Nikon or Canon ....

[jeffryscott]

Several posters have commented about how much more expensive the 7D is than a D7000, but you can easily pick up a decent used 7D for under $800. With a little patience, you can get them for under $700.

thanks ... is that over at POTN? Just starting to look.

 

[Promit]

No love for Sony? The A77 is a badass camera and feels like mirrorless in many ways (full time live view, EVF, etc) but with DSLR performance. You might also want to look at the 70D -- excellent live view performance but it got the 7D's AF system.

 

[wildwildwes]

If you're looking to keep your budget reasonable both now and in the future, my honest and sincere advice would be to go Nikon. Their venerable F-Mount has remained unchanged since its inception in the late 50's, and as you therefore know, practically ANY lens Nikon that has been manufactured over its 50+ year production span will fit on just about any Nikon body... Canon has had 3 mounts during the same time period (Breech, FD & EOS) Nikkor glass also tends to be sharper overall (and I personally know of several PRO photographers who use adapted Nikon lenses on their Canon bodies as such). But, all of that said, if you consider what one actually gets technology-wise with the EM-1 (and factoring in how precious a great photograph is) I'm sure you'd agree that $1400 really is NOT that much of a pill to swallow, right? Just the IBIS alone is worth every cent of admission for me... Oh, then there's the SIZE factor! I'm DONE lugging around big huge cameras and lenses... (unless i've booked an assistant for the day!).

Good luck with your search!

Cheers-

W

 

[carpandean]

thanks ... is that over at POTN? Just starting to look.

No, I just looked at Ebay "Sold Listings" and my own area's CraigsList. The former shows several below $800 and the latter shows one for sale now at $750.

 

[jeffryscott]

No love for Sony? The A77 is a badass camera and feels like mirrorless in many ways (full time live view, EVF, etc) but with DSLR performance. You might also want to look at the 70D -- excellent live view performance but it got the 7D's AF system.

no love for Sony, I'm sure it is nice though ... I just paid for a D7000 with 9K actuations .. $540, so I guess I made my decision. In all honesty, this is more about price, and used prices of Nikon gear can be pretty good (again, as long as the glass is good, I'll take beater equipment.) For example, I'm looking at a Nikkor AF-S 80-200 2.8 with some issues (still works though) for under $500. Even if I need to repair it in six months to a year, it is a great lens with fast AF for what I would pay for a 100-300 or 75-300 m43 lens.

What really lacks in Nikon is a reasonably fast, good wide angle solution for the crop cameras that is affordable. This is where I will miss my 17 1.8.

It is possible, and I've thought this before, of getting a DSLR for long lens work and keeping an m43 kit for wide. Right now I can't support two systems, but I can see that working for me in the future. So in other words, I'll be back:smile:

 

[jeffryscott]

If you're looking to keep your budget reasonable both now and in the future, my honest and sincere advice would be to go Nikon. Their venerable F-Mount has remained unchanged since its inception in the late 50's, and as you therefore know, practically ANY lens Nikon that has been manufactured over its 50+ year production span will fit on just about any Nikon body... Canon has had 3 mounts during the same time period (Breech, FD & EOS) Nikkor glass also tends to be sharper overall (and I personally know of several PRO photographers who use adapted Nikon lenses on their Canon bodies as such). But, all of that said, if you consider what one actually gets technology-wise with the EM-1 (and factoring in how precious a great photograph is) I'm sure you'd agree that $1400 really is NOT that much of a pill to swallow, right? Just the IBIS alone is worth every cent of admission for me... Oh, then there's the SIZE factor! I'm DONE lugging around big huge cameras and lenses... (unless i've booked an assistant for the day!).

Good luck with your search!

Cheers-

W

Agreed on all accounts, it is just the EM-1 price is my whole budget. Can't take pictures without a lens As mentioned in a previous post, I just paid for a D7000 ($540) so I'm in the Nikon camp (for now).

I have no qualms about photo quality with the m43 gear vs. APS. I can just get more performance for the price (at the cost of size and weight) with the Nikon kit.

 

[jeffryscott]

No, I just looked at Ebay "Sold Listings" and my own area's CraigsList. The former shows several below $800 and the latter shows one for sale now at $750.

Thanks. Saw some good deals here on Craigslist, but they all wanted me to respond to a gmail address so it had scam written all over it. Didn't check ebay ... but it is moot anyway since I just paid for a D7000.

The one positive of making a switch like this is if you shop carefully, and get good prices, you can sell Nikon or Canon for what you paid (or slightly more) in six months or a year. So, I may be back sooner than later (to some degree at least).

 

[pxpaulx]

Several posters have commented about how much more expensive the 7D is than a D7000, but you can easily pick up a decent used 7D for under $800. With a little patience, you can get them for under $700.

Yes, but refurbished D7000s are about $650, with patience they've been on 1 day sales (adorama through ebay usually) for as low as $580 - that price is hard to argue!

On a budget if the focal length works I'd suggest an 85mm 1.8g on a d7000, that lens is pretty quick for focus on my d600, and has great output.

 

[jeffryscott]

Yes, but refurbished D7000s are about $650, with patience they've been on 1 day sales (adorama through ebay usually) for as low as $580 - that price is hard to argue!

On a budget if the focal length works I'd suggest an 85mm 1.8g on a d7000, that lens is pretty quick for focus on my d600, and has great output.

An 85 is definitely in the cards. I may also consider a 50 1.8 for a cheap, decent short telephoto.

In the meantime, I have bought the D7000 for $540, 80-200 2.8 AF-S for $425 (works, but a $250 repair is expected at some point, could be a week, could be a year, could be never) and $325 for an AF-D 18-35 3.5/4.5 lens.

I believe this kit will satisfy my needs. It isn't small and sexy like my m43 kit, but, it should be a better tool for my intended use.

 

[pxpaulx]

An 85 is definitely in the cards. I may also consider a 50 1.8 for a cheap, decent short telephoto.

In the meantime, I have bought the D7000 for $540, 80-200 2.8 AF-S for $425 (works, but a $250 repair is expected at some point, could be a week, could be a year, could be never) and $325 for an AF-D 18-35 3.5/4.5 lens.

I believe this kit will satisfy my needs. It isn't small and sexy like my m43 kit, but, it should be a better tool for my intended use.

Nice set. I was strongly considering an 80-200 2.8 older version like yours for awhile, ended up opting for a refurbished 70-300mm 4-5.6 G, loss of 1-2 stops but make those back with VR, it is a decent lens. I absolutely adore the 85mm, don't know quite what it is about it, but I really enjoy using it! If you're end up getting a 50mm, I'd say hold out for the G version as well, I think the AF speed bump is worth it.

 

[Replytoken]

I am curious as to your reasons for picking a D7000 over a D300. Both are good bodies, but I was not under the assumption that the CAM module in the D7000 was as good as the one in the D300 when it came to focusing.

--Ken

 

[inkista]

I'd have a look at the 70 d...

+1.

Unless you need an alloy body and extra UI features, the 7D is getting long in the tooth and is due for a refresh, and the 70D has inherited (most of) the 7D's AF system [same hardware, but the spot AF and spot expansion AF modes are missing. OTOH, the PDAF gives you AF in lower light], and now sports the autofocus microadjust that made people pfft at the 60D. It's more consumer-feel, obviously, plastic body, using SD cards not CF, and having fewer UI niceties (no joystick, etc). But as an MFT shooter, you may appreciate the smaller size/weight. And as compensation, it now has the spanking new PDAF sensor (essentially, 80% of the image sensor can be used for AF function) that have made all of us watch that freaking pizza movie, touchscreen UI (which rocks for picking AF points ) and the Wi-fi near-field stuff.

It's still got dual wheel, it's still got the AF-ON button, and bursts at 7fps (that's only 1fps less than the 7D). So, as a lower-cost sports shooter, this one might work.

 

[jeffryscott]

I am curious as to your reasons for picking a D7000 over a D300. Both are good bodies, but I was not under the assumption that the CAM module in the D7000 was as good as the one in the D300 when it came to focusing.

--Ken

The D7000 is a bit smaller and my impression is the high ISO is a bit better. AF-wise I've read the D7000 is at least as good, if not slightly better. I've no personal experience and its been years since I had a D300 (very briefly then went with a D700, one hell of a camera).

As with any AF system, it's not just about speed, but accuracy. My old Oly E1 kicked the Nikon D1 for accuracy, even though it was slower. I had more keepers shooting NCAA basketball with the Oly and 50-200 than I did with the D1 and 80-200.

 

[jeffryscott]

+1.

Unless you need an alloy body and extra UI features, the 7D is getting long in the tooth and is due for a refresh, and the 70D has inherited (most of) the 7D's AF system [same hardware, but the spot AF and spot expansion AF modes are missing. OTOH, the PDAF gives you AF in lower light], and now sports the autofocus microadjust that made people pfft at the 60D. It's more consumer-feel, obviously, plastic body, using SD cards not CF, and having fewer UI niceties (no joystick, etc). But as an MFT shooter, you may appreciate the smaller size/weight. And as compensation, it now has the spanking new PDAF sensor (essentially, 80% of the image sensor can be used for AF function) that have made all of us watch that freaking pizza movie, touchscreen UI (which rocks for picking AF points ) and the Wi-fi near-field stuff.

It's still got dual wheel, it's still got the AF-ON button, and bursts at 7fps (that's only 1fps less than the 7D). So, as a lower-cost sports shooter, this one might work.

Too expensive. Looking on Amazon the cheapest body is 1100. Twice my D7000 cost. I'm sure it is a nice camera though (had a 20d a long time ago).

 

[nstelemark]

Too expensive. Looking on Amazon the cheapest body is 1100. Twice my D7000 cost. I'm sure it is a nice camera though (had a 20d a long time ago).

Brand new D7000s at Costco for $1100 with an 18-105 kit lens. Not a bad deal.

Pretty small RAW buffer on both the 7000 and 7100. Kind of surprising.

The E-M1 is well ahead in this area.

 

[mnhoj]

Hard to argue the D7000 at current used pricing.
The AF-S 80-200 you found is a ridiculous steal.
If you should find the 18-35 lacking, I'd like to recommend the first version Tamron 17-50 2.8.
And a thumbs up for the 85 1.8G. It's a great lens at a very decent price.

 

[inkista]

Too expensive. Looking on Amazon the cheapest body is 1100. Twice my D7000 cost. I'm sure it is a nice camera though (had a 20d a long time ago).

Ah, didn't realize you were shopping used. I figured if a new 7D body ($1400) or D7000 body ($900) was being contemplated, then an $1100 70D might be in the ballpark, especially if you were a video shooter. Yeah, hard to argue with used D7000 prices, especially since the D7100 came out with the 24MP sensor. I expect something similar might happen with the 7D pricetags if a 7DMkII ever gets announced.

 

[jeffryscott]

Well, all the gear arrived and I've taken a few hundred pics. Hard to get used to big clunky gear again, I really appreciate m43 for its size and design and the OM-D for SOOC image quality.

That said, I knew the Nikon was big and heavy, but I forgot just how big, and heavy, the 80-200 AF-S is. But damn, what a great piece of glass with fast AF.

The D7000 is a decent enough camera, not nearly as ergonomically nice as the K-5II I previously had. Nor as nice as the OM-D EM-5.

So, the gear serves its purpose, I'm pleased with the AF-C, I really like having a fast 80-200 2.8 and the image quality is quite nice.

Do I miss my m43, yes. There are a few lenses offered that may keep me here for a bit - the 18-35 1.8 Sigma being the number one desire.