I want/wanted one, but now it looks like I may be getting a d300 body instead (from a family member, so I know the condition etc.) and I'll use that and hang around and see what the next few replacements look like.
[closed]
Nikon D7000 Officially Official!
(224 posts) (48 voices)-
Posted 2 years ago #
-
NSXType-R said:
If price isn't a factor, I can see how that might be an issue.Nice, I want one too, but I can't afford it.
I'm going to guess that "isn't" was a typo. The 90 kit -- when you can find one -- is, even now, cheaper than what the 7000 will be body-only. Assuming I can scratch together the money in a reasonable amount of time, the same 1500 that'd get me the 7000 kit would get me the 90 kit, bag, spare battery, memory cards, and a spare lens or two. I love the feature set on the 7000, but I'm not sure that I'd necessarily miss it if I got the 90... and that, by itself, is enough to tell me I should probably get the 90.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Don't want to start a new threat ;-) but am now wondering on the best lens choice to start with. Am switching from analogue to digital only now so I don't have any appropriate lenses (yet).
Was considering to start with the 18-200 VR as an all purpose to also allow family to make most out of it but wonder whether this is actually a "waste" of money and should rather start with a good wide and a good zoom in the first place - Any suggestions ?Posted 2 years ago # -
garniemand please do a forum search as there are numerous "which lens should I get" discussions. Especially on the 18-200mm and others in that zoom range.
poster said:
I will be honest. I am bummed out that there might not be a D400. I really grew accustomed to D200 type body. I hope that d7000 body will be similar in feel and usability as D200/300 bodies.No one ever said there wouldn't be a D400. The question is whether it will remain DX or go FX like the D700. I think (hope) it will go FX. The D300 DX "might" then be replaced by a top tier DX D9000.
Posted 2 years ago # -
poster said:
I will be honest. I am bummed out that there might not be a D400. I really grew accustomed to D200 type body. I hope that d7000 body will be similar in feel and usability as D200/300 bodies.I'm not sure how much of a difference the AF is compared to the D300/D3 style AF, but it might be a big difference, so like Doby said, we still might see something higher up.
aslightdelay said:
I'm going to guess that "isn't" was a typo. The 90 kit -- when you can find one -- is, even now, cheaper than what the 7000 will be body-only. Assuming I can scratch together the money in a reasonable amount of time, the same 1500 that'd get me the 7000 kit would get me the 90 kit, bag, spare battery, memory cards, and a spare lens or two. I love the feature set on the 7000, but I'm not sure that I'd necessarily miss it if I got the 90... and that, by itself, is enough to tell me I should probably get the 90.That's what I meant- if you could easily afford both bodies, it might be hard to decide which body you want. If you can't, the D90 is much more appealing, but the D7000 features are really nice too.
I can't afford either, so that's a moot point.
Posted 2 years ago # -
NikoDoby said:
No one ever said there wouldn't be a D400. The question is whether it will remain DX or go FX like the D700. I think (hope) it will go FX. The D300 DX "might" then be replaced by a top tier DX D9000.You know better than most how hopeful I am for the affordable FX camera. I just really wish it was true.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Agreed, if Nikon releases a $2000, or less, FX body it would be great, but I just don't see it happening in the next year.
Posted 2 years ago # -
PB PM said:
Agreed, if Nikon releases a $2000, or less, FX body it would be great, but I just don't see it happening in the next year.That's how I see it too. And if D7k has similar performance to D700, that is more than enough for me. The only thing that I would be missing is having the ability to use ultra wide lenses, Tokina 11-16 at it's wides end is still only considered wide in FX format world. But besides that I am perfectly satisfied and happy with the DX.
Posted 2 years ago # -
-
-
here is a question... how much are you guys selling your d90 camera for? I have a good chance of winning a d90 kit, brand new.. i think i might sell it and get the d7000.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Wait, don't know if it's been mentioned.
So the D7000 can do 20minutes of HD video, what does that mean on sensor heat? How have they fixed that issue?
Posted 2 years ago # -
-
I really hope it doesn't turn into an XBOX 360 issue where heat kills it.
I really hope Nikon came up with a way to cool the sensor because what is the point of raising the limit to 20 minutes if it's just going to kill the camera?
Also if that's the case then I'm getting the D300s or keeping my D90 and getting the 70-200VR.
Posted 2 years ago # -
krevlingoodspeed said:
I really hope it doesn't turn into an XBOX 360 issue where heat kills it.I really hope Nikon came up with a way to cool the sensor because what is the point of raising the limit to 20 minutes if it's just going to kill the camera?
Also if that's the case then I'm getting the D300s or keeping my D90 and getting the 70-200VR.
If you are into video then skip the d300s and go with d7000 at least you can choose manually you're ISO and SS, not to mention Full HD
Posted 2 years ago # -
valonqe said:
If you are into video then skip the d300s and go with d7000 at least you can choose manually you're ISO and SS, not to mention Full HDIt isn't that I'm into video, I was fully ready to upgrade to the D300s before the D7000 was announced but at it's price point + it's features, it seems like a no brainer to get this over the D300s.
However if video is going to be screwed up because Nikon didn't figure out a way to cool the sensor then 5 minutes of video, just like on my D90 is fine with me.
Posted 2 years ago # -
krevlingoodspeed said:
It isn't that I'm into video, I was fully ready to upgrade to the D300s before the D7000 was announced but at it's price point + it's features, it seems like a no brainer to get this over the D300s.However if video is going to be screwed up because Nikon didn't figure out a way to cool the sensor then 5 minutes of video, just like on my D90 is fine with me.
I am sure that Nikon fixed that problem other wise if camera starts to overheat once it goes over 5 min then they haven't anything and will piss a lot of people if that happen to them. Mind you though, every DSLR will overheat if you use it heavily under a hot day, but for quick video snaps will be OK.
Posted 2 years ago # -
Does anyone know if Nikon fixed the "jello" effect at all? I was watching a review of the 3100 and it had a rather bad jello effect. Also, what do you think the chances are, they Nikon comes out with a firmware update to have other video recording options?
Posted 2 years ago # -
The jello effect is linked to the use of CMOS sensor technology, all CMOS based cameras that shoot video suffer from that effect. Only CCD based sensors are free of the jello effect at this time.
Posted 2 years ago # -
I think that's not quite true, Rob. As I understand it, you need an extra transistor per photosite on cmos to do the simultaneous shuttering, but it can be done at the expense of light-collecting real estate. I don't know whether the d7000 has it fixed or not, but I'd rather have jello and better stills if those are the choices.
Posted 2 years ago # -
jonnyapple said:
I think that's not quite true, Rob. As I understand it, you need an extra transistor per photosite on cmos to do the simultaneous shuttering, but it can be done at the expense of light-collecting real estate. I don't know whether the d7000 has it fixed or not, but I'd rather have jello and better stills if those are the choices.Me too, I like video but I'm a still photographer first. Because of this, the jello effect I get on my D90 the 5 or 6 times I've shot video with it aren't a big concern for me. BUT that's just me and I'm sure others may not feel this way. I'd rather have the light gathering ability.
Posted 2 years ago # -
jonnyapple said:
I think that's not quite true, Rob. As I understand it, you need an extra transistor per photosite on cmos to do the simultaneous shuttering, but it can be done at the expense of light-collecting real estate. I don't know whether the d7000 has it fixed or not, but I'd rather have jello and better stills if those are the choices.I was thinking in terms of DSLR cameras, not dedicated video cameras. I cannot think of any CMOS equipped DSLRs that don't suffer from the jello effect to some degree or another.
Posted 2 years ago # -
After reading the D7000 review linked in the NR blog . . . all I can say is, "WOW!"
I swore I'd never buy another DX body again, but this new D7000 seals the deal. The D7000 is so much-improved over the current D90, and priced at just a bit more than the D90 was at its introduction, that I think this has finally helped me to decide . . . to wait for the "D4." Huh? What I mean is, that I'm buying a D7000 now, but I've decided to wait on my new FX body purchase until the next-generation Nikon FX body arrives.
Nikon D7000 wow factors:
Direct-entry, Kelvin color temperature settings. Wow!
39-point auto-focus with four cross-sensors. Wow!
Weather-sealing. Wow!
6 fps. Wow!
1080p24. Finally!Oh yeah . . . the 'U1' and 'U2' user-defined presets are going to be a lifesaver!
What's your favorite new D7000 feature?
Posted 2 years ago # -
I like that its DX and still have the higher iso and the higher MP. also like the 2 cards and the metal body. I like the better video capability too, been wanting to try video. the D Lighting looks improved as well. Oh... best of all its a Nikon!
Posted 2 years ago # -
Coming from a D40, this will be a HUGE step up. I'm really excited about everything. The only thing holding me back is the price, which I'm willing to pay, I just have to wait a little longer than some. =)
Posted 2 years ago #
Topic Closed
This topic has been closed to new replies.
