joer Loc: Colorado/Illinois

You just don't have enough lens to achieve your expectations. The solution is a longer lens not a new camera. Look for a used 200-500 Nikon.

ggttc Loc: TN

80 mm lens on the eagle is simply asking too much of the lens and camera. Your dof didnt help matters. Know the limits of the equipment.

lmTrying Loc: WV Northern Panhandle

Before you go spend a lot of money here are a couple of things that no one else has suggested. 1).Set your Auto Focus for a single point. 2).Adjust the diopter of your viewfinder. These are simple, no cost things that might help.

3).As others have said, a faster shutter speed and greater depth of field will help, but will require a change of ISO.

4).Lastly, from my own experience. I opened a new model kit full of trees of parts, focused on one particular part half way down in the box, and took the photo. Chimped the photo on the screen and found that what was in focus was not what I focused on, but the bottom of the box. For my low end camera there was no correction of the focus between lens and body problem available. A lot of cameras can make this focus correction.

Side notes: So I got the new camera I wanted anyway. Which also lead me to go mirrorless.

Toment Loc: FL, IL

Agree. He's out of focus. f4 is a little open for a clear distant shot. Maybe f8 orf11 would give you more detail, depending on accuracy of focus and shake.

photostephen

Not sure which camera and lenses you want. Consider renting equipment and trying it out.
A lot cheaper than purchased new equipment you do not feel improves your images.

There are a lot of places that rent camera equipment.

Thomas902 Loc: Washington DC

"...Look for a used 200-500 Nikon..." Did you actually read the OP's post carefully Joe?
"...I'm just your typical enthusiast who hikes around Maine...

Hiking with the AF-S 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR isn't what I would consider advising anyone to do...
At 2524 grams it is no longer a usable tool but rather a burden to struggle with...
Been there... Done that Joe... How many miles over rough terrain have you carried the AF-S 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR Nikkor Joe? Please think carefully about the OP's needs before you promote a questionable solution, k?

Since others will likely do the same... I offer a solution that I've actually carried on extended hikes.
The very capable AF-P 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6E ED VR Nikkor which at 694 grams is civilized and doable.

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1349415-REG/nikon_20068_af_p_nikkor_70_300mm_f_4_5_5_6e.html/qa

Below I've posted an image captured in Lake Fairfax Park after hiking for over 45 minutes to reach this site.
Keep in mind I had to cross several streams and climb up numerous steep rocky slopes... On which I would have surely fallen carrying the huge, heavy cumbersome AF-S 200-500mm f/5.6E ED VR.

btw, the newer (FX) version of the is the one to get Geosailor... The AF-P 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6E ED VR Nikkor will work fine on your D7000 except you'll lose your focus point if your turn off the D7000... Really not a showstopper... But I needed to alert you to this only limitation on the D7000.

Bottom Line? Geosailor thinking you may actually lose interest in photography if/when you get caught up in the upgrade spiral that never ends with bird photography.... Maybe choose something that is far more popular like portraiture... Which btw, is the most lucrative genre by far and away (speaking from brutal experience here). Just a thought
.

X Games BMX Rider doing Bunny Hops over a rail: With a D7200 w/ AF-P 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6E ED VR Nikkor

(Download)

gvarner Loc: Central Oregon Coast

I downloaded the file and it’s EXIF data says 8.6 MP when your camera has a 16 MP sensor. I viewed the data with my Snapseed app. Can anyone provide an explanation for that? If you view the file with LR, does it show a higher resolution?

one_eyed_pete Loc: Colonie NY

You came upon a very nice photo opportunity. In order to get a sharp detailed photo of the eagle you would have needed something like a 300 - 400mm lens. I suspect the distance to the eagle was longer than 50 ft. With a 80mm lens on a DX camera the field of view vertically is 11.5 degrees which would fill the frame vertically with a 10 ft subject at 50 ft. Considering an adult eagle is between 2 1/2 to 3 1/2 ft tall, at 50 ft it would about 1/3 of the vertical frame. I concur with other comments about shooting with a smaller f-stop and higher shutter speed.

If I were in your place I would have wanted to have my 100-400mm L on my Canon 80D and zoom in on the eagle head. The downside is carrying a long lens while hiking gets tiresome. I found mounting it on a monopod and using the monopod as a walking stick helps.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

Not true...

Just considering resolution alone, scaling up from DX to FX, 16MP on the former equates to 37MP on the latter.

A DX sensor has approx. 370 square mm of area.... divide 16,000,000 pixels by 370 = 43,243 pixel sites per square mm.

An FX sensor has approx. 864 square mm area... multiply 43,243 x 864 = 37,361,952... or about 37.4 megapixels.

For that reason, the 46MP Z7 would be a much better choice than the 24MP Z6.

HOWEVER, it's not only about the resolution...

For one, you shot that image at ISO 100, f/4 and 1/160. It probably would have been much improved by using one stop smaller aperture and doubling the shutter speed, which would have meant using ISO 400. A full frame camera like the Z6 or Z7 would make for less risk of noise being an issue at higher ISOs.

Another thing.... Lenses on DSLRs ideally should be calibrated because the autofocus sensors utilize light that's been redirected by mirrors. That's to fine tune the accuracy of the focus. But because the AF sensors in mirrorless cameras are embedded directly in the image sensor, on exactly the same plane as the image will be made, there's no need to calibrate lenses on them. As far as focus accuracy, you'll always get "the best it can be" out of any lens used on a full frame camera.

You need a MUCH longer telephoto lens! 16-80mm? That image you provided would have been a lot nicer if you'd used a 300mm or 400mm to get a much tighter shot of the eagle. Heck, at first I didn't even realize there was an eagle in the image!

With the 46MP Z7 you'd have ability to do some cropping, too, if needed. Even so a much longer lens for a tighter shot would have been better.

With the 24MP Z6 you would also need 1.5X longer focal length so that you don't need to crop... to get full benefit of the larger format, figure on a 500mm or 600mm to minimize cropping.

You didn't indicate the lenses you have. But, for example, if one of them is a 70-300mm on your DX camera, instead with a full frame camera you should plan on using something like the 200-500mm. That's trading a 1.5 lb., 5.75" long lens for a 5 lb., 10.5" long lens. That's doubling the cost too (even though the 200-500mm is offered with a big discount right now). Either lens would utilize the same FTZ adapter (adding a little length and weight).

Maybe you should consider sticking with a DX camera so that you also can use smaller, lighter lenses. Where you need 300mm on full frame, 200mm will do on DX. Where you need 500mm on FX, 300mm on DX comes very close. In a sense the DX format acts like a "free teleconverter" and for that reason remains quite popular for wildlife (as well as sports or anything else that requires a lot of telephoto work).

You could upgrade to a later DX DSLR. I'd recommend the 24MP D7200, though it's only available used now (has been superseded by the D7500, but that camera is in some ways a downgrade from the D7200).

Or if you prefer, might choose a DX format mirrorless such as the Z50 or Zfc (both are essentially the same 21MP sensor and AF systems... Z50 is basically a modern camera, while the Zfc is a retro designed to look a lot like and function a little like the FM2n SLRs from the film era).

It might not hurt that a DX camera like the Z50 is half the price of a Z6, about one third the cost of a Z6II or Z7, and less than one fourth the cost of the Z7II.

If you decide to go with one of the mirrorless cameras, be sure to confirm that your "older F-mount lenses" will work properly on it via the FTZ adapter. There are some limitations (I believe there is a new version of the adapter coming, which may change some things).

joecichjr Loc: Chicago S. Suburbs, Illinois, USA

Great shot 👍👍👍👍👍

joecichjr Loc: Chicago S. Suburbs, Illinois, USA

A superb shot ❤️💛❤️💛❤️

fstoprookie Loc: Central Valley of California

I have a Z6II with it’s 24 MP sensor is a great performer. The Z7II has a larger 45MP sensor that is a very nice landscape and portrait camera. It depends on the lenses you have. I use an FTZ adapter for my G lenses and have ABSOLUTELY no complaints. I am sure that if you go to 100% you may find an issue. However, I have NOT been able to find sharpness issues with my Z6II and either 24-70mm f2.8 or my 70-200mm f2.8 lenses. Good luck with your decision and have a Happy holiday season

Retired CPO Loc: Travel full time in an RV

Longer glass and some experience/training in OUTDOOR photography is the solution to your problem. Don't even think about new gear "upgrade" until then. JMHO

wcastro

I have been a Nikon guy since God gave me a Nikon F, if you know anything about Nikon you know how long ago that was. Since than I have owned every Nikon that followed. If I may say so, I've taken great pictures with all of them, some needed a lot, some a few, but most all needed Photoshop attention (for professional use). Only lately with a Z 5, 6 6ii and 7ii was I able to shoot and publish in JPG directly. So, listen to everyone who's saying the same, just switch to Z my friend, everyone else will sooner or later and again, Nikon is showing the way.

Thomas902 Loc: Washington DC

"...God gave me a Nikon F" Really wcastro?

"...I have owned every Nikon that followed. If I may say so, I've taken great pictures with all of them..."
wcastro you just joined UHH on Jan 11, 2021 and haven't posted an image yet...
Can you explain to other UHH members why? Just and observation wcastro...

"...Only lately with a Z 5, 6 6ii and 7ii was I able to shoot and publish in JPG directly..." Really wcastro?
Please post examples of those "Tearsheets" and are they with "Named Credit"?

As for your inference: "...just switch to Z my friend, everyone else will sooner or later and again, Nikon is showing the way..." I'm calling you on this wcastor... On what data source are your basing your inference?

Ok the brutal realty is the most used device for capturing imagery is the iPhone on IG.

But wait, if you need hard numbers for DSLR's or mirrorless then flickr is by far the most well respected and sees the highest image postings in the aforementioned categories...

Here are actual numbers as of 11-26-2021.

Top Nikon Cameras Posting on flickr
Rank ▾ Name | Number of items | Avg. daily users | Type
1 D750 781 27 DSLR
2 D850 534 19 DSLR
3 D500 534 23 DSLR
4 D7200 434 22 DSLR
5 D7100 373 20 DSLR
6 D7000 277 15 DSLR
7 D810 311 10 DSLR
8 D7500 289 14 DSLR
9 D800 240 10 DSLR
10 Z 6 299 11 Mirrorless Camera
11 D3200 216 8 DSLR
12 D3300 209 9 DSLR
13 D5300 226 7 DSLR
14 D90 209 9 DSLR
15 D3100 172 8 DSLR
16 D610 196 6 DSLR
17 D5100 168 8 DSLR
18 D700 169 5 DSLR
19 D5 101 9 DSLR
20 D5200 133 6 DSLR
21 D5500 98 5 DSLR
22 D600 106 4 DSLR
23 Z 7 129 4 Mirrorless Camera

btw, the other Nikon Z models didn't even make the top 100.

Yet you are informing UHH members to purchase Z Cameras? Really?
Seems you're pontificating without any relevant data to validate same...

Here is my source: https://www.flickr.com/cameras/nikon/

Have at it wcastro (who Joined: Jan 11, 2021 with Posts: 8)

Really looking forward to seeing those "Published" tearsheets...
Wishing you all the best on your epic journey wcastro

And yes I truly believe Nikon's new Z9 may be a major game changer...
Provided it actually works as advertised...

Cheers!