Nikon D7000 and SB-700

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by OreoCookie, Sep 15, 2010.

  1. OreoCookie macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2001
    Location:
    Sendai, Japan
    #1
    Looks like Nikon has a winner on their hands with the new D7000: it's a fast camera with very modern AF system and metering sensor in a robust shell that handles like a pro camera (no more stupid picture modes, who needs those?!). You can even meter AI lenses with this thing.

    Also, the new flash looks very promising. The funny UI of my SB-600 irks me and the fact that you can use it as a master makes my fingers itch to go ahead and order one. Too bad I plundered my savings account this year by getting a new computer ;)
     
  2. Piarco macrumors 68030

    Piarco

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2004
    Location:
    Londinium
    #2
    Actually there are plenty of picture modes - more in fact than any previous consumer level Nikon. What's changed is that there is now a Scene mode on the dial, and you then select the picture mode from the LCD menu.

    But it is an awesome looking beast. The rumoured specs have pretty much all come true (even the micro AF adjust which a lot of people moaned would not be present) and in the main it out performs the D300/s on paper.

    I've been waiting to pick up a new Nikon for over the past year and the D7000 is definitely the camera for me. I'll be keeping my 35mm f1.8, but may swap out my 18-200mm VR for the 17-55mm f2.8. I've seen some good deals on the GPS add on too recently so may well pick one up before my next holiday, and I'll be interested to see the cost of the battery pack.

    The only thing that is disappointing, but not anywhere dealbreaker territory, is that I'll have to sell on my Sandisk Extreme CF cards. Four 2GB Extreme III's and one 4GB Extreme IV and it's FW800 reader. They've served me well (sniff!).
     
  3. OreoCookie thread starter macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2001
    Location:
    Sendai, Japan
    #3
    Since my new ProBook has an SD card reader, I don't mind that at all ;)
    If I decide not to go full frame for my next upgrade, I think I'll get a D7000.
     
  4. Piarco macrumors 68030

    Piarco

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2004
    Location:
    Londinium
    #4
    That's one of the reasons why the move away from CF isn't as painful... iMac: sd reader, iPad: camera connection kit!
     
  5. georgemann macrumors regular

    georgemann

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2005
    Location:
    Seattle, Washington & Siem Reap, Cambodia
    #5
    D7000 or wait for new (1080p) version of D300s?

    I have both a D300 and a D80, but I rarely use the D80 because the user interface is just not as good as the user interface for the D300. I have used the D90 a number of times and it is an improvement on the D80, but basically the same user interface as the D80.

    I guess it really depends upon how long I will have top wait for the new version of the D300s and how soon I will need a Nikon that does 1080p HD video. As far as the other "upgrades" are concerned I can wait for the new version of the D300s.


    http://nikondp.com/
     
  6. Cliff3 macrumors 65816

    Cliff3

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2007
    Location:
    SF Bay Area
    #6
    This new body kind of makes me wonder where Nikon is going to go with the next iteration of the D300. I have a feeling it's going to move upmarket and be more closely aligned with the pro bodies.
     
  7. OreoCookie thread starter macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2001
    Location:
    Sendai, Japan
    #7
    Probably, although I am not sure how much they can add to further differentiate it from the D7000: it sure has a more powerful AF system and is slightly faster, but other than that, I don't see what they can add …*perhaps they will make it more movie centric akin to the 7D?
     
  8. Cliff3 macrumors 65816

    Cliff3

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2007
    Location:
    SF Bay Area
    #8
    I was thinking more along the lines of their putting a DX sensor into a full-size body. The D300/D300s already has the same metering and AF system as the D3/D3s/D3x. It would be helpful if it used all the same system components as those cameras too - batteries, chargers, external power, focusing screens, etc.

    The D7000 seems as though it can take over at the high end of the prosumer market from the D300.
     
  9. wheelhot macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2007
    #9
    Yeah, the D7000 spec is too good right?

    Nikon recently introduced a couple of f/4 FX lenses and with the new D7000 it makes me wonder if they are still planning to have a DX flagship camera or change the next D300s to be the smaller body D3s and the next D700 to be the smaller body D3x?

    It makes sense to me :rolleyes: Nikon used to be no.1 in film era and when it comes to digital, they are always behind Canon but recently, it seems they are doing a bit better then Canon. Chances are Nikon wants to be back as no.1. That's what I think though :cool:

    And I have a feeling SB700 will find home in many strobist bag as a supporting flash
     
  10. carlgo macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2006
    #10
    I am guessing that it doesn't cost much more these days for FX sensors. They just come clattering out of machines like anything else. I don't have inside info, but sensors are commodities now and production technology is so advanced that I think this is true.

    FX is a viable way to sell a far more expensive camera that costs little more to make. It provides a more compelling upgrade path to those who have DX cameras than simply making little improvements to existing designs.

    Wait until there are 40 MP Nikons and Canons! Again, little more to make, but yet another compelling upgrade and an even higher profit margin.

    I sure wish there was some sort of super-film, or electronic film, that would allow the use of perfectly good old film cameras, or at least cut down on the constant "need" to upgrade entire camera systems.
     
  11. OreoCookie thread starter macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2001
    Location:
    Sendai, Japan
    #11
    The SB-700 can act as a commander as well, I can really see myself (asking others) getting me one for Xmas this year :)

    I don't like how I have to fiddle with the menus of my D80 when using my flash off camera.

    Regarding Nikon vs. Canon, I think Canon has maneuvered itself in a bad position with the 60D, the direct competitor to this camera.
     
  12. luminosity macrumors 65816

    luminosity

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2006
    Location:
    Arizona
    #12
    Nikon used to be no.1 in film era and when it comes to digital, they are always behind Canon

    That hasn't been true since mid-2007, when Nikon delivered a body blow in the form of the D3+24-70+14-24, and then followed it up a year later with the D700.
     
  13. Cliff3 macrumors 65816

    Cliff3

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2007
    Location:
    SF Bay Area
    #13
    From his commentary dated July 26. He is more likely to be right than you are. (edit: oops, meant to post the link: http://www.bythom.com/2010 Nikon News.htm)

    Too good? No, not really. The D300 is still the more capable body. But I think the weather sealed body and support for AI/AI-S lenses causes the D7000 to move partway into the niche occupied by the D300. Pro shooters still shoot with the D300 and have been wondering where Nikon's commitment to the DX format lies in terms of their needs. This might be laying the groundwork for Nikon to answer that question.
     
  14. Edge100 macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    May 14, 2002
    Location:
    Where am I???
    #14
    Have to agree; Canon's mid-range offerings look woefully inadequate next to this camera, especially in the AF system. And if Nikon can find a way to put this AF system in the D7000, surely Canon can make a 5DmkIII that has more than 9 AF points with a single cross-type point.
     
  15. ManhattanPrjct macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2008
    #15
    I wouldn't mind seeing it disappear and be replaced with an smaller (if there is such a thing) FX camera. An interesting line-up would be:

    Consumer bodies (D3100/5000)
    DX Hobbiest/Prosumer (D90/D7000)
    FX Hobbiest/Prosumer (DXXX)
    FX Medium Body Pro (D700)
    FX Large Body Pro (D3(s/x)

    Unfortunately, market segmentation theory would dictate that if your competitor offers a spectrum of products, you have to have something similar to match them. Canon's approach may prevent something like this from happening.
     
  16. puckhead193 macrumors G3

    puckhead193

    Joined:
    May 25, 2004
    Location:
    NY
    #16
    This camera looks very promising. I wonder what the trade in value is a for a "like new" D90. The kit lens that is available, is it the same as the one with the D90?
     
  17. ManhattanPrjct macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2008
    #17
    Probably not enough to justify an upgrade. It never makes a lot of financial sense to upgrade consumer bodies each time they release a new one, unless whatever you have lacks something you really need. Of course, Nikon and Canon make these upgrades tantalizing enough for you to do just that. However, a good photographer can certainly make do with a D90 over this new camera.
     
  18. Cliff3 macrumors 65816

    Cliff3

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2007
    Location:
    SF Bay Area
    #18
    The current selling price delta for FX versus DX with Nikon is $900 (D700 @ $2390 versus D300s @ $1480). There have also been recent rumors that Sony is exiting the FX business because they can't figure out a way to make a profit at it. I doubt you'll see FX move into the consumer space any time soon.
     
  19. ManhattanPrjct macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2008
    #19
    I understand where you are coming from, but from a business perspective, that argument is somewhat difficult to support. The price difference can be attributable to raw materials, but also takes into account:

    1. Product research/development
    2. Scarcity (difficult to create any type of manufacturing volume savings if you produce fewer units)
    3. Target marketplace/affordability (charging more because you know there will be a market for it

    I acknowledge the materials to create a D700 cost more than a D300, but it's not $900.
     
  20. Cliff3 macrumors 65816

    Cliff3

    Joined:
    Nov 2, 2007
    Location:
    SF Bay Area
    #20
    Here is some more of what I quoted by Hogan in a previous post. He talks about why is is hard to drive cost out of sensor manufacturing for a given sensor size.

    [FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
    [/FONT]

    That's why I said the delta in selling price and not cost. For one thing, I have no idea what the manufacturing or wholesale costs are.
     
  21. OreoCookie thread starter macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2001
    Location:
    Sendai, Japan
    #21
    Full frame sensors are much more expensive to make since fewer fit on a wafer and the yield is much lower lower: only 20 fit on a 200 mm wafer compared to 200 APS-C-sized sensors and at more than twice the surface area of an APS-C-sized sensor, the probability of defective sensors is more than twice as high as well.

    While I wish I was wrong and you were right (I lust for a camera with a full frame sensor), cameras will full frame sensors will remain substantially more expensive than their APS-C-sized comrades. I agree that this probably doesn't warrant a $900 price difference between the D300 and the D700 (which are otherwise very closely specced), a substantial price hike is perfectly explainable.
     
  22. El Cabong macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2008
    #22
    With the big C and the big N being its main competitors for FF, it makes sense for Sony to cede the pro market and concentrate on its bread-and-butter consumer products, which they're doing with both the NEX and SLT lines. Meanwhile, Nikon at least seems to be moving towards in-house FF sensor development, and if the D3S is any indication, they're doing a pretty good job. If they spread FF sensors across more prosumer camera lines (by, say, leading with a FF D4 and reusing the sensor in successive lower-tier bodies down the road), volume increases and cost per unit decreases, not to mention the profits associated with people having to upgrade to FF glass.

    I'm not saying that it's likely (or that we're ever going to see a FF Rebel), but it's not completely cost-prohibitive if done properly. The main issue would be creating a market for it.

    P.S. I'm in a contest to see who can use "FF" the most times in a single post.
     
  23. ManhattanPrjct macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2008
    #23
    I think the hope is that that article you linked to is out-of-date and Nikon can create some efficiencies that would allow a smaller FX camera at a sub-$2k price. If that happens, it casts some doubt as to the future of the D300. Here's hoping!
     
  24. cube macrumors G5

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    #24
    As I understand, the D7000 also supports AI lenses.

    So, the only thing left for the D300 is the C position, AF points and fps?

    What about chromatic aberration correction and AF fine tuning? Does the D7000 have this too?
     
  25. OreoCookie thread starter macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2001
    Location:
    Sendai, Japan
    #25
    Yields are mostly determined by the geometry (i. e. size and shape) as well as the density of defects. That won't change over time. Have a look at this image of the two wafers in this article.

    The article gives some more concrete figures and they arrive at what we've been arguing here: full frame sensors are about 10 times as expensive since the yield (good sensors per wafer) is about 1/10th. Even if you lower defect density and use larger wafers, if you use similar technology to manufacture your APS-C-sized sensors and your full frame sensors, math will tell you that larger sensors are significantly more expensive.

    What we can hope for is that eventually, the difference in price will dwindle because it's cheaper to manufacture sensors period.
    Yes.
    What do you mean with C position?
     

Share This Page