D7000

Pointless because he is happy with his current kit, which actually kinda makes his post pointless!!!

For the rest of us we have the choice, and I will be getting one to supplement my D90 which I will keep, to me its an excellent upgrade, in many ways better than the D300s. I think it will sell very well.......
 
A little birdy tells me we will be able to get these for £950 on release, so still a fair bit more than a D90, but nowhere near £600 more. :)

Hopefully they will come down a bit more reasonably soon after release.
 
Nikon have only released the body and the 18-105 kit so unless they bring out some 18-200/16-85/10-24 kits that are splitable then I cant see the price coming down much lower than £900.

Stock is going to be tight until after Christmas as well.

Stuart
 
Last edited:
Philx1979 said:
nope dont want one, got a d300s and a d90 dont need anymore than that
Click to expand...

*jealous*

OP seriously the D700 is no semi pro as it is set to replace the D90 which puts it squarely in the enthuisist market. Personally it seems to out play the D300 so thinking the D400 will be one awesome camera
 
It's not exactly a replacement for the D90 - Nikon say it sits between the D90 and the D300s. Ken Rockwell reckons it will be better than the D300s :)
 
D7000 is no semi pro as it is set to replace the D90
Click to expand...

well yes but with a number of "semi" or even pro features:

- lens tested to 150,000 actuations
- magnesium body with weathersealing
- Micro adjust focus
- 6 fps
- dual sd cards
- 100% viewfinder
- buttons for most key adjustments

etc. But as was pointed out to me earlier in this thread Nikon put it in their consumer section so no matter what the spec, pros or semi pros may not buy one under any circumstances
 
Dave Pickett said:
, pros or semi pros may not buy one under any circumstances
Click to expand...

As well they should not dirtying their gear bag with such a lowly piece of Kit :bat::razz:


From what I have seen and read it seems to me it is more a D300 replacement spec wise but we know it is not...(so would guess at the 7D competition therefore I reckon the newer D400 or whatever they call it will blow Canons 7D into the dust...) and round and round they go
 
So who's pre-ordered then, I see there are a few out there with 949 as the body only now, obviously with no stock showing though.
 
Some more high ISO samples coming out - they look pretty impressive to me.
Click to expand...

yes on a quick look even the 12800 look pretty decent, although maybe the 25600 is really pushing it a bit far, hardly surprising.
 
FoG said:
*jealous*

OP seriously the D700 is no semi pro as it is set to replace the D90 which puts it squarely in the enthuisist market. Personally it seems to out play the D300 so thinking the D400 will be one awesome camera
Click to expand...

I think you meant the D7000 :). Either way I don't want the weight of pro or semi pro, been there had to get out. I'm going to buy a D7000 when the price seems right to me which is not yet, though I won't be able to restrain myself very far into the new year I suspect. I think that with my D90 it'll make a great pair - I hope they have babies!

Breaking strain of a kitkat. :LOL:
 
Last edited:
trevorbray said:
Is it just me ? If I had D5000/3000 this would be next. It's gonna sell like the proverbial !
Click to expand...

This, I am probably going to upgrade from my D40 in the next six months or so (depending on how well I keep control of my back card), and this one does appeal to me a lot...although I await reviews and maybe a little bit of hands on:)
 
I was told that the D7000 is aimed at the enthusiast market, between the D90 and the D300s, which is semi pro. I bought a D300s three months ago, and that has to last for 5 or 6 years. What do they think,,,, we're made of money? I'm not into buying and selling. Still have a D200 and that's still a brilliant camera, at 5 or 6 years old.
 
i would like one but i'll stick with my d90 for the time being
 
problem is that for sports with an 11frame buffer at 6fps thats less then 2s worth of shooting, depending on the save speed it is next to useless for airshows/motorsport imo
 
I can't really see anything on that camera other than the megapixels that would make me consider selling my D300 for it. Seems like a downgrade rather than a sideways step.
 
Astro said:
Yup !
I nearly have the cash put together for a D7000 to take the place of
my D3000, but I will probably wait until the new year before buying.

And that leads to a question.
Historically, when a new camera is released, how is the price of
the D7000 expected to drop in the coming months ?
Click to expand...


Don't forget VAT is due to rise in the new year to 20% :crying:
so you might not get the saving your looking for I would guess Jan sales may well swallow the Vat increase for a short period but after that who knows?
 
It seems like the ideal replacement for my D80. I have toyed with getting the D90, but i can wait a bit longer and see how the price comes down. The better performance in low light/higher iso is the main reason for wanting to upgrade
 
When will Nikon release a true competitor to the 5DmkII? I'm semi tempted by the D7000 (mainly for the video) but I really want a D700 update that shoots 1080p.
Come on Nikon, sort it out.
 
11 frame buffer (depending on download speed) is very low for an airshow, for example during a red arrows display I may take 4 or 5 of each pass to capture different light angles on an aircraft or different wing positions, not too mention that at the speed needed not every photo will be sharp so I would rather take 4 or 5 and get 1 good critically sharp one.

So when a formation flies by i may take 13-15 shots in very quick succession of different aircraft,

same for motorsport

11 just isnt enough

(was quoted on one of the preview threads on Dpreview)
 
Plus if your at a motorsport event and a car goes off the track you fire loads of frames to capture it all then the camera stops taking shots lol.
 
Oli R C said:
Even so, but I'm sure it wouldn't be 'useless'.
Click to expand...

No i supose useless was abit strong but it would be far from ideal. Its just too small (again if correct Clicky here is the link)

grum said:
How does that buffer (if correct) compare to the D300s? I will wait for proper reviews in any case.
Click to expand...

D300s has a 19 shot buffer in Raw, which is just about ok. My D2x has 17 and I am not a happy snapper i pick and choose my shots but even then when something hectic happens its difficult to keep some shots free

I have just pulled trigger on a D300s, D7000 doesnt give me what I would need from a camera :)

If only it had 20+ raw frames i would have been really tempted
 
I've used a D40 for the past 2 and half years, finally got some cash to replace it so wanted to stick with Nikon so I could keep a couple of lenses. Plus Im just used to Nikon.

I had about £1k to play with and the D90 was the obvious choice but decided to wait to see what the spec & price of the D7000 was, in the couple of weeks I waited my balance went up so when it was announced how could I not order it??

It's going to a huge huge step up for me from the D40 and I cant wait for it to arrive and get started taking some good pics with it.
 
MadMacro said:
Yeah, not wrong! I'm gonna stop fretting and buy a D7000 and find out for myself.......
Click to expand...

dont get me wrong i think d90 >> D7000 is a good move

D2x/D300s >> D7000 is more sideways, no real improvement to be had bar maybe 1 stop on ISO over the 300s.

Aside from that, there is nothing really, the increased MP is a marketting ploy MP mean pretty much zilch I had a print done to A3 from a D1x! that had 5mp never mind 16...
 
PeterCollins said:
dont get me wrong i think d90 >> D7000 is a good move

D2x/D300s >> D7000 is more sideways, no real improvement to be had bar maybe 1 stop on ISO over the 300s.

Aside from that, there is nothing really, the increased MP is a marketting ploy MP mean pretty much zilch I had a print done to A3 from a D1x! that had 5mp never mind 16...
Click to expand...

It's not meant to be an upgrade to the D300s though is it - it's just newer so has some improvements anyway.

I know what people mean about MP but I like to crop to get a panorama aspect on landscape pics - and I sometimes like to print big. I've done a 30x20 print from my GF1 (12mp).

The only thing putting me off at the mo is the Nikon lens range seems a little less affordable than Canon's.
 
grum said:
It's not meant to be an upgrade to the D300s though is it - it's just newer so has some improvements anyway.

I know what people mean about MP but I like to crop to get a panorama aspect on landscape pics - and I sometimes like to print big. I've done a 30x20 print from my GF1 (12mp).

The only thing putting me off at the mo is the Nikon lens range seems a little less affordable than Canon's.
Click to expand...


No its not meant to be but everyone is speaking as though its the next coming, When really compared to the D300s there is only 2 things i can see that are an upgrade. One is the ISO performance depending on data retention at higher ISO's where we have only seen limited examples. The other is the higher capture rate of 14bit RAW's at (i think) 6fps over 2.5 on the D300s.

Its not meant to be an upgrade to the D300s but everyone is comparing it to it :)

Over the D90 its a nice upgrade and If i had a D90 i would be very tempted indeed!

Re the lenses, really? I looked at Cannon a while back and nearly had a heart attack at the cost from them!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top