Woo, apparently I ruffled some feathers! Sorry guys, it wasn't my intentions. I should have clarified some things in my post.
You are the first person I have ever heard say this. While it is a great camera and sensor, saying it is "by far probably the best" is a bit of an exaggeration. Every DSLR maker has incredibly performing DSLRs these days and even noticing a difference at the top levels would take some extreme pixel peeping. Also, the D7000 sensor is supposed to be made by Sony and might be the exact same (or at least very close) model as the one in the Sony A55.
I should have said, it's by far probably one of the nicest DX bodies on the market with the best sensor. As someone who shoots in low light, often, this is huge, especially when (in terms of noise) it's beating out everyone else, including the big flagship models (that aren't full frame).
Yes, the D7k sensor is manufactured by Sony. Nikon lacks the fab plants to do it and it's FAR cheaper to have Sony do the "grunt work" on it. What is now known, according to a few sources I've read, the design of the sensor was done by Nikon and is exclusive to them. There are other cameras that use a 16mp sensor similar to the D7k's, but supposedly, they aren't the same.
I also disagree with your assessment of the Pentax line. Unless you want professional lenses and accessories (i.e. spending many thousands of dollars) then they are not limited. In fact, they have arguably the best prime lens lineup around (and all stabilized unlike Canon and Nikon). For that matter, Sony and Olympus have just as much to offer at the consumer level as well. Go back five years ago and this was not the case, but currently for the non-professional any brand's mount has about anything you could want. How much all that is going to cost and how the ergonomics feel are much more important now than just saying you have to go Canon or Nikon.
I partially agree with that. My issue is, I have friends that started out on 'other than Canon or Nkon' gear, bought a ton of stuff and have now run out of options. A few of them are now REALLY into photography and are at a dead end. Their only option was to sell all of the gear they sunk their money into for a significant discount over what they paid and start with a whole new system. The other issue is you lose out on almost all 3rd party glass. Tokina makes some amazing glass, usually less expensive than the OEM's, that is only available to Canon and Nikon users. The same applies with Tamron. Unless you're shooting Canon, Nikon and in this case, Sony, you miss out on the 18-270mm, which is super sharp, inexpensive and one of the best 'walk around' lenses you can get your hands on. Oly/Pentax is completely left out.
I'm not saying that everyone needs to run out and buy a 17-50 2.8, nor will everyone want a 18-270mm, but to say that people aren't willing to spend the money might be a bit of an overstatement. I know there is at least one person running around here with a D3100 and a Nikkor 70-200 2.8, a piece of glass that cost 4 times as much as the body that it's mounted on.
I guess I see it as buying a Ferrari that's limited to 55mph. You have this great body, but can't make full use of it.
Re: Sony, first off, the NEX menu architecture is 'unusable' to you, based on the first generation version of it. Others seem to have found it OK...so again, a bit subjective here. But also note that Sony issued a firmware allowing the menu architecture to be completely customized, to where most-used functions can be placed on one-touch access to the main control buttons...which was the main complaint in the first version.
But the biggest mistake of the post was to mention the NEX menu as unusable, therefore rendering Sony a non-competitor. Missing the blindingly obvious fact that Sony's Alpha line is many times larger and more diverse than their NEX line, with many more lenses. If one doesn't like the NEX, they can consider any of the 7 current Alpha models available, with over 105 current lenses in that mount and over 350 Minolta-mount lenses fully compatible with it.
This I was unaware of and as such, I'll retract my statement. I remember playing with a Sony and I had to put it down after 5 minutes because I was so frustrated with how back asswards everything was. I couldn't believe that they would let something like that go out the door. It's like no one (that didn't design the UI) actually took the camera out and used it.
It would behoove most people to consider all available manufacturers and omit those they don't like the feel of, those that don't have needed features, those they don't consider price-competitive, or those that don't have the needed lenses or accessories. It doesn't behoove anyone to just dismiss 2 or 3 manufacturers without consideration from the outset.
I agree and I'm probably biased to "the big 2". As I said above, it just seems limiting to get into a system that is fairly dead ended. Look at all of the poor Oly 4/3's guys. Olympus themselves has pretty much admitted they're users will never see a new 4/3 body or glass as it's a dead format and they're moving on with m4/3. I like knowing that I can grab any Nikon mount lens, throw it on my camera and use it. All of that glass, ever made, all the way to way back when.
And as mentioned, the excellent D7000 is ONE OF the best APS-C sensors on the market - that sensor, a 16MP APS-C sensor manufactured by Sony, is also shared in Pentax's K5 and Sony's A55 and A580. The performance in all respects is about even between the D7000, K5, and A580. Including the excellent high ISO performance. The relative bargain of that crowd may in fact be the $800 A580. But they're all excellent cameras, and each has some advantages over the others that should be considered by anyone shopping.
I clarified the "best" comment and the sensor above. I'll throw some things out to help defend my comment though;
Weather sealed body
Optional battery grip
100% viewfinder
3D tracking
Amazingly low noise
Magnesium Alloy body
1080p/24
14bit lossless compressed RAW
2 SD slots
39 point AF (w/ 9 cross type)
25k ISO
6fps
2 user modes on dial
Really the only thing I don't like about the D7000.. 100% SD. I have to drop $300 on new memory now, lol.
As I said in my original post, almost everyone out there makes great gear, but I tend to look at the entire system and how it's going to effect me over years of use. Glass is expensive and not something I want to have to re-invest in over and over. I want to be in a format that I know will be around for a long, long time. Even with all of my DX glass, that can all still be used on FX. Right now, it's a 7mp penalty to use DX on a D3/D700. The guys "in the know" all seem to think the next FX camera is going to be a 24mp sensor, so all things being equal, the next gen cams should see ~10mp in DX mode rather than the current 5mp. 5mp is pretty usable, but 10mp opens up a lot more doors when shooting DX on FX.
My 2c.
