I shoot with a D300 and want to get a second (or first camera). I like the D3100 for its size and would be handy for street photography, but then again, I do this with with my D300 now, it just gets a bit big, but maybe my NAS is kicking in and I am just making excuses!!
I do want to progress up to full frame and advance my images, so maybe the D7k is the way to go and use the D300 as my back up?
Is the D700 better than the D7k? I have not really checked it out.
I have mainly DX glass: 18-200 VR (Dx), 70-200VR, 105 VR, 50 f1.4 and a sigma 10-20 (dx).
#1. "RE: D7k or D3100 ?" | In response to Reply # 0billD80 Nikonian since 22nd Jan 2007Mon 31-Jan-11 03:05 PM
One of the main aspects of a D700 over a D7000 is the Full-Frame viewfinder.
But, there are those who feel that in other areas the D7000 surpasses the D700...
In typical fashion, Ken Rockwell comes out and says the D7000 is the best camera Nikon makes below $7000.
I guess one question to ask is, why do you really want a second body? Another option would be to sell the D300 and just get the D7000. You'd have a little lighter body, but a mountain of photographic potential.
#2. "RE: D7k or D3100 ?" | In response to Reply # 0rasworth Basic MemberMon 31-Jan-11 04:23 PM
I went thru a D70/D200/D300 progression and felt the same as you, i.e. something lighter would be nice, particularly for street/vacation photography. I put my 16-85VR onto a D3100 body, did not like the way it performed and the lack of functionality compared to the D300. I then tried a D7000 and soon thereafter bought one, it's a half pound or so lighter and does everything the D300 does and more. I haven't found any significant lesser capability.
#3. "RE: D7k or D3100 ?" | In response to Reply # 0JPJ Nikonian since 19th Aug 2009Mon 31-Jan-11 04:54 PM
Unless you need the high ISO performance of the d7k or full HD video with Continuous-AF I don't know that the upgrade to the d7k from the d300 is worthwhile unless you are sticking with DX and you are going to make the d7k your primary body.
If you are intent on upgrading to full frame then I wouldn't get a d7k, hold on to the d300. I would then wait for Nikon to refresh the d700 (pretty much a cinch to happen this year). At that point you can choose between the new entry level Full Frame or a cheaper D700 whose price will fall some after the refresh is released.
Is the d700 better than the d7k? Depends who you ask. Full frame has the large bright viewfinder and the wide angle advantage. DX has the smaller, lighter body and the telephoto advantage. Do you want your DSLR to be a functional video camera? Than the d7k is your body. Do you want to be able to use wide angle primes properly? Then the d700 is the way to go, etc. etc. Neither of these cameras produce inherently better images than the other imo. ISO performance is fairly close between the two. I would say that you don't need to move to full frame to advance your images. Many pro photographers choose to shot DX over FX. At the point you are shooting with the d7k or d700 is is more the person behind the lens that will determine the quality of the photograph than the camera.
For photographers, ergonomics can be as important as image quality. I know some full frame people who can't live without the cavernous viewfinder. Myself, a loyal DX shooter, I don't want the haul around a huge FX camera. I also take a number of street shots and find the bigger the camera the less people want you to point it at them. The d7k suits my shooting style. When I had a D90 the only thing I really craved was better ISO performance and the d7k delivered big time. I think if you upgraded from the d300 to the d7k this would be the most notable difference in image quality.
Visit my Nikonians gallery.
Visit my Nikonians gallery.
#4. "RE: D7k or D3100 ?" | In response to Reply # 3glennaa11 Registered since 27th Aug 2004Mon 31-Jan-11 06:17 PM
According to Nikon Rumors the D700 is already being discontinued and is out of stock with no plans to get any more in some places. So I'm not sure how many there will be out there to go at a discount when the new, replacement comes out.
Frankly if I wanted a small, lighter travel camera I would wait until Nikon finally releases their compact/mirrorless ILC or EVIL or whatever you want to call it. All indications are that it will have to finally be released this year. Nikon is losing market share to the likes of Sony and needs to get this kind of product into the market soon.
To me it sounds like the OP is just having a NAS attack. How much street photography do you really do or think you will actually do? You can get a D90 pretty cheap these days. Nice, light full-featured body.
#5. "RE: D7k or D3100 ?" | In response to Reply # 4DigiG Registered since 13th May 2007Tue 01-Feb-11 01:53 AM
I live in China, city of Shenzhen. This (allegedly) is the fastest growing city in the world, 30 years ago had a population of 150, 000 approx., now up to 14 million.
Street photography is like a drug here, so much stuff going on, its crazy... You see locals on electric bicycles with a sofa on the back, next to Merc's and Bentlys waiting at the traffic lights, very surreal place.
Going out now to take some shots