#1. "RE: Alternative body to a D7000" In response to Reply # 0
They are hardly alike. There is certainly plenty that one can do with a D100, but it isn't really even close to the capability of a D7000, as one might guess from the ~$200 price compared to the $1200 price of a D7000. Sure, they are both Nikon DSLRs, and they're both DX and they both have in-camera focusing motors. The resemblance ends about there.
Tell us more about what you're trying to accomplish.
_____ Brian... a bicoastal Nikonian and Team Member
My gallery is online. Comments and critique welcomed any time!
#3. "RE: Alternative body to a D7000" In response to Reply # 1
I, as a general rule, dont buy the latest version of any high
tech equipment and rather go for the proven and tested, mo
matter if the manufacturer is Nikon, Canon, Sony, Apple, Dell,
Samsung etc. That is the reason why I purchased the D7000.
I am not looking for a D7000 look alike or to substitute it
but rather a camera that fits the same lenses and that I can
use basically for landscapes so the D7000 is ready for the
other things I like to shoot as it is, for an ameteur, a very
polifacetic camera. I dont like to be changing lenses
(specially now with digital cameras) frecuently or carry a
large amount of lenses. I am 71 years old, in good health but
now, nor ever before, carrying load of bags or loaded bag has
it been to my liking. I try to do the best I can with the
equipment I have. What I cant do I wont do.
The reason why I mentioned the D100 is because of old
reports I read and photos I have seen taken with it. I dont
mind limitations, all camera have them, as long at does good
what it does. And the price for a used one is very
attractive. I preffer to put the money on better lenses. So
far I have a 35mm f1.8G AFS DX and a 55-200 f4-5.6 AFS DX VR
(because it was lighter 55-300). I am about to buy a Nikon
16-85mm f 3.5-5.6 DX VR or a Sigma 10-20 f 4-5.6 EX DC HSM
But like I said before, I an completlely open to suggestions
on cameras or lenses especially when coming from more
I have tried to give a true "picture" of myself and
Thanks in advance for comments to receive.
#5. "RE: Alternative body to a D7000" In response to Reply # 4 Mon 17-Dec-12 05:14 AM by jrp
Thanks for your comment. I live in Honduras, Central America, and DHL or similar couriers are very expensive (more than USD 100.00 either way plus incoming customs charges) so I better stay off the Sigma and consider the Nikon 10-24 or the Nikon 16-85. Which one is more useful for landscapes according to your experience?
#6. "RE: Alternative body to a D7000" In response to Reply # 5 Tue 20-Nov-12 10:14 AM by RRRoger
Monterey Bay, US
We are talking DX here. I think you will find the AF-S Nikkor 10-24 most useful at 10-12mm for landscape.
My DX kit for Hiking, Landscapes, Portraits, and movies was a D5100 with 10-24,35 f1.8, and 28-300 Nikkors. I used a D7000 for Sporting Events with 28-300, 28-70, and 70-200 Nikkors.
I now use a V1 for travel, and D800 for Events and Landscapes. The V1 uses the D7000, D600, D800 battery and the entire kit fits is a small light bag. The camera is solid and so fast that it is the only pocket camera that I can get an unblurred shot with hand held. It fits in my large pockets with a 10-30 lens. It produces so much DOF that it can be very useful for Landscapes. This camera was too expensive new but there are half price sales on them now and they can be picked up used as a complete kit dirt cheap.
#7. "RE: Alternative body to a D7000" In response to Reply # 0
St. Louis, US
I had a D100 for 8 years prior to getting the D7K in 2/2011. Big difference in how they work and picture quality. Initially, I was going to keep mine as a second body, but after seeing the difference in picture quality, I sold it. It's tough enough learning the D7000, much less two cameras from different digital generations.
Jim Singler D7K with a bunch of lenses and other assorted stuff
#8. "RE: Alternative body to a D7000" In response to Reply # 0 Tue 20-Nov-12 02:31 PM by ericbowles
I agree with the other comments - the D100 is too early a model to be a good option. There are major differences in image quality and functionality.
A used D300 today is a great deal at around $600 or so. The D90 is a pretty good option and is a little cheaper than a D300. The D300 would be my top recommendation as it is an excellent camera and comparable technology. The D90 is a very good option in that it adds movie capability and shares SD cards with the D7000.
A used D200 is a little harder to find, but is probably running around $350 these days. It is a good solid camera with 10 megapixel image files.
A D70 - right after the D100 - is the cheapest option. There are some compromises such as a small viewfinder and 6 megapixel files, but it costs around $175-200. The technology generally represents a step up from the D100.
The above cameras are all very good options at low prices. Other options (D5100 or D3200/D3100) start to compromise your lens choices or give up some features. These are good options as new cameras but check lens compatibility since AFS lenses may be required.
On the lens front, the 16-85 is a very good all purpose lens. It replaced the 18-70 kit lens which is a very good value lens. I find an ultrawide lens is nice to have, to a 12-24 or 10-24 is a good option. Its a matter of shooting style and you can live with out an ultrawide if you have a lens that covers 16-18mm at the wide end.
Given the cost of shipping, try someone like KEH.com for used gear. You may pay a little more, but their grading is conservative and they have their own repair shop. They are by far the largest used equipment dealer - it's their main business. They have an excellent reputation.
By the way, uncheck the box that says "Use Plain Text" to improve the appearance of your posts.
#9. "RE: Alternative body to a D7000" In response to Reply # 5
I would agree with what some others have said - in my view the D100 is just a bit too outdated to be a sensible choice when you consider what other cameras are around. My vote would go to the D90 as the best match to what I think you are looking for
#11. "RE: Alternative body to a D7000" In response to Reply # 0
St Petersburg, RU
Considering the informatiom you provided over a couple of posts, a used D90 would be a very good alternative, light, reliable, wider DR than a D300, D200, D100, D70 etc at low ISO which is what landscape calls for. It was the first of the Nikon's that started extending the DR with lower noise without increasing prices. That continued with the D7000, D800 and D600, all class leaders in the specs that landscape shooting calls for. The D300 has superior AF so if moving subjects such as birds in flight or sports is of interest, it is the best sports camera of any for less than $1000. It is heavier however so carrying both a D7000, which is the best DX camera for IQ, plus a D300 would start to be a load. I have the 10-20 Sigma and like it a lot, very rugged and well made. I also have a 10-24 Nikon and like it for scenes that have more sensitivity to rectilinear distortion such as architecture while using the 10-20 for landscapes. Both are very effective on a D90, 7000 or 300 and will be better optically in the mid range than a 16-85 at 16mm. Throughout the 16-85 range that lens is a good general purpose lens, well made and good optically but none of the mid zooms beat a special purpose wide angle lens for wide scenes. 16 on a Dx is not that wide. I think if i considered budget, I would probably select a 10-20 for landscape, the 35 1.8 for low light and interior shots, and a low cost 18-105 as a general purpose lens for everything else. It is a very versatile lens, light and low cost. Stan St Petersburg Russia
#12. "RE: Alternative body to a D7000" In response to Reply # 8
Thnks Eric for your comments.
I was going in the direction of a Nikon 18-55 VR and a Sigma 10-20 either the f4 or the f3.5 but I have read on Amazon so many return situations on the Sigma 10-20 that I am returning to the Nikon 16-85 idea. Unless a Nikon 10-24 instead of the 18-55/10-20 combo. I know that there is no clear answer to any lens or camera alternative but I am trying to keep my lens inventory to the minimum with a wider usable situation. As I am now I have experienced a gap that needs to be filled to my 35mm 1.8 plus the 55-200 on landscapes and city shots.
Help and ideas are more than wellcome. I have a USA trip in 10 days so I have to make a decission soon.
As far as camera alternative, I am looking into KEH.com for a D200 possibility. Prices for a used D90 are still too high for my purpose. One Nikonians mentioned the additional weight problem for the D100. How is the D200 compared to the D70?
#13. "RE: Alternative body to a D7000" In response to Reply # 11
I had a very pleasant evening last night going over your photos of St Petersburg and show them to my wife. We were somewhat sorry that we had postponed it twice by going to India and then Paris. We made a resolve of putting it back on top of next time vacation places. The photos were beautiful and the narration gave us a sense of reading an illustrated travel book.
I appreciate your suggestion on lenses. As I mentioned in a reply to Eric, comments on the 10-20 lens on Amazon was a let down. So I am quickly reviewing my options. Would I have a more practical complement on what I have by choosing the 18-105 AFS VR or a 10-20/10-24 alternative that I know it eventually has to come true? There is a reserve forest close to home that I would like to explore. Should I put aside my skeptical view on the 10-20 as in fact no lens is perfect nor pleases everyone?
#15. "RE: Alternative body to a D7000" In response to Reply # 13
Brighton and Hove, GB
> or a 10-20/10-24 alternative that I know it >eventually has to come true?
If that's the situation, you've just got to bite the bullet and buy something. I'm assuming your reservations are build quality since the Sigma has always received rave reviews for image quality.
Nikkors generally are a safe option, especially the 12-24 because it was a semi-pro lens in its day. It's a very nice price used these days. Or of course there's that darn 10-24 with those extra 2mm at the wide end.
I have the Tokina 12-24 and it is one heavy, solid-feeling lens. I assume the Tokina 11-16 is equally solid and it gives you an extra millimetre and an extra stop if you like to shoot in the dark.
Or there's the Sigma 10-20. Stan has a good copy, and I'm sure many others do too.
If you're shooting in wet conditions a lot, the Nikkor 10-24 might be a good idea as it has the rubber moisture seal on the mount.
#19. "RE: Alternative body to a D7000" In response to Reply # 13
St Petersburg, RU
Thank you, Carlos, for your kind comments. By all means, come for a visit, I can show you some great photo opportunities and the best times of day for them. Let me know when you want to come, I can send you the required Visa invitations to get visas. I believe the 10-20 is the most popular and widely used Sigma lens. It is well made and has good optics, with good contrast and color. The only issue that I have had is the distortion(all wide angles have distortion) is a complex type that is a little harder to correct in post for straight lines in both vertical and horizontal axis towards the edges. The Nikon 10-24 is a little better in that regard for buildings and interiors but does not seem to be a good for landscapes. In reality, both are very good for landscapes but the Sigma is a lot lower cost and more solidly built so that tips the scales in favor of the Sigma for a lot of people. For interior work in low ambient light, the 11-16 Tokina is better for having a constant 2.8 aperture however, probably their best lens. Stan St Petersburg Russia
#21. "RE: Alternative body to a D7000" In response to Reply # 19
Thanks for your kind offer. I will take you up on it. We have just returned from a three week trip to Madrid so we estimate that June might be the next available time for traveling. Would June/July be a good time in regards to weather photographically speaking?
As far as lenses are concerned, I am going back and forth between the Sigma 10-20 and a Nikon 16-85. The lenses I now have are the Nikon 35 f 1.8 and the VR Nikon 55-200. So I was figuring I need first a 16-85 and then the 10-20.
As far as camera is concerned I will look out for a D300 or a D90 whichever comes first in a good and usable condition.
#25. "RE: Alternative body to a D7000" In response to Reply # 0
Looking through the varied responses here...
My recommendation would be to get a used, low-actuation D90 (I've seen a couple recently on the Want To Sell forum here at very attractive prices).
I come at this issue from the other direction -- I currently shoot a D90 and am looking at another body before a "bucket list" trip to Iceland next year, and the D7000 (or its replacement in early 2013) is at the top of my list.
One point that has not been made here so far is that the D7000 is the evolutionary successor to the D90 in the Nikon product line -- to the extent that when my wife and I (both of us have D90s) took Steve Simon's Nikonians "Master the ..." workshop in NYC last year it covered the D80, D90, and D7000. The physical layout and menus are similar or identical on both bodies. If you want a backup that will be seamlessly accessible based on your D7000 experience and will produce excellent images, I think that a used D90 is the only logical choice.
Having shot with a D90 for almost 3 years, I can vouch for the image quality. In terms of function the D7000 wins, in my opinion, primarily in pixel density and high ISO performance (although the build quality is also a step up from the D90).
#29. "RE: Alternative body to a D7000" In response to Reply # 25
Yes, I believe your advice is the right one for me. Will try to get hold of a used but good D90. If if does not come soon, I will wait for the D7100 or whatever name they give to its replacement. I am very satisfied with the D7000 I have been enjoying its learning process. Have no FX WANT....yet and hope I can defuse it when it comes.
Thanks to all who gave valuable advice on this subject.