Nikon D7000

[Experiment_626]

So, I've looked over some of the specs -- what does the D300s have that the new D7000 does not? There's the ability to auto-bracket nine exposures; as best I can see, the D7000 will only bracket three shots. Anything else?

This makes me wonder when the replacement for the D300s will come down the pike, since I cannot imagine that the D7000 won't hurt sales of the older model. And it also makes me giddy to imagine what the (presumed) D400 might offer ...

[handicap18]

I haven't looked enough into it, but from what I've seen thus far, the D7000 is a real winner. We'll have to see How the sensor actually performs and 16MP is REALLY pushing the MP limit. Technology has really come along way in that regard though.

......

Just spend a little more time looking at the features...

WOW

Had this been available 2 years ago instead of the D90, I would have gotten the D7000 over the D300. Can't wait to see what the D300s upgrade is going to bring. WOW

[ChiSoxKeith]

Go see images over here....

http://blog.chasejarvis.com/blog/2010/09/nikon-d7000

[Experiment_626]

Also crosses my mind that that the D300s has more "hard button" controls, for easier access to settings and adjustments. Still, this significantly ups the ante. I've read speculation on other boards that the D300s may be the last "pro" DX body and that the D7000 may represent the eventual top of the line for that size sensor. Others speculate the D400 will move toward being a full-on pro build, with a D3-like body. I'm not sure what I think yet.

[Groucho]

I'm not positive, but I think the D300/D300s has weathersealing and the D7000 doesn't? This is a very nice feature once you're used to it.

As a Pentax shooter, I've been paying some attention to the D7000 but only the sensor output as it should be basically the same as in the K-5 (and the Sony A55.) ;)

[MarkBarbieri]

I'm not positive, but I think the D300/D300s has weathersealing and the D7000 doesn't? This is a very nice feature once you're used to it.

If the main difference between the D300s and D7000 is weathersealing, it would be a good example of the diminishing returns I referenced in a recent thread. Having had cameras with varying levels of weather sealing (there is no standard definition for what "weathersealing" means), I agree that I like it. How much is it worth, though? Fewer than .1% of the shots I have taken were in conditions that would benefit from weathersealing and, despite using a significant lack of caution, I've never had water penetration problems on non or lightly sealed bodies.

When confronted with something like a weathersealed or a non-weathersealed body, the question to ask yourself is not whether you want it, but how much it would be worth to you personally. If you do most of your shooting outdoors in Portland, it might be worth a lot. If you do most of your shooting indoors in Phoenix, it might be worth very little. At Disney, it comes in handy for shots on the drop of Splash Mountain and (if you are VERY confident in it) on Kali River rapids.

So how many shots will you miss if you don't have weather sealing and how much are they worth to you?

[YEKCIM]

The D7000 *is* weather sealed, with a magnesium alloy body.

[Experiment_626]

I've been paying some attention to the D7000 but only the sensor output as it should be basically the same as in the K-5 (and the Sony A55.) ;)It is strongly rumored that the D7000 uses a home-grown Nikon sensor, not Sony. No final word yet.

[Experiment_626]

The D7000 *is* weather sealed, with a magnesium alloy body.Weather sealed, yes -- but not to the same extent as the D300s, according to reports.

[Uncle Greg]

The 300s has more focus points and faster FPS I believe.

[Experiment_626]

The 300s has more focus points and faster FPS I believe.Yes and yes.

[Groucho]

If the main difference between the D300s and D7000 is weathersealing, it would be a good example of the diminishing returns I referenced in a recent thread. Having had cameras with varying levels of weather sealing (there is no standard definition for what "weathersealing" means), I agree that I like it. How much is it worth, though? Fewer than .1% of the shots I have taken were in conditions that would benefit from weathersealing and, despite using a significant lack of caution, I've never had water penetration problems on non or lightly sealed bodies.
I find that I get a lot of use out of the weathersealing. It's great to not care if the rain comes when at an outdoor event - examples for me include steam events, outdoor concerts, Reconnaissance festivals, car shows, racetracks, Disney (of course), and countless other places. If you live somewhere where it never rains, that may affect your choices - but my cameras have seen torrential downpours, hail, snow, dust, etc, with no issues whatsoever. Some cameras with little or no weathersealing will do OK in some situations, but I have a level of confidence that the gear can stand up to anything short of dunking underwater - which I don't have with my non-weathersealed DSLRs.

Of course - you have to have a properly weathersealed lens, too.

"Halfway" weathersealing (like on some mid-level DSLRs and potentially what the D7000 has) is as good as none IMHO. Sorry, but that's the way I feel.

It is strongly rumored that the D7000 uses a home-grown Nikon sensor, not Sony. No final word yet.
Ehhhhhhhh - I doubt it! That sounds more like marketing speak. It's their own circuitry talking to the sensor most likely, but I'm going to bet than it's the same ol' Sony sensor, and the differences are in the implementation, not the sensor. The Pentax version goes to 51,200 ISO but I suspect it's just back in the days of the 6mp Sony sensor, which went to 3,200 in the Pentaxes and 1,600 in the Nikons. Of course, none of their will easily admit who makes it, but in terms of APS sensors, I think there's only Sony, Samsung, and Canon. I'd be willing to bet that the new Fuji X100 uses the same 12mp Sony sensor as found in the D90/K-x. I also am not convinced that Nikon alone designed their full-frame sensors.

[Experiment_626]

Ehhhhhhhh - I doubt it! That sounds more like marketing speak. It's their own circuitry talking to the sensor most likely, but I'm going to bet than it's the same ol' Sony sensorAccording to Thom Hogan and other sources I found, the sensors in Nikon's D3100 and D700 are both different from the "equivalent" Sony sensors in several ways, including physical size, which is a pretty strong argument for them not being the same.

See http://bythom.com/ and the entries under "The Puzzle" and "Further Comments on the D3100."

[MarkBarbieri]

I find that I get a lot of use out of the weathersealing. It's great to not care if the rain comes when at an outdoor event - examples for me include steam events, outdoor concerts, Reconnaissance festivals, car shows, racetracks, Disney (of course), and countless other places. If you live somewhere where it never rains, that may affect your choices - but my cameras have seen torrential downpours, hail, snow, dust, etc, with no issues whatsoever. Some cameras with little or no weathersealing will do OK in some situations, but I have a level of confidence that the gear can stand up to anything short of dunking underwater - which I don't have with my non-weathersealed DSLRs.

Of course - you have to have a properly weathersealed lens, too.

"Halfway" weathersealing (like on some mid-level DSLRs and potentially what the D7000 has) is as good as none IMHO. Sorry, but that's the way I feel.


We can debate the relative merits of weathersealing if you'd like. Given that there are no standards and, to my knowledge, no independent tests, we'll just be arguing over marketing literature and anecdotal experience, so it should be a good shout. In my personal experience, I've never known someone that has lost a camera to weather. I've read about cases online, but I haven't actually seen it happen. I think most people are overprotective. Heck, my wife has dropped multiple cell phones in the pool and they have all come out working just fine when properly dried.

My point, however, was that the returns on money spent on weathersealing are lower (diminished) than the returns spent on the core of the camera. Let's assume that weathersealing adds 5% to the cost of a camera. It's hard to judge the true incremental cost because weathersealing is never sold as a separate option. Using that assumption, you would need to get at least a 5% increase in the number and/or quality of your shots for the value of the weathersealing not be lower than the value spent on the rest of the camera. Since very few people take 5% of their shots in severely inclement weather, most people will see a diminished return on the money they spend on weathersealing.

That doesn't mean that weathersealing is a bad thing, a rip off, or something that you shouldn't pay for. My point is that once you get to the cost of the most basic DSLR, each additional dollar you spent will probably bring you less value than the earlier dollars. If the value of those additional shots or quality improvements is worth more to you than the cost, then it is still a good idea to spend the money.

I often hear people complain that camera X is not twice as good as camera Y, despite costing twice as much. It doesn't need to be to still be a good value. Even though the price may increase by 100% and the improvement in number of shots or quality of shots may increase by only 10%, it could still be a bargain to buy the more expensive camera. It depends on how much that 10% improvement is worth to you.

[Groucho]

According to Thom Hogan and other sources I found, the sensors in Nikon's D3100 and D700 are both different from the "equivalent" Sony sensors in several ways, including physical size, which is a pretty strong argument for them not being the same.

See http://bythom.com/ and the entries under "The Puzzle" and "Further Comments on the D3100."
Without doing in-depth investigating, I'm still skeptical. First, of course, is that no one else uses a 12mp FF sensor, so there is nothing to compare the D700 to. That's the one that seems most likely to be a Nikon design.

The D3100 and D7000 are, of course, too new to say for sure. But spec-wise, the D7000 sensor sure seems pretty comparable to the that in the Sony A55 and Pentax K-5. Who makes what sensor is so secretive that it's hard to say for sure - only Sony, Canon, and Samsung can seem to say with certainty that they're using their own sensors in their DSLRs! Even if the size is slightly different (and even then, I am somewhat skeptical without someone physically cracking the cameras open and measuring them), the sensors roll off a big single wafer and are then cut into smaller pieces - it could be the same wafer, just cut slightly smaller. :confused3

I find the whole thing somewhat interesting from a cloak and dagger prospective. It will be interesting to see how they compare, especially as the A55 is handicapped by shooting through a mirror (I've heard mentions of about a 1/3rd stop loss of light.) Even with that, the A55 had pretty solid high ISO performance and maybe as importantly, very good dynamic range. If the D7000 and K-5 perform as they might, Nikon's going to need to do something about the D700 sensor - amazing as it is, the APS sensors are catching up in terms of ISO and DR very quickly.

[Groucho]

My point, however, was that the returns on money spent on weathersealing are lower (diminished) than the returns spent on the core of the camera. Let's assume that weathersealing adds 5% to the cost of a camera. It's hard to judge the true incremental cost because weathersealing is never sold as a separate option. Using that assumption, you would need to get at least a 5% increase in the number and/or quality of your shots for the value of the weathersealing not be lower than the value spent on the rest of the camera. Since very few people take 5% of their shots in severely inclement weather, most people will see a diminished return on the money they spend on weathersealing.
You're thinking about this issue much more deeply than I am. :)

It boils down to this: if I have a camera with full weathersealing - every possible opening on the camera and the lens fully sealed - and I will happily shoot in any weather. No waiting for it to dry, no toweling off, just worry-free shooting.

If I have a camera with no seals or with only minimal sealing around the lens mount or whatnot, then the camera goes away in inclement weather.

Use or not use. Very binary.

From my own personal experience, it has been very, very useful having that feature, and I have been in situations where I have been using the non-sealed camera for whatever reason and had to stop shooting. For me, it is an extremely useful feature, and I like seeing it included whenever possible and I don't like the "minimal" seals that make it into some cameras. Lest anyone think I am on a pro-Pentax kick here, I am disappointed that the K-x and K-r are not weathersealed, after the K200D seemed to indicate that all their upcoming cameras would be fully sealed. My point here is that if I was shooting Nikon and the D7000 didn't have full sealing and the D300s did, I would wait for the D300s replacement rather than buy the D7000. That's how important it is to me.

[Groucho]

According to Thom Hogan and other sources I found, the sensors in Nikon's D3100 and D700 are both different from the "equivalent" Sony sensors in several ways, including physical size, which is a pretty strong argument for them not being the same.

See http://bythom.com/ and the entries under "The Puzzle" and "Further Comments on the D3100."
One more comment on thing - Hogan is talking about the 3100 only when talking about the sensor size, Nikon's own spec sheet on their website (http://www.nikonusa.com/Find-Your-Nikon/Product/Digital-SLR/25468/D7000.html#tab-ProductDetail.ProductTabs.TechSpecs) says that the D7000 sensor is 23.6x15.6mm - just like the Sony 16mp sensor. Is it a Sony? Isn't it? This is the stuff that internet forum discussions are made of. :teeth:

[Experiment_626]

One more comment on thing - Hogan is talking about the 3100 only when talking about the sensor size, Nikon's own spec sheet on their website (http://www.nikonusa.com/Find-Your-Nikon/Product/Digital-SLR/25468/D7000.html#tab-ProductDetail.ProductTabs.TechSpecs) says that the D7000 sensor is 23.6x15.6mm - just like the Sony 16mp sensor. Is it a Sony? Isn't it? This is the stuff that internet forum discussions are made of. :teeth:Indeed. I had elsewhere read something that indicated a slightly smaller size for the D7000's sensor as well, but it wasn't from a source I'd consider as reliable as Hogan. I'm waiting to see what he might say about it now. His last blog entry came before the D7000 was officially announced, and he had (in "The Puzzle") seemed to expect the D7000 to have an in-house sensor. He's at the time of year where he posts very infrequently, so it may take a few more days before he addresses the newest camera.

[Gdad]

One more comment on thing - Hogan is talking about the 3100 only when talking about the sensor size, Nikon's own spec sheet on their website (http://www.nikonusa.com/Find-Your-Nikon/Product/Digital-SLR/25468/D7000.html#tab-ProductDetail.ProductTabs.TechSpecs) says that the D7000 sensor is 23.6x15.6mm - just like the Sony 16mp sensor. Is it a Sony? Isn't it? This is the stuff that internet forum discussions are made of. :teeth:

Why does it matter? Is the Sony sensor good or bad? :confused3

[MarkBarbieri]

If I recall, the Nikon D3x and the Sony A900 had the same sensor and the former had significantly better performance in terms of noise and dynamic range even comparing RAW files. I can't claim to know what else in the system makes them different, but having the same sensors doesn't guarantee that you'll have comparable performance.

[Experiment_626]

Why does it matter? Is the Sony sensor good or bad? :confused3Good, I suspect. But if Nikon is making their own -- or, possibly, designing their own and having someone build to their specs -- and the performance is good, seems to me it could be better for Nikon than using Sony's sensor.

As Mark pointed out, however, the sensor itself is only part of the equation. What the camera does with the data the sensor collects also plays a significant role. After all, Nikon used essentially the same sensor in the D300, the D90, and finally the D5000. In each successive camera body, high ISO performance got a little better (so I've read -- I've only really used the D300), despite having the same sensor.

[Groucho]

Why does it matter? Is the Sony sensor good or bad? :confused3
Neither, that's kind of the amusing part. :) From what we've seen so far, I'll certainly take their 16mp APS sensor over their FF 24.6mp sensor! Or their first 14mp sensor (not the Exmoor one) - ugh! My initial comment was I had checked out some samples from the D7000 as an indicator of what to expect from the K-5 sensor. I'd say that it's more likely than not that they are both basically the same sensor (as is the A55 one), and that we'll see very similar performance from them (with the A55 being behind a little due to light loss from the mirror.) So far, it looks like it's a very, very nice sensor.

If I recall, the Nikon D3x and the Sony A900 had the same sensor and the former had significantly better performance in terms of noise and dynamic range even comparing RAW files. I can't claim to know what else in the system makes them different, but having the same sensors doesn't guarantee that you'll have comparable performance.
I dunno... I think you'll get pretty close. I think a lot of the difference is more in the jpg arena, where they've gone through whatever onboard software processes them. FWIW, Luminous Landscape did a comparo of the A900, D3x, and 5D Mk2 (http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/big-three.shtml) and found ..."
I see no significant noise difference between the Nikon D3x, Canon 5D MKII and Sony A900 up to and including ISO 800. At ISO 1600 and higher the Sony falls behind the Canon and Nikon by about 1 EV. It's simply a noisier camera at high ISO." Different, but not hugely so - and DR is likely to be even more similar. This is true with, say, the Sony 12mp sensor - assuming that it's the same sensor in the D90, K-x, D5000, A500, etc... maybe even the D300 and D300s. Yet you see a fair variety of differences in terms of ISO performance. It appears that there's still debate about the D90 using the same sensor as the D300 or not - I suspect it's an incremental evolution of basically the same sensor adding video and some other slight tweaks, like the Samsung 14mp in the K20D vs in the K-7.

All in all, I find it fun to discuss in a purely "water cooler" way - at the end of the day, it's just one component, but fun to talk about. :)

[oregondaddyof2]

Does anyone have any ideas when this camera is releasing. I just found it on the web tonight and am really liking what I an reading but I can't seem to find when it is coming out.

[ssanders79]

The best I can find online is mid-October.

[oregondaddyof2]

Thanks Scott. I think I will be getting that camera.

[MarkBarbieri]

I'd be careful. From what I've seen, the focus and zoom wheels on lenses for it work backwards. It's not compatible with Speedlites. It won't work with newer CF cards. It won't mount on RRS ballheads (or many other brands) without an adapter. It's completely incompatible with all OEM lenses except Nikon's own lenses. That even includes Sony lenses, despite the rumors that Sony is making the sensor. The sensor, by the way, only records reds, blues, and greens. All other colors (even common ones like flesh tones) need to be made by combining the reds, blues, and greens. I also noticed that, while they claim to have something like 16 million pixels, half of those pixels can only see green. I have no idea how people plan to get good white balance when virtually all of the lenses for it are black. It also comes in only one body style (shutter button on the right), so they have basically written off the artsy left handed crowd. Even the video has issues. Rumors have leaked out that the video will have black bars on the top and bottom when viewed on a TV that isn't "widescreen". Good luck even taking good video. I heard that the viewfinder goes black while you are recording. All-in-all, you have to wonder what Nikon was thinking this time. :duck:

[YesDear]

Be careful reading a Nikon review from a Canon person! They look at the world strangely!:eek:

[handicap18]

I'd be careful. ...... It won't work with newer CF cards.

Actually, this is correct.

The D7000 will not take ANY CF cards, it only takes SD cards. 2 in fact.

[MarkBarbieri]

Actually, this is correct.

The D7000 will not take ANY CF cards, it only takes SD cards. 2 in fact.

It's all correct. What part do you think is wrong? :confused3

[handicap18]

It's all correct. What part do you think is wrong? :confused3

While everything else maybe true, its also true of all other brands and not necessarily brand/model specific.

The CF part I just found extra silly for some reason.

How's the wireless flash function working on the Canon you have without a transmitter?

[MarkBarbieri]

Just to be sure that anyone actually interested in the D7000 doesn't taken anything I said seriously, here's a quick rundown of my FUD.

From what I've seen, the focus and zoom wheels on lenses for it work backwards. They work oppositely the way that Canon lenses work. It always confuses the heck out of me when I use a Nikon. The lenses also mount the opposite way.

It's not compatible with Speedlites. Speedlite is the term Canon uses for their flashes. Nikon calls them Speedlights.

It won't work with newer CF cards. As Kyle noted, it uses SD cards, not CF cards. I through the word "newer" in their as a misdirection.

It won't mount on RRS ballheads (or many other brands) without an adapter. Sadly, no one has adopted my idea of making camera bodies in a shape that works directly with Arca-style quick release systems, so you have to buy a bracket. If you like L-brackets, this adds a considerable expense to each camera.

It's completely incompatible with all OEM lenses except Nikon's own lenses. That even includes Sony lenses, despite the rumors that Sony is making the sensor. OEM stands for original equipment manufacturer - in other words, the maker of the camera. Obviously, Canon, Sony, Olympus, or Pentax lenses won't work with it or vice versa. The non-sequitur about Sony making the sensor is just their to add to confusion.

The sensor, by the way, only records reds, blues, and greens. All other colors (even common ones like flesh tones) need to be made by combining the reds, blues, and greens. I also noticed that, while they claim to have something like 16 million pixels, half of those pixels can only see green. This is true of all DSLR sensors other than Foveon sensors. The megapixel count is the total number of pixels, but each pixel is either red, blue, or green. There are two green pixels for every one blue or red pixel because our eyes are better able to distinguish different greens. Each pixel gets converted from one color to a triplet of colors by software that infers the other colors from the pixels around it.

I have no idea how people plan to get good white balance when virtually all of the lenses for it are black. Just nonsense.

It also comes in only one body style (shutter button on the right), so they have basically written off the artsy left handed crowd. I've never seen a lefty camera. I guess handling the camera doesn't really require fine motor skills and it is much cheaper to make and stock them only one way. I've never heard a lefty complain about it (not that I'd listen to their petulant whining anyway).

Even the video has issues. Rumors have leaked out that the video will have black bars on the top and bottom when viewed on a TV that isn't "widescreen". I've heard this complaint about widescreen movies and HD video cameras. I'm always galled by the "cropped to fit your old TV" versions of movies being called "Full Screen/"

Good luck even taking good video. I heard that the viewfinder goes black while you are recording. All-in-all, you have to wonder what Nikon was thinking this time. Dedicated video cameras use an electric viewfinder so that you can use it while recording. Most DSLR's use a mirror in front of the sensor to send the image to the viewfinder. When the sensor is in use, the mirror is moved and you can no longer see through the viewfinder. I think Sony has a translucent mirror on some of their new hybrid cameras so that it can stay down while you are filming. Canon did that for a sports shooter camera back in the film days. It works great, but your viewfinder is dimmer than normal and you get less light on your sensor. Life is full of trade-offs.

Truth be told, I think the D7000 looks like a great camera. For a Nikon, that is.

My original post, for those unfamiliar with the technique, is called spreading FUD - Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt. It is standard practice in the software world. Companies compete on two levels - they announce software that doesn't actually exist yet (vaporware) so that you won't buy their competitors real software while they simultaneously criticize the competition for stuff that is usually totally pointless to make you nervous.

[Bstanley]

:lmao:

I also heard it doesn't even use standard 35mm film...

[NateNLogansDad]

Mark, good stuff:rotfl2: I needed that this morning:worship:

[WDWFigment]

I was under the impression that October 29th was the date, but now that I look online, I can't find anything besides "mid-October," so maybe I made up that date. My Amazon order still doesn't have a date.

[oregondaddyof2]

Even though it is a DX camera, do you think that since it has a higher ISO setting, it will be able to take better night shots?

[WDWFigment]

Even though it is a DX camera, do you think that since it has a higher ISO setting, it will be able to take better night shots?

The best option for good night shots will always be a tripod, but if you absolutely can't use a tripod, then yes, it should be better. It's still not going to be as good as FX in that regard, though.

[oregondaddyof2]

Tripod for sure... I have a D60 now and the only thing I don't really like is the night shots... I was just wondering if I the ISO was really usable up to 6400? I can really only use up to 800 on mine before it gets really grainy...

[YEKCIM]

Tripod for sure...

If you are using a tripod, you should not need to use high ISO unless you have some relatively slow subject motion you are trying to capture. For static subjects, a low ISO (100-200) should be fine.

[oregondaddyof2]

Yeah... When I shoot stuff like the castle, or other buildings, I use a low ISO, but when I shoot handheld, say a concert or show in a dark room and use a shutter speed around 1/40 or so, i would like to be able to bump up the ISO to 800 or 1600 in order to capture an object... My camera seems to struggle doing that and the pics get really grainy... Maybe the D7000 can offer me this option... At least unitl I can afford a D700 :lmao:

[YEKCIM]

Yeah... When I shoot stuff like the castle, or other buildings, I use a low ISO, but when I shoot handheld, say a concert or show in a dark room and use a shutter speed around 1/40 or so, i would like to be able to bump up the ISO to 800 or 1600 in order to capture an object... My camera seems to struggle doing that and the pics get really grainy... Maybe the D7000 can offer me this option... At least unitl I can afford a D700 :lmao:

I shoot @ ISO 1600 all the time with my D300 and get very good results, especially in RAW (thanks, Jeff). I would expect the D7000 to do at least as well, if not a bit better, in the high ISO department.

[WDWFigment]

I shoot @ ISO 1600 all the time with my D300 and get very good results, especially in RAW (thanks, Jeff). I would expect the D7000 to do at least as well, if not a bit better, in the high ISO department.

I would fully expect it to do better. The D300 and D90 have, essentially, the same ISO performance. One of the main reasons I sold my D90 and am buying the D7000 is for better high ISO performance. Not the only reason, but a big one.

[oregondaddyof2]

That is good to hear that it should be a good camera... I just got to find a way to come up with $1100.... :confused::confused::confused::confused::confused:

[Hoan & Poopie]

Be sure to check out the D3100 which was just released. It's looking veeeeery interesting. So long as you don't need a focus motor that is.

[oregondaddyof2]

I saw that one too... and I was interested until I saw the 7000... I figure, if I am going to upgrade, I might as well make it a big one... I like the size of the D7000 better, and I like having the LCD on the top...

[DVC Mike]

Since my next Disney trip is a week away, I decided not to wait for Amazon and went down to Best Buy and picked up a Nikon D7000.

:cool1:

http://i235.photobucket.com/albums/ee26/DVC_Mike/D7000/DVCMike_2010_10_15_111330.jpg

[johamna]

Congrats! Can you PLEASE post some sample shots!? :)

[Marlton Mom]

Don't tell Hitler.....

;)
http://www.disboards.com/showthread.php?t=2576553

[zetachi]

ROFL you beat me to the punch line :)

Don't tell Hitler.....

;)
http://www.disboards.com/showthread.php?t=2576553

[Quicklabs]

Where are the pictures with this wonderful new toy????

[Quicklabs]

Oh, that's too stinkin funny!

[WDWFigment]

If I weren't so averse to paying sales tax, I'd probably head down to Best Buy right now. Enjoy it!

[MarkBarbieri]

If I weren't so averse to paying sales tax, I'd probably head down to Best Buy right now. Enjoy it!

Sales tax, use tax...it's all the same. It's actually easier paying sales tax than doing the extra paper work to pay the use tax.

[WDWFigment]

Sales tax, use tax...it's all the same. It's actually easier paying sales tax than doing the extra paper work to pay the use tax.

I feel like there should be a ;) emoticon after your post, but it seems like you might be that much of a straight shooter.

Taxes aside, I would also lose ~$150 by having to resell the kit lens and 5% in cashback I'd otherwise get from Big Crumbs.

[MarkBarbieri]

I always like to play the "use tax" thing straight, but no, I don't pay use taxes. I don't know how and I don't know any individuals that do. I just find it curious that it is a law that is so openly and commonly ignored. Not to start a political discussion, but I've always been uncomfortable with laws that are almost universally ignored because they are ripe for abuse by those that would enforce them selectively. I wonder when someone is going to get busted at a confirmation hearing because they "cheated on their taxes" by not paying use taxes.

[GvilleDisneyDad]

I had preordered a D7000 body from Amazon when it was announced. I got an email from Amazon last night saying that they really didn't know when it would actually ship.

I had already sold my other camera so I didn't want to wait without knowing how long it might be. I picked up the D7000 kit from BB today and I will sell the 18-105mm lens. I'm glad I did it. :thumbsup2

WDWFigment - I was looking at about the same difference that you are but this coupon bridged the gap for me.

http://m.bestbuy.com/mobile/coupons/premier-1158603.html

Expires tomorrow (Sunday).

[PrincessInOz]

It's been well over 24 hours now. You would have thought that there would be some pictures posted.....popcorn::

[johamna]

I was able to get my hands on one yesterday at BB for 12% off!

I took it to work with me, today, and grabbed less shots than I wanted to, but will have some to show when I get home. Stay tuned!

[GvilleDisneyDad]

Uncropped and unedited getting to know you shots...

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4127/5094533657_49d1f5bdff_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/jeffwinston/5094533657/)
DSC_7858 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/jeffwinston/5094533657/) by Jeff Winston (http://www.flickr.com/people/jeffwinston/), on Flickr

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4149/5094530497_fc95df701b_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/jeffwinston/5094530497/)
DSC_7853 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/jeffwinston/5094530497/) by Jeff Winston (http://www.flickr.com/people/jeffwinston/), on Flickr

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4103/5094535289_2dc842d845_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/jeffwinston/5094535289/)
DSC_7867 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/jeffwinston/5094535289/) by Jeff Winston (http://www.flickr.com/people/jeffwinston/), on Flickr

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4129/5094529137_ea108693d7_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/jeffwinston/5094529137/)
DSC_7843 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/jeffwinston/5094529137/) by Jeff Winston (http://www.flickr.com/people/jeffwinston/), on Flickr

[johamna]

Here we are -- sadly only 4 were really anything worth looking at. These are not artsy in any way -- I literally just snapped some quick shots to test the AF and ISO.

EXIF is available for every file. Like the post above, nothing here has been through any PP.

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4128/5095269048_92fb45b9b1.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/somuchhamilton/5095269048/)
Test Shot (http://www.flickr.com/photos/somuchhamilton/5095269048/) by So Much Hamilton (http://www.flickr.com/people/somuchhamilton/), on Flickr

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4086/5094670293_bdce4532e0.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/somuchhamilton/5094670293/)
Test Shot (http://www.flickr.com/photos/somuchhamilton/5094670293/) by So Much Hamilton (http://www.flickr.com/people/somuchhamilton/), on Flickr

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4085/5095268418_7b566f894c.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/somuchhamilton/5095268418/)
Test Shot (http://www.flickr.com/photos/somuchhamilton/5095268418/) by So Much Hamilton (http://www.flickr.com/people/somuchhamilton/), on Flickr

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4128/5095270724_f85b65e720.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/somuchhamilton/5095270724/)
Test Shot (http://www.flickr.com/photos/somuchhamilton/5095270724/) by So Much Hamilton (http://www.flickr.com/people/somuchhamilton/), on Flickr

[GvilleDisneyDad]

johamna - How do you like it so far?

Just for fun, here's the same shots as above with some quick edits.

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4110/5095654748_5e5785c958_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/jeffwinston/5095654748/)
DSC_7858 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/jeffwinston/5095654748/) by Jeff Winston (http://www.flickr.com/people/jeffwinston/), on Flickr

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4083/5095654686_74173f9725_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/jeffwinston/5095654686/)
DSC_7853 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/jeffwinston/5095654686/) by Jeff Winston (http://www.flickr.com/people/jeffwinston/), on Flickr

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4111/5095654824_6291e77f87_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/jeffwinston/5095654824/)
DSC_7867 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/jeffwinston/5095654824/) by Jeff Winston (http://www.flickr.com/people/jeffwinston/), on Flickr

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4088/5095654596_91fbb48caa_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/jeffwinston/5095654596/)
DSC_7843 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/jeffwinston/5095654596/) by Jeff Winston (http://www.flickr.com/people/jeffwinston/), on Flickr

[johamna]

johamna - How do you like it so far?

I've absolutely fallen in love with it. Coming from the T2i, it feels so much nicer in my hands and the secondary wheel makes setting up a shot so much more efficient.

The kit lens is not as bad as some make it out to be, however I am mostly shooting with the 35mm 1.8 and find it optically better.

I recently picked up a tripod and remote, too, so I'll hopefully have some time to do some land/cityscape shooting this weekend and will be sure to post.

How about you, how are you enjoying it? Were you able to get the 12% off at Best Buy (what a steal, huh?)?

[Gdad]

So I want to add a smaller size DX camera with video to my kit.

I had a D300 and really liked it but jumped to the D700 a couple years ago when they first came out. I kind of missed some of the advantages of DX and started thinking about this and making plans when I first read the specs on the D7000. I have picked up a few DX lenses recently- so I’m committed- but now I am kind of unsure on the camera body.

Right now I am seriously considering bailing on the D7000 idea and going for a used D300s instead.

Availability - D7000 has limited availability…D300s is available new, used, and refurbished.

Technology - D7000 is current…D300s is about a year old. Maybe a year is getting a little long in the tooth for a DSLR but I think it is still a very capable camera.

Price - D7000 lists for $1200…D300s now lists for $1460. The D300s can also be found used or factory refurbished for a price close to or below a new D7000. I would probably only consider a used one since ‘refurbished’ tends to be a negative at resale.

Sensor - D7000 is 16.2 Megapixels…D300s is 12.3 Megapixels. I am not sure how I feel about this. My D700 is 12.3 Megapixels and I have never had an issue with the file size. I suppose more is better but I already feel like I’m fighting a losing battle with drive space with two 1TB external drives that are approaching capacity. I have no idea what I am going to do for storage especially once I start accumulating large video files.

Size & Weight - D7000 is 5.2” x 4.1” x 3” and 27.5 oz…D300s is 5.8” x 4.5” X 2.9” and 33.1 oz. Considering my D700 as a benchmark, which is 5.8” x 4.8” x 3” and weighs 37.9 oz, I know I do not want anything any larger. I would prefer something smaller- but definitely do not want anything that feels cheap or plastic by comparison.

Build - D7000 has a partial Magnesium alloy body…D300s is full Magnesium alloy construction. Looking at pictures it appears that the only metal frame used on the D7000 is on the top and back of the camera. I am a little concerned with the tripod mounting if the bottom is plastic. I have not read this anywhere- just speculation looking at the pictures.

Controls - D7000 has a D90ish layout…D300s has a D700ish layout. No comparison here- using a two camera kit I would really prefer two bodies with almost identical controls. Plus I prefer the uncluttered P-S-A-M menu dial compared to having a bunch of user modes like “Pet Portrait” – I mean seriously- I don’t care how good it is part of me is just inherently anti-pet-portrait mode.

ISO Range - D7000 is 100-6400 (100-25600)…D300s is 200-3200 (100-6400) This actually appeals to me mostly for the low end- although I was disappointed that the D7000 does not have the typical ‘Boost ISO’ setting of half the lowest native setting. I have never really understood why a lot of cameras do not list their actual lowest setting as native but hope this indicates some interest in pushing the lower limits of ISO with some of the same vigor that they keep pushing the high end. Not a consideration here but I would love to see a camera with a low end ISO of 10 or 25 one day.

Auto Focus - D7000 uses 39 Point AF…D300s uses 51 Point AF. This seems like an inconsequential difference, however since some of the D7000’s have been in the field I have read several accounts of the outside sensors not tracking as well as DX or DXXX series cameras on difficult moving targets like birds in flight. This is probably just some of the over-hype of this camera coming back to reality though.

Continuous Drive - D7000 is listed as Max 6fps…D300s is listed as Max 7fps. I don’t care about this all that much since I hardly ever shoot in the fast continuous mode anyway. If I ever do the buffer is probably a lot more important than the fps rate and I suspect the D300s would probably smoke the D7000 at around 8-10 shots.

Movie Clips - D7000 is listed at 1920x1080 HD 24fps…D300s is listed at 1280x720 24fps. Adding video is one of the big things I am adding a new camera for. I do not understand much about it yet but ran across this on another forum, it seems like a clear advantage to the D7000. “All current DSLR video is shot in either I-frame encoding or P-frame encoding. But B-Frame encoding is the desired encoding for quality and to limit "Jello" frame when panning. Currently you can only shoot 1080p 24p B-frame video with professional grade camcorders in the $3000+ price range. That is until the D7000 is actually out. Nikon has confirmed that the D7K uses B-Frame encoding in BOTH 1080p and 720p recording. Using B-frame encoding in 1080p is the reason why it will not be able to do 30p in 1080p mode. There are currently no video cameras capable of recording above 24p (at least I cannot find any that claim they can), so the fact that a DSLR can do it at all is a huge step in video recording with one. A lot of the serious video shooters are buzzing about this and how it weakens the video argument in favor of the Canon 7D. The video thing is totally foreign to me, but one poster claimed that a video shot at 24p 720 with B-Frame can produce better slow motion video than a 60p 720 I-frame video.” Again- I don't know enough about video yet to have a clue if that's important to me or not.

Remote Control - D7000 uses Wireless…D300s uses a 10-Pin Terminal. The wireless remote would be a nice feature to have- . I already have one wireless remote and a couple of the $50 MC-30 cables anyway.

Battery - D7000 uses EN-EL15…D300s uses EN-EL3. I have not researched the battery performance between the two types. For me personally the advantage would be to have two cameras using the same battery system. I already have 2x EN-EL3 chargers and 4x batteries in the camera bag.

Media - D7000 takes Duel SD Cards…D300s takes one SD and one CF Card. Again- this is only a plus to the D300s since I already own like 48 GB’s of CF Cards.

Timing – Right now the D7000 is selling new for full retail price if you can find one- the D300s is already selling new for about $350 off the retail cost the day it was announced. This obviously pushes the used market for the camera even lower. From what I have seen I think I could snag a very nice D300s for less than a new D7000 and I really don’t expect it will drop all that much next year when an amazing new D400 rolls out.

Here is what I am thinking it boils down to:

D7000
• New Model- Nice
• Better sensor - Nice
• Better ISO range – Nice but I have the D700 for that
• Better video – Good- but I have nothing now so anything would be good
• Wireless Trigger – I would like this option but not a huge deal

D300s
• Proven Model
• Available right now new and used
• Solid Professional build
• Better Auto Focus
• Familiar Controls (I think this is a really big deal)
• Same battery as D700
• Same media as D700
• Less depreciation if I buy used and move to a D400 next year?

So am I off base? Crazy to be thinking D300s?

[rossb]

As far as video goes, my D90 is pretty bad. I see bad artifacts and bad "pulsations". I would not let video capabilities enter into this decision. Here are some short samples from my D90:

http://vimeo.com/user3726573

[MarkBarbieri]

Can't offer much advice (other than to suggest that you just switch to a 5DM2 and 7D and be done with all this Nikon silliness).

I can say a few things about the video, but they won't clear up much. Video compression is a darned complex subject. The simplest video compression is mjpeg. It is basically just storing each frame in the video as a jpeg image. The next level in sophistication is compressing one full frame and then storing only a compressed version of the differences for the next several (typically 15) frames. For reasonably static scenes, that significantly reduces storage space. B-frames are part of a multi-directional encoding scheme where any given frame can be based on the difference with the key frame before or after it. That should lead to even better levels of compression.

So will it make for better video? There are so many other factors that there is no way of knowing without doing lots of different comparisons. The encoder could use the more efficient compression to generate smaller files (lower bitrates) rather than higher quality files. Even using the same basic encoding scheme, different encoders produce different quality images in different situations. Having bi-directional compression is a good thing and it does indicate that, if everything else is the same, video files will either be smaller, higher quality, or a combination of both, but all other things are never the same.

One thing that I would research a bit if you are serious about doing video is how this new compression works with your favorite video editors. When I got my 5DM2, I loved the video quality but hated editing with it. AVCHD video takes a lot of processing power to decode, so my preview window in Premiere showed me about 1/4 to 1 fps. I had to transcode (see Cineform's site) to a codec designed for editing to be able to really work with the footage.

Things have improved since then. Adobe's Mercury Engine has completely changed my video editing experience. Now I can monitor 2 AVCHD streams and one HDV stream simultaneously without the computer breaking a sweat. My rendering times also improved by a factor of 10-20 as well. The downside to the Mercury Engine is that NVidia carefully limits the video cards it will work with to encourage the sale of their workstation cards (although their are hacks that supposedly work with some of their gaming cards).

My point is that, just like you need good RAW processing tools that work with your camera's format, you need good video processing tools as well. Make sure that your video software supports the new D7000 files and that it does so with performance that you find acceptable. Failing that, make sure that you can transcode the video into some other format that you can work with.

Honestly, video is a pain. It's much harder that photography. Your lighting has to be continuous. You have to worry about audio. Editing is more complicated. Distribution is harder. I successfully execute about 1/4 of the photography ideas that I have. For video, that number is closer to 1 project in 20. For comparison, I spent 3 hours going through a weekend's worth of pictures including culling, editing, posting, and making a slideshow. When I shoot a 30 minute school play, it takes me about 20 to 30 hours to produce a video.

[MarkBarbieri]

I suppose I can make a few other relevant points.

My 7D has a popup flash that can be used as a controller. Very cool. It means one less device to carry and mount on the hot shoe.

My 5D and 7D share batteries. That's really nice because I only had to buy one extra. Having a single spare battery works has worked well for me, but when I used a 5D and 1D, I needed spares for each. It also means lugging one fewer chargers on trips.

It took me a while to get used to the different controls on the 5D when moving from the 1D. Once I did, I found that I had no trouble switching between the two. While they were different, they both were reasonably efficient. I still hate having a mode selector knob, though. On the 1D, you held down buttons and turned a wheel to switch modes. The problem with the knob is that it gets turned on accident. Maybe that is an artifact of using the BR strap.

Build - I've only owned full metal cameras, but I've got lots of friends with "plastic" Rebels and such. Not one person that I know has had a body fail. I think that the plastic bodies are strong enough for almost any reasonably use. The metal stuff just feels better build. That said, I don't know anyone that lugs around a Rebel with a 2.8 zoom on the end of a BR strap all day either.

I also bought a 7D because I thought it would be nice to have a "DX" (EF-S in my lingo) body to go along with my FX. So far, I'm not that jazzed. The extra "reach" has been handy in a few cases, but overall I'm not that thrilled with the decision. I'll probably grab the successor to the 5D or 1Ds and the 7D will start collecting dust. I'm sure that you have good reasons for wanting both a DX and an FX, but it doesn't really suit what I do.

[omghidanielle]

Does anyone have any experience with the kit lens?

I wanted to pre-order before the Christmas season sinks in, but don't have the money right now. Best Buy's 3 year-no-interest financing is enticing (it will in no way take me 3 years to pay this off...plus I have coupons that would help), but doesn't give me the option to buy body only. I don't know if I really *need* this lens. Everything I've read about it is kind of mediocre.

I don't have much of a kit. I have the 18-55mm kit lens (which I kind of busted up a bit...oops) from my D40 and recently invested in a 50mm f/1.4. I was looking to pick up an 18-200mm sometime in the future, but was looking to upgrade the body first (at the time, to a D90).

One minute I'm hell bent and going for it, and the next I'm cursing at myself and convincing myself to wait until the summer. (and then I convince myself that my husband's 9.9% credit card would be smart, and then realize that is dumb, and then think it would be smart to take a small loan against my savings, then realize that that is dumb also..........so as you can see, I'm torturing myself)

Help? :scared1:

[Groucho]

I would say that part of the question is whether or not you'll keep the D700, or even if you are considering it depending on your happiness with the crop-sensor camera. It sounds like the new sensor (assuming it's the same as the K-5's) really is living up to the hype of offering D700 ISO performance in an APS sensor - and higher resolution, to boot. At the very least, it's awfully darn good and much better than the D300s - and probably much better DR, also which is something you may miss if you went from the D700 to D300s.

In terms of video, from what I understand, all Nikons prior to the D7000 recorded audio at 11kHz, vs the more standard 44kHz that all other DSLRs use. So you might notice a difference in the audio. 1080 is nicer than 720 but I'd rather have 720 at 30fps than 1080 at 24fps. Sorry, film snobs (and I am a lover of classic film, as you can tell by my username!), but 24fps doesn't make much sense for home videos in 2010. You get more jittery movement and there aren't many display devices capable of displaying 24fps correctly. (This is a nice thing about 24fps Blurays on 120kHz TVs, but I doubt they'll play back your DSLR video this way.) B-frames and such are fine for lab-room measurbating but at the end of the day, it's all about how it looks when you play it back, and that is going to be something you probably won't know until you play with it yourself.

One other thing about video - the D7000 is the only DSLR to offer autofocus in video mode. Of course, I'm not how effective it will be, but it's there. The K-5's contrast-detect AF in liveview mode is astonishingly fast so the current gen should be capable of doing it pretty well (I have no idea how the D7000 is in this regard.) This could be the difference between it being an occasional toy and something you'd use more regularly. I am pretty satisfied with the video I get from my camera but manual focusing while shooting is a bit of a pain, and it doesn't help that you're likely to move the lens barrel a little while doing it, giving it a little wobble.

I doubt there's any reason to be concerned about the tripod mount. How often do you hear about it ripping off the camera? Plenty of people use R-Straps on plastic-bodies DSLRs with no issues.

Were I in your shoes, the only thing pushing me towards the D300s might be improved weathersealing - I'm not sure that the D300s has "full" weathersealing but I don't think the D7000 does. The AF may be faster in the D7000 too, being a newer model, so that's not a guaranteed plus for the D300s, either. At the end of the day - the cutting-edge 16mp sensor is too important a feature to overlook compared to the old 12mp sensor which is, compared to newer sensors, looking a little bit long in the tooth. If you did need the D300s build/AF, I'd wait until the replacement with the 16mp sensor comes along.

[Gdad]

...One thing that I would research a bit if you are serious about doing video is how this new compression works with your favorite video editors...

...My point is that, just like you need good RAW processing tools that work with your camera's format, you need good video processing tools as well. Make sure that your video software supports the new D7000 files and that it does so with performance that you find acceptable...

I don't have any video software yet...much less a favorite. I'm sure I'll be looking for some basic type software to cut and piece together files of add some kind of effect but I am seriously just sticking my big toe in the water of video at this point. I have a feeling it will be a long time if ever before I push the video capabilities of either camera.

[WDWFigment]

You make some good points, and after reading your post, it seems like a logical question you have, but I think you're really downplaying the difference in sensors. I would ask myself this: were both of these cameras available for you to purchase today, would you really be debating this? I was told by both Amazon and J&R that the D7000 (body only) would begin shipping on October 28th (information as of yesterday). Now, this doesn't mean yours will ship then if you preordered later, but I don't think the D7000 is "months down the road."

I might suggest that if you haven't placed an order yet, that you follow my 'strategy' at J&R (PM me if you want details, or check out that "Pre-ordering" thread). Really makes the price of the D7000 a lot more bearable.

[Gdad]

I would say that part of the question is whether or not you'll keep the D700, or even if you are considering it depending on your happiness with the crop-sensor camera. It sounds like the new sensor (assuming it's the same as the K-5's) really is living up to the hype of offering D700 ISO performance in an APS sensor - and higher resolution, to boot. At the very least, it's awfully darn good and much better than the D300s - and probably much better DR, also which is something you may miss if you went from the D700 to D300s.

Yes I am keeping the D700- pretty much only for my 28mm f1.4

I don't know anything about the K5 ISO but the consensus on the D7000 sensor seems to be about 1 stop improvement from the D90.

[Gdad]

You make some good points, and after reading your post, it seems like a logical question you have, but I think you're really downplaying the difference in sensors.

You may be right. At the end of the day for me it's Sensor vs. Pro Build / Controls. And I'm surprised I am having such a tuff time with the decision.

I might suggest that if you haven't placed an order yet, that you follow my 'strategy' at J&R (PM me if you want details, or check out that "Pre-ordering" thread). Really makes the price of the D7000 a lot more bearable.

I have not preordered yet- I have looked at the math on your thread. The final price is nice- just seems like a lot of work to get to it. I'm afraid (knowing me) I would end up with $1700 out of pocket- a new printer I never bother to sell- and a lost or expired mail-in-rebate form somehow. (This thread is reminding me I have $250 worth of cell phone mail-in-rebates in my desk drawer I have to do something with from a few weeks ago!)

I would ask myself this: were both of these cameras available for you to purchase today, would you really be debating this?

Well you got me there- if I got an email while typing this that a D7000 was available I would probably order it- then come back here and type 'never mind'...of course I might do the same thing for a right-priced D300s too. A few weeks ago when people were thinking this was a D300s replacement I saw a few nice ones in the $950-$1000 range I wish I had jumped on- the ones I see now are in the $1200-$1250 range.

[Gdad]

I was told by both Amazon and J&R that the D7000 (body only) would begin shipping on October 28th (information as of yesterday). Now, this doesn't mean yours will ship then if you preordered later, but I don't think the D7000 is "months down the road."

Good info- I just spoke with a guy at J&R who told me they are expecting to have 200 available on sale on October 28th and they have 46 preorders so far...now 47.

[Groucho]

Yes I am keeping the D700- pretty much only for my 28mm f1.4

I don't know anything about the K5 ISO but the consensus on the D7000 sensor seems to be about 1 stop improvement from the D90.
I have some some posted K-5 samples including ISO 51,200 - and even that is not too shabby all things considered. Granted, what I've seen has been in consistent lighting (no big black areas) and I haven't pored over 100% samples, but it's very impressive, especially for an APS sensor. Add in the improved DR, it would seem that some of the big advantages of the FF sensor have been removed or at least reduced, so the main difference may be just the extra DoF. Unless someone can prove otherwise, I'm still of the belief that they're the same sensor, just with different circuitry connecting them, so performance should be pretty similar. Of course, your lenses will have to work a lot harder, pulling 16mp from a crop sensor vs 12mp from a FF...

From what I understand, the D300s is virtually the same as the D300, just with video and a couple small tweaks here and there - and coming from the D300, you should have a pretty good idea of what it's like vs the D700.

I'd look at it this way - if you bought a D300s now, you'd probably be itching for the D400 or whatever the replacement will be called that comes with the better sensor and probably other new features (and certainly better audio/video.) If you bought the D7000 now, you'll probably be happy enough that you can skip the D400. If you really need the all-metal construction or better sealing, you still have the D700. If the D400 was available, you probably wouldn't be having this debate (but you'd have to dig a bit deeper to get it!)

[Groucho]

Good info- I just spoke with a guy at J&R who told me they are expecting to have 200 available on sale on October 28th and they have 46 preorders so far...now 47.
Heh... good deal. Guess this thread is all wrapped up now. :)

FWIW, Amazon's shipping dates may not be completely reliable. Not to bring up the K-5 again, but they list it as "available for pre-order" - but they actually have gotten in at least one or two shipments and some people have received their cameras from them a week or two ago, well before B&H, etc have had them. Amazon seems to be good as getting stuff very early. So, I would guess that wherever you order it from, Amazon will probably get it at least as early if not earlier.

[WDWFigment]

Heh... good deal. Guess this thread is all wrapped up now. :)

FWIW, Amazon's shipping dates may not be completely reliable. Not to bring up the K-5 again, but they list it as "available for pre-order" - but they actually have gotten in at least one or two shipments and some people have received their cameras from them a week or two ago, well before B&H, etc have had them. Amazon seems to be good as getting stuff very early. So, I would guess that wherever you order it from, Amazon will probably get it at least as early if not earlier.

Amazon, for a while, was saying mid-November on the order information page. When you call and talk to them directly, they give a lot more accurate information. I think they just estimate loosely online so people are happy when they receive their items "early."

[rossb]

I was just in the J&R retail store (I work in Downtown NYC). They claim they are getting the D7000 earlier than Oct 28. You guys are starting to talk me into it.

[handicap18]

I really like all the specs on the D7000. Very impressive. Had the D7000 came out when I was in the buying process for my D300 I would have gone with the D7000. SD cards are pretty cheep.

If you really get into doing more video you can always switch your computer to a Mac. Much better with video editing and processing.

Way back in the day (in college) I thought I was going to go into audio/video production. I really liked that field at the time and have always like video. That was until digital stills came around. Now with digital video I really would like to get a dSLR with video, but that may not happen for a few years. I miss out on a lot of video stuff, but still like my stills.

I've read a lot more articles recently that "pro" photographers are starting to incorporate video into their regular picture taking on jobs and producing short slide show type stuff with both video and stills taken from the same camera. I was thinking of doing that at our last Down syndrome event, but since my dSLR only takes stills and I forgot the video camera at home. Oh well.

Ok I digressed a bit. Anyway, I'd go with the D7000.

[Gdad]

Good info- I just spoke with a guy at J&R who told me they are expecting to have 200 available on sale on October 28th and they have 46 preorders so far...now 47.

I got a nice email from J&R last night saying my D7000 was back ordered and I might want to consider a Canon EOS 60D instead. I hope they're kidding. :rolleyes1

[Groucho]

I got a nice email from J&R last night saying my D7000 was back ordered and I might want to consider a Canon EOS 60D instead. I hope they're kidding. :rolleyes1
:rotfl2: That's hilarious. Good luck with that sale, J&R! :teeth:

[gwishmael]

I would stay away from the consumer camera (d7000) myself. You already have a prosumer camera (d700) and the d7000 will probly feel like a down grade in equipment. Your prosumer cameras are more durible and sealed better. They are built to last longer. The differance in the MP of the two cameras isn't really that important. It only needs to be a 6MP with the dx sensor to create a good 11x14. If you are wanting to print larger then that you should be using a lab that has RIP software anyway. As for the video, if your movies are any length of time at all. You have to compress the video down (decreasing the quality) inorder to fit them on a dvd anyway. Plus, like I think it was said before, the higher quality the raw video is, the better and more expensive the software needs to be for good editing. In the end, I think if you get the d7000, it will feel like a toy instead of a tool. Especially after using a camera like your d700.
But thats just my thoughts.

[Gdad]

But I like my Holga, and that actually IS a toy. ;)

[WDWFigment]

I got a nice email from J&R last night saying my D7000 was back ordered and I might want to consider a Canon EOS 60D instead. I hope they're kidding. :rolleyes1

I got the same email a few days ago. Hopefully it's just automated. I'm really hoping tomorrow the camera and printer ship!

[Gdad]

I got the same email a few days ago. Hopefully it's just automated. I'm really hoping tomorrow the camera and printer ship!

I just called J&R to see if my order was shipping out tomorrow- and if so could I upgrade my shipping to next-day so I would have it for the weekend. I was put on hold while he "checked with the warehouse" then he came back and said as of today no cameras at all have been received from Nikon. The only information they have from the factory is from 10/20 when they were told to expect shipment in "about two weeks."

Soooo- if they ship from the factory 10/20 + about 2 weeks = about 11/3 + a week in transit from the factory to J&R = about 11/10 + another few days to sort & ship out to customers = about mid November at best. That stinks- I hope it's not that long.

[rossb]

I work up the block from the J&R retail superstore. I've asked them about the D7000 body-only numerous times and the truth is they have no idea when it is coming in. The phone sales people are just guessing based on Nikon's industry wide estimate of 10/28.

[WDWFigment]

I just called J&R to see if my order was shipping out tomorrow- and if so could I upgrade my shipping to next-day so I would have it for the weekend. I was put on hold while he "checked with the warehouse" then he came back and said as of today no cameras at all have been received from Nikon. The only information they have from the factory is from 10/20 when they were told to expect shipment in "about two weeks."

Soooo- if they ship from the factory 10/20 + about 2 weeks = about 11/3 + a week in transit from the factory to J&R = about 11/10 + another few days to sort & ship out to customers = about mid November at best. That stinks- I hope it's not that long.

I work up the block from the J&R retail superstore. I've asked then about the D7000 body-only numerous times and the truth is they have no idea when it is coming in. The phone sales people are just guessing based on Nikon's industry wide estimate of 10/28.

Currently, I have to have mine in hand by November 18th so that I can mail in the rebate prior to my deadline (30 days from the date of the order). This it seems this may be an issue, I may cancel my current pre-order and place another one.

In any case, if I haven't heard from J&R by early Nov (probably around the 10th), I'm canceling altogether and buying a used D90. In that case, I'll probably just get the D7000 next fall after the price has dropped a bit.

[rossb]

A few people on DPR reported that their body-only backorders were shipped today from various vendors. Some local shops also got some body-only stock.

[Gdad]

I read that also. Somewhat encouraging at least.

[rossb]

I'll probably grab one if they show up @ the J&R retail store before Thanksgiving.

[Gdad]

I just wonder what kind of first shipment they will get in. He said they ordered 200- I read where B&H ordered 500- small local camera shops just got a few- but sounds like nobody is getting all they ordered yet. Would Nikon even bother sending 6 out of 200? Or would they wait until they could fill a quarter or a half of the request? Can you tell I hate waiting for stuff?

[rossb]

Imaging Resource just posted their D7000 samples, you can bring them up next to their D90 samples in the Comparometer. The IQ of both cams is extremely close, even at high ISO (3200). I'm starting to think about sticking with my initial gut feeling of keeping my D90.

http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM

[Gdad]

Imaging Resource just posted their D7000 samples, you can bring them up next to their D90 samples in the Comparometer. The IQ of both cams is extremely close, even at high ISO (3200). I'm starting to think about sticking with my initial gut feeling of keeping my D90.

http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM

I looked at the D90 vs the D7000 and then vs the D3S and they all actually look pretty close at ISO 3200. I'm not sure what that test is really for but I think I said early on in this thread what I have heard is a 1 stop improvement over the D90. If I already had one of those I might not buy a D7000 either- but I don't.


I would stay away from the consumer camera (d7000) myself. You already have a prosumer camera (d700) and the d7000 will probly feel like a down grade in equipment. Your prosumer cameras are more durible and sealed better. They are built to last longer.... In the end, I think if you get the d7000, it will feel like a toy instead of a tool. Especially after using a camera like your d700.
But thats just my thoughts.

I stopped by my local camera shop this afternoon and they actually had a couple D7000 kits in stock- and a floor model out. (If they had a body only I would have picked it up today- they sold the two they had but I am the only person on their new waiting list...) But it was the first time I have held one and going in I was actually a little concerned it would feel cheap or plasticy compared to what I have now but I was very happy. It is smaller but feels solid and well made. Controls seem well laid out- I don't think going back and forth will be a problem at all. Getting to tweak on one for a bit definitely eliminated any reservations I had about opting for the D300s.

[rossb]

I'm not sure what that test is really for but I think I said early on in this thread what I have heard is a 1 stop improvement over the D90.

I am not seeing a 1-stop improvement. The IR samples (ISO to ISO) look about equal to me. In any event, if I needed a new DX cam I'd get the 7000 over the 90.

[Quicklabs]

I'm sitting on the wait list for the body only at B&H.

[sznk]

hi DVC Mike -
comment on another of your recent posts - so sorry to hear of your health issues. glad you were able to enjoy the resorts :cool2: and thanks for posting the great photos.
looks like you're enjoying your new Nikon D7000. does your screen have any of the stuck dead pixels I've been reading about in reviews? word is that they are on the view screen and remain on video files.:rolleyes:
also wondering about your impression of the 18-105mm lens (in the kit) after having used it at WDW.

[rossb]

WDWFigment and Gdad - Did J&R ship out your orders? I was told they got about 15 bodies in and they were all shipped to pre-orders.

[Gdad]

WDWFigment and Gdad - Did J&R ship out your orders? I was told they got about 15 bodies in and they were all shipped to pre-orders.

No. They charged me for it last week- so I called them since they were not supposed to charge me until it was ready to ship. They said no- it would likely be another 3 weeks or more- so I just canceled. I picked one up today at a local camera shop.

[WDWFigment]

WDWFigment and Gdad - Did J&R ship out your orders? I was told they got about 15 bodies in and they were all shipped to pre-orders.

No. They charged me for it last week- so I called them since they were not supposed to charge me until it was ready to ship. They said no- it would likely be another 3 weeks or more- so I just canceled. I picked one up today at a local camera shop.

No. I'm probably going to cancel in the next week or so. Canceling almost certainly means I'll be re-buying a D90 for our December trip, so I'm trying to hold off doing that. I have been very dissatisfied with my experience with J&R.

[annnewjerz]

No. They charged me for it last week- so I called them since they were not supposed to charge me until it was ready to ship. They said no- it would likely be another 3 weeks or more- so I just canceled. I picked one up today at a local camera shop.

They did the same thing for me when I ordered a back-ordered Tokina 11-16 last year. I called and cancelled because B&H had them back in stock but I still had to wait around 5 business days for my money to be refunded, which was a huge pain in the a$$.

[rossb]

Gdad - How do you like it?

[Gdad]

They did the same thing for me when I ordered a back-ordered Tokina 11-16 last year. I called and cancelled because B&H had them back in stock but I still had to wait around 5 business days for my money to be refunded, which was a huge pain in the a$$.

Funny- I got a message on my phone J&R refunded my Paypal account within minutes of my canceling. B&H on the other hand has yet to refund me for the Sigma 8-16 which I returned and they got back last Thursday according to UPS. B&H email said refunds takes 3-4 business days. (Then another 3-4 days for Paypal to get it back to my checking account I'm sure...OT but how exactly can they pull money from you in seconds and yet it takes such a long time on the refund process?)

Gdad - How do you like it?

I just got it today but so far I think I am going to be very happy. The little $199 35mm f/1.8 dx plastic wonder I got for my daughter last year is sharp as a tack on it.

[DVC Mike]

hi DVC Mike -
comment on another of your recent posts - so sorry to hear of your health issues. glad you were able to enjoy the resorts :cool2: and thanks for posting the great photos.
looks like you're enjoying your new Nikon D7000. does your screen have any of the stuck dead pixels I've been reading about in reviews? word is that they are on the view screen and remain on video files.:rolleyes:
also wondering about your impression of the 18-105mm lens (in the kit) after having used it at WDW.

Thanks.

No, my Nikon D7000 doesn't have the hot pixel problem that some have reported. I can't find any fault with my D7000.

I left the 18-105mm kit lens at home and took all my pictures using the Nikkor 16-85mm. I find it to be the perfect walkabout lens for me. Since I don't have an UWA lens (yet), the 16mm gives me my wide angle for WDW landscapes, and the lens has just enough reach. The 18-105mm kit lens his still in the box, unused at this point in time.

[Marlton Mom]

The little $199 35mm f/1.8 dx plastic wonder I got for my daughter last year is sharp as a tack on it.

Arrgh! pirate: pirate: pirate:

I can't stand it anymore!

I ordered the lens.... (@ B&H)
I figured the price might jump a buck or two like it did for the D90 when I wanted to order that...

Here's to DX Sensory 'lens' overload.

Marlton Mom

[rossb]

I just got it today but so far I think I am going to be very happy. The little $199 35mm f/1.8 dx plastic wonder I got for my daughter last year is sharp as a tack on it.

I have one of those, it works great with indoor flash. It has bad CA at wide openings when shot outdoors in high contrast scenes.

[proxy10]

and the price tag is...?

[DVC Mike]

and the price tag is...?

I purchased the Nikon D7000 kit (includes the 18-105mm VR lens) the morning of Oct 15 at Best Buy for $1499.

[Twoboysnmygirl]

Ouch!

Well, for those of you getting the D7000, you could take pity on my poor self and sell me your used D90 for a ridiculously low price?!? Give a poor photographer a break? :rolleyes1

[rossb]

Same lens, same settings, same flash. This is the usual result I get when I compare the two cameras, even if I try a different lens.


http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1034&thread=36962900

[YesDear]

FYI the site says you have the picture as private!

[rossb]

Bad link removed

[wenrob]

Nope that's not working either.

[rossb]

Here is the DPR thread. You may not be able to see the original sized photos without being a DPR member:

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1034&thread=36962900

[photo_chick]

Is your issue that they're really similar? Because at that ISO they should be. We're you expecting the new camera to be better?

[rossb]

Is your issue that they're really similar? Because at that ISO they should be. We're you expecting the new camera to be better?

If you check the 100% view (click the link that says 'original') you will see that the D90 looks better.

[WDWFigment]

Are you the OP on dpreview?

[rossb]

Are you the OP on dpreview?

Yes, I am the OP. You should be able to get to the 100% originals if you open the DPR thread. My D7000 is going back today and I'm sticking with the D90. I just taken too many side by side shots where my D90 beats my D7000.

[photo_chick]

Yes, I am the OP. You should be able to get to the 100% originals if you open the DPR thread. My D7000 is going back today and I'm sticking with the D90. I just taken too many side by side shots where my D90 beats my D7000.


Making an upgrade like that isn't really about image quality, IMO. It's about the features of the camera.

[rossb]

Making an upgrade like that isn't really about image quality, IMO. It's about the features of the camera.


Sure, but the IQ should not get worse.

[Gdad]

Have you considered getting a Pentax K-5 instead?

[zackiedawg]

There could be other variables involved. Same dynamic range optimization settings? Same JPEG mode? How about the camera's settings for contrast, sharpness, color, saturation, etc? Sometimes cameras are tuned by default to deliver slightly different results, but one can adjust those picture settings so that they are to the user's liking...maybe the new cam just needs to have those settings played with to get them where you want? And how do they compare at high ISO ranges, or indoors vs outdoors? Lots of variables...you may end up being right, and the D90 is the better choice for you...but I'd say just don't jump to any quick and rash decisions. Test some more, consider adjustments, and see if a simple fix could make the new camera suddenly the better choice for you.

[photo_chick]

What zackiedawg said. LOL

Seriously... there's a lot of things that affect image quality. It could be that the higher resolution of the new camera is showing the quality of your lens as well. I ran into a lot of this when I switched from my Rebel XT to my 50D.

I'm not saying you're not seeing what you're seeing, and it may very well be that they just stuffed too many pixels on that sensor and IQ took a hit. And if IQ was what you upgraded for then you'll probably never be happy with the camera anyway. But you're jumping to a conclusion without making a serious controlled comparison between the two.

[MarkBarbieri]

Have you considered getting a Pentax K-5 instead?

:lmao::lmao::lmao::rotfl2:

[rossb]

I just posted a more controlled test. The D7000 did better this time, it basically matched the D90.