where there’s smoke there’s forum fire
I have been thinking of replacing my 4 year old D 80. It's still a fine camera, but I'd like to step up. I was thinking the D 7000, but it seems to have AF problems on some of them and oil spots. I'd like a D 700, but I don't like the price. I am therefore considering a D 300s or the D 400 when it comes out. I'm not in any great hurry to buy. Is the D 300s better in some ways than the D 7000? And will the new D 400 be better than the D 7000, if it has the same sensor?
DaveO
just get a D7000. If it has the issues you mention get it fixed under the warranty.
This thread will most likely be closed.
Dave,
The D80 was not a good camera, it had many exposure issues.
The D7000 is a great consumer camera.
The D300S has much better constrcution and features, but is not a good at high ISO.
The D400 will blow both away, but be over $2K.
You can keep waiting with the D80 (I kept mine for 6 months and never regretted getting rid of it) or go with the D7000.
Good luck
Thanks for the replies.
DaveO
If you're not in a hurry, you might want to wait for a few months. The D7000 was introduced in August 2010 and the line usually has a 2 year shelf life. So, it would not seem implausible for Nikon to announce its replacement this year......Currently it's almost impossible to find new D7000's anyway....
If you're not in a hurry, you might want to wait for a few months. The D7000 was introduced in August 2010 and the line usually has a 2 year shelf life. So, it would not seem implausible for Nikon to announce its replacement this year......Currently it's almost impossible to find new D7000's anyway....
I found a D 300s refurb for less than a D 7000 at a respected camera store online. They have the D 7000, but want $1400 for them.
DaveO
If the D700 is the camera you want you could wait until the D800 starts shipping and buy one used most likely for the price of a new D300s now. I'm going to pick up a D3 once the D4 starts shipping, if you can wait then you can get your camera you want for the price you can pay.
Two years ago, I bought a D7000 mainly for its video features. Now that I'm concentrating exclusively on stills, I wish I'd never purchased another $1,000 DX body (I already owned a D90, which is still a perfectly good DX body). After buying two, pricey, specialized DX lenses for my D7000 (the Tokina 11-16mm f/2.8 and Nikkor 17-55mm f/2.8), I realize now, that money would have been better spent toward buying a D700, and that DX-lens money put toward a continuing investment in FX glass instead (e.g., a 24-70mm f/2.8 which I still don't own, and kind of need now to shoot paying gigs with a two-body FX set-up). In retrospect, at least for my needs, I definitely would be better off now had I purchased a D700 (as a second body to my D3s), instead of the D7000.
Don't get me wrong, the D7000 is an excellent DX camera, but I would much rather have the lower noise floor of an FX-sensored body, and not have to buy pricey DX-only glass.
studio460 said:
Two years ago, I bought a D7000
The D7000 has not been around for 2 year buddy. It was announced in September 2010. :P
Interesting remarks you made here: http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=4820
golf007sd said:
The D7000 has not been around for 2 year buddy. It was announced in September 2010. :P
Ha! I guess a lot has happened since then! It seems like two years ago! In that time, my interest in becoming a more serious still photographer has completely eclipsed my interest in filmmaking.
golf007sd said:
Interesting remarks you made here: http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=4820
Yes, even though I've since switched to FX, and plan on buying a second FX body, I still think Nikon missed an opportunity to capture "second-tier" working pros using DX gear. Although mainstream pros are typically shooting with dual D3s bodies, I still see many event shooters with pro DX bodies (e.g., D300).
You must log in to post.
