< ! --Digital window verification 001 -->

Nikon D5100 vs. D700 size comparison

Several readers commented about the small size of the D5100. Attached are few images comparing the size of the D5100 to the D700.

The D5100 (5 x 3.8 x 3.1 in | 127 x 96.5 x 78.7 mm) is slightly  smaller than the D5000 (5 x 4.1 x 3.1 in | 127 x 104 x 80 mm). The weight of the D5100 and the D5000 is the same (19.8 oz | 560 gr). The D3100 is still the smallest and lightest DSLR in the current Nikon lineup (16 oz | 455 gr | 4.9 x 3.8 x 2.9 in | 124.46 x 96.52 x 73.66 mm).

The Nikon D5100 uses the EN-EL14 battery that promises 660 shots (the EN-EL3e battery from the D700 is rated at 1,000 shots). The D5000 was rated at 510 shots (CIPA):

The Nikon D5100 doesn't come with a power cord:

This entry was posted in Nikon D5100. Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • Jabs

    Cameras have surely become smaller and smaller over the years and people still ask for even smaller cameras. Maybe they will get so small that you have no place to grasp them – LOL.
    Thanks for the timely information Administrator.

    • D700guy

      +1
      My D700 is just the right size for my hands.
      Sometimes I don’t think it’s big enough, so I throw the vertical grip on to satisfy that need. But seriously, I wouldn’t want a small DLSR. Ergonomically for me, I feel more comfortable with the full size camera. I look forward to the D4 once it arrives and I’m sure its size will be just fine for me. Although, I never have held or performed shoots with a D3, so this is pure speculation.

  • Philipp Hilpert Foto

    lol, love that d700 monster anyway! :D

    • Barbara Bryan

      Love my D700!!!

      • Kingyo

        +700!
        I really don’t like small SLRs..they look like little toys :(
        Even the grip of the d700 doesn’t feel deep enough, but with the vertical grip in place it’s perfect.

  • Mark Wieczorek

    The 5100 is smaller than the 700 because the 700 has the motor drive that will allow it to work with a wider range of lenses. The 7000 also has this motor and I’m guessing it’s bigger than the 5100 and smaller than the 700- more in the 300 range for size.

    • WoutK89

      Size in order of small to large is D3100 – D5100 – D5000 – D90 – D7000 – D300s – D700 – D3(s/x)

      • FX DX

        I think D7000 and D90 are roughly the same size.

        • WoutK89

          The D7000′s viewfinder makes it slightly bigger.

        • lottery

          I don’t care so much about size, but the weight of the D70-80-90-7000 series is creeping up, while the Canon camp manages to keep weight down.

          A lighter D400/D800 would help.

          • chris

            it’s called metal, and most of us are very glad that our cameras are still made of it. the d7000 now has a metal frame whereas the past incarnations of it [d90, d80] were plastic…canon is going the other direction, replacing cameras which used to be metal with chintzy plastic.

            • Philip Soon

              I’m all for a solidly constructed camera – I use a D300s, but lets not put down ‘plastic’ bodies like as though they are made of the variety that model airplanes are made of. Most modern power tools like my Makita cordless drill set have high impact polycarbonate ‘plastic’ bodies that can certainly stand the rough handling that these tools are subjected to daily. They would not be so popular if they were made with heavier ‘metal’ body parts.
              If the entry level DSLRs are given a proper gripy, rubber skin like their bigger brothers, it would take away that ‘plastiky’ feel IMHO.
              Regards

          • iamlucky13

            lottery – the D7000 is actually slightly smaller (1/2″ narrower) than the 60D and less than an ounce heavier.

            I remember comparing a D90 to a 50D, and the Canon felt distinctly larger, although I think that was in part due to the shape of the grip.

            I had my first chance to handle a D7000 yesterday found it was actually smaller and lighter than I was expecting. I’d say it’s closer in size to the D5100 than the D300.

    • chris

      the d300s and d700 are the same size except for the larger viewfinder on the d700. the d90 and d7000 are the same size.

    • http://www.bythom.com Thom Hogan

      Incorrect. The AF motor in camera shouldn’t change the size of the camera. We had small film cameras that had the AF motor, after all.

  • http://www.MartinWongPhotography.com Martin Wong

    Maybe D800 will become a point a shoot, because it will be only the size of a ring, then you “point” and then “shot”

  • sade

    What an amazing rumor!

  • Shkacas

    “Honey, I Shrunk the Camera” :D

  • Mandrake

    Even the red strip in the front is different then past Nikons.

    • Global

      The red stripe is different on every camera.

      • chris

        no

  • R R

    thanks admin for the images for comparison, love the 35mm on that D700, thats my next lens :)

  • The invisible man

    My wife always says “the size does not mater as long you know how to use it….”
    :)

    • Martin

      Oh, it’s a great size comparison… cause it shows that I definitely need a full frame camera with D5100 size. This should be almost possible, since I don’t need the features that make D700 big:

      - D5100 AF system would be fine
      - View finder can be mirror type (making it lighter)
      - lens motor not needed
      - top lc display not needed
      - smaller, lighter battery sufficient
      - i don’t even want the swivel screen of the D5100, so we could save more space here

      Yes, give me a tiny tiny FX camera, D5100 features, and make me happy :-)

      Price point could be slightly above D7000, say 100$ / 70€ more.

      • George

        That’s a good point, except that you would still need a bulky FX lens for that dream camera… making the whole set huge and heavy anyways.

        Just compare, for example, the two “universal” lenses – 28-300 VR FX and 18-200 VR II DX. While their range on their respective platforms (FX/DX) is very similar, they show noticeable differences in weight and size.

        Same goes for any other lens – FX sensor is simply larger than DX, so it needs more glass attached.

        I’m actually happy with a DX format for this reason. With latest sensor developments, even a low ISO performance is not such an issue anymore, as it was like just a few years ago.

        • http://www.bythom.com Thom Hogan

          Disagree. Put a Voigtlander 20mm and 40mm on a downsized FX body and tell me that it’s too big. Indeed, show me a DX solution at 20mm/40mm FX that’s the same size ;~).

          • George

            ;) Well yeah, Voigtlanders are some nice, niche lenses… but as soon as one would want e.g. autofocus (mostly considered a pretty basic feature nowadays :) ), then my remark above seem to be generally true.

            And not even mentioning zoom lens… or when one prefers not to use any other lens than the original Nikkor.

    • Don Gunkwell

      She’s just trying to make you feel better.

      • enesunkie

        They would really say that just to make you feel better? Oh no…

        • Martin

          i hope the name “invisible man” describes something else….

  • R R

    in the other hand, the battery chargers are getting bigger

    • WoutK89

      D5100′s charger has the powerplug built in

      • http://dundermifflin.com dwight schrute

        Just like canon.

  • Porfirio Reyes

    I was considering the D5100 but seeing how tiny it is, no thanks!

  • Momin

    Admin can you kindly do a D7000 vs D700 size compariaon.

    Thanks!

    • Craig Houdeshell

      Agreed. What is the point of the 700 vs. 5100 size comparison.

      If you happen to have these two sitting around I get that, but the cameras aren’t for the same target audience………..

    • http://nikonrumors.com/ [NR] admin

      I don’t have the D7000.

      • The invisible man

        I know you’re busy but what about comparing the D800 & D900 battery life ?
        :)

      • enesunkie

        Those still aren’t in stock at the Best Buys near me.

      • Mock Kenwell

        Wow. Some people are just never satisfied. Admin is not your bitch.

    • R R

      I can show you a picture I took of just that.. (if admin approves of course) http://www.flickr.com/photos/perrolokostudio/5289019701/

      • Momin

        Hey, thanks a lot!

  • Zim

    No power cord is a very good idea.

    • http://www.bythom.com Thom Hogan

      No, Apple’s “user choice of cord/no cord” is better. Nikon did that with the D7000, though not quite as elegantly.

  • john-e-boy

    can you please do a D5100 to D7000 size comparison please? Pretty please?

    • john-e-boy

      how about borrowing one or taking a side by side of a d7000 in a shop?

      • B

        I’m sure you can do it yourself, post the pics on flickr, and link back here if you’re so inclined.

  • nikonnerd

    what is the point of comparing a DX body with an FX body? compare the D90 w/ the D5100 and the D7000 if you must– but sensor size, motor drive and different user interface (read: buttons need space) of a prosumer FX (D700) have to be different from an entry-level DX body…

  • http://www.meteostra.it/dslrank Nicola

    Do you guys think i can put the D5000 battery grip on the D5100?will it fit?

    • chris

      i dont think so since the d5100 is a different size

      • WoutK89

        Plus the D5000 (EN-EL9a) uses a different battery than the one in the in the D5100 (EN-EL14)

  • Bart

    I don’t really understand the reason why to compare it to a full frame with much more buttons for pro functionality. Anyway, I don’t like those little tiny bodies. They feel way to fragile. The D700 is just the right size. The D3 series is just one step to big for normal use. Although, I do use the battery pack on the D700 when I’m going to a concert or sports event. For everything else it isn’t much of a use.

  • Russ

    No power cord? How extremely annoying. Not all sockets can accommodate that huge adaptor.

  • http://www.meteostra.it/dslrank Nicola

    Guys i’ve looked closely at the dpreview’s studio shots of D5100 ad D7000,plus D3000,D3100,D5000,D3,D3s,D300s for comparison.
    The basic is that the D7000 seems to reproduce the meter overexposure of D90.
    Nothing huge like Canon’s(!),but it’s there and it’s enough for me to place it below D5100(sound absurd but the image is that).
    My list,if it can be of any help:
    http://www.meteostra.it/dslrank

    Goodnight!

    • PhotoCat

      Nicola,

      Are you speaking of shooting jpeg or RAW?

      • Nicola

        Raw

    • Bernd

      The D7000 doesn’t overexpose – it meters correctly but you’ll need to understand how it comes to the meter reading it produces. For more detail please read Thom Hogan’s review at bythom.com

      • http://www.meteostra.it/dslrank Nicola

        I understand. Much like D90, it “squeezes” every drop of dynamic range out of the sensor in an matrix-database-averaged-way.
        That is cool.
        BUT to get the benefit of it you need to compensate either before(learn the new matrix behavior) or after the shot(post production,if they aren’t burned off).

        Overall,i cannot see a direct improvement on image quality,just a different behavior.Which is complicated.And affects autofocus.Which,as far as a D7000 with a 85 1.4AFD/14-24AFS is just intuitive as a woman’s tought.

        So,while new autofocus and meter not necessarily a bad thing(and capable of a firmware update,let’s all keep that in mind),it is more complicated than the previous,which in turn makes me put it just under the previous system.
        At least this is what i can say with a D5000,D90 and D7000 here at hand.

  • Suzanne Chirgotis

    I don’t understand the point, aren’t you comparing apples to oranges, aren’t they ment for two different types of shooters?

    • http://www.meteostra.it/dslrank Nicola

      If you listen to the marketing,yes.
      And if you need high fps,or weather sealing,and so on.
      But practice if you are just a photographer,aka you take pictures, you can buy an apple which is 100% good and costs $800 or an apple that is 99,9% good and costs $1100,that is why i made the comparison.

  • http://photoartbymark.zenfolio.com photoartbymark

    5100 is just too small i rather spend the money and have a good fell to the camera

  • http://www.dimalozz.ho.ua dimalozz

    I can’t understand where are buttons from the left side from the screen now?
    They was present in D5000, but now…

    • http://www.meteostra.it/dslrank Nicola

      Yep they are still there.Look at the right of the screen and on top

  • That’s me

    I don’t understand the reason to compare cameras from completely different classes.

  • http://nikonrumors.com/ [NR] admin

    Just to clarify for everyone – I am just using the D700 as a reference to illustrate the size of the D5100. I currently do not have another camera handy (my D300s should be back next week). Obviously those two cameras are lightyears apart.

    • Hamuga

      I for one thank you for taking the time to compare these two cameras.
      (I still want a D7000 though, until I can afford a D700 somewhere around 2016)

      • The invisible man

        @ Hamuga
        Why would you buy a D700 in 2016 when the D800 will be relase in 2017 ?
        Can’t wait one extra 12 months ?
        :)

    • Mooboy

      Thanks very much as this is a great reference for me. I just bought a D700 in Feb and gave away my old D80 w/18-200mm combo. As much as I love the D700, I find it a bit big and bulky to travel with.

      So, the D5100 with a couple of primes or the 18-200 VR2 is very, very tempting. Just wish it had the aperture dial on the front still.

      That, or wait and see what the EVIL cameras have to offer (or start moaning about Leica not releasing the M10 and how I may have to switch to Fuji).

    • Dan

      NR Admin, I think the size comparison is very helpful. I shoot with D700′s on assignment but have been trying to figure out what DSLR to get for personal travel purposes and have been seriously considering the D5100. I took a D300s w/18-200 on my last trip and it was big and heavy enough that I left it in the hotel at least half the time and just used my G10. Many of us need different kinds of cameras for different purposes.

  • Roger

    Amazing how much better the size of D700 is, when you see them side by side. Fits almost perfectly in your hand, almost. Only the D3 like cameras are better.

  • http://www.chalupaphotography.com seb

    ….I hope D700 upgrade is not relased 2017…I can not still take photos with my Nokia N70…I just need more pixels….and better ISO

    • Bernd

      In that case the D700 will do fine, don’t you think? ;)

  • slightly fuzzy

    Thank you for showing this comparison. Until Nikon comes out with its mirrorless camera, this could be a great small, light alternative.

  • amosrides

    I like the size of the d700 a bit bulky with a grip although I prefer one. The d3 is just about perfect. I hope they don’t shrink in the future models. I would never complain about a lighter camera though, as long it was not the result of plastic.

  • That’s me

    If D700 replacement won’t have built-in flash, I won’t buy it.

  • http://facebook.com/podchong Podchong

    could you make D5100 vs D7000 size comparison and video (1080p) comparison please ?

  • edstate

    Call me crazy, but I like the smaller size. I hope the d800 shrinks a little bit :)

  • DanD

    Wow, the D700 look so new! I might be off topic, but does anyone know how to keep your equipment brand-new for a long time. I heard somebody use tape to cover their camera, is it real?
    Many thanks in advance for enlightening me.

    • lurwig

      You could cover it in plastic wrap or not use it?

      Do you have plastic on your couches and your tv remotes as well?

    • DanD

      What I mean is you can keep it brand new for a long time even when you use it a lot on the field. I heard tales of using gaffer tape to cover the brand name and places that vulnerable. Is it real, can any pro photographer give me some insights?
      Thanks,

    • broxibear

      Hi DanD,
      Keeping your equipment “brand-new for a long time” as you put it is just down to how you treat it.
      I worked as a freelance assistant for a few different photographers, some threw around their cameras where others placed them down gently. On location some are happy to put their cameras on the ground, personally I would never do that and instead put them on the camera bags or lighting cases.
      I wouldn’t recommend gaffa tape, that stuff is difficult to get off…if you have to use tape use masking tape and but take some of the tackiness off first.
      The reason some cover the brand name of their cameras is to attract less attention if their taking street images or if they’re in difficult places.
      Although photojournalists that I know don’t do it ?

  • http://ronscubadiver.wordpress.com ronscubadiver

    If it won’t fit in your pocket, then it’s big.

  • One More Thought

    A bit off topic, but NR Admin, how do you like your 35 1.4g on your D700?

    • http://nikonrumors.com/ [NR] admin

      I like it, but if I have to choose I will get the 24mm 1.4 – just personal preference. Hopefully I will have a quick hands-on of the 35mm f/1.4 lens next week.

      • One More Thought

        Thanks! Your insight is always valuable.

  • http://www.wupperphotos.de Holger Reich

    Very funny,

    ihr vergleicht hier eine Consumer Cam vs. Profi Cam (DX : FX)

    lol
    cu
    Holger, Germany

  • Back to top