D7100 Upgrade for newbies to photography...

captjamocaptjamo Posts: 8Member
edited April 2013 in Nikon DSLR cameras
Hey Guys: Haven't been at it real long or on here all that long. Lets just say I bought a 5100 and shot it fairly often for one year (3000-4000 shutter releases) and now I'm the proud owner of the 7100. I instantly say "It's historical". If you think about it for a second, which I did, as I took this new thing out of the box, knowing, I would be familiar already just made the acquisition so sweet. The first shot with the new 16-85 mm I bought with it-I can't believe how clear it was. I may crop it and put it on a wall in my home. I love this combination. It is a substantial upgrade. I really like the OLED display at the bottom of the view finder. Nice and bright ( was hoping for color), but it is white. I'm interested in hearing from you old timers, but I want this thread to be somewhat about newbies that love photography like I do and have upgraded similarly. and very balanced, hefty, but light. I would say it is very travel friendly. Actually I want to hear from all about how cool this digital photography thing is. Wow, I'm blown away. Sounds very positive, I know, but its truly what I felt like writing. I love this purchase. For real.
Post edited by Msmoto on

Comments

  • captjamocaptjamo Posts: 8Member
    Love the P-A-D forum, BTW.
  • dissentdissent Posts: 1,313Member
    edited April 2013
    Congrats. Shoot lots of great photos. Have fun. Sounds like a great camera.
    Post edited by dissent on
    - Ian . . . [D7000, D7100; Nikon glass: 35 f1.8, 85 f1.8, 70-300 VR, 105 f2.8 VR, 12-24 f4; 16-85 VR, 300 f4D, 14E-II TC, SB-400, SB-700 . . . and still plenty of ignorance]
  • Golf007sdGolf007sd Posts: 2,840Moderator
    @captjamo: Congrats :) I know how you feel. I had the same feeling back in 2010 when I got my first DSLR (D7000). Now I'm the proud owner of yet another amazing body (D4). You (like me) have opened up your own "Pandora's box" so proceed with caution. This new toy of yours is going to be very addicting, which will lead you to other rewarding paths...which by the way will lighten the weight of cash in your wallet but make up for it on the credit card.

    Happy shooting :D
    D4 & D7000 | Nikon Holy Trinity Set + 105 2.8 Mico + 200 F2 VR II | 300 2.8G VR II, 10.5 Fish-eye, 24 & 50 1.4G, 35 & 85 1.8G, 18-200 3.5-5.6 VR I SB-400 & 700 | TC 1.4E III, 1.7 & 2.0E III, 1.7 | Sigma 35 & 50 1.4 DG HSM | RRS Ballhead & Tripods Gear | Gitzo Monopod | Lowepro Gear | HDR via Promote Control System |
  • satyasatya Posts: 1Member
    Hi captjamo, how is your experience with the 16-85 so far? I have a D7100 as well (which is awesome BTW) but am not too happy with the 18-200mm lens.

    I am looking to replace the 18-200 with a better standard zoom that works well on D7100.

    Thanks.
    Satya
    D7100, 35mm f/1.8 DX, 50mm f/1.8G, 18-105mm VR, 70-300mm VR.
    EOS XTi, Sigma 17-70mm, EF 50mm f/1.8.
  • spraynprayspraynpray Posts: 6,450Moderator
    I can tell you that the 16-85 lens is pretty good. I think it would be great if Nikon could give it a refresh to pro grade for the D400 though.

    I recently sold my 18-105 and got the 16-85 because of a gap between my 11-16 and 18-105 that I kept finding myself wanting to be in. It seems in some cases to be sharper at some FL's but the CA may be a fair bit worse. If you have a good 18-200 I would say that unless - like me - you really wanted the 2mm at the short end, you may be better off keeping your 18-200.
    Always learning.
  • dissentdissent Posts: 1,313Member
    Interesting spraynpray. I was wondering about this very thing when I was shooting my Civil War reenactment a little while back. There were times when the 70-300 was was too long, but I only had the 12-24 on my second cam, and that was more often too wide. The 16-85 (if I had one) would have covered much of the just under 70 nicely, but I could do the same thing with the 18-200 I already have. Hmm . . .
    - Ian . . . [D7000, D7100; Nikon glass: 35 f1.8, 85 f1.8, 70-300 VR, 105 f2.8 VR, 12-24 f4; 16-85 VR, 300 f4D, 14E-II TC, SB-400, SB-700 . . . and still plenty of ignorance]
  • NSXTypeRNSXTypeR Posts: 2,228Member
    Enjoy your new camera!

    I had the same bump when I moved from a D40 to a D7000.
    Nikon D7000/ Nikon D40/ Nikon FM2/ 18-135 AF-S/ 35mm 1.8 AF-S/ 105mm Macro AF-S/ 50mm 1.2 AI-S
  • spraynprayspraynpray Posts: 6,450Moderator
    @dissent: Providing you have a decent copy of the 18-200 and as you already have an overlap at the short end with your 12-24, you don't need to change/buy lenses. if my 18-105 was a 16-105 I would not have changed it.
    Always learning.
Sign In or Register to comment.