D7100 or D700

Samko

Im in for a new Dslr, body only. ( moving from my D90 )

I have 2 offers on my hand:
D700 with grip 15k shutter, like new = 585 usd
D7100 no grip 25k shutter, like new = 540 usd ( is 25k somthing to think about ? )


Im sure they good cameras with good AF and IQ at base ISO.

What I look for is:
Good low light preformence/noise
File size pr image ( lower better )

Can you give some input on some + and - , I really cant decide.

Thanks . Samir.

Pistnbroke

This is back to the old DX FX argument but if going FX don't get an old 12 MP D700
The D7100 will give you a better picture be lighter and the lenses are cheaper ..if you don't have one go for a 18-140 and if shooting JPEG set sharp to +9 and shoot large basic.

All IMHO

manhattanboy

What are you primarily shooting? That should help sway you one way or another. In general I would agree with @Pistnbroke and go for the 7100 over the 700, but both are probably capable of doing more than expected.

Nikoniser

It depends what you want. D700 is more of a Pro body than the D7100 and is bigger and heavier. The D700 has a much better buffer. The D700 has better performance at high ISO and a narrower depth of field. The D7100 has a slightly better autofocus system. For portraiture and wedding work I would pick the d700, I would pick the D7100 for travel and sports/wildlife.

I also have to point out that the D700 makes great use of its 12MP on most lenses and the D7100 *really* struggles to make use of all of its 24mpix - and doesn't make effective use of all of them on any of the DX lenses wide open. off the top of my head the D700 has about 4 times the amount of glass per pixel which gives you way more latitude regarding sharpness and Cromatic abberation.

safyre

Samko,

The D700 w/ grip for 585 is an absolute steal. Buy it and never look back.

About a year ago I was in a similar position as you. I had a D90 and was looking to move onto something with better low light performance. I originally purchased a D7100 but was very disappointed to see that the low light performance wasn't that much better than a D90. Aside from the huge increase in file size due to more pixels, I did not notice a significant increase in picture quality to justify keeping the D7100 so I ended up returning it.

I then purchased a D700 and was blown away by the huge performance increase in high iso, autofocus, and just general picture quality. To give you real world examples, ISO 3200 in the D700 is as good as ISO 800 in the D90. The D700 has much better autofocus especially in difficult lighting situations such as backlight and low light. The D90 used to hunt a lot when center point wasn't used. The D700 doesn't have any of these problems. Picture quality is also noticeably clearer on the D700 due to its FX sensor.

Since you mentioned you cared about low light performance and smaller file size per image, the D700 wins hands down in both categories. I can guarantee you will be very satisfied when you get it. I only wish that I had gotten mine sooner. There's a reason why the D700 has been the highest rated DSLR made in the past 10 years.

PB_PM

Samko,
There's a reason why the D700 has been [edit] among [/edit] the highest rated [edit] Nikon DSLRs [/edit] made in the past 10 years.

Fixed the statement for you. The D700 is a very good camera, I should know I've had one for over five years. To say it is the most highly rated DSLR made in the last 10 years is bit overly optimistic though. I can think of several DSLRs that are "better" from both a technical and operational standpoints (they all came out after the D700).

The D700's auto focus system is better than the D90 (I've used a D90 as well), no doubt about that. Better than the D7100? The D7100 has an upgraded version of the AF sensor from the D300s, so I suspect the D7100 and D700 are very close if not a dead match in the hands of someone with a decent amount of shooting experience. The D7100 might even have slightly faster acquisition time, thanks to a faster processor. I've never touched a D7100, but if the AF is anything like the D7200 (which my Dad has), it beats the D700 in terms of speed. As for accuracy, I couldn't see a noticeable difference.

I also think you've highly overrated the high ISO performance of the D700. The newer Nikon DX bodies are at least as good if not better than the D700 in that area. They also have far superior dynamic range.Particularly if you down sample the files. What I do agree with is that the look of the files from the D700 are nicer, less digital looking.

I think the decision really comes down to this; what does the OP have more of, DX or FX lenses? If the OP has a stack of DX lenses, going with the D7100 is likely more practical. If the OP has a bunch of FX glass and almost no DX glass, grab the D700.

Samko

Thank you all !

D7100 on its way.

Im gonna try it out and see what i think.
The reason i took the D7100 is the DR and some real great reviews from many photographers. I also took a look at the weight, becouse i hike quite a bit so less i better.

But the biggest reason is the lenses. It will coast me a lot more in FX to get wide or telephoto, with a D7100 i can go with a tokina 11-16 or a nikkor 300 f4 af for a nice price. A 300mm could give me 600mm f4 and 15-16mp out there is not bad ?

Im gonna test it out and see, its not to late to get a D700.

But very tuff to call D700 vs D7100

spraynpray

@Samko: Congrats, Good decision. You will have a great time with the D7100. I have one along side my D750 and am not looking to get rid of it at all. For macro and wildlife I use it exclusively. I only use the D750 for nightscapes, weddings and studio work really.

@safyre: I could not agree less with an opinion about a camera body. I had a D90 - low light noise was rubbish so I got a D7000 which was better in most ways including low light. When the D7100 came out I tried one out of curiosity just to see if any progress had been made and was blown away by its low light performance so bought one the next day. I think you must have an ETTL shooting habit because if you ETTR the D7100 is a massive improvement over the D90. I agree with PB_PM on this.

Snowleopard

We run into situations here, where technically... I would say the D700 all the way, but then you have a consumer camera with a newer sensor.... so in that respect it is a toss up.

If you really love photography and want to learn all the manual settings (and shoot auto if you really need it), I would say go with the D700. I am not selling mine, but it never gets used anymore with the new camera.

Samko

I dont know with consumer cameras, but the D7100 is loaded with specs. Dual SD, 100% VF , good iso , focus points accros the frame, 5 bracket, 1/8000 shutter , good AF, good DR and the list goes on and on. I really dont know what i would miss here. Only downside as I can see is the DX sensor, but the prise to get wide and tele photo on FX is just to much as I dont get paid and its just a hobby for me.

esquilo

A 300mm could give me 600mm f4 and 15-16mp out there is not bad ?

It will give you 600 mm f/8 equivalent in 1.3x crop mode. Normally it would give the equivalent of 450 mm f/5.6

Samko

Esquilo , why does the apeture chance ?

Ironheart

It doesn't. The DoF will be the equivalent of what he is saying, but the EV is whatever the lens is, it ain't a teleconverter :-)

Samko

Yea thats what I will say too. Its gonna be pretty nice for wildlife and birds

heartyfisher

The aperture changes for DOF "equivalence" but not for EV (light) .. (what @ironheart said lol)

esquilo

It doesn't. The DoF will be the equivalent of what he is saying, but the EV is whatever the lens is, it ain't a teleconverter :-)

Exactly! The autofocus is not affected, but depth of field is. Exposure, sort of, since the ISO levels of DX cameras has more amplification and thus more noise. That's why I see DX cameras as FX cameras with a built in 1,5x teleconverter.

Samko

Another thing now, I have been using D7100 for a couple of days now. When I zoom in in LR at 50% they look OK but when I zoom at 100% my photos look a bit soft (on D90 100% they where "ok" sharp).

Are we talking about sharpness of the lenses I use at that point ?

I have 18-55 vrII , 35mm1.8 dx, 50mm 1.8D and 35-135af.

heartyfisher

yeah its the lense .. I have some nice kit lenses .. and I have the 70-200 F4 ..
On my D7200.. you know you have a sharp lense .. :-) I still use my kit lenses though.. I just avoid pixel peeping :-)

Samko

Damn haha. Im just gonna look at them on 50% until i get better glass .

manhattanboy

Damn haha. Im just gonna look at them on 50% until i get better glass .

You need to double check that it is your lens versus your shooting settings. On a bright day that allows for ISO100 on all shots, pick a lettered sign and shoot at increasing shutter speeds up to 1/2000. Look at the pics and if they are still soft at ISO100 at 1/2000, then it is your lens. If they pick up in sharpness as the shutter speed increases, then it is your settings. Remember that with high resolution sensors like the D7100, there is less slack allowed in the focus so you will generally have to shoot at a faster shutter speed than you previously did to get the same sharpness on 100% magnifications.

Ironheart

You should check your AF fine tune. The two primes are pretty sharp. Also remember you have 2x the number of pixels, so looking at 100% on the D7100 is like looking at your D90 at 200%

Samko

Damn haha. Im just gonna look at them on 50% until i get better glass .

You need to double check that it is your lens versus your shooting settings. On a bright day that allows for ISO100 on all shots, pick a lettered sign and shoot at increasing shutter speeds up to 1/2000. Look at the pics and if they are still soft at ISO100 at 1/2000, then it is your lens. If they pick up in sharpness as the shutter speed increases, then it is your settings. Remember that with high resolution sensors like the D7100, there is less slack allowed in the focus so you will generally have to shoot at a faster shutter speed than you previously did to get the same sharpness on 100% magnifications.

I shot from a tripod , iso 100, mirror lock, exposure delay. Most time I manual focus on liveview. Its my normal workflow for landscape photos. After I zoomed 100% I wrote here.
I experienced that with shutter speed/handshake the first day I took the D7100 for a run, its not forgiving as the D90.

You should check your AF fine tune. The two primes are pretty sharp. Also remember you have 2x the number of pixels, so looking at 100% on the D7100 is like looking at your D90 at 200%

I need to learn how to AF fine tune, I have not tried it yet.
So D7100 100% = D90 200%
D90 100 % = D7100 50%

heartyfisher

The Primes are can be really sharp thats true, but if you tested them at their widest aperture its going to blur..

Also the sharper the lense the more need there is to make sure the AF fine tune is done. I really don't bother with my kit lenses (I did check though :-) ) .. the DOF usually covers any minor AF mis. You should check the AF fine tune setting of your primes though..

spraynpray

When you say 100%, do you mean 100% or zoomed all the way in? 100% is two clicks back from all the way in. You can set your 'OK' button to give 100% with one click. Plus yes, Ironheart is right of course which is why Nikon put out a list of 'recommended' lenses when people found their old favourites to be soft on the D800. Canons new 50mp beast has forced then to rework most or all their normal/wide lenses too.

Pistnbroke

Samko ..I did send you a PM ...I have two of these and to get any good out of them you need sharpness at +9 and the lens fine focus adjusted spot on. anything over 150 mm (eg 18-200 or 18-300) will be soft over about 150 mm which is why I use the 18-140

Samko

Heartyfisher
I only shoot wide open as last option ( very very dark ) or DOF shot, but no matter what I need to AF tune all my lenses.

Spraynpray
Zoom 100% I mean when I open it in Lightroom and put the zoom on 100%.
It would be no surprise if it is the MP/budget lens mix, there must be a reason why many good optics are that expensive.

Pistnbroke
What do you mean with anything over 150 will be soft ?