Going with a cheaper body now and getting more and better lenses does make some sense. But this sort of depends on how much you intend to immerse yourself into photography. If you just want a better camera but don't plan to experiment a lot or do a lot of really creative or challenging photography then the cheaper body would probably be fine. But if you want to really get into photography the more expensive bodies being considered here offer some advantages.
Based on a very quick browsing of these two pages....
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond7000/
and
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond5100/
.... there are a few things that catch my attention:
- it appears that the D7000 has two control wheels (front and back) while the D5100 has only one in the back. This surely will make manual adjustments of aperture and shutter speeds (and maybe other things) more cumbersome on the D5100. Personally I would not want the D5100 for this reason.
- the 5100 lacks wireless flash control - this is a really cool feature that I use a lot with my D200 (requires a Nikon flash to use this feature), allowing the camera to control flash output using through the lens metering with the flash off the camera. It appears the 7000 has this.
- the D7000 has a focusing motor so autofocus works with older lenses, but the D5100 requires newer lenses that have their own built in focusing motors. You would be more restricted in what lenses you could buy with the 5100 (this would be another deal breaker for me).
(By the way, the D7000 even works with pre-autofocus era lenses that don't communicate with the camera like newer lenses do - they won't do autofocus of course, but you can tell the camera the maximum aperture of the lens and then you can have automatic exposure (in aperture priority mode) - I have some old lenses from about 1980 (pre auto exposure and pre auto focus) that I have used on my D200 this way, but this is not likely to be an issue for you if you are new to SLR cameras).
- the D5100 has an articulated (flip out) LCD screen. It does not appear that the D7000 has this. This could be handy, though on the other hand not having this feature would make for a more rugged camera (so I think a lot of professional photographers might not want this on a camera, and my impression is that currently this is a feature that seems to be only found on less expensive cameras).
- the D7000 seems to have a more rugged body - may or may not matter to you (a feature that might be more important to a professional photographer, or to someone who does a lot of photography out in the field - e.g. bird photography, etc).
- the D7000 appears to have a more sophisticated focus system. If you will be mostly using the camera for casual photography this might not make much difference to you, but if you are trying to capture action, for example, this might be more important.
Personally, I think there are a couple of differences above that would be deal breakers for me in favor of the D7000 (and there might be other important differences that I am not aware of - I have only browsed the specs quickly). If you can afford the D7000 I'd get that. If money is really tight, I'm sure the D5100 would be fine as well, and the high ISO capabilities (a feature shared by both cameras) and great image quality will just astound you regardless of which camera you get.
Personally, I would not get the D3100 because the highest ISO is not as high as what both the D5100 and D7000 have. Really high ISO is really really useful. There are probably other important differences too, but I have not read up much on the D3100.
As much as I like the layout of controls and the semi-pro features of the D300s I would not buy one of these at this time myself. The D7000 seems to have some of those pro-features, and is significantly more advanced in other important ways from what I have read. The high ISO capabilities of the newest Nikons are just astounding. I have not shot photos with the D7000 or D5100, but I used a rented D700 (which has the same high ISO capabilities) for some wedding photography and the image quality at high ISO levels just astounded me. I was getting very useable, relatively noise-free photos under surprisingly low light conditions using an ISO of 6400. In contrast, the highest I can go without becoming pretty grainy on my D200 is an ISO of 800 and I think on the D300 you would have a comparable amount of noise in your pictures at 1600. So these newer Nikons are giving you four times the light sensitivity of the D300 (and 8 times the sensitivity of my D200!). This is a HUGE deal, if, for example, you want to take photos in dim rooms, or if you want to take action shots (higher ISO allows for faster shutter speeds), or if you want to take telephoto shots (where higher shutter speeds are needed).
So again, my take on this: Don't get the D300. Get the D7000 if you can afford it, though if you end up getting the D5100 you will also be getting a great camera.
Based on a very quick browsing of these two pages....
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond7000/
and
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond5100/
.... there are a few things that catch my attention:
- it appears that the D7000 has two control wheels (front and back) while the D5100 has only one in the back. This surely will make manual adjustments of aperture and shutter speeds (and maybe other things) more cumbersome on the D5100. Personally I would not want the D5100 for this reason.
- the 5100 lacks wireless flash control - this is a really cool feature that I use a lot with my D200 (requires a Nikon flash to use this feature), allowing the camera to control flash output using through the lens metering with the flash off the camera. It appears the 7000 has this.
- the D7000 has a focusing motor so autofocus works with older lenses, but the D5100 requires newer lenses that have their own built in focusing motors. You would be more restricted in what lenses you could buy with the 5100 (this would be another deal breaker for me).
(By the way, the D7000 even works with pre-autofocus era lenses that don't communicate with the camera like newer lenses do - they won't do autofocus of course, but you can tell the camera the maximum aperture of the lens and then you can have automatic exposure (in aperture priority mode) - I have some old lenses from about 1980 (pre auto exposure and pre auto focus) that I have used on my D200 this way, but this is not likely to be an issue for you if you are new to SLR cameras).
- the D5100 has an articulated (flip out) LCD screen. It does not appear that the D7000 has this. This could be handy, though on the other hand not having this feature would make for a more rugged camera (so I think a lot of professional photographers might not want this on a camera, and my impression is that currently this is a feature that seems to be only found on less expensive cameras).
- the D7000 seems to have a more rugged body - may or may not matter to you (a feature that might be more important to a professional photographer, or to someone who does a lot of photography out in the field - e.g. bird photography, etc).
- the D7000 appears to have a more sophisticated focus system. If you will be mostly using the camera for casual photography this might not make much difference to you, but if you are trying to capture action, for example, this might be more important.
Personally, I think there are a couple of differences above that would be deal breakers for me in favor of the D7000 (and there might be other important differences that I am not aware of - I have only browsed the specs quickly). If you can afford the D7000 I'd get that. If money is really tight, I'm sure the D5100 would be fine as well, and the high ISO capabilities (a feature shared by both cameras) and great image quality will just astound you regardless of which camera you get.
Personally, I would not get the D3100 because the highest ISO is not as high as what both the D5100 and D7000 have. Really high ISO is really really useful. There are probably other important differences too, but I have not read up much on the D3100.
As much as I like the layout of controls and the semi-pro features of the D300s I would not buy one of these at this time myself. The D7000 seems to have some of those pro-features, and is significantly more advanced in other important ways from what I have read. The high ISO capabilities of the newest Nikons are just astounding. I have not shot photos with the D7000 or D5100, but I used a rented D700 (which has the same high ISO capabilities) for some wedding photography and the image quality at high ISO levels just astounded me. I was getting very useable, relatively noise-free photos under surprisingly low light conditions using an ISO of 6400. In contrast, the highest I can go without becoming pretty grainy on my D200 is an ISO of 800 and I think on the D300 you would have a comparable amount of noise in your pictures at 1600. So these newer Nikons are giving you four times the light sensitivity of the D300 (and 8 times the sensitivity of my D200!). This is a HUGE deal, if, for example, you want to take photos in dim rooms, or if you want to take action shots (higher ISO allows for faster shutter speeds), or if you want to take telephoto shots (where higher shutter speeds are needed).
So again, my take on this: Don't get the D300. Get the D7000 if you can afford it, though if you end up getting the D5100 you will also be getting a great camera.
Last edited:
