is the d7000 still a "relevant" camera in 2013?

Hi! New member here
I am in the market for my first DSLR after a couple of years on a photography hiatus and am leaning heavily toward the D7000. I remember when the D90 came out and after borrowing one from a friend I determined that it was my dream camera...but that was almost 6 years ago. Now that I'm researching DSLRs again I am leaning toward the D7000. Though it doesn't quite have the same shiny tech specs as the newer D series models I think that it has a better build quality and lots of room for me to "grow into". I am not concerned about MP and HD video and would prefer to have a camera that feels more solid and professional in hand.

My only question is....is the D7000 still a relevant camera 3 years after its release? The D7100 is way out of budget at the moment, and I really feel that I would outgrow the newer D3200 or D5200 very quickly.

I'm also considering lenses, everyone seems to have a different opinion about what a first lens should be. Some people are certain that prime lenses are the way to go for beginners, others say that the kit lens is a good choice. I think I'm leaning towards a 50mm fixed lens, but I'm concerned about loosing the versatility of a zoom lens (18-105 kit lens)

​Any thoughts?

It is still a great camera...But if you could save alittle more I would get the D7100(Semi-Pro camera) Weather-sealed etc...

Echoing ShootRaw... echo echo echo

Love the D7000

I have a D7000 that I bought in February. I absolutely love it. At the time, I really could not spring for something more expensive so I decided to get the D7000 at that time instead of waiting for the D7100. I started my digital photo journey with the D3000, so for me it was a big jump forward. I figure I will have many years of great photography with this camera. If you can afford it, the D7100 is an excellent choice, but don't disregard the D7000. It's a solid camera that will serve you well.

Ask those with the even older D90 (like me) how relevant it still is

It's an excellent camera capable of amazing shots and plenty of mp's for enlargements. As far as lenses I would take the 35 or 50 1.8g over the kit zoom, but it depends on your shooting style/preferences.

Were I buying today, I would consider the D7100 but I'm not buying today so my D7000 is absolutely fine with me. If I were buying several years ago, I would probably have considered the D90. If I were buying in another 2-3 years, I would probably be looking at a yet to be produced replacement for the D7100. At that time, people will be wondering if they should buy a reduced price D7100 or it's replacement. If you want a dslr now and can't swing the D7100 and don't feel something like a D3200 or D5200 is enough camera, then the D7000 should serve you fine. The 18-105 kit lens is a very good all-around lens for a lot of photography. If I were buying a separate D7000 body and lens, I might also consider the 16-85 or possibly the new 18-140.

It's absolutely relevant to those whose needs are met by the functions it provides. The question is, what do you want from a camera now, and how do you see those wants changing in the next year, and over the next 2-3 years after that? If you believe your needs will be met by the D7000, and you don't anticipate growing out of it, then it can save you some money that you can put in glass, while providing a great platform to shoot on. As was mentioned, folks have been shooting with the D90 for years and years, and some are still with their D70's and D80's.

If you want something you won't feel is "old technology" 2-3 years from now then you're going to need to go with something recent. If that's not going to bother you, save your money.

I had the choice between the D7000 and the D7100. Decided on the the D7000(also a semi-pro body) and have had no regrets what so ever. There's plenty of shots here and elsewhere taken with these 2 cameras. Check 'em out and decide for yourself if there is $500 difference in IQ. Save the money IMO and spend it on better glass. That will make a hell of a lot more difference than the one between these 2 camera bodies. In a couple of years there will be a D7200 and I reckon that will be when I'm ready to upgrade bodies as I think the gap in features will then be worth the difference in price over the D7K.

An absolutely fine camera and quite a bargain right now. Of course you will need a nifty 50 lens irregardless of any other lenses you might buy. Once you know what you prefer to shoot, you will be able to make a more informed decision about future lenses.

Is a Derek Jeter still relevant? lol. If you love it, it's relevant. And you'll love that camera. Even the old film camera's, and the first DSLR cameras are still relevant. People use them, and people love them.

Love the D7000 with DX 17-55mm f/2.8G. Focal length of 26-83mm.

I'd say it's still relevant. With 16.2 mpxl, a 100% viewfinder, multiple batty shooting modes, 'semi-pro' controls, the ability to use legacy lenses..I mean, the list just goes on and on. It's really one of those cameras that will go down in history as one of Nikon's proudest achievements, balancing power with weight, ingenuity with class and features with cost.

The D7000 is truly one of those cameras that demands as much out of you as it does out of the glass in front of the sensor. We're not talking D800 territory here, but I do think that it's true to a large extent. The better glass i've put in front of it, the better the results are. (I of course, had something to do with that outcome, too. Well, maybe. )

Oh and welcome as well.

I used to have a D7000 and one of my biggest complaint was the easy at which the mode ring can be changed by just simple handling. Yesterday I played around with a D7100 and Nikon was listening and you now have to press a button in order to turn the mode ring. This single little change can make a world of difference out in the field and if I were in the market, the D7100 is worth buying over the D7000

The D90 is still a very good camera. Although the D7000 has more resolution, I think that a D90 with a better lens might get better results than a D7000 with a less stellar lens. But you'd get better high iso results with the D7000.

Lens are a better investment than the latest camera.

D7000 with the 18-105. Great way to go


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2

I shoot a lot of sports and I haven't found anything the D7000 cant do.
I started with a D70 then a D90, they both had limitations.
But like I said the D7000 does anything I ask of it and it's great for low light situations.
There are better cameras but for the money right now it's worth the buy.

As far as lens go.
Since you don't know what you'll be shooting. Get the zoom lens then you will have the versatility you need until you get a better understanding what you want to shoot. Then I would add the 50 1.8 because you can pick one up for a $100 if you look around.

jenniferrb517 said:

would prefer to have a camera that feels more solid and professional in hand.

Click to expand...

As money allows you can pick up a battery grip and it will feel very professional for you.
I'm 6' 5" with big hands and have a grip on mine. It fits me with no problems.