Should I Buy A D7000, D400 Or A D4, Or Wait For The D800?

Nikon Rumors Forum » Nikon DSLR

Should I Buy A D7000, D400 Or A D4, Or Wait For The D800?

(158 posts) (54 voices)

Tags:

« Previous 1 234…7 Next »

DaveyJ

preferred member
Joined: Jun '10
Posts: 452
offline

I have held out for a long time waiting for an upgrade for the D300, D90, and D700 which I use now. We still use a D200 every week to for a hardcore field camera that really gets tested for durability. We are really in a bind here as Nikon hasn't released a camera which would further enable us to take for instance better video (and we do own 7 video cameras but I do not go into the field with them.)

Right now we could get a D7000 video but like Mike Gunter lean a little towards a D800 or a D400 which would actually be a better field rig for us. I would also hazard a comment that just possibly this topic is MOST central to Nikon Rumors. I KNOW I don't speak for you all. I also note that I do appreciate the differing points of view that show up and always conclude well each photographer has a somewhat different mission and certainly budget.

When I used to spend in the multi thousands for a lens which I would not and could not do today. I would most say that I really need to know what the D7000 users think as compared to say a D90. I also have exactly NO intention of getting a mirrorless camera. I would have kept my Hassleblad rangerfinder XPan if that camera worked well for me. That was a nice film camera, but accessories cost a fortune and the resultant pics were hard to use in slide sound shows and even to print.

Posted 1 year ago #
kyoshinikon

preferred member
Joined: Jan '10
Posts: 1,200
offline

Compared to the D90 you say?

More solid feeling, much nicer contrast in the colors, bigger file sizes, much better lowlight, and better video. Other than that a D90 is good enough. I prefer my D90 to my D200 as a field camera even though I am a 100% manual shooter ([M] manual WB, ISO, Af point selection(if I even bother using Af)). It handles higher Iso's much better, is almost as durable in my opinion, much better buffer handling (much faster write speed), and isn't always getting dust on the sensor... I like the video alot in the D7000 too much better at handling low light than the 7D or Eos1...

Posted 1 year ago #
casperwb

preferred member
Joined: Jan '11
Posts: 558
offline

guys, these future cameras have not been announced to date, therefore, folks are waiting on a camera that they hope will have this, and may be up to these specs based on everyones interpretation of this and that.

also, when a new camera is announced, and, nobody knows when that will be, consider the long waiting list to get one.

the old people said, a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush.

I do not have a bird, but, my D7000 is much fun and worth a lot more than yet to be announced cameras that are in the bush.

Posted 1 year ago #
DutchNikon

preferred member
Joined: Apr '11
Posts: 241
offline

Don't worry, and buy the lot whenever (and if) they become available, that way you're sure you've got the best possible Nikon available all the time... :-)

Posted 1 year ago #
RyanWard

senior member
Joined: Mar '10
Posts: 61
offline

So, to answer the original question - buy the D7000 since you actually can't buy the others so you can take some photos until the others are released and you can re-evaluate based on the real performance of the other cameras (since all we have is speculation)...

Posted 1 year ago #
casperwb

preferred member
Joined: Jan '11
Posts: 558
offline

RyanWard said:
So, to answer the original question - buy the D7000 since you actually can't buy the others so you can take some photos until the others are released and you can re-evaluate based on the real performance of the other cameras (since all we have is speculation)...

on the nose

it could not have been put better

Posted 1 year ago #
Rx4Photo

preferred member
Joined: Oct '10
Posts: 951
offline

Humor me on this question for just a moment....especially for anyone who went from a D90 to a D300 or D300s.
The D7000 is my first Nikon and I really do enjoy shooting with it and I've concluded that I don't really need/want to upgrade to a full frame camera for various reasons (necessity and $$$ leading the way). In the last few months I've "held" a Canon 7D and a Nikon D300s and really do like the ergonomics of those cameras more than my D7K due to the extra room on the grip.
Have any of you upgraded simply due to ergonomics and felt it was a justifiable reason even though it cost more money? And were you actually satisfied after doing so? I know the D300s replacement will likely be annunced in the next several ?months? so that's my reason for asking. Just looking for thoughts & responses, thanks.

Posted 1 year ago #
casperwb

preferred member
Joined: Jan '11
Posts: 558
offline

buy, borrow or rent

the Nikon MB - D11

try it for a few days, or, go to the camera shop, put it on the D7000 and see if it makes the difference that you are looking for.

as for what will happen in the next several months, people have been talking about that for a year of more, and giving their predictions.

sometimes, when you go back and read the old [I know for sure] predictions, I wonder how foolish these people feel now.

try the MB - D11 and if it is not what you are looking for, then, think about the other cameras.

Posted 1 year ago #
Mike Gunter

preferred member
Joined: Sep '10
Posts: 946
offline

casperwb said:
buy, borrow or rent

the Nikon MB - D11

try it for a few days, or, go to the camera shop, put it on the D7000 and see if it makes the difference that you are looking for.

as for what will happen in the next several months, people have been talking about that for a year of more, and giving their predictions.

sometimes, when you go back and read the old [I know for sure] predictions, I wonder how foolish these people feel now.

try the MB - D11 and if it is not what you are looking for, then, think about the other cameras.

Hi,

Very good advice from Casper.

I will add a question. Why do you want/need the grip? Unless you're shooting a specific type of photography that calls for fast action, it's unlikely that you'll really need the additional frame rate you'll get from the grip's additional juice.

The grip adds weight, and while for some it might provide a counter-balance (something I don't find at all - to me weight is, well, weight), if you're lugging more than trivial amount a lenses during a shoot with several speed lights as well as stands, reflectors, and more, a few ounces start to add up.

Furthermore, changing a battery during a shoot isn't arduous - in career that spans almost a half century, I've done it thousands of times. I find that a spare battery or two is much lighter to carry and change out than multiple batteries on grips.

Still, to each his own. If you find that the battery pack suits you, go for it.

I still long to see what Nikon has or has not in store this week.

My best,

Mike

Posted 1 year ago #
iris chrome

preferred member
Joined: Feb '11
Posts: 394
offline

@Rx4, I don't know if this answers your question but I've once or twice not bought a camera because I didn't like the way it feels however I've never upgraded only because of ergonomics. Just like what casper said, see if you can test out the MB-D11 out first. I use a D7000 too and aside from the nice balance and feel it adds to the camera, it really makes taking a photo in portrait easier and more stable.

@Mike, in the D7000 case the grip doesn't contribute to the camera's frame rate. It's capped at 6 frames/s with or without it.

Posted 1 year ago #
Rx4Photo

preferred member
Joined: Oct '10
Posts: 951
offline

OK, full disclosure. I already have the MB-D11 grip and I actually like it a lot. Thanks, anyway casperwb. It does give a lot more balance on the D7000 with a meatier lens on like the 24-70 F2.8. So it is a valid option.

The thing is I find myself leaving it home on the table more often than I initially did - never thought I'd get to that point. In line with Mike Gunter's comment the camera IS lighter without it and sometimes that's what I want. Just wanted to hear thoughts from others about moving "up" the camera line. I appreciate your comment iris chrome about not upgradig purly due to ergonomics. This all gives me something to think about.

Posted 1 year ago #
Mike Gunter

preferred member
Joined: Sep '10
Posts: 946
offline

iris chrome said:

@Mike, in the D7000 case the grip doesn't contribute to the camera's frame rate. It's capped at 6 frames/s with or without it.

Hi IC,

It is a sad thing to 'assume'... ;-)

For my shooting, I wouldn't want the grip, but that's me.

Different strokes.

@Rx4Photo, I have typically upgraded equipment due to one of two things, catastrophe or new features. The latter has always been more pleasurable since it also meant that I did it in the fullness of measured thought and capable pocketbook.

The former was done hastily through insurance.

It seems to me that those are the two most logical reasons to new gear.

Good luck and my best,

Mike

Posted 1 year ago #
kyoshinikon

preferred member
Joined: Jan '10
Posts: 1,200
offline

I think the grip is a great soultion anyhoo. That is what all of my bodies have (digital at least) and tI like the extra weight too. I have big hands so only the D3 really fits me great...

Posted 1 year ago #
TaoTeJared

preferred member
Joined: Apr '10
Posts: 2,422
offline

Rx4Photo said:
Humor me on this question for just a moment....especially for anyone who went from a D90 to a D300 or D300s...Have any of you upgraded simply due to ergonomics...

I have not upgraded due to ergonomics but after getting a D300 I will not go back down with ergonomics being one of my major personal factors.

I have an old D50 that is IR converted and I will shoot that when the weather is right and my hand will cramp something awful from using that smaller body with my larger lenses (Tokina 28-70, 70-200vr) all day. I don't have that issue at all with my D300.

On the flip side, I have had more friends who have gone down body sizes for the weight factor as well.

As Mike G said "Different strokes".

Posted 1 year ago #
Pierre

preferred member
Joined: Mar '10
Posts: 1,023
offline

@Rx4, if you ask me, I have a D700 with big glasses and if a camera half of its size and weight could outperform it photo quality wise, I would switch right-away. Weight is definitely something I could shoot without.

If you really like the weight, you could attach a brick to your camera, no need to pay a fortune for that ;)

Posted 1 year ago #
El_Pickerel

preferred member
Joined: Jul '11
Posts: 581
offline

Twitch instinct: buy the D7000 since you can take photos with that NOW!

I'll probably wind up getting one of the upgraded bodies and selling my D5000 "backup" which I really have only used once since I bought my D7000... the D7000 is far and away better, especially in the interface, where I'd rather take the extra few seconds to swap lenses rather than fumble with the D5000 getting everything right for the shot with a second lens on that camera. Maybe I'll get the D5000 converted for IR or something, or hang onto it to let kids / friends without a good camera use it while out shooting.

Work is probably going to turn into 60-80+ hour weeks for the next few months, so I think I'll be able to justify a new camera, a new lens or two, AND fixing my truck before even burning up the overtime pay. And after that all ends, I'll be plenty excited to get my hands on more camera stuffs to play with... and have a decently functional truck to run amok to shoot photos!

Posted 1 year ago #
casperwb

preferred member
Joined: Jan '11
Posts: 558
offline

camera truck

blacked out windows , with opening ports [like gun ports on a sailing ship] to stick your new D4s with the new 600mm f2.8 out the port and a tripod on tracks so you can move it around.

D400 with the new 300mm f1.8 with nano coating and

D800 with 14-30mm F2 also with nano coating for your grab and run paparazzi kit.

built in computer in the truck so you can post you latest photos of Mr. and Mrs Smith to Nikon Rumors Forum.

Way to go Pickerel

Posted 1 year ago #
jonnyapple

Goldfingers
Joined: May '09
Posts: 3,400
offline

I love the truck idea. Let us know how that turns out, Pickerel.

Posted 1 year ago #
El_Pickerel

preferred member
Joined: Jul '11
Posts: 581
offline

@_@ I didn't think that far ahead... though I did re-read my post to see if I had, since that IS the kind of thing I would try doing, and I did make extensive plans to convert vehicles into 'paintball tanks' way back in the day. I just need to replace all the things you usually need to replace on a 14 year old truck. It IS good for photography though... has a rollbar on the back that makes for a pretty stable platform to get a quick 6' height boost roadside. And a few years ago one of my friends who is more into video built a camera boom into the truckbed. (Long since dismantled, but we have plans for a better one eventually... maybe that will go along with the repairs hmm?)

Posted 1 year ago #
bidyutde56

new member
Joined: Sep '11
Posts: 1
offline

Please don't buy NIKON D7000.
My camera one day suddenly showing 'ERR'
on the lcd screen.After that it was stopped functioning.
After visiting NIKON service center ,they say one motor
inside the grip,gone.I used that camera for only three
months,make hardly over 700 shots.Later I heard that this is the most
weakest part (aperture motor)of this famous camera from
NIKON stable.That parts can malfunction (common problem)any time.
Good, this is a new experience for me as a professional using
NIKON cameras for more than 33 years.I felt sorrow
for NIKON when I heard about the disaster at their SENDAI FACTORY
after great tremor and sunami.
Now I am thinking what will happen
after the warranty of two years,I have to keep 1/6 th price of the camera
plus a great headache,for a next visit to NIKON SERVICE CENTER.

Posted 1 year ago #
donaldejose

preferred member
Joined: Mar '11
Posts: 1,043
offline

For many years I had not done any photography. A few years ago I purchased a D80 to learn how to do digital photography. Then I bought a D7000 for low light shooting (High School Basketball). Then I bought a reconditioned D90 to see if I really would miss the resolution of the D7000. I didn't. Than I purchased a D3100 for my wife. I just purchased a D40 and a D70 on E-Bay to see if I could fill my new 55 inch flat screen TV with a sharp image from a sensor containing only 6 megabytes shot in JPEG basic or normal. Amazingly, I could.

So I have proven to myself that as long as I am printing on my inkjet printer, viewing on my computer monitor or viewing on my 55 inch LCD TV I don't really need any increased resolution above what is now available on e-Bay for a few hundred dollars. Image quality seems to be good enough for all reasonable normal use now from used cameras you can obtain for much less than $1,000.

Why pay more? For other features or more robust build or better weather sealing or the ability to print super huge posters (which none of us are going to do). I can see the difference an FX sensor makes in side by side photos of the same subject and sure would like to have one but I have to admit I don't need one.

All reasonable needs are satisfied by the Nikon cameras we already have. BUT, I am looking forward to buying a D400 or D800 when they become available. Just cannot resist the temptation of "improved IQ."

Posted 1 year ago #
jonnyapple

Goldfingers
Joined: May '09
Posts: 3,400
offline

donaldejose, 1080p (1920x1080) only works out to 2 megapixels, so there's no surprise there. I totally agree that with each new release the number of people with rational reasons to upgrade gets smaller and smaller, but I understand the upgrade itch too. We live in a great time for photography!

Posted 1 year ago #
El_Pickerel

preferred member
Joined: Jul '11
Posts: 581
offline

Say @donaldejose, you should buy me a D40 and D70 so I can make this test myself! :P

My biggest reasons for going to a better DX body or an FX body are mostly even more rugged build, even better autofocus, and better low light performance. For FX specifically, I also would like to increase versatility to my lenses by being able to take away that 1.5x crop factor and widen things up when the conditions call for less long / more wide.

Posted 1 year ago #
casperwb

preferred member
Joined: Jan '11
Posts: 558
offline

El_Pickerel said:
For FX specifically, I also would like to increase versatility to my lenses by being able to take away that 1.5x crop factor and widen things up when the conditions call for less long / more wide.

.
.
ther are two sides to that story

Posted 1 year ago #
El_Pickerel

preferred member
Joined: Jul '11
Posts: 581
offline

casperwb said:
.
.
ther are two sides to that story

This would not mean getting rid of my D7000. Shoot, as I said in the mirrorless thread I would even consider getting a CX body down the line to get more reach if it can produce images good enough to be worthwhile. A crop sensor camera would fill the role of being smaller and lighter when that's necessary (hiking probably) and when more reach is wanted. If I were to be walking around with two bodies at the same time and I did have a full frame body, I could see having my 70-200 or another telephoto zoom on my D7000 and a midrange or wide lens on the full frame body.

Posted 1 year ago #