I have been waiting for D300 replacement for a while like many nikonians here. Brain suggested one time why not D7K. It is a very rational option. Or, is it?
Now why I need a new camera:
I hate to change lenses in the field for my three most used lenses, 11-16, 17-55, 70-200, with D80 and D300. 11-16 usually went with D80 and 70-200 with D300. I have a little problem with 17-55/D300 because of slow focusing sometimes. So I want to have add a new one, e.g., D400 or D7000, for the mid-range, i.e., 17-55mm.
Should I wait for D400 or go with D7K now? Please advise on the con's of having D7K now because there are many pro's I am sure here.
#1. "RE: What's wrong with buying D7K Now?" In response to Reply # 0 Fri 25-Mar-11 04:00 PM by agitater
You're likely to be waiting for a D400 a lot longer than anyone might have thought up until the disaster in Japan. Although the D300 is produced in Thailand - well away from anything related to quake and tsunami disaster in Japan, a lot of key parts/fabs come from Japan for the D300 series. If production of the D400 was scheduled soon, you can be sure the dates have all been pushed out by many months.
Your D300/17-55 combination should not be "slow focusing" at all. I used the combination for years. With even marginally decent focus targets on your subjects, the combination should be about as fast as you can get.
The only con to adding a D7000 to your gear is that you'll be carrying a total of three bodies and three heavy lenses all at the same time. I am currently using the D7000 + Nikkor 17-55mm f/2.8 - it's a superb match.
A minor D7000 con might be its hair-trigger shutter button. The solution is to set the AE/AF-L button as AF-On and not bother with a shutter button half-press at all. It took me almost a full month of shooting to get used to controlling the lighter action of the D7000 shutter button. If you have use for separate AE-L and AF-On buttons, you'll have to sort it out.
It varies from unit to unit, but a number of D7000 bodies have a slightly longer delay between the time you press the playback button and when the first image appears on the rear LCD. This is so minor it's inconsequential IMO.
The AF-S/C/Focus Area actuator control is located concentrically inside the body AF/M switch. You have to press the button, then work the rear command dial to change settings. The settings changes are visible in the viewfinder and in the top LCD. Just try to quickly press the button while wearing shooting gloves. It's like amateur night at the dart board until you get the hang of it, and even when you do it can cause the occasional frustrating moment when you have to take your eye away from the viewfinder and relocate your finger position on that stupid little button. I'm used to it now, but still occasionally have to look. Warmer weather and an absence of gloves has improved things, but I still don't think that control actuator was well designed.
I'm delighted with the camera. Every DSLR body design includes things we have to get used to before we can get the most out of the thing. I think the D7000 is superb.
#2. "RE: What's wrong with buying D7K Now?" In response to Reply # 0 Fri 25-Mar-11 04:49 PM by Len Shepherd
The D7000 has no cons compared to a D80 - though some compared to a D300. Although well built the D7000 is not a pro body, the top left dial is to easy to accidentally change, and setting exposure and AF modes has changed quite a bit. What is not known is - will the D400 be "more pro" with a bigger permanently attached battery - good for some users - not so good for others. The pros are, when needed, the D7000 has better resolution and noise than the 12 MP, a very good AF system, and Nikon's best video yet. Why not trade your D80 for a D7000 for now, and decide about a D400 when it becomes available?
Photography is a bit like archery. A technically better camera, lens or arrow may not hit the target as often as it could if the photographer or archer does not practice enough.
#3. "RE: What's wrong with buying D7K Now?" In response to Reply # 2
I was waiting for a "D400" to replace my D200, because I believe in waiting 2 generations before upgrading. If I owned a D300, I don't know if I'd be in the market right now, but that's a personal bias.
When the D7000 came out, I was taken off guard, and jumped on it as opposed to waiting for the "D400".
I'm very glad I did. It's a super camera that excels in color tonality, resolution (which I need), high ISO, AF-Speed, battery life, and build quality (it's weather sealed). The 6fps while shooting 14-bit images is way more than I need because I never shoot high speed multi-frame images. Though I think 6FPS is wonderful.
The shutter release pressure is now as familar to me as any camera I've owned over 35 years, and that's saying something considering the D200's comparitively heavy pressure requirement.
Truth be told, I think the D7000 is a lot more camera than the D300 in ways that actually affect basic image quality.
The "D400", if it will exist, will have to be one heck of a machine. Mainly because the D7000 already is.
#4. "RE: What's wrong with buying D7K Now?" In response to Reply # 1
>A minor D7000 con might be its hair-trigger shutter button. >The solution is to set the AE/AF-L button as AF-On and not >bother with a shutter button half-press at all. It took me >almost a full month of shooting to get used to controlling the >lighter action of the D7000 shutter button. If you have use >for separate AE-L and AF-On buttons, you'll have to sort it >out.
Thanks for this info. I was wondering if this button could be reprogrammed.
#5. "RE: What's wrong with buying D7K Now?" In response to Reply # 1
Thanks, Howard, for your quick reply, and the "set the AE/AF-L button as AF-On" tip. I am wondering will it also help slow focusing I run into when pressing the shutter button. I will test it out soon.
#6. "RE: What's wrong with buying D7K Now?" In response to Reply # 3
Monterey Bay, US
Unless you get one of the first (beta) versions, it will probably be nearly one year before the D400 is readily available. I would get the D7000 now. The use you get out of it should be worth more than the couple hundred dollars it will depreciate. And you may just decide to keep it.
#9. "RE: What's wrong with buying D7K Now?" In response to Reply # 7
Wading River, US
That is exactly why I jumped from a D-80 to a D-90 and then from the D-90 to the D-7000. I got a reasonable fair price for both camera bodies right here on the FS Nikonians forum and they sold relatively quickly. Now a good used D-80 is selling for half the price that it was two years ago. I love my D-7000 and figured the upfront outlay of dollars was well worth the effort. Eddie
"If only God would give me some clear sign! Like making a large deposit in my name in a Swiss bank account". Woody Allen
#10. "RE: What's wrong with buying D7K Now?" In response to Reply # 0
I just got a D7000 yesterday, tested it out with my Nikon 70-200 VRII and Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 today, and love it!
Here's why -
- compared to my D300, it's lighter, yet with a very solid and well made feeling, thus a great walk-around outfit. No more need for my micro-4/3rds camera, since the D7000 is small and light enough for travel, hiking, etc. and so much better.
- the ISO performance is great! I've no problem shooting at ISO 1250, which I wouldn't do with the D300. I don't like going much over 400 with the D300.
- love the sound of the shutter, even on regular mode, it's quieter.
- just a lot more advanced in many ways, lots of new features.
Still love the D300, and I'm sure the D400 will be even better, but after reading extensively about this camera, I decided it was right for me and didn't want to wait possibly until early 2012 for better ISO, etc.
Were the D400 now available, would I have got that? Yesterday I would have said definitely, now I'm not sure. No use speculating on a camera that doesn't exist yet.
#11. "RE: What's wrong with buying D7K Now?" In response to Reply # 10
Brownstown Twp, US
I have a D80, D90, D300s and now a D7000. The D300s was to replace my D90 after it had a terrible fall. I should have waited for the D7000. I was looking for one but at the time they were very hard to come by.
The D80 is going to my son. The D90 is still one of my favorites. But the D7000 - WOW is all I can say.
I tend to shoot a lot of different things and lots of kids sports - some indoors. So the D7000 is great for High ISO and Noise Reduction.
But it is amazing in the field too.
I know it is not a PRO body like many have stated but it out shoots the D300s hands down! Matter of fact I like the images out of the D90 over the D300s. More to come on that. I am doing a direct comparison test with all 4 cameras, same subjects, same settings (as close as I can get them), same lens and exposures.
So it should be interesting. My money is on the D7000.
#12. "RE: What's wrong with buying D7K Now?" In response to Reply # 0
About the only con I can think of is the D7000 doesn't quite achieve extreme responsiveness of the 8fps in the Dn00 series when you mount the MB-D10. And maybe not quite the toughness and weather sealing (but not far off). The D300 is also more configurable having 4 shooting banks vs. the D7000 2 modes (U1 and U2).
Other than that, my D7K has usurped the role that my D300 was playing in my kit.
#13. "RE: What's wrong with buying D7K Now?" In response to Reply # 0
I was having similar thoughts a few weeks ago. I finally decided to go with the D7000 now and when the D400 comes out, I'll sell my D90 to put towards the D400. Which as a few pointed out might be delayed even further. Of course, I do not have a D400 or anything "higher" than a D90 for comparison but I don't regret going ahead with the D7000 one bit. It is a sweet camera for the price. I'm getting good results at sporting events at ISO6400. I've posted two images of fastpitch softball, one at 6400, the other at 200. Take a look over in my Nikonian gallery.
I've not given it the real test yet. Highschool football is probably the worst lighting situation ever so as soon as that comes back around, we'll really see what it can do.