[MCHRKiller]

I got a bonus at work...and I am contemplating investing some of it into a new camera. I currently have a D60 which is a great entry level DSLR, it has served me well and I have learned a lot about photography with it. However I am considering adding a more professional camera to my case. I am willing to spend $1500...and have came across the D7000 and all reviews I have seen are fabulous. I just thought I would ask for opinions as most of my photography is of the tanks and fish.

Has anyone used this camera? If so what are your thoughts on it?

 

[TickleMyElmo]

Look at the pics in the tank journals in my sig, and let me know if it's adequate :hihi: theres even some pics of the D7000 in the last few pages of my ADA journal....

I had one since they came out last year. I actually got one of the ones BestBuy sold before they were supposed to be released (big whoops for BestBuy!) I really wanted a more professional camera, but at the time it was (and still is) the best DX camera available and the Nikon with the newest tech, so I bought one, and I have to say it's really impressed me, especially for its price. I certainly plan to upgrade to the D300s successor when it comes out, but the D7000 has no problems what-so-ever keeping up....great camera with lots of features for the price!

 

[MCHRKiller]

To say those photos are good is an understatement

Most of the comments I have read have stated just what you have, for its price it is amazing. It is also especially nice to see the awesome aquarium photography.

I have a dumb question, will my current AF-S lenses work on the D7000? I have a few that I would hate to part with.

 

[TickleMyElmo]

To say those photos are good is an understatement

Most of the comments I have read have stated just what you have, for its price it is amazing. It is also especially nice to see the awesome aquarium photography.

I have a dumb question, will my current AF-S lenses work on the D7000? I have a few that I would hate to part with.

Absolutely, the AFS lenses will work with the D7000. AF-D lenses also work with the D7000 since it has a screwdrive focus motor built in, so now you can buy those older, cheaper, yet still amazing lenses and save some money if you want!

There's a thread I started a few topics down here in the lounge, which has a bunch of landscape style pictures taken with the D7000....just some more inspiration and to make you want the D7000 even more Besides, it's my social duty to make sure you get a new Nikon, and not one of those icky Canons :hihi:

http://www.plantedtank.net/forums/l...3-sh-national-park-picture-story-seasons.html

 

[MCHRKiller]

lol! I would never even consider a Canon. But you are right they are inspirational shots and do make me want to buy one even more.

What lens are you using for the landscapes and the tank/fish shots?

That compatibility will be of huge benefit in the macro lens department...I had been avoiding paying more of a macro than my original camera kit cost

Thank you for the help, it has been much appreciated.

 

[TickleMyElmo]

lol! I would never even consider a Canon. But you are right they are inspirational shots and do make me want to buy one even more.

What lens are you using for the landscapes and the tank/fish shots?

That compatibility will be of huge benefit in the macro lens department...I had been avoiding paying more of a macro than my original camera kit cost

Thank you for the help, it has been much appreciated.

Haha thanks! Most of the landscapes and fish were taken with the Nikon 17-55 f/2.8 lens, and the wildlife shots and some of the fish shots were taken with the Nikon 300mm f/4 AFS lens...

And yeah, the new AFS Nikon 105mm 2.8 Macro lens is about $900 new, but the older AFD 105mm 2.8 Macro lens goes for about $350 used, which is much more affordable....see! the newer cameras pay for themselves in cheaper lenses! lol...

 

[MCHRKiller]

The 105mm 2.8 AF-S was what I was eyeballing for my D60...I was just never willing to pay $300 more fo a single lense than I paid for the original kit. $350 is a much better price for a macro, lol.

Thanks again for the help, I am going to do further research and mull on it for a couple of weeks. But I definitely see a D7000 arriving soon, they just seem incredible

 

[MCHRKiller]

Just thought I would mention that I went ahead and got off the pot so to say. After reading a Kenrockwell.com review of the camera I ordered a new D7000 body from Dell.com. They were out of the kit with the lens...no huge deal as I have 5 other lenses from the D60 which will work

 

[shrimpnmoss]

so is the cannon vs nikon like chevy vs ford type of fan base...or is one really better?

 

[mordalphus]

so is the cannon vs nikon like chevy vs ford type of fan base...or is one really better?

nope, canons are really better ;D

 

[MCHRKiller]

Which is better is subjective to the user. To me a Nikon will always win as it is what I have always used, the layout is much better to me and I just generally think they are a better built higher quality camera. Someone else may feel that way for a Canon or a Pentax or whatever. Many people joke around in light of the whole Nikon-vs-Canon measuring contest, most people dont really take it seriously.

 

[mistergreen]

I'd buy lenses.

Your camera is good. Switching camera isn't going to make your pictures look any better but good lenses will.

 

[tetra73]

I'd buy lenses.

Your camera is good. Switching camera isn't going to make your pictures look any better but good lenses will.

Correct. Now, don't go walking around with a $1500+ camera and using a "kit" lens. You then wonder why your photos look so soft and not as sharp. Unfortunately, I see it all the times. Lens would probably break your bank account more than the camera. A good, professional grade lens would run you up to $1k+.

 

[tetra73]

Which is better is subjective to the user. To me a Nikon will always win as it is what I have always used, the layout is much better to me and I just generally think they are a better built higher quality camera. Someone else may feel that way for a Canon or a Pentax or whatever. Many people joke around in light of the whole Nikon-vs-Canon measuring contest, most people dont really take it seriously.

Once you stick to one brand, it is very hard to switch because all of your lenses would not work with the other brand. Second, Nikon and Canon have their different layouts. You will get used to using one way. You really don't want to relearn another layout, especially when you NEED to get that shots. And don't want to miss it because you were fumbling with the dials and buttons.

 

[speedie408]

I'm holding out for the 5D MK III. Canon FTW!!

 

[MCHRKiller]

I do believe that the body makes a huge difference as well as the lenses you use. Putting a 1K lense on a $400 camera body wont deliver awesome shots either. The main 3 things for me in buy this camera was that its image quality is rivaling much more expensive "professional" cameras, it will autofocus older lenses, and it shoots video.

 

[mistergreen]

Video is another story. If you need that, sure go for the d7000.

Now if you compare 16 megapixel in the D7000 vs 10 megapixel in your D60, that's not much of a leap in quality except for $1000 (man, Nikons are expensive )

You shouldn't worry about 'professional' cameras unless you're doing really high quality prints. I'd be more impressed with an awesome telephoto or macro lens.

 

[TickleMyElmo]

I do believe that the body makes a huge difference as well as the lenses you use. Putting a 1K lense on a $400 camera body wont deliver awesome shots either. The main 3 things for me in buy this camera was that its image quality is rivaling much more expensive "professional" cameras, it will autofocus older lenses, and it shoots video.

I agree with you, people like to preach about how lenses are more important than the camera, and I agree, but there comes a point when the body does make a difference. Going from the D60, which is ancient technology is todays DSLR world, to a D7000 will be like night and day. Not only in image quality, but also build, quality of construction, feel, material used, etc...

Video is another story. If you need that, sure go for the d7000.

Now if you compare 16 megapixel in the D7000 vs 10 megapixel in your D60, that's not much of a leap in quality except for $1000 (man, Nikons are expensive )

You shouldn't worry about 'professional' cameras unless you're doing really high quality prints. I'd be more impressed with an awesome telephoto or macro lens.

You have to pay for the best :hihi:

 

[tetra73]

I do believe that the body makes a huge difference as well as the lenses you use. Putting a 1K lense on a $400 camera body wont deliver awesome shots either. The main 3 things for me in buy this camera was that its image quality is rivaling much more expensive "professional" cameras, it will autofocus older lenses, and it shoots video.

FYI, speaking as a hardcore photography hobbyist (Canon)/freelancer and making some money on the side (cycling photography), professional grade lens is an investment. It does not depreciate in value in the used market. Sometimes, when the price of the same lens has gone up, you could actually make profits selling it. Bodies come and go. The body won't matter unless you are shooting in an environment that demands the cleanest picture at the highest ISO 3200 and the ability to focus at the dimmest lighting condition. On a bright day and shooting a still subject, the D60 would perform as well as the D3, assuming both bodies are using the same lens.

 

[mistergreen]

You have to pay for the best :hihi:

Like Apple products? :hihi: