x30 than you need a different camera. If not shooting raw go back in the manual and revise your settings and you'll get that 6 fps as advertised.........

Shot Sat, on continuous mode

FiddleMaker Loc: Merrimac, MA

amehta wrote:

Drive down to Concord, rent the D7100 from LensProToGo, shoot it for 3 days alongside your D7000, then have someone help you set up a "blind" comparison. If you can consistently pick out which camera took the picture (maybe 8 out of 10 times), then get the D7100. Then rent the D800e and do the same thing. :-)

Anand, a 4-day rental is $93 for the D7100 and that includes round-trip shipping. I would prefer to have a root canal done than to drive all the way to Concord.:lol: