p.3 #1 · Official: Nikon Announces 24MP D7100 DSLR Camera
I think it's a brilliant offering. Having had a D7000 before which I found very satisfying, this just ups the IQ with a few other nice tweaks. For the price it is more than competitive. I think it will be a big hit.
p.3 #2 · Official: Nikon Announces 24MP D7100 DSLR Camera
perfect cam for the money!!! Love it... and a D7100E - well done Nikon
And also the video mode should be excellent - as I read via eoshd.com and slashcam.com that the small D5200 with same sensor(?) beats all bigger brothers and sisters...
p.3 #7 · Official: Nikon Announces 24MP D7100 DSLR Camera
mike-in-ak wrote:
Look for the D400 in mid to late summer.
Does it matter anymore? Do Nikon consumers even remember the glory days of the d200 and d300 class of prosumer sports cameras? It has been so long ago. All attention ever since has been d700, d7000, d3s, d800. That segment is a distant memory for many and are alien to Nikon noobs.
p.3 #8 · Official: Nikon Announces 24MP D7100 DSLR Camera
I find it interesting how a d7000 worked great up until yesterday for many now they need more FPS. Less megapixels etc. I'm a fan, I like the d7000 as a back up. Bt regardless. What are you guys shooting that needs more FPS in a not pro body? Just curious. I understand if you are in a competitive corner, however if your field is that competitive per dollar I would imagine you would be looking at a better camera to begin with. This will make a great camera for many, 1/320 sync speed and 6fps is still pretty darn good. Some are talking about the focus limitations. Unless you have used the camera I'm not any of can say we know fore sure it is limited. The sensor is not the same as the d3200 or 5200, with that being said it may resolve outstanding. Also to consider than many complainers are putting subpar glass in front of this.
If you need the speed, FPS and you are putting 5k. Glass on a camera then perhaps looking at a d300s is still the best option. 12mp resolves fine for Print magazine or iPads. The technology to process 24mp at the speed is still impressive I think.
If you have money to burn then making a decision like this is easy. But if you make a living, full time in photography , the body would be an after thought. Not to say its not good enough , it's plenty good. Bt if you are shooting for the kind of publications that need these features like higher FPS, then there would be other things that are even more limiting From ergo and button placement size and balance with a proper telephoto.. These would slow you down to "miss the shot" I believe more than FPS
When I pick up a d700 and then a 7000 the difference is always the ergo and the buttons, the little big things that make shooting a little bit more of a headache..
Typos due to apple iPad and my lack of proof reading plus bad grammar.
p.3 #9 · Official: Nikon Announces 24MP D7100 DSLR Camera
... "Nikon consumers even remember the glory days of the d200" ...
I well remember -- The glorious day for me and my D200 was the day I sold it for a fair price..
.
Bought a refurbished D50 for a bridge camera until my D3 arrived. Still have the D50. Even shot a couple of HS basketball games with it and a 50mm f1.8 this past week. Was a lot more fun then if I still had the banding D200.
Examples http://goo.gl/HAjGO
p.3 #10 · Official: Nikon Announces 24MP D7100 DSLR Camera
I like everything about it except the buffer size. It seems that Nikon used the same buffer as the D7000, but with the larger sensor/file size, the number of shots the buffer can hold is obviously much lower.
p.3 #12 · Official: Nikon Announces 24MP D7100 DSLR Camera
Tete wrote:
1. What are you guys shooting that needs more FPS in a not pro body? Just curious.
2. I understand if you are in a competitive corner, however if your field is that competitive per dollar I would imagine you would be looking at a better camera to begin with.
3.This will make a great camera for many, 1/320 sync speed and 6fps is still pretty darn good. .
1. A bride coming down the aisle. Sometimes, they blink.
2. I take paying jobs to put money in MY pocket, not Nikon's. I go for the cheapest that will do the job.
3. I believe that's only for high speed sync and only with dedicated Nikon SB, which is fairly low power. The "real" sync, the one I use with my monolights, is 1/250s.
p.3 #14 · Official: Nikon Announces 24MP D7100 DSLR Camera
Too all those who think the discussion is about fps: for most, it isn't. 6 fps is fine, or at least what one can expect to get for $1,200. It's about buffer size, how many frames that can be shot before the camera slows down and starts emptying the buffer. With the D7100 in RAW, that happens after just over a second. Even simple athletic exercises like pole vault take longer than that.
Even the D90 did 11 RAW frames at 4.5 fps...
... and my F6 can do 36. Takes a while to empty the buffer though
Feb 21, 2013 at 07:12 PM
Andre Labonte Offline • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
p.3 #15 · Official: Nikon Announces 24MP D7100 DSLR Camera
Jorgen Udvang wrote:
Too all those who think the discussion is about fps: for most, it isn't. 6 fps is fine, or at least what one can expect to get for $1,200. It's about buffer size, how many frames that can be shot before the camera slows down and starts emptying the buffer. With the D7100 in RAW, that happens after just over a second. Even simple athletic exercises like pole vault take longer than that.
Even the D90 did 11 RAW frames at 4.5 fps...
... and my F6 can do 36. Takes a while to empty the buffer though
+10 ... it is the BUFFER and the ergonomics, and the connector
Consider what a D400 should look like given all the modern tech but put into a D300 body ... it would be a kick butt DX camera. And it need not be 24MP ... in fact, I prefer it was not. The D4 at 16MP is just fine except the price tag and the FX format ... I'd be fine with a 16MP D400 and supper high ISO performance.
p.3 #16 · Official: Nikon Announces 24MP D7100 DSLR Camera
Jorgen Udvang wrote:
Too all those who think the discussion is about fps: for most, it isn't. 6 fps is fine, or at least what one can expect to get for $1,200. It's about buffer size, how many frames that can be shot before the camera slows down and starts emptying the buffer. With the D7100 in RAW, that happens after just over a second. Even simple athletic exercises like pole vault take longer than that.
Even the D90 did 11 RAW frames at 4.5 fps...
... and my F6 can do 36. Takes a while to empty the buffer though
You need to jam at 6 fps for a pole vault? Learn your subject, man!
p.3 #17 · Official: Nikon Announces 24MP D7100 DSLR Camera
Andre Labonte wrote:
+10 ... it is the BUFFER and the ergonomics, and the connector
Consider what a D400 should look like given all the modern tech but put into a D300 body ... it would be a kick butt DX camera. And it need not be 24MP ... in fact, I prefer it was not. The D4 at 16MP is just fine except the price tag and the FX format ... I'd be fine with a 16MP D400 and supper high ISO performance.
Yup, just look what Pentax did with the K-5 II, and the old K-5 could do 25 frames btw., the Canon 60D does 15 and the Olympus E-5 20. Come on, Nikon. You cannot mean that the only Nikon camera for sports shooters is the $6,000 D4, can you? There's the D300s of course, but then I have to go home before the sun sets, since the camera goes "blind" above ISO 1600.
p.3 #18 · Official: Nikon Announces 24MP D7100 DSLR Camera
I doubt that D400 will come out soon.
I have been waiting for D700 upgrade for years. Finally, D600 and D800 were released. But neither of them is what I need for wedding photography. Ironically, Canon 5D Mark III is exactly what I need.
p.3 #19 · Official: Nikon Announces 24MP D7100 DSLR Camera
waysaz wrote:
You need to jam at 6 fps for a pole vault? Learn your subject, man!
Then I'll let ya borrow my D1x.
No idea. Was just looking for something that takes just over a second. Never done track and field
Motor sports, which is what I mostly do, is simply a too obvious example.
p.3 #20 · Official: Nikon Announces 24MP D7100 DSLR Camera
DavidCZ wrote:
I have been waiting for D700 upgrade for years. Finally, D600 and D800 were released. But neither of them is what I need for wedding photography.
