Christian H wrote:
....I have no complaints - huge or otherwise - about either camera and, frankly, don't understand what people are talking about.
Thus nobody else's complaints are valid, right?
Just because you don't understand some of the persistent beefs with the D7100 doesn't mean those issues are not very real for some of us.
I'm glad you're so happy with the D7100, I think it ticks a lot of boxes for a goodly number of photographers. For the most part it works fine for me but I sorely miss those few aspects where it falls short of a D300/7D-type of camera.
Andre Labonte wrote:
Oh well, yes, since you use 14 bit raw it must be the only format worth talking about
14 bit raw was just coming out at the time of the D300 ... but in 12 bit raw, the D300 matches the frame rate of the D7100 and smokes the D7100 in terms of buffer depth. The same is true for jpg ... so in general, your statement was not correct.
That's not correct with a performance-optimized setup.
D300s in 12bit lossy, best performance has ~17 frames of RAW at 7.1fps (actual measured fps when shooting at the 8fps setting). D7100 in 12Bit lossy 1.3x crop has ~14 at 7fps (actual measured fps). That's 2.5 seconds of buffer vs 2. A really fast card will get you an extra 1-2 frames in both cases.
If you optimise your setup for performance, buffer depth simply isn't a significant difference. yes, this requires 1.3x crop mode on the D7100, but it still delivers more pixels with more IQ than the D300(s) does in a performance-optimized setup.
The same is true for JPG. The D7100 in its best performance configuration (16MP 1.3x crop mode) shoots 100 Large/Fine JPEG's at 7fps, the D300(s) also does 100 Large/Fine 12MP JPEG's at 7.1fps. However the D7100 only delivers a paltry 50 JPEG burst depth in DX mode.
In a pure performance setup, the D7100 is 98% of a D300 in performance. In a pure IQ setup the D300 is not even in shouting distance. In between is a balance, the D300 retains a better buffer given a 12-bit configuration which isn't performance optimized, but the D7100 remains well in advance in IQ.
mawz wrote:
That's not correct with a performance-optimized setup.
D300s in 12bit lossy, best performance has ~17 frames of RAW at 7.1fps (actual measured fps when shooting at the 8fps setting). D7100 in 12Bit lossy 1.3x crop has ~14 at 7fps (actual measured fps). That's 2.5 seconds of buffer vs 2. A really fast card will get you an extra 1-2 frames in both cases.
If you optimise your setup for performance, buffer depth simply isn't a significant difference. yes, this requires 1.3x crop mode on the D7100, but it still delivers more pixels with more IQ than the D300(s) does in a performance-optimized setup.
The same is true for JPG. The D7100 in its best performance configuration (16MP 1.3x crop mode) shoots 100 Large/Fine JPEG's at 7fps, the D300(s) also does 100 Large/Fine 12MP JPEG's at 7.1fps. However the D7100 only delivers a paltry 50 JPEG burst depth in DX mode.
In a pure performance setup, the D7100 is 98% of a D300 in performance. In a pure IQ setup the D300 is not even in shouting distance. In between is a balance, the D300 retains a better buffer given a 12-bit configuration which isn't performance optimized, but the D7100 remains well in advance in IQ. ...Show more →
********************************************
No cropping, full DX frame ... apple to apple my boy. We all know that the D7100 has better IQ and resolution as it should given the march of time, but if you have to crop it, you are loosing a significant portion of that and cropping changes FOV and DOF in a significant way.
And when it comes to ergonomics and controls the D7100 is not up to snuff with a D300 ... Face it, the D7100 is NOT a D300 replacement and 98% of the performance with 75% of the ergonomics and controls is a downgrade, not an upgrade (IQ and high ISO performance not width-standing)
Feb 03, 2014 at 09:33 PM
Andre Labonte Offline • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
Christian H wrote:
I happen to think that complaints are rarely if ever valid where voluntary exchanges are concerned. They make it, you buy it or you don't.
I happen to agree ... it's how the free market works. And if Nikon or any other company wants we to voluntarily part with my money, they'd better make something I'm willing to spend it on.
hijazist wrote:
"IQ and high ISO performance not width-standing".
Andre, that's 80% of the performance for many of us
Oh, no doubt ... but I also think we are in the area of diminishing returns here as well. And for some of us, IQ is from the D300 is darn good and the gain in what the D7100 provides is not worth all the other losses.
Andre Labonte wrote:
I happen to agree ... it's how the free market works. And if Nikon or any other company wants we to voluntarily part with my money, they'd better make something I'm willing to spend it on.
I bought a pair of Nikon D300 bodies when it was time to upgrade from a pair of D70s bodies. I like the ergonomics. Fits my hand as well as a pair of F3 bodies that I used to use for the weddings for many years. The D70s size seemed kind of small for me. I don't know what I would purchase next. The D300 size is perfect for me. The build quality is great. The high ISO performence could be better but for now, I am not complaining too hard about it. The money comes and goes. When it is here, we make our choices, as confounding as that can be.
Gaylon Holmes wrote:
Thank you for the kind words, Doug.
Ergonomics are very important to me and this is the primary source of my D7100 beefs. I don't get on well without the AF-On button and the location of the AE/AFL button is less than ideal for my hand/face relationship. Other niggles but I'll learn to live with 'em.
On D600 there is an option to set AF-ON function to DoF preview or Fn button. Perhaps D7100 has this option too. It may work for you better. AE-L/AF-L position is too left for me as well - when I reach for it, I no longer have secure grip without using other hand too.
jefflee wrote:
Yes, on the 7100 you can change the AF on Button to one of the two front buttons. I happen to like this better than a back button.
AF-On on the front of the camera would require me to become a person with quadruple jointed fingers.
There is a reason why pro bodies have that button on the back of the camera, The thumb can operate it (or the AE-L button) while the index finger can operate the shutter release. That's the whole Thing. Moving the AF-On button next to th emount will slow you down considerably because you can't use that and the shutter release at the same time.
For me coming from the film days I'm used to the concept that a camera Body lasts a decade or more. When taking my first steps in digital the first camera I had in Hand (2002) was the D100. I bought a D70s to replace it, then a D200 and a D300. With ISO Performance and Image Quality of the D300 I'm 80% satisfied. And I can work around another 15% which means it will do what I want in 95% of the situations I Encounter.
One thing I do not Need is more megapixels. But by the Looks of it I'll be forced to deal with that sooner rather then later.
Just to be clear: I loved my D300s. Capable of first-rate results between ISO 200 and 400 and with minimal cropping. But to be honest I don't miss having to check the histogram for blown highlights. The dynamic range of the new sensors effectively frees me from having to think about exposure at all, which is a big help in the field.
Christian H wrote:
Just to be clear: I loved my D300s. Capable of first-rate results between ISO 200 and 400 and with minimal cropping. But to be honest I don't miss having to check the histogram for blown highlights. The dynamic range of the new sensors effectively frees me from having to think about exposure at all, which is a big help in the field.
*******************************
Beautiful work Christian!
So, if I understand you correctly, you are saying that for you in the field, the dynamic range from the D7100 frees you up enough from worrying about exposure that it trumps the reduced control set of the smaller body.
Now that is an interesting perspective I've not considered. I shoot 99% manual exposure and try to get it right in the camera to avoid PP as much as possible. But you do present a different way of looking at shooting.
Does not make me want the "mythical D400 (D9000)" any less, but opens my mind to a new thought process ... especially if a D7200 comes out with a deeper buffer.
Andre Labonte wrote:
No cropping, full DX frame ... apple to apple my boy. We all know that the D7100 has better IQ and resolution as it should given the march of time, but if you have to crop it, you are loosing a significant portion of that and cropping changes FOV and DOF in a significant way.
And when it comes to ergonomics and controls the D7100 is not up to snuff with a D300 ... Face it, the D7100 is NOT a D300 replacement and 98% of the performance with 75% of the ergonomics and controls is a downgrade, not an upgrade (IQ and high ISO performance not width-standing)
Why full DX frame? D7100, like the D2Xs, has it's best performance in HSC mode. And while you give up some of that IQ, it still retains a massive IQ advantage in crop mode over the D300(s) in FF mode, and gets far better AF frame coverage as well. Quite simply you are artificially limiting the D7100's performance and then wondering why it can't match the D300. Set both up for max performance and there's not much to choose from. Set both up for max IQ and the D300 gets stomped in performance. Gimp the D7100 setup and it falls behind.
And frankly, the only ergonomic advantage the D300 has is the AF-on button, and even then that only applies if you are a user of AE-Lock(the left-side buttons are actually easier to access where they are on the D7100, as you can actually see what you're changing, left-top buttons are a lousy location, they sucked on the F801/N8008 and they suck to this day). My setup on the D7100 and now the D600 is AF-On on the AE-L/AF-L button, AE-L on the top front button for the rare times it's needed. I've owned both cameras and while I understand why some prefer the larger, better built D300, it's for the most part not actually a matter of control layout. Note the D7100 has the same AE-L/AF-L setup as the D4, which is hardly an ergonomic disaster.
Feb 04, 2014 at 12:57 PM
Andre Labonte Offline • • • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
mawz wrote:
Why full DX frame? D7100, like the D2Xs, has it's best performance in HSC mode. And while you give up some of that IQ, it still retains a massive IQ advantage in crop mode over the D300(s) in FF mode, and gets far better AF frame coverage as well. Quite simply you are artificially limiting the D7100's performance and then wondering why it can't match the D300. Set both up for max performance and there's not much to choose from. Set both up for max IQ and the D300 gets stomped in performance. Gimp the D7100 setup and it falls behind.
And frankly, the only ergonomic advantage the D300 has is the AF-on button, and even then that only applies if you are a user of AE-Lock(the left-side buttons are actually easier to access where they are on the D7100, as you can actually see what you're changing, left-top buttons are a lousy location, they sucked on the F801/N8008 and they suck to this day). My setup on the D7100 and now the D600 is AF-On on the AE-L/AF-L button, AE-L on the top front button for the rare times it's needed. I've owned both cameras and while I understand why some prefer the larger, better built D300, it's for the most part not actually a matter of control layout. Note the D7100 has the same AE-L/AF-L setup as the D4, which is hardly an ergonomic disaster....Show more →
******************************
Yes, full DX frame. For two simple reasons:
1) It's not worth the money if I have to use crop mode to get the FPS & buffer depth I need to make it usable.
2) My lens kit is optimized for DX, not a DX crop ... now everything is off. Same reason I use DX lenses not FX lenses unless it meets my DX needs.
Well, I waited and waited for the mythical D400. I gave up in late November after a frank discussion with the regional Nikon sales rep and got a D7100 on sale. I have to say that I love it. I kept the D300 for situations when I need the deeper buffer, but so far I haven't encountered any. As has been previously mentioned, the dynamic range of the D7100 is incredible. I do much less PP with this camera than I did with the D300. Is it perfect, no. But it does meet most of my needs. Most importantly, I am very pleased with it!
By the way, I always thought my D300 buffer to be marginal when compared the the D2H I shot with previously!
Just shoot me!