Nikon D7000 Review from an ex Canon user

philtherower

So, after a month and a half of owning this camera, I've come to gather some thoughts after the initial break-in, what a great camera period. I'll tell you all that while I shot Nikon first, the transition from using my Canon 30D for 3 years was quite rough and I'm still figuring out everything with my new tool.

Handling
To me, this is the greatest component of a camera, following the sensor (almost all are good now) and AF system. The way this camera feels is great. Compared to my 30D it's smaller and lighter, without any loss of quality in terms of build. The shutter is quiet (unlike most Canons) and allows me to shoot birds up close without disturbing them, especially in quiet mode. I like the way the camera feels and I like [almost] where the buttons are. The ISO button and WB buttons are on the left of the screen and the AF control is on the bottom left in the front. These kinda bug me because on my 30D they were all in reach of my right hand. I'll admit I miss this operation. To a new user, I'd have to say the Nikon would be more friendly, but the 30D became a part of me as a tool, one which I felt more a part of. With the Nikon, there seems to be more between my idea of how I want the subject and the actual subject. By the way, I particularly love the focus indicator which with the great, vintage Nikon lenses (cheap and great quality but MF), I can easily focus just by turning the focus ring in the direction it's pointing to. So cool!

Menus
Compared to my relatively old 30D, this is where this camera excels. It's menus are well organized and thought out. After a few days of getting used to it all, I fell in love with this. I'm able to quickly customize what I want to, and in this sense the operation is faster. Because of this, I'd say it's worth it.

Features
This is also something way above my 30D. The 30D didn't have any video mode, a bad LCD screen, no live view, and didn't have ADR (AKA D-Lighting). The dual card slots and the weather sealing are useful to a contemporary sports shooter. The ability of this camera go up to ridiculously high ISOs compared to my 30D is another point that got me to upgrade. This is stunning! This gives me so many more possibilities to shoot wherever I want.

Now, I know this isn't the longest or most in-depth review ever and I know it doesn't address everything there is to this camera, but it's just a few thoughts I have which I hope will help you with your purchasing decision or just give you some insight. If I were to do it all over again, I'd choose this camera once more because of the lens choices and the feel. The 7D would have been much larger and more costly, with the resale value depreciating much faster than the D7K which is new and will keep it's price for much longer (like the Nikon D90). But, remember one thing, any camera you get and learn/master how to use (I'll get this one down eventually), you're the key component.

Here's some sample images taken recently. I also bought a beat up 135mm 2.8 AI on craigslist yesterday for 30 bucks and it's so sharp. I might do a review later if you guys want it. These are all taken with the 28-200G.









Thank you! Please tell me what you think of the images and feel free to ask questions.
Phil

NeilL

If your new camera leads you into new and exciting territory you have done well!

Neil

Matthew Saville

In all fairness, as much as I also love the D7000 as a Nikon user, ...the better comparison to the D7000 is of course the Canon 7D. Just for the sake of new camera buyers, this should be noted that the Canon 30D is "ancient history" and if the Nikon D7000 DIDN'T totally blow it away, Nikon would be getting laughed out of business right now...

And on that note, the 7D is pretty identical (and in plenty of ways superior) to the D7000. If you shoot sports or action or wildlife, I'm tempted to say that any current Canon users should STRONGLY consider the 7D, for it's amazing frame rate and awesome cross-type AF points. (The 7D is the FIRST amateur camera that I know of to have 100% cross-type AF points, though correct me if I'm wrong. The bottom line is that it's a revolution in AF performance either way...)

Having said that, any Nikon shooter definitely need not covet the 7D, because the D7000 rocks as well.

Particularly as an outdoor photographer who likes a very versatile, creatively un-inhibited camera, for me the D7000 adds quite a few features that the D90 didn't have, including manual focus lens support, a built-in intervalometer for time lapse photography, and a few other features that I'm overlooking or that Philip has already mentioned.

If I had to choose between the two, my personal preference would take me towards the D7000 because I shoot more landscapes and time lapses etc. than telephoto action sports. And, I feel that the Nikon control layout is more intuitive for me.

Philip, I will say that if you miss right-handed controls, I can relate. I've handled Canon cameras plenty, and although I don't care to have so many functions assigned to so FEW buttons (two functions per button, on the top-right side) ...I do envy their ability to adjust the ISO right-handed.

Other than that, what you may be missing on the D7000, you can get on the semi-pro camera bodies like the D300 and D700. On those cameras, the right hand has immediate access to your exposure mode and metering, which I take advantage of. Plus, which is similar to the D7000, AF is on a mechanical switch which, after you get used to it, is very intuitive because you don't even have to take your eye off your subject if you need to switch modes; you just feel it. (Same with the metering switch on the semi-pro Nikons...)

One tip: Unless you have a deathwish, set the C1 to be in aperture priority or something, with a medium-low ISO and RAW. While testing the D7000 a month or two ago, I accidentally bumped the camera from M to C1, and C1 just so happened to have ISO 6400 set in manual exposure, yet I was currently shooting in broad daylight. Needless to say there are a few exposures that look like a polar bear blinking in a blizzard.


Good luck!
=Matt=

Tim Kamppinen

Matthew, I thought the D7000 had cross-type AF points as well. Maybe just not all of them?

I shoot with a D90, which is fine for portraits, etc. but I have been renting a D700 for weddings. The only reasons I feel that I really need is the high ISO peformance and the AF. Since the D7000 came out I have seriously considered upgrading to a D7000 and using that for weddings as well as everything else and saving the $250 or so per wedding to rent the D700 and CF cards (I would keep the D90 for backup or else rent a second D7000 for backup at weddings).

I have read the reviews, looked at the sample images, etc. but as a wedding photographer what is your opinion on whether or not that is feasible? I mean, I know people are out there shooting weddings on D300's and doing just fine, so... And if it matters, my reception shooting is typically with an sb900 on camera and a speedlight on a stand off camera as a rim light for the dance floor. Even with the D700 I rarely shoot over 1600 ISO, and that's mostly in the chruch during the ceremony. I also shoot with the 24-70 and 70-200 VRII (both rented, again, but worth every cent!) and don't shoot with primes a whole lot. If you can give your thoughts I'd really appreciate it.

philtherower

Tim, the D7k does have 11 (or 9) cross type AF points. I'd upgrade if it saves you money. The high ISO is stunning (look on my Flickr) and the AF system is spot on, especially with 3D tracking.

Matt, I did consider the 7d (I got the Nikon because I wanted to try Nikon out especially with the value the D7k presents) but I'm comparing to what I shot for a few years. In terms of AF, ISO, and artistic potential, the D7k is just great. For me now it all comes down to figuring it all out. I currently have the 50mm 1.8 AF, 135mm 2.8 AI, 28-200G, and in the next few days I'm going to pick up an 80-200 2.8. I'm excited to spend more time shooting with it.

Thanks for the feedback so far. If you have any questions fell free to pm me or comment!
Phil

Matthew Saville

Tim Kamppinen wrote: »

Matthew, I thought the D7000 had cross-type AF points as well. Maybe just not all of them?

I shoot with a D90, which is fine for portraits, etc. but I have been renting a D700 for weddings. The only reasons I feel that I really need is the high ISO peformance and the AF. Since the D7000 came out I have seriously considered upgrading to a D7000 and using that for weddings as well as everything else and saving the $250 or so per wedding to rent the D700 and CF cards (I would keep the D90 for backup or else rent a second D7000 for backup at weddings).

I have read the reviews, looked at the sample images, etc. but as a wedding photographer what is your opinion on whether or not that is feasible? I mean, I know people are out there shooting weddings on D300's and doing just fine, so... And if it matters, my reception shooting is typically with an sb900 on camera and a speedlight on a stand off camera as a rim light for the dance floor. Even with the D700 I rarely shoot over 1600 ISO, and that's mostly in the chruch during the ceremony. I also shoot with the 24-70 and 70-200 VRII (both rented, again, but worth every cent!) and don't shoot with primes a whole lot. If you can give your thoughts I'd really appreciate it.

Can't recommend the D7000 as your sole wedding camera; not after getting used to the D700.

Like you said, I was one of those people who shot with the D300 for years at weddings, and although it does a great job, once you wet your appetite for the D700's low-light image quality, it is hard to go back.

I used the D7000 very confidently in low light even up to 3200, and it was really cutting it close on both focusing power and detail. (At f/1.4, 1/90, and ISO 3200 slightly under-exposed, you're REALLY getting dark...)

I can HIGHLY recommend the D7000 as a supplement to any wedding shooter's system, though. Personally I'm just way to used to the D300 / D700 controls so I'm going to wait and see if they make a D400, but if you can get used to the D7000 controls then it is a fantastic camera.

=Matt=

Matthew Saville

philtherower wrote: »

...I currently have the 50mm 1.8 AF, 135mm 2.8 AI, 28-200G, and in the next few days I'm going to pick up an 80-200 2.8. I'm excited to spend more time shooting with it.

Sounds like you've got a whole slew of medium / telephoto stuff; do you shoot mostly birds / telephoto like I'm seeing in your sample images?

If so then yes the 80-200 is one of the best buys in the market; because it doesn't have stabilization many people overlook the fact that it is WICKED sharp!

Personally however, since I find myself shooting in more close quaters candid situations, I got the crop-sensor Sigma 50-150 2.8 for my D300, and wow that lens is just a gem. Works amazingly on the D7000 as well, I was surprised to see how well a 2006 lens resolved 16 megapixels of detail even wide open.

As someone who shoots weddings on the weekends and nature / wildlife / landscapes in spare time, the perfect system for me has been a couple / few primes on a D700, and a couple zooms on a crop sensor. :-)

=Matt=

philtherower

My dad wants to use the camera for sports events and I might try to add a TC to the 80-200 and have a decent length, even if it means using MF to achieve faster focus. On my 30D, my favorite lens was my Tamron 17-50 because it was small, light, sharp, and had a decent Macro setting. I'm hoping to pick up one of those in the summer if I get the $$ and then eventually a Tokina 11-16 which would with the TC on the 80-200 would cover everything. By the way, what do you think about finding an 80-200 for only 380 bucks? :P

Phil

Brett1000

Matthew Saville wrote: »

In all fairness, as much as I also love the D7000 as a Nikon user, ...the better comparison to the D7000 is of course the Canon 7D. Just for the sake of new camera buyers, this should be noted that the Canon 30D is "ancient history" and if the Nikon D7000 DIDN'T totally blow it away, Nikon would be getting laughed out of business right now...

And on that note, the 7D is pretty identical (and in plenty of ways superior) to the D7000. If you shoot sports or action or wildlife, I'm tempted to say that any current Canon users should STRONGLY consider the 7D, for it's amazing frame rate and awesome cross-type AF points. (The 7D is the FIRST amateur camera that I know of to have 100% cross-type AF points, though correct me if I'm wrong. The bottom line is that it's a revolution in AF performance either way...)

right, but even the cheaper Canon 60D is better than the Nikon D7000 - of course there are some that may disagree!
http://www.popphoto.com/reviews/cameras/2011/01/tested-canon-60d
http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/equipment/review/Canon_EOS_60D_review_12154.php
http://www.photoradar.com/reviews/product/head-to-head-review-canon-eos-60d-vs-nikon-d7000?page=0%2C4

Matthew Saville

philtherower wrote: »

My dad wants to use the camera for sports events and I might try to add a TC to the 80-200 and have a decent length, even if it means using MF to achieve faster focus. On my 30D, my favorite lens was my Tamron 17-50 because it was small, light, sharp, and had a decent Macro setting. I'm hoping to pick up one of those in the summer if I get the $$ and then eventually a Tokina 11-16 which would with the TC on the 80-200 would cover everything. By the way, what do you think about finding an 80-200 for only 380 bucks? :P

Phil

There are multiple versions of the 80-200, and I would only go for the newest, AFS version. The older AFD versions, let alone the oldest push-pull version, will not perform as fast IMO on the D7000. The lens you would buy for $380 is most likely a push-pull design, in which case I just wouldn't buy it because it's not even a good deal, but if it's an AFD version then yeah it's worth trying, or if it's a good condition AF-S version then the seller is leaving as much as $700 on the table, which sounds shady to me. So, just be careful what you buy and get it from somewhere that has a GOOD return policy in case you get it and it tests softly, etc. (And so that you know it's not stolen, lol...)

=Matt=

Matthew Saville

Brett1000 wrote: »

right, but even the cheaper Canon 60D is better than the Nikon D7000 - of course there are some that may disagree!
http://www.popphoto.com/reviews/cameras/2011/01/tested-canon-60d
http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/equipment/review/Canon_EOS_60D_review_12154.php
http://www.photoradar.com/reviews/product/head-to-head-review-canon-eos-60d-vs-nikon-d7000?page=0%2C4

Canon was indeed quite smart in "splitting" the 50D lineup and making both the 7D and 60D, and it's a great camera, a strong competitor against the D7000 depending on your needs. And you have a good point in mentioning it, when comparing the D7000 to Canon. Rightfully, the D7000 is going to be seen as rival to the 60D, and the 7D's proper rival would be the yet-to-materialize D400...

Personally though I'd definitely go with the D7000 for my shooting needs. The 60D might have a few extra megapixels, and a couple other white-paper advantages, but the D7000 has features and functions that I'll use in the real world like the dual card slots, built-in intervalometer, AF Micro-Adjust, AF point control joystick, manual focus lens adaptability, 100% viewfinder, White balance button, etc. (I won't rub it in too much.. ;-)


=Matt=

Brett1000

Matthew Saville wrote: »

0 for my shooting needs. The 60D might have a few extra megapixels, and a couple other white-paper advantages, but the D7000 has features and functions that I'll use in the real world like the dual card slots, built-in intervalometer, AF Micro-Adjust, AF point control joystick, manual focus lens adaptability, 100% viewfinder, White balance button, etc. (I won't rub it in too much.. ;-)


=Matt=

But what good is any of that if the Canon has significantly better image quality, better ISO performance, better AF, (much) better video, lower price, better ....
sorry, I won't keep rubbing it in!

http://www.popphoto.com/reviews/cameras/2011/01/tested-canon-60d
http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/equipment/review/Canon_EOS_60D_review_12154.php

http://www.photoradar.com/reviews/product/head-to-head-review-canon-eos-60d-vs-nikon-d7000?page=0%2C4

babygodzilla

in the end, it's the photographer and not the camera

Matthew Saville

Brett1000 wrote: »

But what good is any of that if the Canon has significantly better image quality, better ISO performance, better AF, (much) better video, lower price, better ....
sorry, I won't keep rubbing it in!

http://www.popphoto.com/reviews/cameras/2011/01/tested-canon-60d
http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/equipment/review/Canon_EOS_60D_review_12154.php

http://www.photoradar.com/reviews/product/head-to-head-review-canon-eos-60d-vs-nikon-d7000?page=0%2C4

Yep for my use, (adventure / outdoor photography) ...the D7000's versatile features still make it my obvious choice. The image quality is superb and the AF never let me down. And besides,

babygodzilla wrote: »

in the end, it's the photographer and not the camera

philtherower

Matthew Saville wrote: »

There are multiple versions of the 80-200, and I would only go for the newest, AFS version. The older AFD versions, let alone the oldest push-pull version, will not perform as fast IMO on the D7000. The lens you would buy for $380 is most likely a push-pull design, in which case I just wouldn't buy it because it's not even a good deal, but if it's an AFD version then yeah it's worth trying, or if it's a good condition AF-S version then the seller is leaving as much as $700 on the table, which sounds shady to me. So, just be careful what you buy and get it from somewhere that has a GOOD return policy in case you get it and it tests softly, etc. (And so that you know it's not stolen, lol...)

=Matt=

Well actually I dropped my offer for the push pull one because I know the AF on that one is quite slow, but I am getting an 80-200 AFD (double ring version) for 450 on Saturday, or at least checking it out. Of course, if the serial number is filed off, I'm outta there. I'm hoping it's good

Matthew Saville

philtherower wrote: »

Well actually I dropped my offer for the push pull one because I know the AF on that one is quite slow, but I am getting an 80-200 AFD (double ring version) for 450 on Saturday, or at least checking it out. Of course, if the serial number is filed off, I'm outta there. I'm hoping it's good

$450 would be a good deal, but only if the D7000 is powerful enough to make it AF fast. Sometimes you need one of those big honkin' flagship cameras to make those lenses perform well. I just remember trying to drive the 80-400 VR with my D70, that was a joke! Slap the 80-400 on the D1X though, and it was incredibly snappy...

=Matt=

philtherower

Just picked up the lens and I'm loving it! I'm shooting an auction tonight and I'll post how it goes. The d7000 motor is plenty fast for the lens to shoot birds in flight. Can't wait to put more time into using it!

ziggy53

Congratulations on the new (to you) zoom.

Molotov Everything

I just got my D7000 about a week ago and one thing that bugs me is in video mode the built in microphone picks up the sound of the autofocus motor and it drowns out everything else, and the autofocus seems to jump around like crazy, making it barely useable. But I didn't buy the thing to shoot video so it's not a huge deal. But I would rather have them not include it and make the camera a little cheaper. I haven't spent much time with the video mode so maybe I'm just doing something horribly wrong though.

philtherower

Sorry to bump such an old post, but I just saw the commit from Molotov. I get what you mean with the video being next to useless with the mic picking up any adjustments you make on the lens. I've looked into the Nikon ME-1, which would fix the problem, but isn't as good of a mic as some 3rd party alternatives. It is kind of annoying that they sold us just an okay mic, but like you said, we bought it mainly for the photography, which it does really well.