Nikon D7100 vs D600

Our last comparison will be to show the difference between the new Nikon D7100 and the full-frame Nikon D600, which we reviewed last year. Despite the price differences, seems like a lot of people are wondering which one of the two cameras to choose – the D7100, a cropped-sensor “DX” camera, or the D600, a full-frame “FX” camera. In this article, I will first go into detailed specifications of both cameras, then talk about main features that differentiate the two. Please keep in mind that this comparison is purely based on specifications.

Nikon D7100 vs D600

First, let’s go over the bare specifications:

Nikon D7100 vs D600 Specification Comparison

Camera FeatureNikon D7100Nikon D600
Sensor Resolution24.1 Million24.3 Million
Sensor Size23.5×15.6mm35.9×24.0mm
Sensor Pixel Size3.91µ5.96µ
Low Pass FilterNoYes
Sensor Dust ReductionYesYes
Image Size6,000 x 4,0006,016 x 4,016
Image ProcessorEXPEED 3EXPEED 3
Viewfinder TypePentaprismPentaprism
Viewfinder Coverage100%100%
Built-in FlashYes, with flash commander modeYes, with flash commander mode
Flash Sync Speed1/2501/200
Storage Media2x SD2x SD
Continuous Shooting Speed6 FPS, 7 FPS in 1.3x Mode5.5 FPS
Buffer Size (RAW, Lossless 14-bit)616
Buffer Size (RAW, Compressed 12-bit)927
Max Shutter Speed1/8000 to 30 sec1/4000 to 30 sec
Shutter Durability150,000 cycles150,000 cycles
Exposure Metering Sensor2,016-pixel RGB sensor 3D Color Matrix Metering II2,016-pixel RGB sensor 3D Color Matrix Metering II
Base ISOISO 100ISO 100
Native ISO SensitivityISO 100-6,400ISO 100-6,400
Boosted ISO SensitivityISO 12,800-25,600ISO 12,800-25,600
Autofocus SystemAdvanced Multi-CAM 3500DXMulti-CAM 4800
Focus Points51, 15 cross-type39, 9 cross-type
AF DetectionUp to f/8Up to f/8
Video CapabilityYesYes
Video OutputMOV, CompressedMOV, Uncompressed
Video Maximum Resolution1920×1080 (1080p) @ 24p, 25p, 30p, 50i, 60i1920×1080 (1080p) @ 24p, 25p, 30p
Audio RecordingBuilt-in microphone
External stereo microphone (optional)
Built-in microphone
External stereo microphone (optional)
LCD Size3.2″ diagonal TFT-LCD3.2″ diagonal TFT-LCD
LCD Resolution1,228,800 dots dots921,000 dots
HDR SupportYesYes
Bracketing2 to 5 frames2 to 3 frames
Built-in GPSNoNo
Wi-Fi FunctionalityEye-Fi Compatible, WU-1aEye-Fi Compatible, WU-1b
BatteryEN-EL15 Lithium-ion BatteryEN-EL15 Lithium-ion Battery
Battery Life950 shots (CIPA)900 shots (CIPA)
Battery ChargerMH-25 Quick ChargerMH-25 Quick Charger
Weather Sealed BodyYesYes
BuildTop and Rear Magnesium AlloyTop and Rear Magnesium Alloy
USB Version2.02.0
Weight (Body Only)675g760g
Dimensions135.5 x 106.5 x 76mm141 × 113 × 82mm
MSRP Price$1,199 (as introduced)$2,099 (as introduced)

At first, it might seem like these two cameras have a lot in common. However, there are a number of differences, some of which are so big that I will spend some time talking about them detail. The first main difference between the D7100 and the D600 is obviously the sensor. The Nikon D7100 has an APS-C sized sensor, also known as “DX” in Nikon lingo, while the D600 has more than twice larger full-frame “FX” sensor. I won’t spend a lot of time discussing differences in sensor sizes here, because I have already written about it in detail before. Head on over to my Nikon DX vs FX article, give it a good read and then come back here. In short, sensor size matters! While both cameras have comparably similar resolution (24 MP), the sensor sizes are different, which means that the full-frame D600 has several advantages such as: lower noise, higher dynamic range, better colors, shallower depth of field, less diffraction and wider field of view. Larger sensor also means a larger mirror and viewfinder, which is a huge advantage that many people underestimate. If you took a DX camera and an FX camera and looked through the viewfinder of both, you would notice the difference right away. I talked about this a number of times before, but it is best to experience this yourself. I highly recommend to go to a local camera store and compare – it is hard to visualize until you actually see it. Yes, it is that much different.

Lack of a low pass filter, also known as “anti-aliasing filter”, means that the D7100 will produce sharp images and take advantage of good lenses that can resolve a lot of detail. The D600 has such a filter in place, so it is at a slight disadvantage in that regard. Although for some people, the possibility of moire showing up in images is much worse than having slightly sharper images. Again, I won’t cover the advantages and disadvantages of low-pass filters, because I covered it in detail in my “what is a low-pass filter?” and Nikon D800 vs D800E articles.

Speed-wise, both cameras are comparable at 6 (D7100) and 5.5 (D600) fps, although the D7100 can shoot at 7 fps in 1.3x crop mode. The buffer capacity difference, however, is quite big. One of the limitations of the D7100 is its very small buffer that can accommodate a maximum of 16 smallest (compressed) RAW files before the buffer fills up and the camera slows down. The D600 is better in that regard: it can fit 60% more images before slowing the camera – an important metric for sports and wildlife photographers. At the same time, the D600 has an inferior autofocus system from the D7000, with 39 autofocus points that are tightly placed around the center of the viewfinder. The Nikon D7100 is the complete opposite of the D600 in that regard – because it uses the autofocus system from high-end full-frame cameras, its 51 focus points are spread out across the frame. Take a look at the difference between the two:

Nikon D7100 vs D600 Viewfinder

I will save my commentary on the above for the next article that I am working on.

Another important difference worth noting is the maximum shutter speed – the D7100 can go all the way to 1/8000, while the D600 is limited to 1/4000. Most people won’t care about this difference, but it could make a difference for shooting very fast prime lenses in bright light. The same goes for the flash sync speed limitations – the D7100 is better at 1/250 sync speed, while the D600 is limited to 1/200. For most photographers out there, this does not make a difference, but flash gurus will prefer the 1/250 sync speed for a number of reasons. Lastly, bracketing is also limited on the D600 compared to the D7100 – the latter can do 2 to 5 frames, while the D600 can only go as far as 2 to 3 frames total.

Screen sizes on both cameras are of the same size, but the D7100 has more resolution, with its 1.2 million dots versus 921K. The D600 is slightly larger and about 85 grams heavier. Lastly, the price difference between the two is quite big – the D7100 retails for $1,199, while the D600 is at $2,099 (although its price has been around the $2K mark for a while now).

So, here comes the big question – should you get the D7100 or the D600? It is surely a tough choice and not an easy answer. The D7100 is better in features, but the D600 is better in image quality. Personally, I favor the D600 for its better image quality and large viewfinder. But it comes at a much higher cost, especially for someone that owns a number of DX lenses. So I suggest to go through your priorities and decide what is more important for you and decide whether the cost difference is worth the change or not.


  1. 1) Sebastiano
    February 25, 2013 at 2:33 am

    Hi Nasim, the game between D7100 and D600 is getting hard … and to make a choice I need to see a comparison by images, spreading from low to high ISO, low light and shooting to moving subjects …

    Good article, I look forward to see the next comparison between these two cameras.

    Regarding the viewfinder yes, it’s a big difference. I own both F60 and D70s, and the F60 viewfinder make you to see the world really differently. I love Fx viewfinders, but I’m very disappoinded about the D600 AF coverage.
    So, I’ll wait your next excellent review :).

    Bye, Sebastiano

  2. 2) Donz
    February 25, 2013 at 2:39 am

    Thanks for the comparison Nasim as a lot of us are considering these two cameras.
    The other big difference for me is while the fps might be slightly faster, the D600 has a considerably bigger buffer. Pity it wasn’t bigger on the 7100. My big query to wait and see about will be the effect of the absence of the Low Pass filter.

    • 2.1) Sebastiano
      February 25, 2013 at 2:56 am

      Buffer speed could not be a problem if we use SDXC cards, able to up to 104MB/sec and, in the next future, up to 300MB/sec.
      This means the buffer is almost never full, butfilled with 3 or 4 frames, allowing to keep the shutter pressed until you release.
      We need some test to judge how “slow” the D7100 sustained fps is.

      • 2.1.1) Red
        February 25, 2013 at 4:09 am

        Buffer is THE most important thing if you need to shoot action and unfortunately your calculations are way of.
        First speeds you are mentioning are “theoretical max speeds” which means those numbers are WAY lower in reality.
        Also D7100 spits out files that are around 30MB in size even if we pretend that todays fastest cards (104Mb/sec) can deliver that speed in reality it would take only 3 shots to saturate that card, but as I said those numbers are only there for MARKETING. You need to learn difference between marketing and reality, 2 very different realms.

        • Sebastiano
          February 25, 2013 at 4:45 am

          Hi Red,
          we still haven’t seen any test so I was speculating ;)
          What I can say is that if D7100 files are about 30Mbytes we need a card able to write at least at 240 (30×8) Mbps.
          I read that Sandisk sells 95MB/sec 64GBytes card (SanDisk Extreme Pro 32 GB SDHC Class 10 UHS-1).
          95MB/s is more than 240 Mbps ;)
          I think we have to see the tests to say the D7100 buffer is too low.

          • Scott M
            February 25, 2013 at 11:00 am

            You are confusing your units a bit: everything should be in MB and nothing in Mb.

            RAW filesize: 30MB
            8 fps would be 240MBps (>> 95MBps)

            The best you could hope for would be 4fps sustained if you use compressed / 12-bit RAW, or 3 fps without uncompressed 14-bit RAW. Real world maybe more like 2-3 fps.

            • Herb Martin
              February 25, 2013 at 7:41 pm

              Check out D7100 specs here
              Raw files range in size from 13.4 MB for 12 bit compressed 1.3 crop files to 28.5 MB for 14 bit lossless . At fastest card speed of 105MB/sec, that would imply real time shooting rate of between 7.8 and 3.7 /sec, indefinitely!

            • Sebastiano
              February 26, 2013 at 3:35 am

              oh! what a mistake! :) you’re right … 7frames per second requires at least 210 MBytes/sec writing speed … that is >> 95MB/s

              So I don’t understand why they didn’t put more buffer memory (i.e. for about 30 shoots @ 14bit NEF lossles). Does this type of memory cost so much?
              DDR 3 SDRAMs have more than 210 MB/s I/O rate … and 1GB costs about 30$ … what the extra cost for a wider buffer? :S

            • herb
              March 24, 2013 at 2:42 am

              Shaun at has confirmed with fast sd cards, he was able to fire sustained frame rates of between 2.5 and 3.1 /sec for uncropped raw files

  3. 3) Peter
    February 25, 2013 at 2:39 am

    how is comparing the Flagship DX camera to the the entry level FX camera fair.
    Why not compare the D7100 to the D4 for a tyrue DX to FX compariosn?
    Flagship against Flagship.

  4. 4) darrell
    February 25, 2013 at 3:02 am

    I cant help feeling that Nikon are taking the p*** out of all of us here, All most of us want is a 24mp D800 even if it costs the same as the 36mp D800. So eventually we get over the disappointment of not being given that choice and talk ourselves in to putting up with a D600, then Nikon bring out a DX like this which is generally more highly specked than the D600 at nearly half the price……so what is a reasonable Nikon devotee supposed to think right now !!

  5. February 25, 2013 at 3:12 am

    Well , the thing is I might still keep D7000 but my 300 F4 +TC14 will be permanently attached to D7100 in crop mode while still getting the best part of picture :) ,I.e more than 800mm 5.6 in 15+ MP :) ,I care less about the buffer as hit ratio will be more and it does not take ages to empty buffer while using fast SDXC cards :)
    It will certainly be a great camera :)
    I’m not sure why are you comparing it with D600 ,only thing HUGE in D600 is that it is a FX camera with great IQ.


    • 5.1) John
      February 25, 2013 at 10:39 am

      Yep, very good point! The 300mm F4 with the TC just became an 800mm , that’s of huge value!

      I would love to see an image quality comparison between the D7100 and the D600 using the same lens. I can’t see it being such a massive difference without pixel peeping.

      • 5.1.1) Adnan Khan
        February 25, 2013 at 2:42 pm

        I was going to buy Nikon 1 V2 body + adapter only for the longer reach but CX sensor is very small compared to DX sensor and the samples from V2 are not nice.
        D7100’s IQ will be like or slightly better than that of D5200’s and D600 will win over IQ being a full frame camera :)
        But up to ISO 1600 one will get very nice results with AF ability up to F8 and in crop mode the IQ will be same but giving 2x more reach .i can mount TC 20 EIII and make it a 600mm F8 lens with AF ability and in crop mode it will be around 1200mm :)
        No AA filter means it will deliver much better results with TCs .

        D600 will win over IQ at high ISO’s as being a FX camera but if you want to compare IQ of D600 with the now latest same MP DX camera ,that is D5200 and the difference in IQ is obvious D600 wins!

        I have shot D7000 in ISO 25K and with a bit of cleaning and added sharpness printed a 4×6 picture and it looks very nice ,it can be scanned again to larger size .. LOL
        D7100 will have better IQ and DR than D7000 and right now this is perfect for my needs as being a second or third body after D800 :)


  6. 6) Jason
    February 25, 2013 at 3:28 am

    Hi Nasim,

    I believe you made an error in comparing the number of focus points, I believe both have the same 51 focus points not 39 on the D600. Please clarify.

    Kind regards,


    • February 25, 2013 at 3:42 am

      D600 has 39 focus points just like D7000 but with the ability to focus at F8 ,same meter.

      • 6.1.1) Bilal
        March 3, 2013 at 10:06 pm

        doesn’t anyone else find it a bit strange that the D600 has a small AF sensor and only 39 points? that is the only thing stopping me from buying it. i feel like if i do i will be letting myself be fooled by Nikon.. i’m really angry about this move by Nikon. I search the net looking for someone who shares my pain but everyone seems okay with it like “who cares type attitude”

        my angle is, what if i don’t want or need the 36mp why can i not get a decent FX package with 24mp and 51 af points to at least cover part of the area as opposed to the tiny 39 point system they have in the 600….

        if i’m being silly here please let me know!

      • 6.1.2) Bilal
        March 3, 2013 at 10:06 pm

        doesn’t anyone else find it a bit strange that the D600 has a small AF sensor and only 39 points? that is the only thing stopping me from buying it. i feel like if i do i will be letting myself be fooled by Nikon.. i’m really angry about this move by Nikon. I search the net looking for someone who shares my pain but everyone seems okay with it like “who cares type attitude”

        my angle is, what if i don’t want or need the 36mp why can i not get a decent FX package with 24mp and 51 af points to at least cover part of the area as opposed to the tiny 39 point system they have in the 600….

        if i’m being silly here please let me know!

        • Vern
          March 4, 2013 at 12:20 am

          Yes, you are being just a bit silly, Bilal. If you expect a lower cost camera to have all the features of one costing $900 more, then you are expecting too much. And did you read Nasim’s comments about the AF system in the D600? It’s not a bad system at all. It is better than that of the D7000, which camera has many satisfied users. In fact, I happily use a D7000. If you are someone who needs more focus points then by all means buy a camera with 51-points. I have cameras with both, a D3 and D300 with 51-point AF, and a D7000 with the 39-point system. The only time I need the 51-point system is for wildlife and then it isn’t really the number of focus points that is most important. It is the frames per second. The D3 shoots 10 FPS, leaving all others behind, except the newer top level Nikons. All the rest are much slower in this area. And the D800 lags behind the D600. As Nasim said, the D800 is really a special purpose camera. 36 MP files are unwieldy to many and I see some pretty sad results from D800’s simply because it is too much camera for the person. It’s a great camera, but one should think carefully about whether they and their lenses are up to the D800 requirements. The D600 is more of an every person’s camera.

          So from someone who has shot both AF systems, the hoopla over the 39-point system is being overemphasized. I think if you try it you just may find there is nothing to complain about. It really is a pretty capable system. But, if you are someone being paid to do sports or shoot wildlife, then you need the D4 with its fast FPS. Lots of pro’s use only 21 of the focus points in their 51-point systems to speed up moving the points around the screen. Nasim also compared the size of the focus area of the D600 with that in the D800 and there isn’t that much difference. All full frame DSLR’s have a smaller focus area than those on a DX camera, and that includes all brands. There too if one wants something that covers more of the view screen, then they have to buy a DX camera, not a full frame one. It’s true of all full frame cameras from all manufacturers.

          Hope this helps a bit. I will be getting my new D600 on Tuesday. Will have lots of fun using it for general shooting. When I want to shoot fast for wildlife, etc, I will pull out my beloved D3. Now if you want fast, buy a used D3. Y can get one for a good price. It’s my favorite Nikon of all time. :)

          Best wishes,


        • Adnan Khan
          March 4, 2013 at 12:23 am

          Yes ,a disappointing small AF area but not too small to get great pictures :)
          It’s like punishment from Nikon for releasing a low priced full frame camera :)
          Nobody would have bought or have stopped buying D800 if that was the case :)

          When Canon 5D M II came ,most Nikon full frame shooters started complaining about low MPs on D700 and D3 and D3x was out of reach from many.
          D800 is a very reasonable priced camera and it is really a game changer if used properly it can blow away 60K MF digital backs.

          Bilal ,look n search for D600 photos and see how people have got great pictures with a small AF area camera :)


        • Sebastiano
          March 4, 2013 at 3:28 am

          I drawed some additional point to the D600 AF anc compared to 5D MkIII and D700/800/D3/D4 AF areas:

          As I wrote in italian, I think for normal use (you have time to catch the focus and then recompose) the 7 points I drawed red are enough.
          But for some kind of macros and for moving subjects more IMHO more points more effordable AF.

          In fact, what I’m saying in that forum is “ok, if the D600 AF is so good why not the same on D4?” ;)

          Anyway, we can survive with D600 AF, and make excellent (and in focus) photos, but I think if the D600 had the same D4/D800 AF system this would make it a better camera.
          And more wanted :)

          • Adnan Khan
            March 14, 2013 at 10:27 am

            Sebastiano ,

            It’s very disappointing to see when ppl. forget so soon that every camera company had basic cheaper models to high end flag ship in film days and they all had different purposes and were for different class of photographers but shared one common thing that is film (same sensor) , so same is in digital , you are asking D4 focus on cheaper camera NOT made for D4 users and you can get 3 D600s in D4’s price.
            People were shooting great master pieces before AF was even invented :)
            Give me a 28 2.8 AI-s and D600 and I can make it a point n shoot :) will not need a single AF point :)
            This is the most bad thing happened to G type lenses that ppl. don’t know about DoF scale anymore ,but only good thing I see in G type is in Macro PG that one can shoot handheld in F51 with flash :)

            Looks like everyone wants everything in one camera for free :)

            in another post many ppl. were demanding a 135mm F1.8 , but for what ? there is already a masterpiece 135 F2 DC “Bokeh factory” and F1.8 and F2 are nearly the same thing.And if God forbid Nikon came up with a 135mm F1.8 G these very ppl. will be screaming over the price :) LOL


        • Dave L
          March 4, 2013 at 3:52 am


          If you go back and check Nasim’s original review and sports / wildlife posts, he wrote that the D600’s autofocus was better than the D300’s (except for the smaller coverage of course). I’ve had the D600 for a week and, so far, I’d agree. I haven’t done sports yet but I’ve been trying to trick it in low light and it’s doing as good or better than my D300. In addition, my kids are very fair-skinned. The D300, even with the Nikon 24-70, would miss focus slightly more times than I thought it should if I didn’t get the focus point on a great spot and they were moving around a bit. I’ve had none of those issues with the D600. I’m very pleased with focus (so far). It locks on and it’s been accurate in situations where I expected it to.

          Now that I’m using the D600, my biggest day in, day out feature-related gripes are 1) no 100% one button zoom – this is a huge annoyance when trying to work quickly with groups; 2) body size: it’s too small for me to hold properly with 24-70 and flash (I have long fingers) – I’ve ordered the grip. I also miss the AF-on but this can be worked around by re-programming buttons.

          I’ll love the D600’s images but I’ll have to live with some annoyances while actually shooting. High ISO / overall image quality / FX depth of field / viewfinder size is so much better than D300 that it’s worthwhile. Once I saw the 7100 specs, I knew there was really only one option for me.

          I would have been open to real D400 and I really wanted a D600 sensor in a D800 body (and I would have paid near D800 prices). We’ll all have to decide what we’re willing to live with regarding compromises among the models. D600 seemed best for me.

        • puckhead193
          March 9, 2013 at 11:14 am

          That’s my complaint about the D600, I would have bought it a long time ago but the fact the AF points are so close to the center is just madding. I use my rule of thirds a lot and it doesn’t help… I’m leaning more towards the D800 because of it…

        • Derek
          April 25, 2013 at 7:06 pm

          How does one get upset over 39 focal points? I have 51 on my D300 and have found that 21 works better for me when tracking flying objects. Also, lets not forget that last years Canon 5d2 had a whoping 9 point system.

  7. 7) jeff kermath
    February 25, 2013 at 3:54 am

    Great information. I’m considering the 7100 but would really like to see built in wifi. Is there anything on the horizon at Nikon for that upgrade?

    • 7.1) TimR
      March 3, 2013 at 3:02 am

      no built in wifi yet maybe they will on the next camera, however, you can buy the Nikon WU-1b Wireless Mobile Adapter ($60.) and attach it to the D7100

  8. 8) Dave L
    February 25, 2013 at 3:54 am

    Thanks for the comparison. Even though it is a DX / FX comparison, I agree many people are weighing both choices. As a D300 owner, I’ve been doing the same. Both options appear to make existing owners face tough compromises. For what I am looking to do better, I’ll be “compromising” soon with a D600 to get achieve better overall image quality. I can see also why others will wait or go with D7100. Thanks again for a thoughtful and relevant comparison piece.

  9. 9) fiza
    February 25, 2013 at 4:37 am

    hi nasim. thanks for putting it all in a nut shell . As always, ur thought process syncs well with the majority of serious photographers looking out for guidelines.

    nasim, hw soon cud we expect ur review on sigma 35mmf1.4. i have been reading rave reviews abt it, but waiting for ur review as the final word before committing on a purchase decision.

    thanks a ton for ur time

    • 9.1) June
      February 26, 2013 at 7:31 am

      wht r u tkng abt? You appear to be in such a hurry that speed is more important than sense and clarity. Are you 12?

    • 9.2) Jon McGuffin
      March 2, 2013 at 9:54 am

      I own the Nikon mount Sigma 35mm 1.4 and all I can say is that it is amazing in every way and the positive reviews you are seeing out there are legit. Amazing piece if glass and though I have a D700, I find myself using it on my D7000 a little more frequently.

      • 9.2.1) jorge Balarin
        March 2, 2013 at 2:13 pm

        I will buy the 35mm Sigma. It seems it is a fair priced very good prime.

      • 9.2.2) fiza
        March 4, 2013 at 1:28 am

        thanks Jon . hw do u find the Autofocus , its as efficient as the Nikkor primes ?

        • Jon McGuffin
          March 4, 2013 at 6:45 am

          I have the 85mm 1.8 and the 50mm 1.8 (both AF-S) and the focus motor is silent and fast, not perfect but certainly in the same general performance category of both those lenses.

  10. February 25, 2013 at 5:06 am

    Remember the D7100 is *not* a D300 replacement, it is not a professional build camera like the D300/300s, a D400 or equivalent will arrive,

    trust me…

    • 10.1) Mike
      March 1, 2013 at 7:28 pm

      How is it not? The only thing a D400 can possibly add is faster fps. I doubt we will see a D400

      • 10.1.1) Jon McGuffin
        March 2, 2013 at 9:57 am

        This is just not the case.

        – Faster frame rate in the 7/9 frames per second
        – Better RAW buffer to hold 30-40 shots before delay
        – D800/D4 Build Quality
        – USB 3.0 Interface

        All elements that could easily command another $400-$500 price premium and would be joyfully welcome by enthusiast and professionals alike. It’s called the D400 and it will be here by summers end. :)

        • AMusingFool
          March 2, 2013 at 2:22 pm

          XQD is another possibility, although that would mostly be a way to improve the buffer without improving the buffer.

        • AMusingFool
          March 2, 2013 at 2:24 pm

          And more bracketing options.

  11. 11) Jacob Langlands
    February 25, 2013 at 5:58 am

    Just under a year ago, I purchased a used D700 body for around 1,400 GBP. Shortly after that, the D800 was announced, which I was slightly disappointed about (notleast because secondhand D700 prices went down).

    However, looking at the debate here, and also the enormous file sizes from the D800, and having returned from a trip to Salzburg in Austria with a clutch of great photos (OK, not professional) – I am truly delighted with my D700 and wouldn’t change it at all – not for a D800, a D600 or a D7100.

    I’d recommend considering a used D700 – about the same cost as a new D600, but with higher spec in some respects (OK, older sensor and processor)… I love mine!

    • 11.1) Robert
      February 25, 2013 at 3:30 pm

      I think this is a very good point. I’m in the market to upgrade my D300s sometime this year but I’m frustrated with the more consumer-level button and dial layout of the D600, as well as the limited number of focus points. I’m sure I’d get used to both of those shortcomings but after the great handling of the D300s, the D600 seems like a step backwards in some respects (despite being FX of course). I could get the D300s’ pro-handling features on the D800 but I’m not convinced that I need the huge file sizes for the premium price. Now that a used D700 is so affordable, I’m very tempted to just make do with a D700 for a while until Nikon completes what is a very confusing range of high-end cameras. If they brought out a D700s, I’d jump on it.

  12. 12) Clarence
    February 25, 2013 at 6:05 am

    I have been using the D600 since October and I am extremely pleased with the IQ. Yes it has oil and dusts issues still after 4000 shots but I can wet clean it myself in about 10 minutes. The process is not difficult if you take your time.
    Nasim – thanks for the 24-120 lens suggestion. I got it last Friday and used it over the weekend. It is very pleasant to handle and it is sharper than I expected.

  13. 13) FrancoisR
    February 25, 2013 at 6:23 am

    Hello Nasim,

    My last DX body was a D7000, which I kept for three months and never missed after (except for the two programmable modes on the dial “à la 5D”). IMHO there cannot be a comparison between a FX and a DX. These devices are meant to catch light and it’s all about sensor size. What you see in the viewfinder is what you get and you get a lot more with FF. 1/8000s, 51 points, etc are just lures to catch the last remnants of DX. The only important factor between the two is price (almost 2 to one) and glass in the bag. I would consider a used D700 instead for the same price, video out of the equation ( the AF audio noise and constant action on the D800 video really bother me). DX has met the end of the road (except for low end maybe but mirrorless will slash them all eventually). I also agree with gary smith, the D7000 is not a replacement for the “full fledge” D300(s).

    Thank you for making my bedtime reading (all the time reading should I say lloll) “si enrichissant”.

    p.s. I say again, the 70-200 f4 collar at $26.00 on eBay is great! But not that needed, given the small size of the lens.

  14. 14) craig
    February 25, 2013 at 7:15 am

    I just sold my D600 yesterday as I found it very redundant along with my D800e. I could never find a niche for it. The D600 was just sitting and gathering dust (because that’s what D600’s do!). Anyway, I plan on replacing it with the D7100 and a long lens to use for wildlife as a compliment to my D800e camera; just as I used to utilize the D700 & D300 pairing.

    • 14.1) Jay
      February 28, 2013 at 5:14 pm

      Craig, where do you sell your ols DSLR? Just asking and might as well a good deal from where you sold yours.. Thanks..

      • 14.1.1) craig
        February 28, 2013 at 6:14 pm

        Most camera sites have stand alone buy & sell boards. Fred Miranda, or Nikonians among others. Most sellers and buyers are very reliable, although there can be exceptions so do your research. So let the buyer beware.

  15. February 25, 2013 at 7:50 am

    Good article Nasim, but there is one more big “disadvantage” on FX cameras that is rarely mentioned: the lens are much bulkier and heavier. As a travel and trekker photographer, that is a really important aspect, and will discourage me moving to FX, even considering the better dynamic range on the D600, which is one of the most important advantages of the full frame in my opinion.

    • February 25, 2013 at 12:23 pm

      Robson, considering that Nikon has only a couple of good DX lenses, I do not consider lens size/bulk to be a disadvantage for the FX mount. Most people end up buying heavy lenses for DX cameras, because there are no DX alternatives. Sucks, but Nikon has been treating the DX crowd really badly, with no good DX lens announcements during the last 3-4 years.

    • 15.2) AM
      February 25, 2013 at 7:31 pm

      There is another point that has not been mentioned so much which is the fact that the D7100 will demand better glass to get the most out of it. When the D7000 was released, most of the DX lenses started showing their limitations. Now you have a sensor with a higher pixel density and that won’t forgive. There is a reason why the AA filter was removed from the D7100. And, as it was pointed out on another blog, the D7100 picture samples on Nikon’s web site were taken using FX glass. Does this kind of say something?
      So, at this moment, it looks like if you want to really get the most out of a D7100, you need FX glass. Unless Nikon comes with better DX glass that keeps up with higher pixel densities. So, the big question is, is it a better investment to buy better DX lenses (non-existent yet) or make the switch to FX? I’d rather make the move to FX.

    • 15.3) Richard
      March 4, 2013 at 11:17 pm

      Robson, I agree with you. I have a D700 and D7000 and find that while travelling I much prefer to carry the D7000 based on weight alone. Pair it with the Tokina 12-24 f4 or 11-16 2.8, the Nikon 50 af-s 1.4 and the 24-120 f4 and you have a very versatile system that can be used for stills and video but without too much bulk and weight. For a trek in the hills I would leave the 24-120 behind. The losses in IQ to FX are considerably outweighed by the weight and bulk considerations in my mind. For a longer lens I sometimes carry the old but diminutive and sharp Nikon 70-210 3.3-5.6; however the 24-120 generally replaces this now.

  16. 16) Neil
    February 25, 2013 at 8:08 am

    The biggest benefit of the DX system, though, is putting more relevant pixels on a subject given the crop. That’s the benefit to wildlife, sports, and macro people. And the DOF difference for the same framing comes in handy for DX users.

  17. 17) Steve
    February 25, 2013 at 10:59 am

    I have a 600 and think its great.
    But I have a question regarding lenes.
    I have a Tameron 28-300
    Since the Nikon 28-300 is on sale I’m wondering if its worth upgrading to the Nikon.
    Is there much difference in the two lenes??

  18. 18) Big_Mike
    February 25, 2013 at 12:36 pm

    Thanks Nasim for this comparison/review…..I think both cameras are great and I like that they offer different things. However, I made the leap to full frame (D600) a few months ago and I don’t think I will ever go back to using a DX camera for my main camera. Everything is wider and better looking with a full frame.

  19. 19) Jorge Balarin
    February 25, 2013 at 12:53 pm

    Dear Nasim,

    Perhaps you don’t know the answer, but, why Nikon is misplacing the autofocus systems ? I would buy inmediately the D600 if it had the D7100 autofocus system. I’m going crazy. Greetings.

    • 19.1) Randall
      February 26, 2013 at 9:50 pm

      Well the answer is obvious. So in a year they can release the d610 with improved auto focus!

      • 19.1.1) Jorge Balarin
        March 2, 2013 at 4:07 pm

        I hope they will do it, but that is not a good reason for me, because they always could improve the camera in a positive way. When I have a nice camera that offer me what I want, then I could invest my money in glass and other accesories. Also from a marketing point of view it is good for Nikon to be recognized as the producers of the best, fair priced photo equipment of the world.

    • 19.2) Sebastiano
      March 1, 2013 at 5:34 am

      Me too, dust problem apart.

      If the reason is “to have room for an improved D600” (i.e. D600s, D610 .. doesn’t matter the name) I would say “So, why are you releasing cameras that always miss something important to be fantastic, then? …”
      It does not make any sense to have not put the same D800/D4 51 AF multicam also in the D600.
      Why? Is the D600 a camera for still photography only? My F80 had a wider AF coverage and the tecnology improves … so, seriously, why has Nikon choosen the “poor” 39 AF system?
      To cut costs? Does not make sense …
      To differentiate the products? Does not make sense, as many still say D700 AF was better then D600.

      IMHO, If Nikon wanted to “slit” the D700 into 2 different cameras it made an error in making too poor the entry Fx …

  20. February 25, 2013 at 3:04 pm

    Great review as always. I was hoping you would have review D4 by now? Might you do that in the future?

  21. 21) Diego
    February 25, 2013 at 7:34 pm

    Nasim, no need to convince me of the virtues of FX, I am a happy owner of a D700 and will be for a while. What I am thinking is to get a good DX as second body for the reach. The small buffer is a limitation while built and AF look good on paper.
    I hope you will be able to test D7100 iq soon and maybe also its degradation when a TC Is applied and the actual “continuous” shooting with a good card.

  22. 22) Gary
    February 25, 2013 at 10:14 pm

    Curious but can changing the d600 af from 39 to 51 be changed Ina firmware update????
    How many types of things be changed Ina firmware update?

    • February 26, 2013 at 9:30 am

      No, there’s a physical sensor there that would have to be upgraded.

      • 22.1.1) Gary
        February 26, 2013 at 10:42 am

        Too bad. Sounds like the d600 would have been much better with 51pts….and of course no dust problem……..does anyone not have any dust at all?.???

        • Jorge Balarin
          February 26, 2013 at 11:39 am

          I completely agree. It was silly to launch an FX camera with a DX autofocus system.

          • Sebastiano
            March 1, 2013 at 5:41 am

            Agree with you Jorge :(
            I hope Nikon is hearing …

            • Derek
              April 25, 2013 at 7:30 pm

              They did listen, that is why they made a D800. The D600 is suppose to be an entry level, non pro, FX camera at an affordable cost. You guys are asking them to make a 24mp D800. In other words a D3x. When the Canon 5D mark 2 came out it was close to 3 grand and it had 9 focus points. While some people were complaining, others were taking stunning photos. Here lately I have noticed if one wants to stick out all they have to do is STOP whining. The D4oo, aint going to happen!

  23. 23) Vern
    February 25, 2013 at 10:23 pm

    Hi Nasim. The D600 appeals to me because of having an FX sensor. But a few things concern me. I have found the 39-point focusing in the D7000 a bit slow, especially when I compare it with my D3 and D300. Also, I find it overexposes quite a bit, a stop or more in comparison. These are issues I can deal with. But the big thing that concerns me is the reported dust problems with the D600. Is there no solution for that, or does one just have to deal with that too. I am not anxious to physically clean the sensor and seldom have to do anything about it with the D3 or D300, or D7000 for that matter.

    Though I would prefer the FX format, would I be better off considering the new D7100, with its 51-point AF system and other advancements? I really don’t want to deal with extraordinary dust problems. Does the oily substance eventually become less of a problem? Would appreciate any feedback. I would prefer a DX model without dust problems to an FX model that has them.


    • 23.1) Gary
      February 26, 2013 at 10:42 am

      Too bad. Sounds like the d600 would have been much better with 51pts….and of course no dust problem……..does anyone not have any dust at all?.???

      • 23.1.1) Jake
        March 1, 2013 at 11:45 am

        The “dust”, or properly, the paint chip problem was a very limited production run. My light box components are clean as a whistle.

        • Vern
          March 1, 2013 at 1:38 pm

          That is great news, Jake. I wondered if that were true. Things often get blown out of proportion. My D600 is on its way. :) As for dust, there isn’t a DSLR out there that is dust free. We all have to learn sensor cleaning. My D3 doesn’t have a sensor cleaning feature and so I probably have to clean it a little more that others may. But it has never been a problem. Usually all it takes is blowing the sensor clean with a hand blower. I am no expert on wet cleaning the sensor. But some sites have great tutorials on how to clean a sensor and show how easy it is.

      • 23.1.2) Fred Mueller
        March 9, 2013 at 5:32 am

        my 600 is “normal” – about like my 700 was/is

  24. 24) Gary
    February 26, 2013 at 10:43 am

    Can we take a tally how many vote for d7100 vs d600

    • 24.1) John
      February 26, 2013 at 1:41 pm

      I have a D600 but I would like one of each. :)

    • 24.2) Randall
      February 26, 2013 at 9:47 pm

      D600… You know what they say…. Once you go full frame you never go back…. lol

  25. 25) Grimbot
    February 26, 2013 at 1:31 pm

    Hi Nasim,

    It strikes me that the two cameras (i.e. D600 and D7100) are different tools for different jobs. The D600 is a great ‘budget’ full frame option for great still photos and low light shooting, as well as being a pretty capable video DSLR….and the D7100 with its extra ‘reach’ provides added flexibility when using FX lenses…..better for sports/wildlife (even with the buffer issue).

    I’m planning on upgrading my D7000 sometime in 2013, mainly to take advantage of better video capability. Right now I’m going to wait and see if the D7100 has any initial problems….Nikon’s track record with the D600 and D800 was poor in this regard. By mid-year if there are no problems…and no D300s replacement is nowhere to be seen….I may very well go for the D7100. The lack of an anti-aliasing filter does worry me from a video standpoint though.

    If it ends up being a problem then I may go with the D5200 as the video quality with this camera is currently the best of any Nikon body, including the D800 and D4. Some professional reviews have put it above the Panasonic GH2 and GH3…and almost on par with the video of the Canon 5D Mark III….a camera costing almost 4x more than the D5200. For folks shooting a lot of video the D5200 is an amazing value.

  26. 26) Randall
    February 26, 2013 at 2:00 pm

    It’s not like Nikon is trying to pigeon hole you into a camera. I mean it makes TOTAL sense to put a better auto focus in the d7100 than the d600. I mean if they made the perfect camera it would totally Canabalize the sales of the these Frankenstein cameras. I mean they will sell more camera this way right? Oh wait the bottom fell out of the camera market….Or maybe nobody wants this crap.

  27. 27) Vern
    February 26, 2013 at 9:22 pm

    I am sorry I started all this with a simple question that I truly wanted an answer to. I wasn’t looking for a bunch of ranting about Nikon. That solves nothing. If a person is not pleased with their products, just go buy something else. I find much of this useless and it is why I have avoided most forums, etc. I thought I would take a chance here but may stop the mail. I am not interested in tirades but helpful answers and feedback, such as we all get from Nasim.

    Someone mentioned liking to have both D7100 and D600. I go along wit that. LOL Then I could have each to compare and test myself. What I wanted to know was if the oil and dust problem in the D600 abates after a number of shutter actuations. I also wonder if it wouldn’t be a good idea to buy a factory refurbished body. Perhaps the oil and dust problem would be cared for. I am interested in that possibility.

    Thanks to all who gave helpful answers.

  28. 28) Randall
    February 26, 2013 at 9:45 pm

    Ranting does do something. First it shows that people who love Nikon may share similar feelings. Secondly who knows maybe some people from Nikon actually visit this site and take customer feedback seriously. But since this website is not named I will attempt to answer your question. I have a d600. It had dust spots. I sent the camera to Nikon and it was cleaned by them. The dust spots returned. I would think your refurb would be a similar situation. However Most cameras have similar dust / spot issues if you do some research people said the same things about the d7000. My main problem with the d600 is the autofocus is not the best in low light. I’m not talking nighttime I’m talking like inside a house. I will feel a bit jaded if the d7000 performs better in this area. Regardless problems aside nikon is better then the completion in my opinion. I had a mark iii and I like my d600 images better even with all the problems.

  29. 29) gregorylent
    February 27, 2013 at 1:21 am

    one thing in common between d600/d7000 is construction quality .. both of mine have had loose dials, loose sd card slot cover, things move when taking out of the bag .. both very decent cameras, of course, other than that

  30. February 27, 2013 at 3:17 am

    Instead of getting distracted by the latest shiny thing to be dangled in front of my eyes I’m likely to look for a bargain on a used D300S for a more robust body and superb autofocus/ergonomics when shooting sports. It’ll be a killer backup, and with the introduction of the D7100 the used price should be dropping under US$500 soon.

  31. 31) Mike
    February 27, 2013 at 3:40 am


    Can you please explain the capacity of D7100 buffer size or it is similar to Nikon D7000

    Nikon Limit of 6fps ??
    (7fps in 1.3x crop mode)

    My Canon 7D have continuous shooting speed of 7fps and can capture 25 raw/130 JPEG without having any break.

    Mike Canon

  32. 32) Gary
    February 27, 2013 at 6:25 am

    But from what we “know” of the 7100 it should be a great camera. Portraits kids sports landscape… should do it all correct

  33. 33) DavidB
    February 27, 2013 at 6:35 am

    Perhaps Nikon will see the error in its ways and issue a D600S, with the 51pt meter. Stupid choice, as clearly it wasn’t the cost of the part that made the determination since they put it on the 7100.

  34. 34) Gary
    February 27, 2013 at 11:33 am

    If the d7100 has the same sensor type, same mega pixels, and no low pass filter shouldn’t the image be close? Or very very good?

    Does the size of the sensor size and pixel size make better image quality? Is that more packed into the 24 megapixels because of the “full frame”

    Will the d7100 still give great pictures that could be used with landscape and pics of kids sports…gosh everything

    Can you be “respected”…. Heck maybe even sell some of these pic?

    • 34.1) Randall
      February 27, 2013 at 12:16 pm

      Yes the d7100 will be an amazing camera and plenty of people will make a living from it. The main difference like many articles (i.e. FX vs DX) is viewfinder size, iso performance, and depth of field. Obviously build quality is no longer part of the equation. LOL. I had a DX camera (d5100) and many of my favorite shots came from it. Sometimes when browsing I cant remember if a shot came from that camera or the d600 without looking at the photo info. However that being said I cannot go back to a smaller viewfinder because I am to used to full frame. Also my best lens the 85mm 1.4g seems to perform twice as good on the d600. I feel like my images are sharper and have more shallow depth of field. Now mind you people will tell you both basically have the same depth of field you just have to move farther away but my experience has been better subject isolation with fast lenses via FX cameras. Now if you want more depth of field for landscape then dx would probably work the opposite. Either way get what camera you can afford and save money for a nice lens and maybe lightroom or something. I dont think you can go wrong these days even with the lowest model dslrs. They all do pretty much the same thing.

      • 34.1.1) Vern
        February 27, 2013 at 2:37 pm

        It’s good to hear that you are pleased with your D600, Randall. I am seriously considering one myself. I also like the features of the D7100 very much, corrects the things I find lacking with the D7000. For a full frame camera I have the wonderful D3, and absolutely love it. But there are times when its size and weight preclude using it. Also when walking the streets of Eugene, it does attract lots of attention. So for times when a smaller lighter body would be in order I find the D600 appealing. The only thing I was worried about frankly was the oil and dust problem. As for dust, the D3 has no dust removal mechanism like the later Nikons have, so I am used to dealing with dust. But with the D3 about all I have to do is blow the dust off the sensor. If the dust problems diminish with time, then I won’t be all that concerned with the D600. I can get a great buy on a factory refurbished one and have had great results buying refurbs over the years. Your comments are greatly appreciated.

        How long have you had your D600 and is the oily problem diminishing? Nasim has said that the AF system works better and faster in the D600 than it did in the D7000. That is good. I have wished there were 51-point AF system in the D7000. The D7100 will be a fine camera. Actually, I want both, the D600 and D7100. LOL Problem is I don’t know how to accomplish that.


        • Randall
          February 27, 2013 at 3:32 pm

          After I had my d600 cleaned by Nikon the dust spots have not returned to the level they were originally. Sadly I really dont know because I only have fast primes I can only stop down to f16. I only see a few tiny spots on a blue sky if that. If I could stop down further Im guessing I would see more. I can tell you that all the shooting I do of people the spots never how up. If you were a landscape shooter this would probably be more of a concern. The spots dont even show up in studio shot using my strobes. Honestly though that camera is soooo good I dont care. I will remove any spots digitally if I had to. I had a mark iii for a while and for some reason I just like the d600 raw images above all else. From what I have read though the spots do diminish as time goes by. I wouldnt let it stop my purchase especially since Nikon will help you if it really becomes a concern. If I start having problems again I will probably just clean mine myeslf. The autofocus is better then the d7000 my only problem is sometimes I have difficult locking focus in low light but again the camera images are soo good i just deal with it.

  35. 35) Oregano
    February 27, 2013 at 5:14 pm

    Nasim, small criticism:

    The effective resolution of the D7100 and D600 LCDs are exactly the same – 640 x 480. The D7100 uses a more advanced LCD similar to what Sony uses that has a white dot in addition to the usual RGB triad which gives the screen better performance in bright ambient light plus some other stuff, I’m sure.
    D600: 921K = 640 x 480 x 3 (RGB)
    D7100: 1.23M = 640 x 480 x 4 (RGBW)

  36. 36) Ralf Nagel
    February 28, 2013 at 9:17 am

    Hello Photography Life,

    I thought the D7100 has a Built-in stereo microphone? I’m interested in the new crop mode where you get out 140-400mm out of a 70-200mm lens, but this would drop the resolution remarkable under 10 MP on a 24 MP FX body.

    To the D600: I’m annoyed forced by Nikon to buy a D600 which isn’t better than the D7100 in every way, even in small things like the LCD. If I spend money I want the optimum at all points. The D600 came in September 2012, so after just 6 months the D600 looks antique to me. For me as a potential buyer of a D600 the D7100 really spoiled the party!

    But I agree, as an owner of a D300, I’m still waiting for a D800s with 24 MP, up to 8 FPS and without compromise AF. Anyway I would buy a D800/D800E if Nikon would find a way for a small RAW implementation (like Canon has?).

    So what is in the crystal ball for 2013, Photography Life:
    – At the end of the year a D4s with 18 MB and more/spead AF points (I think the are waiting with a new carbon fibre body and an on-sensor phase-detection AF for the D5) and

    – For summer 2013 the end of the D800 production (only the D800E is still in production) but a reportage/enthusiast FX D800s with 16-24 MP, without low pass filter will see the light

    – For autumn/winter 2013 a Flagship DX D400 without compromises.

    Time will show.

  37. 37) David B
    February 28, 2013 at 10:01 am

    Nikon France posted a full-size Jpegs from D7100, that are quite disappointing.
    I am talking specifically about the ISO1600 image posted, the terrible combination of noise and noise reduction destroyed the texture of the hair on this lovely lady, and not just at 24MP size, at 3.5MP size it can be seen as well. I hope NEFs are better, but for now, this is not acceptable. (at 100%, ISO1600, 18-105VR) I fully hope it is an issue of shooting JPEG

    • Profile photo of Romanas Naryškin 37.1) Romanas Naryškin
      February 28, 2013 at 10:11 am

      It’s actually a pretty decent performance when you take the high resolution and high sensitivity into account. There’s some skin texture visible. In any case, official manufacturer sample images are most often not quite as representative as they should be. How strange of manufacturers not to have decent images taken when new products are introduced.

      Right now, I would not judge D7100 too harshly based on these sample images. Let’s wait and see.

    • 37.2) Sebastiano
      March 1, 2013 at 5:54 am

      Still my D70s can do better if you use flashes in the right way and then cleaning the digital noise with some tool :/ …. look at the hairs

    • 37.3) Joshua Boldt
      March 3, 2013 at 12:00 am

      You probably know this, but just to make sure… You need to look at the Original 6000 x 4000 image on Flickr. All the other images and previews have been edited by Flickr’s uploader and don’t represent the actual quality of the picture. Also note the the files appear to have been edited in Capture NX so we don’t know the extent to which they were digitally manipulated and how that would change their quality. They aren’t being billed as direct from camera showcase examples. You can get the official Nikon D7100 examples on their website which are much better for direct analysis, but of course not taken in low light situations.

    • 37.4) Joshua Boldt
      March 3, 2013 at 12:19 am

      Also, if you look at the exif data on that girl:
      It was firmware .24 so it was a pre-production model.
      It was taken at 1/10 of a second, probably handheld, so it’s a miracle it is as sharp as it is.
      It was without flash (the exif says the flash didn’t fire and the catchlights in her eyes look like a street light).
      It was shot with the 18-105mm f/3.5-5.6 which was kind of a dumpy DX lens when it came with the D90 five years ago (maybe the newer ones are better?).

      Keeping all that in mind, all-in-all it’s pretty amazing how nice that picture looks at 1600 ISO. I’m waiting for real world tests from people like Nasim before I pass too much judgment on the D7100.

      • 37.4.1) David B
        March 3, 2013 at 12:39 am

        I am familiar with 18-105VR lens, I owned a couple of samples and shot it with various cameras, including D7000. It is a decent lens that comes with D90, D7000 and will come with D7100 (but for some reason with $400 difference between the price of D7100 and D7100 with that lens).

        Not sure what sharpness or the slow shutter speed has to do with color bleeding and noise reduction plus noise nasty artifacts that I pointed out in the photograph. However, I will buy your argument that it was shot with a pre-production camera. Perhaps final firmware will find a right combination that would leave some actual details there.

        Having owned Sony NEX7 and Nikon D800, I am familiar with challenges of cramming large amounts of megapixels in sensors and noise in low light associated with them.

        And I did make my comment after looking at full 24MP at 100% yes.

        I hope D7100 is a hit and Nikon quality control issues are things of the past.

        • Jon McGuffin
          March 3, 2013 at 8:54 am

          Like you David, despite having a 7100 on order, I too am a little concerned. That image is poor and there is a ton of noise on the right side in the darker areas. Knowing how they shot and handled noise would mean worlds to me. If that’s a straight ISO 1600 jpg out of camera, I’m quite pleased as that is probably on par or better than my D7000. If that’s “after” post processing…. Yuck :)

  38. 38) Roger D
    February 28, 2013 at 3:50 pm

    Nasim, great info, and I love your honest but good-natured reviews and articles. Thanks!

    I recently bought a D800e to try out and I’m finding I like the 1:1.2 crop mode (I call it half-DX) that still yields about 25MP resolution and turns my 300mm f/2.8 into about a 360mm f/2.8. So far, it’s producing superb wildlife shots in that mode, while still giving me FX for scenic shots at 36MP. Absolutely no moire problems thus far.

    I’m ready to sell my D700 now, and maybe my D7000 also as the D800e replaces both of them for me. I’ll keep my D300s for backup. But I’m seriously considering a D7100 and will wait for your review of it when you get one. It might be the best wildlife/sports body yet. It doesn’t look like we’re ever going to get a 24MP D400 now (which I’d prefer to the more consumer-grade D7100).

    • 38.1) Jon McGuffin
      March 3, 2013 at 8:48 am

      I strongly disagree Roger in that I very much believe Nikon will produce a D400 and “complete” this generation of DSLR bodies from the bottom 3200 to the top D4. There are added features such as faster frame rate, better buffer (dismal on D7100, just dismal) and a true larger, more rugged build that will be relatively inexpensive for Nikon to incorporate and will command a price premium (+$400-$500) over the D7000 that plenty will pay for and represent good profit margin for Nikon.

      Also consider that Canon is due to roll out the 7Dmii this year. Think about how Canon and Nikon have essentially released similar bodies side by side the past year or so. Also note that Nikon wouldn’t have a direct competitor to that (extremely popular) camera if it did nothing.

      Lastly, one of the coveted bodies had to be last to the party. It’s the D400 and it is going to be a D7100 on roids (maybe even fewer MP) and it will be here! Patience my friend…

      • 38.1.1) Roger D
        March 3, 2013 at 8:48 pm

        I’m glad you disagree with my doubts about ever seeing a D400, Jon. I hope you’re right.

        I bought a D7000 last year expecting it to replace and upgrade my old D300s. It did not. Now I’m ready to sell my D7000 while it’s still worth something and wait for a D400 (or whatever they name the true D300s replacement). I want it to be at least 24MP, have no anti-alias filter, and have a button to instantly zoom in for quick photo review.

        I can afford to wait now that I’ve got a D800e (see my above post for why). I’ll also wait a while before buying a D400 to allow the quality control issues to be resolved. I want to be wrong on my gloomy prediction.

      • 38.1.2) Jorge Balarin
        March 4, 2013 at 5:35 am

        I hope God hear you.

  39. 39) gary
    March 2, 2013 at 7:19 am

    Sorry I wanted to post thishear as opposed to the d7100 vs d7000 blog….
    I think we should wait in judgement of the d7100 ..its pictures and quality etc. till it really comes out in late march. This way guys like nasim, adnan and others can give us a good idea if they like the new camera and the pictures and video (and then get reviews from real buyers who hold it and take pictures with it).

    Then we can judge and give opinions, bash and praise (hopefully more of the latter since there seems to be a lot of continuation about dust and oil and we wish we could have had….)

    D7100 hopefully we just love what comes out of the camera

    Sounds like a good idea??

    Now Im just going to go back and hug my d5000 with an articulating LCD that I have used once. HAd it for about 3 years and still (yes I admit use a lot of scene modes) but I get pictures that I think look great and a lot of people compliment- and a bunch that are good and a few I just delete right away. But isnt that the way it goes. I have a 3 1/2 year old and a dog and Im just going to keep shooting:) and reading post and reviews and maybe upgrade.

    I know a better camera wont make me a better photographer BUT maybe the technology can help a little too.

    Thanks to all and to Nasim and group for hosting

  40. 40) Johnny T
    March 3, 2013 at 7:16 am

    Great article. I side-tracked to the FX vs DX article from 2010; also a great read. I’m hopeful that you will have time to conduct and post a contemporary “High ISO comparison” using the current generation of 24 MP DX and FX sensors to determine how many stops faster the current FX sensors may be. Also,I have a technical question re the high ISO comparison you posted in 2010. You specified shots were captured in RAW with camera’s “High ISO noise reduction” set to “Normal”. I thought RAW means no in-camera processing, so isn’t the noise reduction setting irrelevant?

    • 40.1) Jon McGuffin
      March 3, 2013 at 8:39 am

      This is a great post/question and I hope Nasim you have a chance to see and comment on this. I too found your DX to FX post compelling however that is a generation old and most importantly, it was my understanding that the D7000 was in fact a step up in low light over the D300s despite the similiar DX format. I own a D7000 (actually looking to sell it to buy D7100 and I also own the D700.

      My non scientific findings are that I’m not affraid of 3200 on my D700 and I don’t like to get above 1600 on my D7000. It feels as though there us only a 1 stop difference to me between the two.

      Though I don’t own a D600 or D800, feeling around the net seems that their ISO performance is more similiar to a D700, not a D3s/D4. If that the case, than 7100 may very well ending up being about a stop poorer vs D600 rather than the potential 3 stops suggested in the article.

      Having owned the better bodies Nasim, what do you think?

  41. 41) Yang Zhou
    March 5, 2013 at 9:00 am

    On a second thought these two cameras actually complement each other. So it might be a good idea to take both of them with a wide-angle lens attached to the D600 and a tele attached to the D7100, in which case you’ll be able to take advantage of the unique features of both cameras and at the same time save yourself the trouble of changing lenses.

  42. 42) Adele
    March 5, 2013 at 9:41 pm

    Looks like Nikon is trying to sell more bodies by not delivering one camera body with all the features people want. There is always something missing. I love the IQ of my D600 but hate the AF points and ISO button placement. Beside that I can’t trust the weather sealing because Nikon do not publish concrete information about that.
    Pentax, on the other hand, seems to deliver exactly what I need. The K5 IIs has TRUE and proofed weather seeling, do not go overboard with MP count, has IS in the body and the ISO button is placed where it should be. The pentax glass is very compact and the pentax prices are more affordable.
    But before I sell all my Nikon stuff and jump ship, I’d like to hear opinions from people who actually used Pentax DSLRs, especially th K5. Anyone?

    • 42.1) Gary
      March 7, 2013 at 11:08 am

      I think the Pentax answer should come from another site?

    • 42.2) Adnan Khan
      March 14, 2013 at 9:45 am

      LOL , Pentax was very good until they made film cameras and the MZ-s was suppossed to be converted in full frame DSLR but it’s been 7 yrs now and I think they dropped the idea :) ,as of today only 3 companies make full frame DSLRs NIKON ,CANON and SONY.
      Pentax’s so called MF 645D is not a true MF and it is still way out of reach from many Pentaxians and now is out dated in IQ by DX Nikon cameras :)
      Which lenses you have planned to buy when jumping ship into icy cold water btw ? :)

      Pentax ,Minolta ,Olympus ,Konica , Yashica and Contax all have disappointed in digital competition , Fuji is still fighting in their own way and might surprise us.

      You have very lame excuses on buttons and weather sealing ,are you always going to shoot in rain ? then better get some singing lessons too :)

      Happy jumping :)

      • 42.2.1) Adele
        March 15, 2013 at 10:19 pm


        “You have very lame excuses on buttons and weather sealing ,are you always going to shoot in rain”

        LOL. Weather sealing might not be an issue in your country. But believe it or not, there are places in this planet, like northern Europe where I live, where it rains and snows a lot and the temperatures drop far below zero degrees in the winter. Dust is also a HUGE issue in some other countries where I travel occasionally.

        Nikon’s high-end model, D4 (quoted from Nikon Imaging site):
        “Operating environment Temperature: 0 to 40°C/32 to 104°F; humidity: less than 85% (no condensation)”. I could not find a word about weather sealing there :(.

        Pentax K5/K5IIs as quoted from pentaximaging:
        “Weather resistant: Yes (77 weather protection seals)
        Operating temperature: 14-104°F (-10 to 40°C)”

        “Fully weather sealed and coldproof design resists water, fog, snow, sand, dust, and more, for top performance in extreme field conditions as well as in the studio.”

        Oh and don’t forget to check out youtube to see what Pentax means by “Weather resistent: Yes”. Here is an example: (Don’t try this at home with your Nikon! ;-))

        Regarding buttons, if you shoot fully manual, like I do, then you will know how important it is to have an ISO button on the top right of your camera. A “feature” that Nikon reserves only for the D4, where you can re-programm the movie button to do ISO AFAIK.

        But thanks for taking the time to comment anyway..


        • Adnan Khan
          March 16, 2013 at 1:21 am

          OK ,so there were no photographers shooting film and movie cameras before the arrival of K5 in Norther EU ?
          As you have adapted to colder weather , try to improvise on photography too :) ,it’s in human nature.
          I have lived in Canada for 4 yrs. and have visited pretty cold parts were windchill factor was -40 C .And people from that area also freeze while taking LEs .
          And I live where we have the tallest and huge mountains on planet :) and have done some shooting there in winter with film in late 90’s in chilling weather, the wind only can rip one’s face if you don’t apply petroleum gel and cover your face with full mask :)
          Even if a camera is fully weather resistant some moving part might stop moving :)
          Only Nikon was ordered to make 2 D3s and one D3x for space environment and they did a pretty good job :)
          When they say weather sealed body it means it’s pretty much safe and I’ve had an experience with D7000 in rain until I could find a shelter the camera was just open in my hands as I was on the beach wearing shorts and T shirt ,it stood up pretty good ,I cleaned it with a towel and my cotton T shirt then used the rocket blower ,and it was on playing whatever I shot ,then I took some test shots to check the sensor and it was all OK. After that I just carried a plastic shopping bag with 2 rubber bands in my pocket ,cut holes for lens and VF :) ,no more rain problem :)
          But this doesn’t mean that it will survive a underwater fall :)
          D4 ? D300s and D700 are pretty much very weather resistant.

          You are only impressed by the video and I’m sure you are just a kid with excuses :)
          If one wants to take photographs they can use their phone :)

          There will never be a perfect camera or never has been ….only perfect images will keep coming :)

          I’m using a very odd combination of D800 and D7000 and 90% I shoot manually and in just few days I’ve adapted that D7000’s ISO button is beside the LCD and the D800’s on top left as these are coming from F100 body design basically.
          There is an option to put auto ISO to reasonable low values like 100-800 (just like normal film speed range) ,so that the photographer should concentrate more on the composition and not fiddle with the buttons.

          But, all this argument over an electronic item is useless as it will be replaced by another model in just a few yrs. or maybe next year :)

          If you are interested in PGy ,go out n shoot rather than visiting sites ,comparing cameras and watching videos as it is a never ending story :)

          On G+ there is a woman who is shooting daily on her morning walks with a D3200 and lives in Siberia :)
          She never complained about that basic model’s controls and buttons because she is interested in shooting good pictures rather than complaining about this n that.

          I had so many things in mind about D800 that how it could have been a better user friendly camera but all are gone :)

          I won’t be replying to your excuses and explanations anymore.
          If you like K5 then get it :)

          happy shooting n good light in harsh climate :)

          • Adele
            March 17, 2013 at 9:07 am


            “..and have done some shooting there in winter with film..”

            you can’t compare the old high quality mechanical SLRs with the fully electronic plastic stuff you get today for the money. I used my old Minolta SRT 101b for about 15 years without any issues at all till I sold it and I didn’t had to send it for service not even once in all that time. It is sad to see that now a days you have to send a NEW DSLR directly to service after you receive it because of QC issues (e.g. D800/ D4/ D600).

            “..and I’ve had an experience with D7000 in rain..”

            the point is, you do this ON YOUR OWN RISK. Means that if your Nikon DSLR and/ or lens get damaged because of the rain it is highly unlikely that Nikon will repair it on warranty. They don’t say anywhere that you can use it under rainy weather conditions after all.
            On the lens front it is even more confusing. Till now everybody thought that a Gold Ring lens is weather sealed to some degree. But with the introduction of the 70-200/4 this seems to be not true (any more?).

            “…and in just few days I’ve adapted that D7000′s ISO button is beside the LCD and the D800′s on top left…”

            LOL, You miss the point again. It is not about getting used to something. The current placement of the ISO button on all Nikon DSLRs will force you to take the camera down each time you want to change ISO which is very distracting. That’s why Sony, Canon, Fuji, Pentax and others put the ISO button near the shutter button so that one can change ISO without taking their eyes off the viewfinder.
            Interestingly Nikon seems to know that because they offer the setting “easy ISO” which lets you change ISO using the rear dial in A and S modes. But unfortunately this does not work in M mode. An easy solution would be to make ISO assignable to the Movie record button on all DSLRs and not only on the D4. A (small?) change in firmware would enable this but Nikon seems to think that you have to pay a D4 price to get this feature.

            “..D300s and D700 are pretty much very weather resistant.”

            Define “pretty much”. Is it water splash?, a little bit rain, heavy rain? You’ll never know because Nikon won’t tell you. You’ll know that it was too much when it is too late and your equipment gets damaged.

            “..I won’t be replying to your excuses and explanations anymore…”

            LOL. Didn’t know that I need excuses to decide where and on what to spend my hard earned money. I was hopping that someone who ACTUALLY USED or is still using Nikon and Pentax DSLRs would share his/her experience because on paper everything always looks good ;-). And it is more than obvious that you have never touched a Pentax before.

            BTW I definitely don’t want to start a Nikon versus flame war. I liked my D7000 and I like my D600 specially for its excellent IQ. But I’m definitely not a fanboy ( and if the K-5 IIs fits MY needs better than the D600 (which looks so at least on paper) I don’t have any problem changing brands. It is about photography after all and not collecting gadgets from specific manufacturer just for the fun of it.


        • Ads
          April 6, 2013 at 9:34 pm

          “Operating environment Temperature: 0 to 40°C/32 to 104°F”

          That’s extremely conservative – I have shot a D5100 at -45c for hours at a time with with no issues apart from reduced battery life. Ditto with dust in Africa – 99% of dust issues in Africa are from changing lenses in the field, not sealing problems.

          The D5100 isn’t weather sealed at all according to Nikon, so I doubt you’ll have any problems with the D600 in bad conditions.

  43. 43) Jose Alessandri
    March 7, 2013 at 1:30 pm

    I am planning to use the D7100 with my Nikon 24-120 F4 to photograph in lower light than what I can do with the D7000. (In reference to the D7100 Giveaway Contest)

  44. 44) N.R.
    March 8, 2013 at 1:54 am

    One thing to note – those “f8” focus points are different. D7100 will only focus with the central point at f8, the D600 on 7 points. Something to add to the table.

    • 44.1) Adnan Khan
      March 14, 2013 at 9:22 am

      One can move that focus point and it is for TC only in Crop of DX mode 1.3x it uses full 51 points with no TC :) and gives 15.4 MP with VF filled with AF points :)
      D600 can shoot 10MP in DX mode the AF points might get a little bit more area but D600 should not be compared to a DX camera ,even though very much look a like but the FX will always have an advantage in it’s own class.
      It’s all about your type of PG and need :)
      Longer reach get DX ,standard full frame 35mm get FX and FX is better in low light ,however until we see D7100’s ISO performance compared to D600’s which is only second to D3s in all digital cameras ever made as of today.


      • 44.1.1) grimbot
        March 14, 2013 at 10:24 am

        Finally got my D600 back from Nikon Service (7 weeks with Nikon Service plus another quick sensor clean after that by my dealer)….and so far it actually looks like the dust/oil/debris issue is fixed! This was critical for me since I do a lot of video work.

        The paperwork from Nikon Service indicates that the camera was disassembled, thoroughly cleaned, then reassembled. Whether any parts were actually changed out is not apparent from the paperwork.

        I am in love with my D600 again! I did a still photo session this week under quite poor industrial lighting conditions (had to shoot at between ISO3200 and ISO6400)…used my Nikkor 70-200 f/4 VR lens….and the results were amazing. 200mm shooting hand-held in FX and some in DX (300mm equivalent) @ 1/40th of a second and I got beautiful, tack-sharp images… client loved them. The low light capability of the D600 in real-life situations is amazing.

        I’ve done some tests at ISO8063 to ISO12,800 and I can get very useable images that only need a modest amount of noise reduction…..obviously nature of image use is the key with such high ISOs. I haven’t pushed the D600 that far with any client work yet…..and would rather not…but great to know that in a pinch the camera can be pushed.

        I also have a D7000 and have loved it as well….no hesitation to shoot up to ISO1250…and depending on client need I can usually go to ISO1600 without issue. For a crop sensor camera that is very good performance. After ISO1600 noise can be a problem…..and I suspect it will be an issue with the D7100 as well.

        At this point I’m going to hold off upgrading my D7000 for three reasons:

        1) Nikon’s track record with initial quality on the D600 and the D800 was poor. I would not want to risk buying another new Nikon model straight out of the gate until initial quality has been proven.

        2) I shoot more video for corporate clients than I do stills….so the video performance of any kind of upgrade to my D7000 needs to be established before I’m going to bite on a new DX body. I certainly realize that being limited to 24 fps in 1080 is an issue since most clients now want 30 fps in 1080. Also, not being able to do 60 fps for many industrial clients where slow-motion segments is required, is also an issue with my D7000. The D7100 has that capability….but with no low pass filter I want to be sure that there is no serious moire issue with video with the D7100… there is with the D800.

        3) Recent statements from Nikon Europe about the D7100 NOT being positioned to replace the D300s, and some rumors about a potential D400 introduction in the late summer/early fall of 2013…will also cause me to wait for the next 3-4 months to see what else is introduced. As has been pointed out by other folks on Nasim’s blog, having both FX and DX bodies can be very handy from a flexibility standpoint when on a shoot…..the additional DX crop mode on the D7100 is very intriguing……especially to add even more flexibility with video without having to invest in more glass.

        Paying more for a D400 over a D7100 would be a no-brainer for me if it had:
        1) 60 fps in 1080 (like the Panasonic GH3)
        2) ability to change aperture while in LiveView like the D800 (not a huge issue for me as I’m used to working around it with the D600 and D7000…but definately a nice to have)
        3) no moire issues in video

        • Adnan Khan
          March 14, 2013 at 11:23 am

          Good for you Grim , the D600 is all OK now :)
          Yes ,D600’s high ISO really is very good :)
          Yuo can shoot D600 in 6400 ISO and with a little bit of PP downsize it to 6 MP it can still be printed in 24 inches with very high quality.

          For just video ,i’d personally go for Panasonic,Canon and Sony as all of these were and are into video cameras long before digital ,that’s why their video always looks better and Nikon seems to be struggling in that part.
          I haven’t shot any video from any DSLR I have owned ,I have a bridge zoom Panny Fz 35 and it’s 720 is enough for me in video.

          For commercial work I think Sony now offers better video in DSLRs.
          But now that you have mentioned I’m going to test video ability on D800 ,I got the ME-1 mic for free with D800 and it’s still in the box :) ,time to test it :)

          Yes, the D400 is the only upgrade left and in late Sep. to Oct they usually announce new models but can happen in july also :) ,first they need to sell D7100 :)

          Don’t know ,how much Nikon pays attention to a action camera like D400 in video but if the sensor has the ability it surely will shoot good quality video.
          For moire which actually is not a big issue ,but if you get yourself in a situation where it happens try using smaller apertures from F13 to F16 ,a bit of diffraction and angle change can cancel it.


          • grimbot
            March 14, 2013 at 2:58 pm

            Hi Adnan….

            Thanks for the input. Since I’m already heavily invested in Nikkor glass moving to Panasonic, Sony or Canon doesn’t make a lot of sense for me. While I shoot more video than stills for my clients (about 55/45 video skew) I still need to be concerned with still image quality….and Nikon is simply better than Sony, Canon or Panasonic for stills….especially shooting in RAW and where dynamic range is important.

            I did look at the Panasonic GH3 late last year and priced it out along with some of the pro grade constant aperture zoom lenses that Panasonic recently introduced. I was tempted but some of the pro testing I’ve been reading/watching indicated that the GH3 has some video moire issues that the GH2 did not have. I did not see enough video advantage to drop close to $5K and buy into a completely new system…..and from a stills standpoint there is no comparison at all….Nikon wins easily.

            My D600 does have a few moire issues…about the same as what I’ve seen with the GH3 tests. The GH3 can shoot in addtional codecs….but overall the D600 is a far more capable, well-rounded camera for the work I do. I recently added a Nikkor 70-200 f/4 VR and a 16-35 f/4 VR to my kit….both great lenses….and about $350 less than if I had bought two constant aperture ‘pro’ Panasonic zooms (i.e. 7-14 and 35-100).

            Agree with the techniques you noted i.e. trying to elicit lens diffraction by stopping down….of course that’s not always an option creatively depending on the DOF effect desired. You can also knock the in-camera sharpening down as low as it can go…and reduce contrast as well, both with help with eliminating/reducing moire….but can create more work in post…..ah….everything is a trade-off. :)

            Nikon has been making some very good strides with the quality of video in their cameras, and right now the D5200 produces the best quality video of any Nikon camera with virtually no moire…’s a bit better overall than the GH3 and almost up to the standard of the Canon 5d Mark III…..a camera that is about 4X more money. I’m hopeful that the D7100 or the rumored D400 will be at least at the same level as the D5200 in terms of video quality…..if they are then either one would meet my DX needs.

            As is often said….there is no such thing as the perfect camera or perfect lens….everything involves some kind of trade off. Like everyone else I try to find the best fit for the shooting I do and make as few compromises as possible.

          • grimbot
            March 14, 2013 at 3:14 pm

            Hi Adnan….once you test your D800 for video you’ll find that it is extremely sharp and can produce outstanding video footage…..and trying to shoot around the moire issue can be done to some degree.

            If you wanted a very simple moire solution for the D800, Moasic Engineering does make a special filter for it that does a very good job….similar to how it helps the Canon 5d Mark II. The filter runs about $350-$400 and is inserted over the sensor. The D800 is pretty good with 1080 video and the filter makes it almost perfect. The big advantage of shooting with the filter is not having to even think about using moire reduction techniques when shooting….you can just focus on the subject at hand.

            Shooting in 720 is where the D800 really has big moire problems….often footage is so bad it is simply not useable at all. The Moasic Engineering filter doesn’t eliminate it 100% at 720…but does reduce it sufficiently to make footage acceptable.

            The downside of using the Moasic Engineering filter is that you can’t leave in installed in the camera. Every time you change from video to stills, the filter needs to be removed, then re-installed to shoot video again.

  45. 45) Fred Mueller
    March 9, 2013 at 5:15 am

    dilemma solved: one of each …

    There were many good reasons why the 300/700 made a great pair (still do) … this is just a refresh of that pairing (at a considerably lower total cost in adjusted dollars too). For those of us fortunate enough to contemplate that scenario, there is a lot to be recommended.

    My reaction to moving to full frame was, frankly, that I often miss the deeper DOF for equal angle of view, as often as I appreciate the ability to isolate with shallower DOF. Also, of course, telephoto reach is much more economically achieved with a DX sensor. DX cameras are smaller and quieter. They are cheaper.

    I think it is clear that Nikon is protecting (unwisely) a probable D400 release with the buffer capacity of the 7100. It would be trivial for them to add the necessary ram. But aside from that one very glaring omission, the 7100 seems like a splendid camera. The in hand reviews will be very interesting; especially finding out just how the Toshiba sensor performs compared to the Sony Exmore class chips …



  46. 46) Vern
    March 9, 2013 at 11:40 am

    Well, I did it and am I glad! I bought a D600 and have been having great fun with it. Works wonderfully with the 24-120 f/4 VR. It now has 1000 shutter clicks on it and no problems! I don’t anticipate any more dust problems with it than I have with my great D3! A lot of people are missing out on a fine camera because of the complaining about some features. For example, the complaints about the AF focus spots being too centered in the viewfinder, not a problem! And as Nasim mentioned there isn’t really all that much difference between it and the D800. All full frame DSLR’s have the focus spots in the central part of the frame. So the D600 isn’t really much different from any of the rest.

    As far as the sensitivity of the 39-point system in comparison with the 51-point system I am used to, not a big issue. The camera does fine. Sure 51-points are better, but not $900 better just to get the D800, which simply has too much resolution for most people, creating its own set of problems, not the least of which are it will show up the flaws in any less than pro lenses. I find 24 MP, as in the D600., ideal.

    I went through all of my first concerns and the continual complaints of others, most of whom have never even seen the camera, and ticked them off my list of negatives one by one as I saw they were not big issues. I am happy to say that I saw what a fine instrument the D600 is and what great results one can get with it, so I bought one. I have not one regret. it is a fine camera. No need for me to bother reading any more of the conjecture and theorizing. I can just go out and shoot it and see for myself what it can to.

    Color me a very pleased D600 user! One thousand exposures and not one speck of dust.


    • 46.1) Adnan Khan
      March 14, 2013 at 9:11 am

      Good for you Vern :)
      Happy shooting n good light :)

  47. 47) Kip Chanin
    March 9, 2013 at 1:41 pm

    I got a D600 the week it was released. That camera loves light.

    • 47.1) Adnan Khan
      March 14, 2013 at 9:06 am

      and low light too! :)

  48. 48) Dean
    March 9, 2013 at 2:24 pm

    For someone like me, who often uses auto-focus, it sounds like the 7100 is a better choice, with a superior auto-focus system.

  49. 49) Gary
    March 10, 2013 at 8:33 pm

    Oh for goodness sake is the d7100 here yet?????

    When does the boat dock? When does the plane land

    Where are they coming in?

    Now lets take bets who gets the first hands on review in.

    Lets take bets on the percentage lovers vs haters…..of the d7100 of course

    Lets take bets how many folks hate the buffer size for sure;)

    I mean after they really use it……

    This should be fun reading

    Me? I’m hoping its all good and almost all love it.

    We need some really good news just about now.

    • 49.1) Adnan Khan
      March 14, 2013 at 8:57 am

      Have some patience my friend :)

  50. 50) Joseph
    March 14, 2013 at 8:46 am

    I was looking to upgrade my D700 or replce my D200 backups, now I just dont know, maybe another D700 would love 24MP, 36 too big for me.

    • 50.1) Adnan Khan
      March 14, 2013 at 9:05 am

      You can still keep shooting with your D700 the camera is good enough for another 3 years, and can wait for the D200’s upgrade (maybe this fall) ,if Hogan D90 can go on, then D700 is still very much in the game :) and the D800 can also shoot in 24MP and 16 MP :)
      or you can wait for D900 which might have 42 to 48 MP :)


  51. 51) steve
    March 14, 2013 at 12:22 pm

    BTW the Nikon d600 and 800 will autofocus lenses above 5.6 with nikon teleconverters which I understand from the nikon post is new. I wonder if the d7100 can?

    • 51.1) Adnan Khan
      March 15, 2013 at 3:39 pm

      Yes it can Steve :)

  52. March 15, 2013 at 3:49 pm

    OK ,I downloaded a sample shot from shot at ISO 2200 , that was only high ISO shot ,shot outdoors at 2200.
    And shot my D800 in ISO 2000 in DX Mode , I re sized the D7100’s picture to D800’s DX mode size.
    it’s not a true comparison as lenses and focal range plus apertures are different but just to give a rough idea , for me ISO set at 1600 for outdoors works fine on D7100

    You can have a look at as I used a TC on D800 with the 300 F4 and kit lens is crappy :)

  53. 53) cgw
    March 16, 2013 at 7:14 pm

    Why pretend to review a camera you’ve not shot? No news here apart from what’s in the D7100 press kit!

    • 53.1) Adnan Khan
      March 16, 2013 at 11:10 pm

      This is NOT a review cgw ,it’s just sepc. comparison ,we guys love to talk before the thing arrives :)
      so, what do you like ? ;)

  54. 54) Grimbot
    March 16, 2013 at 8:51 pm

    I have been looking at some initial postings by the first owners of the new Nikon D7100….looks like the D7100 may have the same problem as the D600 with oil on the sensor right out of the box!

    • 54.1) Adnan Khan
      March 16, 2013 at 11:04 pm

      No man! not again ….i didn’t see the video link there is a lot of “video promotion” going on from desperate ppl. who want more views or can be industrial spies like the Pentax K5 guy :)

      On the very forum the MOD said :

      ” Not oil, just a single dust bunny. Most likely got in when he attached the lens.”

      I haven’t encountered any duusty or oily image in full size image yet :)


  55. 55) Shaz
    March 18, 2013 at 6:00 am

    Hi Naseem and Experts

    Thank you for your article and comments. Could you please direct me in right direction here are the details:

    OK guys I am new so please take my post with patience… some has to start from some point. Please feel free to ask questions

    I am a point shoot person, with Panasonic DMC LX5. I wanted to ge more involved in day to day photography and also wants to capture the best memories for the trips that have planned to europe and Africa this summer. Also with day to day photography i want the best I can get e.g trip to London city, outdoors etc

    Not studied photography at all yet, but I am keen to read and even take a small course in London if that’s something really helps in moving forward and taking good photographs as mentioned earlier.

    2000 to 2500 GBP for new future proof kit, (Very important a resale value) (Camera + Lense)

    Yes of course I hate carrying big bags with lot of lense, but I know I have to compromise at some point with one light bag and light weight camera

    Please recommend if the d600 or d7100 is good for me or I am completely out of this game

    Thanks for reading


    • 55.1) Adnan Khan
      March 18, 2013 at 4:05 pm

      Shaz ,forget the resale value ,you will loose a lot of money on camera body after a few years.

      1- D5200 + 35mm 1.8 G DX
      2- D7000 + 18-200 VR II DX + 50mm 1.4 D
      3 – D7100 + 18-300 VR DX + 50mm 1.4 D
      4 – D7100 + 50mm 1.4 + 70-300 VR
      5 – D600 + 28-300 VR 0r 24-85 VR or 50mm 1.4 D + 85mm 1.8 G (as much as your budget allows , try to adjust the lens combination, so ,I’ve given 3 options )
      6- D600 + 50mm 1.4 D or G

      Best to start with one prime lens like normal 50mm as it will improve your composition skills.

      My personal pick would be D600 + 50mm 1.4 D ,the new G lens is also very good but has more distortion than the older version ,both are equally sharp. :) ,the D version is cheaper n tougher built than the new G lens.

      You cannot auto focus with non motorized DX bodies like D5200 ,D5100, D5000,D3200,D3100 and D3000 with AF-D lenses. However you can manually focus them.
      D90,D300s, D7000 and D7100 DX bodies can AF with AF-D lenses.

      D600 is full frame and is a very good camera and lenses made from 1977 to 2013 can be used on it.
      For general PGy any mid range zoom lens like 24-85 is good for full frame.

      If you like only street or Landscape photography then get 3 primes a 24mm ,50m and 85mm.
      Better to start with the 50mm as it’s the most useful and cheaper too. 5 steps forward will take you to 85mm equal and 3 steps back will take you to 35mm equal angle of view.Try to move your feet to get a good composition :) ,you can add other lenses afterwards.
      Shoot in A mode with F8 and F13 apertures for greater depth for still object like buildings ,corridors and narrow streets.
      For portraits use F4 to 5.6 on closeup shots and F8 for chest level shots choose the AF-S mode for focus and use focus point on eyes.
      For street shots n moving ppl. choose AFC mode in focus settings or buttons , choose S mode and max number of AF points ,set shutter speed to 1/250 and above ,the camera will choose the aperture until you get to M mode :) ,… that session will be in next class :)
      Read articles here on this site for better understanding about technical stuff and types of photography. it’s listed on left side of HOME panel, will save you money on getting classes :)

      Keep the panny as a backup camera or sell it to invest on new gear :)

      good luck n good light :)

      • 55.1.1) Shaz
        March 19, 2013 at 10:10 am

        Hey Adnan, Thank you so much for such a detailed answer. I am was looking for the exactly same kind of info.

      • 55.1.2) Steve
        March 19, 2013 at 10:27 am

        Aden, do you have any experience with the Tameron 28-300 compared to the Nikon 28-300?

        • grimbot
          March 19, 2013 at 11:01 am

          Hi Steve,

          If you want to look at lens performance DXOMark is a great resource. Lenses can perform differently depending on the camera body they are used with….on a D800 the Nikon 28-300 is better than the Tamron on all dimensions measured…..although neither of them score particularly well. If you compare their test scores with the Nikkor 70-200 f/4 VR you’ll find that it blows both of those lenses out of the water.

          Here’s a link you can view all of the lenses they tested with the D800:

          The D600 hasn’t been tested as thoroughly as the D800 yet in terms of lens performance, but on the three lenses that have been done on both the D800 and the D600, the D600 scores almost the same as the D800 so you can likely use the D800 scores as a general guide in terms of matching up the best performing lenses with a D600.

        • Adnan Khan
          March 19, 2013 at 2:14 pm

          No i have not compared these lenses but briefly borrowed the the Nikon 28-300 VR and it’s an A OK lens for an all in one solution for being just one lens for general shooting on FX.

          Your question has been pretty much answered by grimbot.

          I personally never suggest third party lenses for Nikon or Canon, only manual focus or Tokina lenses are much better off brand lenses as they are very well made, and in manual focus lenses like Samyang 35mm 1.4 or Zeiss and Voigtlander 20mm and 40mm , if they are really good or if budget is very tight.

          Now that you have mentioned the D700 then do not expect the same score with D800’s score on D700 (due to very high MP difference)

          The Tamron lens was not tested at DXO on Nikon D700 but here is a rough idea compared the Nikon 28-300 lens on D700 and D800 with the Tamron compared on Canon 5d2
          The Canon 5d2 having more MP than D700 scores equal on Tamron vs Nikon 28-300 on D700 but scores high at 36MP on D800 ,meaning that it can handle better high res. cameras, hence having superior optics vs Tamron.

          Hope the link works but if does not then select compare lenses and choose the lenses and camera body :)

          IMO the Nikon lens wins in most areas. The Tamron is not bad but I’ll prefer Nikon glass for Nikon camera :)

          The reason why I do not recommend 3rd party AF lenses, as there is no deal Nikon or Canon has signed or even if they had they can pull it off any time by just introducing a new firmware or can embed it in their cameras that will stop AF , metering and VR or IS on 3rd party lenses , as both make their own lenses. But manual focus lenses will still keep working.
          Camera bodies will be changed overtime as being an electronic item but lenses stay for a long time ,so don’t go cheap on lenses and the risk is always there.

          I’ll always prefer a Samyang (Rokinon) 35mm 1.4 manual focus lens over a hot AF Sigma 35mm 1.4 :)


          • steve
            March 19, 2013 at 2:35 pm

            I have a 24-120 f4, a 70-200 f2.8, 50, f1.4, a 17-35 f2.8
            Its nice to have an all in one for those instances where its tough to bring multiple lenses.
            it if I look at the tests it doesn’t look like it would be worth the switch from my tamron to the Nikon if Im understanding.

            • grimbot
              March 20, 2013 at 8:15 am

              Hi Steve….from your list it looks like you have a lot of great glass. If your 70-200 f/2.8 and 17-35 f/2.8 are both Nikkor you have two excellent zooms. The only IQ upgrade may be replacing your 24-120 with a 24-70 Nikkor.

  56. 56) Steve
    March 19, 2013 at 11:34 am

    Hey thanks! That was very helpful as I also have a d700.

  57. 57) steve
    March 19, 2013 at 2:39 pm

    Thanks, BTW I have a 50mm f1.8, a 24-120 f2.8, a 17-35f2.8, a 70-200 f2.8

    It doesn’t look like it would be worth upgrading to the nikon from my 28-300 tamron if Im understanding the tests?

  58. 58) Jon McGuffin
    March 19, 2013 at 6:53 pm

    So I received my D7100 today and the first thing I did was compare it to the D7000 by running some noise tests. I tried to make it as reasonable apples to apples as I could.

    Set both cameras to the following:

    JPG Compression = Fine
    JPG Quality = Optimized for Quality
    High ISO NR = Normal
    Active D-Lighting = Off
    Picture Control = Neutral
    Colorspace = sRGB

    Shot the same subject at ISO 6400, 3200, 1600, & 800 (changed just the shutter speed to match exposure).

    Used a tripod, and shot with my Sigma 35mm 1.4 (so I know it’s sharp). I have the files to share but don’t quite know the best way for me to share them as I can’t post them in this forum without an upgraded account.

    I’m not seeing any real discernible difference between the two files. I’m looking at them before and after re-sizing the D7100 to match the D7000 16Mb resolution. I can’t tell them a part to be frank. The difference would be so minutely small that nobody could possible care and I couldn’t say which is actually better than the other.

  59. 59) Manny
    March 20, 2013 at 7:56 am

    Dear experts,

    should i get a brand new d600 or try to find a great but used D700, or should i just get a D7000 until Nikon fixes the D600 dust issue. Or…assuming that money wasnt a problem, should i just get a brand new D800.

    • 59.1) grimbot
      March 20, 2013 at 8:48 am

      Hi Manny,

      You haven’t really given us any idea on what kind of shooting that you are doing and how important video is in your decision.

      For the vast majority of casual shooters the D7000 is more than enough camera for them. 1080 video is limited to 24 fps but you can do 30 fps in 720 and the quality is quite good. I have a D7000 and it has been a great workhorse for both video and stills. You can shoot up to about ISO1250 without hesitation and ISO1600 will produce good quality images. At ISO3200 noise is an issue if you are doing larger size prints.

      For most people a D800 is overkill for their needs. It is a superb camera and the folks that I know that have one tend to use it for studio and landscape work….usually on a tripod….and with top quality glass to get the most out of the sensor. Unless you intend to spend a lot of money on high quality glass there is no point buying a D800. Putting low quality lenses on a D800 is like harnessing a thoroughbred to a chuck wagon.

      The D600 is a wonderful camera from an image quality standpoint. I have had significant oil/lubricant issues with both of the copies I’ve had. Nikon Canada had my second body for about 7 weeks under warranty. From the paperwork it looks like they disassembled the camera, cleaned it completely, then reassembled it. My dealer did a quick sensor cleaning after I picked it up as there were a few small specs on the sensor that Nikon had missed. At this point the oil/lubricant issue with my camera appears to be solved. I’ve been checking it after every client shoot and the sensor has remained totally clear. It is an amazing camera in terms of image quality/price. Again, to get the most out of it, good quality glass does make a big difference. I primarily use 3 Nikkor lenses with mine…16-35 f/4 VR, 70-200 f/4 VR, and the 105 Micro VR. With a D600 you can shoot up to ISO3200 without worry, and depending on the image use you can push the camera easily to ISO6400 and also get useable shoots at 8,000. The question to ask yourself is if you really need an FX body and if you are willing to put out more money for good quality FX lenses.

      A camera you didn’t mention was the D5200. This is Nikon’s top consumer DX body. It will deliver very good image quality and great video quality (the best currently available in any Nikon body regardless of price). The body isn’t weather sealed and there’s a few other features missing….but for many people it is all the camera they really need. If you match it up with some good DX lenses like the 10-24, 16-85, 85 Micro VR, and 35 f/1.8 you’ll be able to shoot a wide range of subjects and get very good results. Add a 70-300 FX zoom and you’ll have a very flexible kit….and not break the bank in terms of total cost. When I bought my D7000 I did a lot of research on lenses and ended up buying all of the lenses noted above as they are the best choices in terms of IQ/cost for use with a DX body.

      I just checked on B&H and you could purchase a D5200 with the 5 lenses I’ve noted for a total of $3,165….just a bit more than just a D800 body would cost you. So what would you rather have for $3,000? A D800 body that you can look at….or a D5200 with a good lens assortment that can deliver good quality and a lot of flexibility…..not to mention fun.

      • 59.1.1) Manny
        March 20, 2013 at 9:19 am

        Hello Grimbot,

        i did forget to mention a few details. Im into everyday photography, street events, but mostly family photos. I just purchased 50 f1.8 and i am contemplating on the 24-120 f4. Actually the decision has been made i am going to purchase it as soon as i can settle on a body. Regretably I sold my 24-70 f2.8 (due to bulk) and D700 once nikon stopped making the D700 and have been looking for a replacemnt since. I dont think i will be purchasing Top glass for whatever camera i chose unless i absolutely need it. e.g i chose the 85 f1.8 over the 85 f1.4 because i doubt the f1.4 is 3 times better than the f1.8 in terms of price.
        I havent looked into the D5200 at all. Im not into video with a DSLR do it does not mean much to me. I will use the camera strictly for photos 99.9% of the time. After reading a ferw more reviews on here, i think the D600 is the best choice for me. (either that or a refurbished D7000 given the dust/oil issues with the D600).

        • grimbot
          March 20, 2013 at 10:38 am

          Hi Manny,

          You will find that the IQ with the D600 is far superior to your D700. Big increase in dynamic range and much better low light performance. Your 50 f/1.8 will be excellent with the D600.

          I’ve downloaded a number of reviews on the 24-120 f/4 and compared it to the 24-85 VR and surprisingly the test scores don’t look that much different (although I know Nasim strongly prefers the 24-120 over the 24-85). I’ve looked at a lot of charts etc. and there doesn’t seem to be much difference between the lenses. Stopping both lenses down to f/8 really helps corner sharpness as neither one is all that good shooting open. I was comtemplating the 24-120 f/4 but based on what I’ve read it really doesn’t seem to be worth the extra money to me.

          The 24-85 VR hasn’t been tested by DXOMark yet….but the old version has and it actually scores a tiny bit better then the 24-120 f/4 (overall score 23 compared to 22, and sharpness the same at 12). Everything I’ve been reading about the new 24-85 vs the old one is that the new one is definately better so I’m anticipating the new 24-85 will score a bit higher than the 24-120 on DXOMark. I guess if you’re looking for a walkaround lens that will give you good flexibility the 24-120 is a good choice. Have a look at the D800 lens scores on DXOMark. If you’re looking for one NIkkor zoom with walkaround flexibility I suppose your choices are pretty much narrowed down to the 24-120 and 28-300. Based on DXOMark scores the 24-120 is clearly the better choice in terms of IQ (overall score of 22 vs 17, and sharpness of 12 vs 10).

          I’ve looked at Photozone and CameraLabs tests as well and they don’t really put the 24-120 ahead of the 24-85… I’m going to use my 24-85 until such time as Nikon does a 24-70 f/4. I’ll only be shooting it in the ‘gap’ between my 16-35 f/4 and my 70-200 f/4 anyway.

          When I bought another copy of the D600 I figured I would have to deal with the oil/lubricant issue…but getting the kit for under $2,000 was just too good a deal to pass up. Now that the oil/lubricant issue appears to be finally fixed on my D600 (yeah….it did take 7 weeks at Nikon Service) I have no problem recommending the D600. Yeah…it was a hassle….but the D600 is superb…..and in the end the hassles dealing with the oil/lubricant issue was worth it. Since you’re used to FX I’d suggest moving to the D600 in spite of the ‘oil/dust’ issue.

          The two copies of the D600 I had were both horrendous in terms of the degree of the oil/lubricant problem. I didn’t have a few specs only visible at f/22 like many folks have reported…the sensors on both of my copies were covered with well over 60 blobs each (that’s when I stopped counting)….some were large enough to be clearly visible on the sensor with the naked eye…they were clearly visible on images when shooting at f/5.6…..and these blobs appeared within 100 shutter actuations on both cameras. My point is if Nikon Service can fix the problem that I had which was quite severe….other than a bit of hassle and time you likely don’t have much to fear by choosing the D600…and you’ll LOVE the IQ.

          • Manny
            March 20, 2013 at 1:34 pm

            Thanks again Grimbot. I think i will go ahead and take a chance with the D600. I appreciate your help.

  60. 60) Grimbot
    March 20, 2013 at 1:12 pm

    Obviously it’s very early to see what the initial quality will be with the D7100……

    There was one video report of oil on sensor staight out of the box as was experienced with the D600 (could be an isolated incident)….

    and now a new posting has surfaced with a potential left AF focus issue with the D7100 as was prevalent on the D800. Hopefully these are isolated incidents.


    • 60.1) Jon McGuffin
      March 20, 2013 at 1:57 pm

      In all honesty, I’m guessing people are hyper-aware of both issues and you can bet that any data coming in right now is representative of that. I received my D7100 yesterday and have tested it pretty thoroughly and I can say there is no left focus issue and no dust on the sensor.

      It truly feels like a fantastic camera in hand, and I’m quite happy with that purchase.

      • 60.1.1) Grimbot
        March 20, 2013 at 3:05 pm

        Hi Join,

        You’re absolutely right that folks buying a new Nikon are going to be hyper sensitive about the sensor oil and the left AF problems that have plagued Nikon’s last two product launches… people should be. Nikon simply dropped the QC ball on the D800 and the D600.

        I have a D7000 and it has been a terrific camera…..the specs on the D7100 certainly indicate it should be a fantastic camera. Very glad to hear you’ve got a pristine copy. As I said in my post….hopefully the couple of early reports about the D7100 are isolated incidents. I’ve been a Nikon user since 1975 and have never had a problem with a Nikon body until I bought the D600.

        • Jon McGuffin
          March 20, 2013 at 3:47 pm

          Yes, I agree with everything you said here including the fact Nikon has dropped the QC ball no question about it. Worse is the fact they aren’t being forthright and owning up to it. If new D600’s are still shipping with the issue frequently, that is a real shame as well.

  61. 61) Steve
    March 20, 2013 at 2:27 pm

    I’ve had great IQ with my 600. I had oil/dust as well and took to Camera West where I purchased it and they cleaned the sensor but the spots are back. I guess I’ll keep cleaning the sensor until they go away…hopefully before 3000 pics.

  62. 62) Steve
    March 20, 2013 at 4:30 pm

    Perhaps the Nikon upper management needs to understand that there is honor in honesty… and dishonor in dis-honesty. They spend millions on marketing building and promoting their brand and throw it all all away by not being straight forward and honest with their customers regarding quality control issues. We all understand that products can have issues but Nikon is waiting to long before acknowledging their QC issues.

    A “brand” is a promise….Nikon is “educating” their loyal customers, and new ones, that their “promise” of quality, high performing products (Which is the Nikon “brand”) is of diminishing value. It cost a business 5 to 6 times as much marketing money to get a new customer than to keep one.

    All business relationships are based on trust… Trust is based on credibility… Credibility is based on honesty.
    That means if you have problem be straight about it and have plan to inform and take good care of your customers in a timely manor.

    Nikon FYI, Quality control is a process that happens at each step of the manufacturing process and the “process” should be designed so that you discover the problems, not your customers.

    Remember its not how many cameras you make or even how much money you make that determines your success…its how much money you get to “keep” that makes you successful as a business at the end of the year. How much money you get to “keep” is determined by how well you control your call back costs. Not to mention quality problems ultimately destroy your brand and your business.

    I’ve always been an early purchaser of Nikon products, but no more. In the future I will wait to see what issues there are BEFORE rushing to buy the next product offering.

  63. 63) Heshan
    March 20, 2013 at 7:42 pm

    Nice comparison. I was of the opinion that APS-C DSLRs are quite pointless, considering the awesome new set of APS-C mirrorless cameras…and I still am, sort of – but the D7100 kinda brings the APS-C DSLR back into the game a bit. If I were buying a DSLR now, I think I would definitely go full-frame, and if I couldn’t afford it, I’d get something like the Sony NEX 6 or Fuji X-E1

    • 63.1) Jon McGuffin
      March 20, 2013 at 7:53 pm

      Well, to each their own and certainly different cameras work for different people but I really beleive there is plenty of relevance of the DX based DSLR over the mirrororless options. Cost in many cases favor the DSLR.

      The D7100 really represents, in my opinion, kind of the ultimate price performer as far as cameras go. You get 80% of what you’d have in a D4 for 20% of the price.

      I’m sure that comment will draw a lot of reaction, but the point I’m trying to make is that you can do almost anything that the highest end bodies can do at a fraction of the cost.

      • 63.1.1) Heshan
        March 20, 2013 at 8:04 pm

        Oh, your point is perfectly valid. I admit there’s a lot in a DSLR other than sensor size and pure image quality that it delivers, and cameras like the D7100, if they continue to be produced, definitely have a lot of potential. But yes, each to their own indeed! For my kind of street work, I find a smaller mirrorless camera to work better than a large DSLR, even though in terms of speed etc. the DSLR wins

        But are you sure cost favors the DSLR? I was always under the impression that a new APS-C mirrorless camera would cost the same, or even cheaper, than a new APS-C DSLR?

        • Jon McGuffin
          March 20, 2013 at 8:20 pm

          I thought that too but compared what would be the equivalent Sony NEX to a D7000 awhile ago and was surprised they were very close. You figure you can pickup a d3200 at a fraction of the cost and I think the DSLR’s look quite competitive.

          To be honest, I would really like a mirrorless small pocket camera and I I thought I could get a really capable one for around $400-$500 complete with a fast lens I would but always come back to just slap a cheap (good) prime on my DSLR and I am good to go.

  64. 64) Paul K.
    March 22, 2013 at 4:19 am

    Great article. I just bought the Nikon D7000 few weeks ago. Can you compare the image quality with the new D7001? Is it that much better? Is it worth spending a few extra hundred dollars for the D7001?

    Please advise.


    Paul k.

    • 64.1) Adnan Khan
      March 22, 2013 at 4:30 am

      Paul ,
      For me as a D7000 user who will keep the D7000 and get the D7100 too as per my needs n budget ,yes it is worth for me :)

      If you are worried about small buffer capacity in RAW of the D7100, then D7000 is for you :) ,beside that D7100 is a much better camera :)

      Checkout D7000 vs D7100 spec comparison post


    • 64.2) Jon McGuffin
      March 22, 2013 at 8:00 am

      Well, if you had the opportunity to return and spend the few extra hundred bucks, I would say it is definately worth it. If however you would have to sell and then rebuy, maybe not.

      There are lots if nice little upgrades in the camera not the least is the much superior (noticeably) better LCD on the back of the body.

  65. 65) Gary p
    March 24, 2013 at 7:33 am

    Is it me or is it taking a long time to get some real reviews of the D7100 out there? I mean I see some customer reviews on a few seller sites but not much. Sounds like most like it a lot

  66. 66) Gary p
    March 24, 2013 at 7:37 am

    I’m curious Can Nikon make the dust and oil issue go away (not just clean) on newer shipments or will it be a residual problem based on a design/engineering flaw. Thanks

  67. 67) Luc Poirier
    March 26, 2013 at 8:12 am

    Hi Nassim
    You were right about the D600 saying the FX should always outperform DX sensors.

    A full review in, on the D7100 is to be read by all of the photographers who would like the D7100 be as good or better than the D600. They gave a rating of 4/5 to the D7100 and 4.5/5 for the D600, even if the D7100 has much more appealing features than the D600. Neither of theses two cameras can fullfill all the expectations and wishes of all photographers.

    Nikon D7100 poorest of the bunch tested (D700, D600, 5DMKIII, D800,etc.) in low noise using DXO software, but good dynamic range.

    • 67.1) Jon McGuffin
      March 26, 2013 at 8:36 am

      That article at techradar would seem to backup everything I have experienced with the D7100 and I sold my D7000 to get the 7100.

      Noise performance (and I have apples to apples comparisons) seems to my eye to be visually indisticntive between the two. So I think the story remains the same here, for me that’s shooting ISO 1600 if you need to and know you can work it in post, or if you’re in a pinch 3200.. but try not to go there.

      In all other aspects (buffer aside) the camera feels like a very well refined D7000 and is a smarter, stronger camera. The better and larger LCD is quite surprisingly superior and I’m surprised that’s not getting a little more press. I’m enjoying this camera immensely but I would say most D7000 owners would need not upgrade.

  68. 68) David B
    March 27, 2013 at 12:13 pm

    The DXO results are in and they are quite surprising. As Nikonrumors site points, D7100 scores suprisingly lower in than D5200 and lower than other Nikon cropsensor cameras in other categories. The low light figure is lower than D5200. The dynamic range figure is lower than both D5200 and 2010’s D7000. And what surprises me is that these lower numbers came out in a camera where Nikon removed AA filter. Which logically should lead to increase of all of the above numbers (just look at D800E scores over D800).
    Every new Sony sensor typically show an increase in Dynamic range at least. Not sure what happened there.

    • 68.1) Adnan khan
      March 27, 2013 at 12:26 pm

      Yes David ,I think Nikon is better tweaking Sony’s senor and this is Toshiba’s sensor but slight improvement over D7000 beside DR , you know the D5200’s weakness with no motor and lesser AF system vs D7100 ,both are for what you need is what you get.
      D5200 is top camera for general shooting ,while D7100 is much more helpful in action and getting long range ,I’d say a slightly tweaked D7000 ,not much :) ,was hoping it to score 85-86 but still lots of tiny improvements including the focusing and metering ability :)

      I already added some things in it’s announcement post :)


    • 68.2) Jon McGuffin
      March 27, 2013 at 12:32 pm

      I can’t say I’m super surprised by my findings of the D7100 and my D7000 side by side comparisons have really not shown me anything IQ wise to suggest it’s really all that much better. As far as worse? Well, that’s the thing about these silly DXOMark numbers and scores. What shows up as a point or two in either direction is not something the end user is going to be able to really see.

      My noise tests (and I can share the files) of apples to apples does NOT show the D7100 doing really any better (visually speaking) than the D7000.

      Despite all of this, I’m happy with the camera. It builds in key areas which will yield superior pictures such as a noticeable improved AF system. For my tastes, the LCD on the back of the screen is worth the price of admission as it’s far brighter, clearer, and renders a much more accurate rendition of what I’m going to see on the screen down the road. Though I use the histogram, let’s be real; I chimp my pictures as much as the next guy and that’s an important component for me.

      • 68.2.1) Adnan khan
        March 27, 2013 at 1:14 pm

        For noise level you have to downsample the image size of D7100 to that of D7000’s.
        16MP vs 24MP is not equal in comparing ,but the D7100 has very slight noise level improvement over D7000.
        24Mps in DX is not much of a good isea in first place ,IMO they should have tweaked the D7000’s 16MP sensor with all the new improvements which might have helped in buffer capacity too.

        For sharing it would be best to shoot both cameras in 14 bit RAW with noise reduction off at same time with same lens with mirror lock up on tripod and re size D7100’s picture to 16MP or exact equal size of D7000’s image size and then crop 100% from center until it is 2048 or can share full size if you have Pro Flickr account.
        ISO 1600 to 6400 is good enough for testing.
        Convert RAW either using View NX without any change or in Lightroom with sharpness set to zero.

        D7100 has more flexible ISO options which actually help in getting better exposure ,please kindly list what ISO numbers are missing in D7000 vs D7100.


        • Jon McGuffin
          March 27, 2013 at 1:22 pm

          Oh, make no mistake about it, I downsampled the D7100 and did so accurately in photoshop (bicubic) and did what I felt at the time was the best comparison I could shooting on a tripod, selecting a subject with some good dynamic range, various colors, etc.

          As I’m sitting there trying to knit-pic the differences it dawned on my how pointless all this, and the time and energy, this really is. They’re roughly the same, no test charts, numbers, or anything is going to change that..

          It’s a solid camera, maybe the best overall camera for the $$ you could ever buy, but at some point you just have to forget these silly fraction detail differences and just go make pictures :)

          • Adnan khan
            March 27, 2013 at 1:48 pm

            I agree ,I don’t care much in IQ at least in all the latest models ,it’s pretty much same at normal levels ,I’m keeping the D7000 (maybe later have it converted to IR) ,I placed the order as soon as it was announced ,it’s just that the new toys arrive a month later in my part of the world :)
            It will take another 10 days to 2 weeks to arrive.
            The reason I’m buying it is only for better focusing system and for longer reach in crop of dx mode.
            If the D800 had 4x crop mode ,then there was no need for it :)

            • Jon McGuffin
              March 27, 2013 at 1:50 pm

              Yes, I think you’ll be happy with this camera over the D7000. The AF gains are legitimate and the body feels very refined over the D7000. I haven’t tried the 1.3DX crop mode just figuring if I wanted the center area of the frame, I’d just crop it in post.

              On related news, I’ve tried the “hack” that gets Lightroom and ACR to open up D7100 .NEF files and it works beautifully!!


  69. 69) Frankie C. Che'Francois Photography
    March 28, 2013 at 8:41 pm

    Thankyou for the excellent review Nasim,
    For my 2 cents worth, I will be upgrading to the d7100 over the d600. I do not think that the d600 is worth the money, considering its like a band-aid for the d800/e. I would much rather invest the $3k and get the d800 or better yet wait till summer when the d900 comes out, which rumors are already circulating. I shoot weddings and model portfolios I used a d7000/d800e combo and I must stress that when your technique is good, the d7000 delivers great detail with FX glass. I use it mostly for the reach and for the models, because that slight loss of detail over the d800 actually hides alot of blemishes the 800 would pronounce pre-production. My only gripe about the d7000 was the autofocus, which when shooting in dimly lit clubs or catering halls, would not lock focus, so I had to either do it manually or use a small led light so the camera would lock on. I think the AF will be alot better shooting in these situations with the d7100.
    If the d600 had 51 AF points…it would have made a great camera and that would have been my first choice, but those 39AF points suck wind in clubs and some catering halls, where I have no problem with the 51 AF system. From 100-3200 the images are very clean in low light, not ofcourse like a d4 but enough that I can give a client up to a 16×20 print and not have to worry.
    In conclusion, I think Nikon isn’t the same Nikon that it used to be from decades past, especially with all these quality control issues and marketing blunders, so I dont think that spending $2k on a d600 is worth it when for about 800-1000 more you can get a d800e and call it a day, and get the best of everything. If the d600 body was $14-1500, I would overlook alot of these issues but certainly not for $2k, even if they throw in a lil extra oil and dust. LOL

  70. 70) RRRoger
    April 10, 2013 at 7:13 am

    The way I feel about this comparison is that
    if I had a chance to swap my D7100 + D600 for a D800e, I would.

  71. 71) Jon Lizarralde
    May 22, 2013 at 10:50 am

    Hi my name is Jon and do not know if I can participate. Anyway, I’ll do it. Apologies if it is a closed forum.
    My current computer is a nikon d200 + nikon 17-55 + nikon 70-200 vrI + tokina 12-24. I like the new nikon D7100. My question is this Nasim:

    What about the duo nikon D7100 + nikon 17-55 mm (how well it worked on my nikon d200)?

    I have read several of your articles and I like very much. Thanks for all and sorry for my horrible English. Greetings.


    • 71.1) David B
      May 22, 2013 at 11:20 am

      I am curious in general what Nasim thinks about the old 17-55. That lens is getting old, Nasim, and it is a beast. Do you think it is good enough for modern 24MP crop sensor in terms of resolving it?

      • 71.1.1) Grimbot
        May 22, 2013 at 12:09 pm

        DXOMark has just published their test results for the best lenses for use with a D600….they have also published similar information on the best lenses for a D800. Since no DX lenses are included on these reviews you’d need to do a bit of comparison on the DXOMark website to assess various lens purchase options. If you do a web search for “best lenses for D600 DXOMark” you should find the information quite easily.

        I did have a look at the 17-55 DX on DXOMark for you to see how it scored on different cameras. There are typically three ratings that I pay more attention to on DXOMark: the overall score (shooting a low light scene), the sharpness score (how many effective MP the camera/lens combination delivers) and the mid-light score (shooting a well lit scene).

        The 17-55 scored 13 overall, 5 for sharpness (41.7% efficiency), and 23 for mid-light on a D300s.
        On a D7000 it scored 15 overall, 6 for sharpness (37.5% efficiency), and 27 for mid-light.
        This comparison tends to indicate that the lens does perform somewhat better on a camera with a sensor with more mega-pixels….although the improvement in sharpness is less than what might be expected with the higher pixel density.

        I also compared the FX 16-35 f4 on a D7000 and that lens scored 13 overall (understandable since it is an f/4 lens compared to an f/2.8) 8 for sharpness (50% efficiency) and 27 for mid-light. So, while there is an improvement in sharpness on a D7000, in terms of maximum ‘excellent’ quality print size (i.e. the overall and mid-light scores) there is not a huge reason to switch to the 16-35 f/4 from the 17-55 DX when using a crop sensor camera.

        The FX 16-35 f/4 scores on the full frame D600 were: 23 overall, 14 for sharpness (58.3% efficiency), and 42 for mid-light….so the lens performs significantly better on an FX, high MP body like the D600 than it does on a crop sensor camera.

        The latest information on DXOMark gives photographers some additional information to consider before making camera body or lens purchases. In many cases the most expensive lenses are not the best performing depending on the body with which they are used.

        Hope this has helped a little….

    • May 22, 2013 at 1:18 pm

      Jon, if you already own the 17-55mm, it should work fine on the D7100. It is a pro level lens that has pretty good resolution, especially when stopped down to f/5.6 range. However, if you are planning on buying one, I would recommend against doing that for a couple of reasons. The whole notion of a “professional” DX lens just doesn’t sound right nowadays. Why spend so much money on a lens that you can only use on DX camera? Plus, it is clear that Nikon has no interest in further developing “pro” level glass for DX. The 17-55mm, the 12-24mm and the 10.5mm fisheye are pretty much the only “pro” DX offers from Nikon – we have not seen any pro DX lens for years now…

      • 71.2.1) Jon
        May 23, 2013 at 2:06 am

        Hi Nasim,

        Thank you for your attention. I would have liked to jump into fx, but those lenses are my property. First I have to sell the lenses. And the economic effort to buy the new lenses and full frame camera is overkill for me. The question that I have is to wait for the D400 (if it ever comes to light) or buy the D7100 and continue with the lenses that I have.

        Thanks and greetings to all.

  72. 72) RRRoger
    May 23, 2013 at 8:25 am

    I have both cameras and have to sell one.
    It will be the D7100 for several reasons.
    1. My second shoot likes the handling of the D600 better.
    2. I have not used the D7100 to shoot long like I thought I would.
    a. The hand held images at or above 400mm are mostly blurry even at high shutter speeds.
    b. I do not like to carry a TriPod everywhere, especially on hikes.
    3. The D600 actually focuses better in low light at 6400 ISO
    a. The images are also better above 6400 and we have low light Events to do.

  73. 73) hani
    May 26, 2013 at 6:56 am

    hi nasim is nikon d7100 with nikor 105mm afs g good option or d600 and if d600 than which lens i have less mony if iwill buy d600 kindly give me good sugestion is nikon d7100 worth buying also over d7000

    • June 10, 2013 at 6:15 pm

      I would personally go with the D600 if you photograph portraits/people/landscapes and architecture. For wildlife and sports, the D7100 is the way to go.

      • 73.1.1) Martin
        September 29, 2014 at 9:11 am

        “For wildlife and sports, the D7100 is the way to go.”
        WOW. There you said it!!!
        So where does that leave:

        Also, see how the D7100 beats the D800:

        • Profile photo of Nasim Mansurov Nasim Mansurov
          September 29, 2014 at 11:21 am

          Martin, I said it because of the autofocus system – the D7100 has the 51 point AF system and the way I look at it, it is better to have a noisier shot that is in focus, rather than having a noiseless blurry one :)

          • Brian Jennings
            September 29, 2014 at 3:37 pm

            So now we have the 51 point AF system of the D750 vs the 51 point AF of the D7100.
            Given the choice between those two, Nasim, would you still take the D7100?
            I think it boils down to, given the same focal length, shutter speed and ISO would a cropped FX image (and I don’t mean one shot in DX mode) best a cropped DX image? I say no because I think it’s all about getting pixels on the subject even if those pixels are noisier (just like Martin’s 2nd link shows – and I’m surprised the D800 is so poor in comparison).

  74. 74) V. Bhargav
    June 10, 2013 at 6:55 am

    Dear Nasim,

    Thank you so much for such vital info on various part of photography. I need your advise to buy camera. i have d80 with 50mm, 18-135,70-300 & 105 macro vrII with me. i love to do life, portraits,macro and landscapes. very less in to wildlife or birding. need your clear cut opinion to buy my up gradation in next camera. should i buy d7100 or d600. pl advise.

    • June 10, 2013 at 6:14 pm

      If you want the best image quality, get the Nikon D600. The only problem is your 18-135mm lens – that one will work in DX mode, so I would recommend to upgrade it. Currently Nikon is running a great deal for cameras + lenses. If you buy the D600 with a lens, you can get a lot of $ off. Here is the deal.

      • 74.1.1) V. Bhargav
        June 10, 2013 at 11:37 pm

        Thanks Nasim for your final vote. i will go for D600. Can you suggest any specific filter to be purchased with cam? as i love to shoot life,portraits and landscapes. suggest lenses too.

        • Nasim Mansurov
          June 11, 2013 at 2:20 am

          I would get a wide-angle lens for the D600. Go with the Nikon 24-120mm f/4 – it is $300 off right now. I think you are set for everything else. As for filters, I would get a circular polarizer from B+W – other than that, maybe protective filters…

          • V. Bhargav
            June 11, 2013 at 2:46 am

            Great. In India, D600 is costing 2315 $ with kit lens & D7100 is 1438$. price compare is quite a high. though both falls in diff. category but price is also matters. bit confuse for d600. help me.

  75. 75) V. Bhargav
    June 12, 2013 at 5:47 am

    Dear Nasim, Finally i have gone for D7100 due to price factor. Thought in diff. of amount i can increase my lens kit. kindly suggest how can i use the best of D7100. pl advise sp. features of the same and tips too.

  76. 76) Brian
    September 30, 2013 at 3:57 pm

    This article was actually really helpful. If you are a portrait photographer, the 250 sync speed is a plus, as is the 1/8000 max shutter for outdoor portraits in sunlight. Plus you get all the “pro goodies like commander mode. I don’t think I’ll pay double for a larger sensor at his time. Thanks for posting.

  77. 77) Victor
    February 12, 2014 at 9:46 am

    Hello Nasim Great review … But still … i don’t know what i should buy … I’m torn apart between the D7100 + the wonderful SIGMA 18-35 1.8 …. and …. the D610 + a Nikkor 50mm 1.8G that i already own …

    Both combos are on the same price level … Do you have any advice ?

  78. 78) Manish Sharma
    June 14, 2014 at 7:07 am

    I am a wildlife and nature enthusiast… I am struck between D7100 and D600. Because being an aps c sensor d7100 will provide a 1.5x crop which will be advantageous for wildlife. However it wont provide me with the wide perspective for landscapes and nature photography ..
    any advice? or is the 1.5x crop negligible?

    • 78.1) Martin
      September 29, 2014 at 9:13 am

      Nasim said above that D7100 is the way to go for wildlife.
      For lanscape you have the glorious Nikon 10-24mm DX and other non-Nikon offerings.

  79. 79) jdizzl
    December 11, 2014 at 11:07 am

    The price difference used is only about 300 bucks at this point. Why buy the D7100… moving to fx is a no brainer now. Esp if you were upgrading from a d80/d90/d200 and already have FX lenses… I always shot with FX lenses, never owned a DX lens actually, b/c I went from Film to DX DSLR. I’d say the only reason to go DX at this point is if you are a beginner and plan on shooting mostly with a zoom kit. If you were already shooting 1.8 primes for example or a 2.8g zoom on the older DX, again, the FX upgrade is a no brainer. The few things the 7100 wins in are very tiny. I mean if you have to have wildlife, I suppose a dx crop factor is better, for me, dx always sucked b/c I like to shoot wide. There has never been a good 16mm or 24mm affordable dx lens that matches to a 24mm or 35mm fx to this day.

Comment Policy: Although our team at Photography Life encourages all readers to actively participate in discussions, we reserve the right to delete / modify any content that does not comply with our Code of Conduct, or do not meet the high editorial standards of the published material.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *