Choosing the D7100 >Over> D5200 (Somewhat of a Re-Post) Lens Help

topgunwghs

Senior Member
Here is the original to this thread, in which I planned on choosing the D5200 based on comparison, reviews, what I need it for, and price point. I was quickly, convinced otherwise by several members that this was not the way to go for me.

http://nikonites.com/d5200/16213-choosing-d5200-over-d7100-lens-help.html#axzz2dEXh3COt


Here, now is my new dilemma. I am shelling out quite a bit more for the D7100 and will be purchasing a Body-Only at whatever best price I can get, it seems $900 is as good as it gets... I am a full time student and a full time County Ranger, I do not make much $ at all and saving is key for me.

I recently struck a deal with a few businesses to sell my work in their stores and restaurants. I have only been using a simple D3100 with the kit 18-55mm or 55-300mm AF-S lenses. I learned as much as I could from that platform, and even though the quality of my media is "low" people notice I have "the eye" for shots.

I print onto Metal in 10x20 and 20x30" frames. The MP and Increase in sensor size made me debate between the two.

Clarity is key and I will need to be shooting wide Rocky Mountain landscapes and Telephoto 300mm+ Rocky Mountain Big Horn Sheep and Birds. This is my passion and what I do best.

---------------------------------------------------

Now for the questions:

1) Have I made the correct decision of Body? Should I look further? Or should I buy the D5200, save money and use it for Glass? (This truly is beyond my existing $ limits)

2) I understand that I can now shoot AF/AF-S -- DX/FX lenses, so all types made by Nikon. Do no AF lenses come with VR, and if I were to pick up the 70-300mm AF f4-5.6G lens, will I noticeably and terribly miss the VR from my 55-300mm AF-S VR DX?

3) In correlation with #2, I need to figure out (On a Budget) the sharpest lens at full focal length for the D7100 for fast wildlife.

4) I need a magnificent piece of glass to help the DX D7100 create breath-taking large landscape photos on a wide color and EV spectrum. I truly enjoy the in-camera HDR capability of the D7100 so I can get instant overlay shots. Though, it looks like the D5200 does this under another name "EV bracketing by 3"?

Two Examples from the D3100:

DSC_8795.jpg


DSC_2638.jpg
 
Last edited:

gqtuazon

Gear Head
Even though I would like to suggest something, I will pass for now since I tend to tell you to get the more expensive stuff that you will enjoy in the long run instead of a short term basis.

Based on the two examples that you've shown, these came from two different lenses and to look for something similar that offers better optical performance, your overall cost will not be cheap. Try looking something in the used market including the camera model that you are looking for. Is loan a possibility?

Great images by the way.
 

Jokeman

Senior Member
About the only thing I can ad. I was in your position two years ago except my choices were the D5100 and the D7000. I had a kid on the way and a budget. Unfortunately I chose the D5100. If I had known then what I know now, I would have gone one step higher and purchased the D7000.

The one issue Ive been having with the D5100 is that the options are so Menu driven. It is a pain to stop and go into the menu to make changes.
 
Last edited:

singlerosa_RIP

Senior Member
I agree that navigating menus is a pain, although I have no personal experience in the digital world, having owned a D100, D7000 and D600. Also agree that spending money on lenses is the way to go, so you might consider a used or refurbed 7000. I have the current 70-300VR and used its predecessor for many years. Don't know that VR helps much when shooting action.

The cheapest way to do landscapes is buy a 50 1.8, shoot in portrait mode and stitch multiple shots together to create a panorama shot. Under $150 (assuming you have Photoshop or some other PP software). Or, buy a wide or ultra wide lens and spend $500 and up. I have the Tokina 11-16 2.8 and use it on both DX and FX with decent results.

As for HDR, I have that feature on my D600 and it's crap compared to what software can do.
 

topgunwghs

Senior Member
Yes, these are 2 different lenses for the D3100 shots, which show the 2 types I am looking for.

As for a cheaper wide angle and using a Post Editing Software to "stitch" what intuitive software would you guys suggest? At the moment I do very little PP and use "FastStoneImageViewer" which allows me to do much more than I do to a picture, I just mess with Saturation, Background light, Foreground Light, and Contrast. I need to be able to do much more, especially stitch!
 

Horoscope Fish

Senior Member
Yes, these are 2 different lenses for the D3100 shots, which show the 2 types I am looking for.

As for a cheaper wide angle and using a Post Editing Software to "stitch" what intuitive software would you guys suggest? At the moment I do very little PP and use "FastStone Image Viewer" which allows me to do much more than I do to a picture, I just mess with Saturation, Background light, Foreground Light, and Contrast. I need to be able to do much more, especially stitch!
Lots of possible software suggestions but do you shoot JPG or do your shoot RAW? That's an important question because if it's the latter software that works with the different, proprietary, RAW codecs can be an issue sometimes.

Adobe products such as Light Room and Photoshop support these codecs well, of course, but they're also the most expensive applications (by far). There *are* cheaper options, like ACDSee Pro 6 (freaking amazing app and currently retailing for $60), but I don't know how well these applications support the different RAW codecs at this time. You could always download a free trial and find out though. ACDSee offers a few different applications that are good alternatives to LR and PS but again, it's a question of RAW support.

Personally, I think your decision to move to the D7100 was a good one. IMO photography is a chain of events... We need to invest in a good camera, the best glass we can AND good post-processing software. This makes for a very short "chain" and as such does not well tolerate even a single weak link. Just my thought's on the matter.


.....
 

Horoscope Fish

Senior Member
I shoot in L* JPEG always. I tried RAW before, I rather have my food cooked! ;)
Well I don't want to rehash what amounts to the "Ford v. Chevy" argument of photography, but the real difference in JPG and RAW is not whether the final product is cooked, but rather who does the cooking and how. By shooting in JPG you effectively surrender that control to the camera and it's internal processing power. Shooting in RAW gives *you* control of that operation and draws on the power of your home computer and specialized software applications developed for the task and designed to take full advantage of your home computer. By shooting in .JPG you are also reducing significantly the color depth your camera is capable of rendering.

While a JPG can render a total of 16.8 million color gradients, the typical RAW file can render 68.7 billion color gradients, or, to put it another way...Over four thousand times as many colors as JPG. Now, like I said, I don't want to rehash an old argument, but this might be something to consider.


......
 

Bill16

Senior Member
It looks like you have some of the best helping you, so I'll just wish you great luck, and I hope you'll love your new Nikon! :D
 

topgunwghs

Senior Member
Well I don't want to rehash what amounts to the "Ford v. Chevy" argument of photography, but the real difference in JPG and RAW is not whether the final product is cooked, but rather who does the cooking and how. By shooting in JPG you effectively surrender that control to the camera and it's internal processing power. Shooting in RAW gives *you* control of that operation and draws on the power of your home computer and specialized software applications developed for the task and designed to take full advantage of your home computer. By shooting in .JPG you are also reducing significantly the color depth your camera is capable of rendering.

While a JPG can render a total of 16.8 million color gradients, the typical RAW file can render 68.7 billion color gradients, or, to put it another way...Over four thousand times as many colors as JPG. Now, like I said, I don't want to rehash an old argument, but this might be something to consider.


......

My reference to the term "cooked" wasn't with a definition intention. I was trying for humor, I failed. ha .. Anyway, I would like to shoot in RAW as soon as possible, I need proper editing software that isn't overwhelming. I want to be able to layer shots together for the HDR look, in an "undercooked" fashion and be able to stitch together a panoramic shot that equals the MP of all the photos placed together to get truly great printing resolution.

Would the mentioned $60 program do this and with somewhat of an ease? I realize there is a learning scale for all things. I just hate being overwhelmed to the point I simply do not edit the image.
 

topgunwghs

Senior Member
It appears as though the D7000 will be my ultimate choice. I would like to be past the true Entry Level DSLR's in DX and get to an actual step above, the metering/focus/internal motor/sensor/control layout/weathering will make the D7000 perfect for what I need. I will not follow suit with the MP hype, if in fact it doesn't mean much more than the 16MP D7000.

The largest of my photos will be 20x30" or so and the D3100 was capable of producing an outstanding photo with light sharpness loss at that size. I look forward to getting the D7000 for a steal as well, since many are after the D7100 with its latest craze in DX MP history.

I believe the AF 35 1.8 will suit my close up and landscape needs, now just need to figure out an AF for wildlife, it will probably be the 70-300mm. Will I really notice or miss not having VR in the AF-S lens on the D7000 if keep it at 1/400 minimum? Thanks for all the responses guys and gals!

 

topgunwghs

Senior Member
Thank you for the heads up! I have my eye on a few with decently low shutter counts for < $600 and some here and there accessories.

I see the D7000 has a 23.6 mm x 15.6 mm Sensor, which is .1 larger than that of the others, including the D7100. Obviously miniscule, but why are they different if they are DX?
 

Horoscope Fish

Senior Member
Thank you for the heads up! I have my eye on a few with decently low shutter counts for < $600 and some here and there accessories.

I see the D7000 has a 23.6 mm x 15.6 mm Sensor, which is .1 larger than that of the others, including the D7100. Obviously miniscule, but why are they different if they are DX?
Something tells me they're *NOT* different and what you're seeing is simply an error in reporting. Nothing else, really, makes sense.

BTW, what's with all the bold'ing and underlining?

....
 

topgunwghs

Senior Member
I tend to write BOLD when I am the OP in forums. Helps others find my Q's and responses faster. The underline, was because I actually thought there was a difference and was questioning it. That number was supplied from the NikonUSA site.


 
Thank you for the heads up! I have my eye on a few with decently low shutter counts for < $600 and some here and there accessories.

I see the D7000 has a 23.6 mm x 15.6 mm Sensor, which is .1 larger than that of the others, including the D7100. Obviously miniscule, but why are they different if they are DX?

For $689.00 for a refurb with a 1 year warranty why buy used?
 

topgunwghs

Senior Member
The warranty deal does sound quite enticing. I may choose that. What denominations for Sigma etc... = Nikon's "AF" and will Auto Focus with my internal motor? I don't feel the need to pay the extra $ for AF-S lenses to pair with the D7000 and they will weigh more. Is there info behind the:AF Zoom-Nikkor 70-300mm f/4-5.6G in terms of quality and clarity at 300mm?
 
The warranty deal does sound quite enticing. I may choose that. What denominations for Sigma etc... = Nikon's "AF" and will Auto Focus with my internal motor? I don't feel the need to pay the extra $ for AF-S lenses to pair with the D7000 and they will weigh more. Is there info behind the:AF Zoom-Nikkor 70-300mm f/4-5.6G in terms of quality and clarity at 300mm?


I bought my D5100 refurb and at a later date I bought a 18-105 zoom from them and both were Refurbished. I will buy my D7000 from them too. Great service and great prices.

Compatible Lenses
AF NIKKOR for F3AF not Supported
AI-P NIKKOR: All Functions Supported Except 3D Color Matrix Metering II
DX AF NIKKOR: All Functions Supported
Electronic Rangefinder can be used if Maximum Aperture is f/5.6 or Faster
IX NIKKOR Lenses Cannot be Used
Non-CPU: Can be used in modes A and M; Color Matrix Metering and Aperture Value Display Supported if user Provides Lens Data (AI lenses only)
Other AF NIKKOR: All Functions Supported Except 3D Color Matrix Metering II
PC Micro-NIKKOR does not Support some Functions
Type G or D AF NIKKOR: All Functions Supported

From D7000 from Nikon
 

singlerosa_RIP

Senior Member
Think you'll love the D7000. I've used one one for almost 3 years, although I've been using it less since May, when I got my D600. I still use it when I want to get the most out of my long lenses, or carry two bodies to avoid lens changing. Good luck.

​Jim
 

topgunwghs

Senior Member
Does the: Tamron SP 70-300mm f/4-5.6 Di VC USD : Autofocus on the D7000, is that what the USD is for, or is it a built-in motor, like the Nikkor AF-S lens? Will it AF regardless if it has an internal motor? The images this lens produces are amazing for the price!
 
Last edited:
Top