| Author | Thread |
|
|
05/05/2014 10:20:42 AM · #1 |
Good Morning friends!
I have been getting a little gun shy about doing an upgrade from my Nikon D60 to a Nikon D7100..
I was heavily looking at the D5200 but for a few hundred more I could get the 7100.
There has been multiple issues going on with that lately and one of them is being oil spots on the sensors to which have multiple complaints on them among a few other complaints as well..for this kind of money it is serious money to me. Luckily, Nikon has been fixing that issue, but another issue from another user (not on these forums)
The other issue seems to be a freak thing, but it was not covered under Nikon warranty, this dudes D7100 a few months old ended up with a Melted shutter..EEKKK.. I am thinking he just left it in the car in bright sunlight without a lens cover on (owner error).
However, still with these issues, its a lot of money I plan on putting out and its taking me over a year just to save for this. So I need to be sure I am getting the right thing. I have been thinking about "renting" a camera to decide before buying, but I never did that anyway and after a few hundred $$ I am thinking no, that will be a lot of money out the door and hubby won't agree to that.
Ok, Now it won't be for a few months anyway (until after my vacation and a few house projects taken care of that I will be able to actually upgrade..it has taken me almost a year to decide just on the 5200 over the 7100 LOL .. I take my time and research everything but I know nothing about Canons, so I thought I would ask you all.
I also have been looking at canons which would come close to the D7100..
My main thing would be wildlife especially eagles and birds, nature, events for friends and at church, portraits (which I hate) but its for my friend's kids, and in general shooting maybe some sports for my nephew because he will be playing football this year. I also will be going out and capturing the air show this summer too. I love HDR so having a bracketed HDR is a must! I am not caring about videos or the quality about how that works.. that is the least of my worries.
I haven't even started to look for a Canon yet, but I have used my dads rebel (EOS xs) and that did great, but it was wayyyy to slow for what I wanted and I missed a lot of eagle action pictures with it. But as far as the picture quality, I could not really tell the difference.
One reason I loved Nikon was that the lenses exchange out and if I upgrade to another Nikon, all my equipment I had purchased can just go to my new upgrade. My budget is about 1k if not less. If it is a Nikon, I just need the body only because I have all the other lenses for it. with the Canon, I will have to start all over again and I will have to get a bundled kit or something that includes a telephoto lens with it.
I have searched the forums from other camera suggestions, but the ones were suggested tended to be way out of my camera budget for what I wanna spend..and I have already been through those reviews. But not sure on which one to start on still..
I will be going with some of your suggestions as well on the other thread about doing refurbished cameras! That was an awesome suggestion! |
|
|
|
05/05/2014 11:13:24 AM · #2 |
As far as the relative merits of specific Nikon bodies, I will leave that to those familiar with them. Two points I want to make:
1.) In order for you to even contemplate a switch to Canon, there would have to be a really, really big advantage that Nikon does not offer. That is not the case. Both the Nikon and Canon systems offer great performance for your applications. The *one* thing that Canon offers that Nikon cannot is compatibility with a wide range of old manual-focus lenses from other brands. I don't believe this is even a consideration that should enter into your equation.
2.) For your application, you are definitely looking at the right bodies from Nikon (the APS-C bodies, not the 35mm frame ones). As with the Canon system, lenses designed for the APS-C sensor do not function with the 35mm bodies (though Nikon offers a path to compatibility using a cropped portion of the 35mm frame, while Canon does not).
Good luck on the decision. Don't obsess too much about reported problems unless you *know* that an issue is real. A lot of issues are grossly overblown; once one person sees and reports something, all the "measurebators" start trying to replicate it, often using highly questionable methods, and the whole thing gets out of hand very quickly.
Edit for typo
Message edited by author 2014-05-05 11:13:52.
|
|
|
|
05/05/2014 11:17:03 AM · #3 |
so lucky you it seems full frame isn't a requirement.
you dont need to buy the biggest and best camera for your money. Figure out what specs are important and but the one that has them. In your case that's AF performance, burst rate, pixel count, etc..
image quality on any modern crop dslr is going to be marginal unless you go full frame, where the jump is exceptional from a crop, especially in ISO and DOF control.
Ive seen people buy way too much camera. More expensive feature filled cameras don't take better pics, the just make it easier. You can compensate by learning your tool.
as far as canon and Nikon, both have their pros and cons, if you aren't heavily vested in glass i'd look at canons, particularly a 70D. glass is easy to sell, but like kirbic said unless you have a good reason to switch, there really isnt a point and these two system are always neck and neck with each other. (though, one good reason to switch is if you have a friend who shoot Canon with much better glass you can borrow :) )
Message edited by author 2014-05-05 11:20:23. |
|
|
|
05/05/2014 12:04:27 PM · #4 |
Thanks guys!!!
That is one thing I am happy about at the moment, I do not have a lot invested in what I have now.. a friend gave me her D60 for me to have while I learn the DLSR, the basics and get used to the settings, how to take pictures and learn from it. The only thing I had purchased for this camera was my telephoto lens 70-300mm which never comes off from it, a bag, and a remote. So less than $150.00 was spent on those things.
Right now my only concern would be what you said Mike.. exactly and ISO is important for me as well... The highest print I had sold was a 16x20 and that came off from my point and shoot which was 18mgpx..
As you said the full frame I am not interested in or wanting.. I feel the full frames are for the real professionals or who need it for business or for serious money making. I am a home hobby photographer for fun LOL.. I am not so much into easy I am learning a lot off from my D60 and its almost perfect except it doesn't have no grid for my rule of thirds and it doesn't have auto HDR.. if it did I would keep that camera forever!
Thank you Kirbic for saying this: Don't obsess too much about reported problems unless you *know* that an issue is real. A lot of issues are grossly overblown; once one person sees and reports something, all the "measurebators" start trying to replicate it, often using highly questionable methods, and the whole thing gets out of hand very quickly.
That is one thing that I really worry about and too many of them really makes me second guess things a lot.
I will be planning on ordering off from Amazon as well :-))
|
|
|
|
05/05/2014 12:12:40 PM · #5 |
| No wonder you're nervous.... It's not a canon! ;) |
|
|
|
05/05/2014 12:15:05 PM · #6 |
| I upgraded from a Nikon D50 to a D7000, and I have never regretted it. The step up in image quality and especially ISO performance is huge! I do love my D7000, it does everything I could wish for and it will probably be years until I consider getting any other camera. I have no experience with the D7100, but if you are considering refurbished, don't overlook the D7000 unless you really want the latest and greatest. :) |
|
|
|
05/05/2014 12:33:18 PM · #7 |
I am not really interested in having "the best and greatest" or the latest thing, I want something that I can take good quality pictures so that if my friends and followers wish to buy a print I wouldn't be ashamed of selling them a jpg from a point and shoot LOL.
After learning to shoot Raw, I can never imagine going back to jpg shooting.
No wonder you're nervous.... It's not a canon! ;)!! Wendy that is soo funny..
I do think that the Canons and Nikons are just like cars... Chevy vs Ford kind of thing... but then again, I am not so sure.. it always seems Canon is cheaper than Nikon especially for the pricing that I am starting to check out.. yes Wejna, I have been looking at the D7000 as well LOL That seems to fit my budget way better too :-))
I also have noticed that a few of the latest huge events I have been too over the last few months (they were pro photographers) After the event I did stalk them and talk to them about their cameras! LOLOL
I found it funny not one of them owned a Nikon.. I really found that interesting..
Message edited by author 2014-05-05 12:35:03. |
|
|
|
05/05/2014 02:17:00 PM · #8 |
Originally posted by kirbic:
A lot of issues are grossly overblown; once one person sees and reports something, all the "measurebators" start trying to replicate it, often using highly questionable methods, and the whole thing gets out of hand very quickly.
|
This.
|
|
|
|
05/05/2014 02:24:05 PM · #9 |
Although I am not a Nikon user, I usually recommend D3200 to beginners but for you, I think even the D5200 might fit the bill as well. One advantage of D5200 is that flippy/tilting LCD screen that D7100 doesn't have. It does come in handy at times. Of course you'll pay only half as much as for a D7100. If you don't have to have top of the line model, I don't see why D5200 won't suffice.
Message edited by author 2014-05-05 14:34:42. |
|
|
|
05/05/2014 02:28:43 PM · #10 |
| Oh and I wouldn't worry about built-in HDR, most serious work in HDR is done in post processing on your computer using dedicated software. You only need the exposure bracketing capability in your camera to capture the images that you'll later process as HDR. Rule of thirds as well is mostly judged by eye as it doesn't have to be very accurate - you just need to be mindful about it in your composition. Most DSLR won't have a grid in viewfinder anyway - only when you use live view and LCD to compose you can turn those on. |
|
|
|
05/05/2014 02:44:54 PM · #11 |
I have never heard of oil spots on a D7100. this was a problem on the FX D600 and it has been retired and replaced with a D610, again in FX. Old D600's are being repaired free of charge by Nikon. The D7100 is a fabulous camera for Bird in Flight (BiF) but it is the most trying form of photography. You cannot direct the subject and you must work with available light.
You need fast glass and fast reactions. You absolutely must know your camera and lens capabilities and the birds habits and characteristics and environment.
It's a smaller step from a D60 to the D7100 in learning curve and grasping the menu than learning a Canon menu.
I train BiF and I've had clients with 3x Canon 1DX's (yes, three 1DX's per client in the safari vehicle) battle for three days with their cameras to "understand" the genre, never mind the mind bogglingly complex menu system. I got them shooting BiF but the camera is only half or some may say a third of the equation...
The D7100 is a competent hard worker with a super fast AF system Expeed 3 (the latest AF system they make for DX) and with patience and persistence will get you great BiF shots. It is also at a good price point right now, even 2nd hand.
Start with a 70-200mm f/2.8 and a 1.4xTCII or 1.4xTCIII and get yourself as close as you can to the subject till you can afford a prime 300/400/500/600 or longer zoom telephoto like the Sigma 120-300mm EX DG HSM APO f/2.8 which will give you effective reach on a DX sensor of 180-450mm at f/2.8. I use a Sigma 2.0x TC on mine giving me effective 360-900mm reach at f/5.6
It is magnificently sharp on the D300, D300s, D7000 and D7100 I've used it on as are the 70-200mm Sigmas. If you are a brand person and can afford a Nikkor, by all means.
 
Note the further the subject is from you the more atmospheric haze, dust, water vapour will be between you and your subject which will render soft or less sharp images. Often bigger is not better, closer is better. :)
Comments like "you should buy a Canon" or "Sony is the best" or "Nikon any day" are rather pointless and worthless. Back up statements with fact and experience. Join the local birders club and tag along if you cant justifying hiring gear...
All brands of DSLR in the past 24 months in that class are magnificent. The key is patience and persistence. Even that little 70-300mm in the right light will get you great images.
Baby steps...
Message edited by author 2014-05-05 14:46:46. |
|
|
|
05/05/2014 02:48:48 PM · #12 |
| Be careful. The little tilty thingy LCD that the D5200 (and other cameras have) is useless for Bird in Flight. Great for Gig or Golf shoots where the crowd is in the way. It's good for ground shooting too but not for fast moving subjects that need to be tracked. |
|
|
|
05/05/2014 02:53:50 PM · #13 |
| Incidentally if you get convinced to ditch your Nikon gear and go for a Canon the 7D MkII is on the cards but the Canon peeps will no doubt know more about the rumoured specs. It may well be above your budget when released. Sony mirrorless DLSR's are also excellent choices for BiF photographers as the sight picture is not lost during burst shots as is the case with a mirror based dSLR camera. Sony branded lenses at least in my country MUCH more expensive than even Nikon/Canon or the excellent Sigma equivalent. |
|
|
|
05/05/2014 03:01:01 PM · #14 |
Harvey, thanks for chiming in. Its great to hear from someone who has actual experience in the field. Though 3.0" LCD on D5200 can't be categorized as "tiny" compared to a 3.2" one on D7100... I mean the difference is only 0.2" and an articulating LCD is a wonderful thing as I am finding out with my Canon D60.
Message edited by author 2014-05-05 15:02:33. |
|
|
|
05/05/2014 03:08:39 PM · #15 |
| As for lenses, I think Sigma has up the game in fast primes but when it comes to zooms, Tamron takes the cake. No need to go for Nikkor 70-200/2.8 VC when Tamron 70-200/2.8 VC kills it easily. But for birders, Tamron has excellent value in their new 150-600 VC lens. On a crop, that goes to 900mm without needing a teleconverter! Priced at $1069 in US. |
|
|
|
05/05/2014 03:54:57 PM · #16 |
Thanks guys..
My budget for a new camera is 1k.. So I am thinking that Canon 7D is kinda out of my price range for my budget.. but that looks great! Yes, I will be mainly shooting birds for my wildlife especially eagles.. that is my main subject. Right now, we have our pelicans who have decided to hang around in our area now as well, so I would love to get more better pictures of them as well.
I have that tilty thinggy on my sony cybershot and I have never used it..for me that doesn't weigh in whether or not a camera has that. Not a high top must have.
The oil spot on the D7100 a few friends of mine have had that happen and they had to send theirs back, it just happened within these last few months.. One camera was less than 3 weeks old, the other camera was 2 months old. |
|
|
|
05/05/2014 04:34:41 PM · #17 |
Any of the current models would be a noticeable step up from the D60, and for what you're doing, you won't notice all that much difference between them. There's a ton of overlap between models. Personally, I'd just wait for the next sale and get whatever is on special. With a $1000 budget, I'd get a cheaper body, and start saving for lenses. If you already have Nikon stuff, stick with Nikon.
The D600 oil spot situation was an extreme case, and nobody is saying that there are problems with oil spots on any other bodies. One of the problems of the internet is that there is a lot of FUD over things that are actually either user error or normal maintenance issues. |
|
|
|
05/05/2014 04:43:09 PM · #18 |
Originally posted by jgirl57:
...The oil spot on the D7100 a few friends of mine have had that happen and they had to send theirs back, it just happened within these last few months.. One camera was less than 3 weeks old, the other camera was 2 months old. |
This is one of those "hot button" issues that you need to be careful of. The original (and very real) issue with really excessive oil contamination on the D600 led others to obsess over small occasional spots that resembled oil, but remember that:
- All DSLR sensors will eventually collect things that cannot be easily removed by in-camera sensor cleaning systems
- Some of these adhered materials may well look like "oil spots"
- Hell, some of these adhered materials may actually *be* oil spots!
Even if a few isolated instances of oil spots do occur, it is not necessarily unusual or a problem. We should recognize that any DSLR sensor will need a wet cleaning from time to time to remove tightly-adhered soils. It's not a clean room in there!
All that said, some camera models do seem to collect more crud than others. My trusty ol' Canon 5D, for instance, is a dust magnet, and I think most 5D users would concur that the (original) 5D is worse than most in this regard. Still, an occasional wet cleaning is more than sufficient to keep things in check. After 8.5 years, it still makes great photos... though my new 6D runs circles 'round it in some regards ;-)
|
|
|
|
05/05/2014 05:40:38 PM · #19 |
How often does a DLSR need to be maintenance for spots and cleaning?
I would like to think a camera could go for a few months without needing anything but that is another thing that I need to learn too |
|
|
|
05/05/2014 05:40:39 PM · #20 |
.
Message edited by author 2014-05-05 17:40:56. |
|
|
|
05/05/2014 06:28:17 PM · #21 |
Originally posted by jgirl57:
How often does a DLSR need to be maintenance for spots and cleaning?
I would like to think a camera could go for a few months without needing anything but that is another thing that I need to learn too |
A few months is reasonable, for sure, unless you are, well, anal. If you shoot a lot at very small apertures, e.g. f/13, f/16, f/22 you are probably going to be cleaning more often than if you are commonly shooting wider than f/8. Most of us don't shoot with apertures that small that often except for macro and some landscape applications. |
|
|
|
05/05/2014 09:00:18 PM · #22 |
instead of worrying about high ISO get a fast prime, like 35 or 50/1.8 for indoor work. you will be amazed how sharp a prime is compared to your 70-300.
|
|
|
|
05/05/2014 09:08:34 PM · #23 |
Originally posted by kirbic:
If you shoot a lot at very small apertures, e.g. f/13, f/16, f/22 you are probably going to be cleaning more often than if you are commonly shooting wider than f/8. Most of us don't shoot with apertures that small that often except for macro and some landscape applications. |
I am missing something here, could you please elaborate why using smaller aperture would cause more dust/dirt to settle on sensor? |
|
|
|
05/05/2014 09:14:21 PM · #24 |
Originally posted by MEJazz:
Originally posted by kirbic:
If you shoot a lot at very small apertures, e.g. f/13, f/16, f/22 you are probably going to be cleaning more often than if you are commonly shooting wider than f/8. Most of us don't shoot with apertures that small that often except for macro and some landscape applications. |
I am missing something here, could you please elaborate why using smaller aperture would cause more dust/dirt to settle on sensor? |
It doesn't cause it, it reveals it. |
|
|
|
05/05/2014 09:58:54 PM · #25 |
Originally posted by bohemka:
Originally posted by MEJazz:
I am missing something here, could you please elaborate why using smaller aperture would cause more dust/dirt to settle on sensor? |
It doesn't cause it, it reveals it. |
Whew! That's better. |
|
