It won't help me take better pictures, but ...
I want one
The reasons why (over my D5000 in brackets):
1.3x "range extender" giving a combined crop factor of 2 on my lenses
My 70-300mm, FFE 450mm at 12 MP on D5000, becomes FFE 600mm at 15 MPBurst rate 6fps @ 24MP, 7 fps @ 15MP (4 fps at 12 MP)
51 point AF with 15 cross type, works at f/8 (11 with 1 ct, f/5.6)
Fastest shutter speed 1/8000 (1/4000)
Highest iso 25600 (6400)
Two User modes on dial (none)
Two control wheels (one)
Dedicated control for shooting modes; S, CH, CL, Q, ST (via menu or "i" button)
Two SD Memory slots allows separate RAW and jpg saving (1 slot)
100% Pentaprism viewfinder (95% Pentamirror)
14 bit RAW available in some modes (12 bit)
More weather sealed for the odd occasion I get caught in the rain
LCD 3.2 inch 1.2MP LCD (2.7 inch 0.23 MP)
Top panel LCD for shooting info (can tilt rear LCD)
About four more dedicated buttons to access things directly
All of the above would be very useful to me - actually, those things might help me take pictures of better quality/when I can't now.
Fixed LCD (D5000's tilts, great for Live View at low or high shooting angles and tripod use)
Weight 675g (550g)
Larger file sizes 24MP (12MP) - unless I use the 1.3x mode which gives 15MP and boosts my telephoto reach and improves the fps (win-win-win?)
Other features that may be good (will likely have a down side to);
No Optical Low Pass Filter on sensor (moire patterning more likely)
Size 135.5 x 106.5 x 76 mm (127 x 104 x 80 mm) too similar to be important
Accepts a grip - with 6x AA capability (D5000 doesn't, and they cost more money!)
In body focus motor (D5000 doesn't, but I have all AF-S lenses anyway)
Electronic level (may get in the way)
Depth of Field preview button (may be too dark to see, got used to not having one)
Buffer may be bigger/quicker to empty (I never found the D5000 to be as big as the 11 RAW they say)
There's quite a lot more I haven't mentioned here as it won't impact me much
I found it odd that on that Nikon page it describes "no OLPF", but the Anti-dust section does mention an "optical filter", but they probably mean the one for IR blocking.
This looks to be a very good release from the spec., I wonder if the reality is as good
Last edited by Dave Humphries; 21st February 2013 at 10:56 PM. Reason: correct error
Dave: I took a quick look at the specs and the lowest ISO is 100, not the 50 you stated. One thing I do like better is that now you can set it up to 5 exposures if bracketing instead of the max of 3 now.
This looks pretty interesting Dave. I have made the step to FX, but this camera really is a step forward for DX. It took Nikon long enough I would add.
The 1.3x crop mystifies me a bit. I found the DX crop more than enough, but for the tele end it might have some benefit I guess. Curious to see how quality holds up though.
It's not looking too good for a D400. The D7100 now has an update AF system, special crop mode, and other goodies. But I haven't found information yet on the number of frames that can be captured in RAW at max shooting speed. Also, the D7100 doesn't have an AF-ON button, so people who like AF-ON will have to set AE-L to AF-ON and lose the AE-L function. It doesn't have a sync port, and it doesn't quite have the build quality of a D300s. I guess the D7100's status for NPS will really tell us how Nikon is positioning the camera.
Graystar: I know that alot of people have a problem with this guy Ken Rockwell, however he has a good general description with alot of specs, and also Moose Peterson who spend some time shooting the promo images with the D7100. So check out what they have to say.
You might need to revert to your first set of data, Dave. Take a look here, where it indicates "ISO 100 – 6400, Lo-1 (ISO 50), Hi-1 (ISO 12,800), Hi-2 (ISO 25,600)."
In any case, the "Lo" ISO settings are nothing more than built-in ETTR. The camera simply overexposes the scene. You lose highlight space with the Lo settings.
Typically, the base ISO setting doesn't utilize all of the sensor's DR, for no other reason than it's difficult to perfectly coordinate the sensor's maximum light gathering performance with the exposure standards. So you can be left 1/3 or 2/3 stops short of max DR. The "Lo" settings can get back that DR.
On my D90 (which has a base ISO of 200,) when I'm not using Auto-ISO I'll use L 0.3 (like ISO 160) and that will actually maximize my DR. Any further and I'm just losing DR. I'll use L 1.0 for my black dog, though, to boost the signal of those dark tones. All the camera is doing is overexposing and then remapping mid gray to high luminance level. It just saves me the trouble of doing it manually.
Assuming you trust the site, here are some info
Some great improvements released in the D7100 over the D7000, most notably for me, is the ability to autofocus at F8 rather than f5.6. This will allow for any f4 telephoto (or zoom) lens to retain its full functionality with an attached 2xTC. As with any feature, there are often pro's and cons. The 24mp sensor gives more cropping ability than the D7000 sensor, but brings with it, the additional computing power and storage (and associated costs) required.
My disappointments are primarily focused (excuse the pun) on the frame rate and the buffer size. Ideally, I would have expected a minimum of 8 frames per second and a buffer of at least 5 - 8 seconds before reaching the limit; unfortunately for Nkon, this limitation is likely to be a deal-breaker for many , prompting them to wait for and then look at the anticipated 7d mkII from Canon.
Looks like Nikon is trying to force action and wildlife photographers to the D4, but with that investment, the Canon 7dmkII with associated lenses and accessories, may prove to be a better option....
I do not want a full-frame camera. I would like an upgraded D7000 with the new auto-focus module, but more importantly, ALL I NEED IS A FASTER FRAME-RATE AND A BIGGER BUFFER than the D7000 currently offers..... Anyone at Nikon listening?
I'm really interested in seeing what DXO finds when they evaluate this camera. Does the lack of an anti-aliasing filter materially improve the resolution? Does it increase the dynamic range measurably? Does it routinely cause Moire patterning? Inquiring minds want to know...
i loved the crop 1.3x like a m4/3 system!
At last a digital zoom/in camera crop that brings some benefit - smaller files, faster fps and increased equivalent focal length.
I'll wait for it to get sub £1000 though.
Thanks for confirming it wasn't a figment of my imagination,
Come on, Canon San, what are you waiting for