Upgrade question...

[Bukitimah]

In my simple logic, why would manufacturers make expensive bodies if there are no advantages? Who gonna buy these expensive stuff? To show off?

I am sure you pay for what you get. Thus, the FX cost more than DX. However, it is not always about camera body. The lens is equal if not more important. Of course that person behind the camera is the MOST important equation. haha

 

[Pebbleheed]

Really? I just wondered what are the minus points for FX against DX?

It depends on the individual's needs and I think to suggest FX as a natural progression from DX in a one size fits all fashion ignores this.

For example a friend of mine recently moved from DX to FX. He's now looking at buying a second DX camera for his birding photos as he says the FX doesn't do the job for him.

It's like saying diesel cars are an upgrade to petrol or vice versa. Both do a good job but it's not an upgrade, rather a choice depending on your needs and sometimes budget too.

 

[alfaholic]

This FX vs DX debate is not that simple because people observes only one spot on the timeline. But do not forget about D3 as a first nikon FX camera for example, if you compare it with D7100 it has worse dynamic range, IQ, color depth, resolution, maximum ISO. D3 has maybe one stop less noise at ISO800, but one or two years from now some DX body will have even that better.
Do not forget that D3 was 5 times more money than D7100 is now.

I would say that it is valid to say that FX is the next step if you want to have "the best" in that moment in time, but tomorrow something will be even better and then what.
Tomorrow some new DX body will be better than your yesterday's FX, that is just funny.
I think everyone should find something that is good enough for him, it does not matter whether it is an DX or FX sensor. The most important piece of equipment is located 10 centimeters behind the camera, as someone said...

 

[Felisek]

This FX vs DX debate is not that simple because people observes only one spot on the timeline. But do not forget about D3 as a first nikon FX camera for example, if you compare it with D7100 it has worse dynamic range, IQ, color depth, resolution, maximum ISO. D3 has maybe one stop less noise at ISO800, but one or two years from now some DX body will have even that better.
Do not forget that D3 was 5 times more money than D7100 is now.

This is a very good point. When I try to recall the reasons why I decided to go for DX (apart from the money), quality was one of them. I decided that DX had improved so much in recent years that its quality is more than sufficient for me.

But again, it was my very own personal decision.

 

[kamaccord]

I look forward to upgrading to an FX body for this football season. I often get frustrated with the hunting of the D7000 in many low-light situations and missing photo action opportunities coming my way on the field due to the weaknesses of the auto focus system in the D7000. Most of the time the camera performs extremely well. There are to many missed shots in my opinion due to the inferior focusing and low light ability compared to an FX. The D700 seems far better in low light sporting events which is why I am anxiously awaiting the specs of the rumored D750.

 

[Bukitimah]

Hi guys, when comparing cameras, we need to be very objective. You cannot compare an old model with a latest series. Obviously in electronic, everyday it is advancing. Having said that, we also cannot write off DX. Afterall I am still using a DX. But if we really look at current technology, DX sensor is still not up to mark with FX. That is a fact.

 

[aroy]

In my opinion, with the IQ of both DX and FX sensors quite near each other and the high ISO also quite good, getting an FX for IQ and low light is less of an argument, than the wider reach and (in many cases) better AF performance. If you are shooting in good light and your main interest is in street photography, or portrait or general images, then there is no disting difference between DX and FX. Yes if you want high FPS only FX have it, if you want higher density sensors then DX have it.

 

[alfaholic]

I am not comparing cameras, I am just saying that inferior D3 was used by professionals only few years a go, and today DX body have better IQ and dynamic range, even maximum ISO.
You can not say that photography from few years a go does not count. I remember some great shots made with D200, now they still look good, no matter the body is obsolete by today's standards.
So, if you want to say that when you choose DX format there is something better available at the same time, yes that is true, and that is ok.
No one says that you must have the best all the time in order to be professional photographer. I am sorry, but that is just funny...

 

[alfaholic]

Is there anyone who took this route so he can give me some advice what to do?

 

[Pebbleheed]

Advice on a D7000 to a D7100? You've had answers on that here but surely ultimately only you know what you want to spend your money on. People have given their opinion, but it's not our cash or our camera.

 

[FastGlass]

I choose to go full frame because #1 I wanted to take full advantage of the wide angle end of the focal range. #2 I wanted a well sealed body against rain, sand etc... #3 The D3s I have has 4 Shooting menu banks. Meaning I can preset different shooting settings so I can choose them and not dig through the menu and set them up every time. #4 the D3s has 10 fps shooting burst capabilities. So when shooting sports It comes in pretty handy. Although the more experience I gain the less of the 10 I need. Dual cards, Virtual horizon indicating how level the camera is, Focus system is more superior then the D90. Plus there's very few cameras out there that can beat the D3s in low light capabilities. Lets face it, if wanting more useful features then the body you have now is what your looking for. Sometimes going to a pro body is the only way to achieve it and pro bodies are full frame. This may not be the case in the future seeing how the new bodies are becoming more and more packed with all the goodies the pro bodies offer. In fact when I feel the D90 doesn't do it for me anymore, DX format will still have its spot in my bag.

 

[alfaholic]

Thank you all.

Yesterday I picked up my new D7100.
I will open a new theme about it in the appropriate section, but I will share some of my observations from the first 24 hours of usage, so if anyone needs another opinion it will be here.

The body it self does not look much different than D7000, buttons feel different, they wobble little bit and command dials are lighter, but nothing to serious.
AF confirmation sound is different and it makes you feel like AF is much faster, very clever Nikon.
That 1.3 crop mode is very nice, it can be turned on and off just by pressing the FN button, so it is convenient for someone who does not have big zoom, 15.4 megapixels is still good enough, actually I can not see any big difference if compared to 24 megapixels.
Low light quality is somewhere equal to D7000, just I still need to adapt to this new sensor, but sometimes I have feeling that D7000 was better with noise and grain.
I did not have problems with banding yet, but we will see in the future. I like to raise the shadows so very soon it will show how bad it is.
OK button zoom to focus point when reviewing images is brilliant.
Display is very good, bright and clear, much better than the one on D7000 which had some yellowish tint.
I can not see that D7100 is initially sharper, but as for moire, it is the same as D7000 as far as I can see.

I decided to upgrade because of 2 year warranty, and much better AF, and I got both. Last night under bad yellow light this camera did not hesitate even without assistant light, and each time the focus is on the right place, not 20 cm at the back, not 20 cm at front like D7000 was doing in almost 40% of the shots taken in the same conditions.

I still need to play with it and learn to exploit all of it, but for now I can say that this camera is better in every aspect than D7000, but in a very small extent, so for me the AF speed and accuracy is worth the upgrade, while everything else is just a bonus.

I will write more in the appropriate section for D7100.

Thank you all...