Nikon D7000

[Sue Allen]

The truth is that most of the shortcomings of the first DSLRs were rectified a few models ago - start up, buffer, noise at 'normal iso settings, battery life etc. It's hard for any new camera to really have that wow factor in comparison to the model it's replacing. Of course they've now come up with extras - live view, video etc. If they're of no interest then the other upgrades are sometimes fairly minor.

[Novac]

Originally Posted by Eyeayen

I don't know if you've read all the posts in this thread Novac but it's just a review, each person will review a camera differently and rate it on how THEY like it. And it seems silly to point your finger at the mag when I've worked in 2 different industries and seen first hand people writing their own reviews and getting them published by the magazine, not surprisingly they went very much in favor of the tested product. None of us know what it's really like to review a camera or award a score for it but if you feel that strongly go out and buy one and write your own review.

Yes I have read all the posts. I also have spent my working life working in more than 3 different Industries in 2 different countries. What that got to do with these posts I'm not sure!

The cold hard facts are that the Reviewer in question did not bring to the readers the full specification and its performance , and as a result the cameras ability was down graded I feel unjustiability.

[HinFrance]

The point is that they're all good these days, and that in order to have something to say reviewers have to resort to analysing minutiae. Personal preference inevitably comes into it (not dishonestly, everyone has a list of personal priorities) and will affect conclusions.

To recap, the camera for you is the one you feel comfortable with, albeit a cheap point and shoot or something exotic.

I happen to believe that the D7000 is a very good camera, but it's just not the one for me.

[Eyeayen]

Originally Posted by Novac

I also have spent my working life working in more than 3 different Industries in 2 different countries. What that got to do with these posts I'm not sure!

My point was when I was in these industries for which I had been reading the magazines of for years I suddenly got to see it from the other side and realised people wrote their own reviews and some manufacturers even insisted on vetting their reviews and having parts removed.

I've never worked in the camera industry though but none of us really know what goes on ?

As H has said above, it's all about personal preference and if you feel the Nikon has been down graded and but is still the camera for you, go for it, get one. I tried one in a shop the at the weekend and it felt really good to hold and everything else seemed okay. Yes the lower than I was expecting scores are in the back of my mind but lets face it, it's not a high end camera, I'm not a pro and if I bought this or the Pentax or the Canon or pretty much any other SLR I'm going to get good images.

The reviewers do this day in day out, they notice and use stuff I'll probably never realise and I'm sure that goes for most of us. So, is the score really that important ? Probably not ? Will I still get this camera ? More than likely....

[Novac]

My final word on the subject of the D7000 test. Yes potential buyers of cameras can be influenced if they do not have the enthusiasm that perhaps we have. This is one of the reasons why magazine get sold, no doubt sales of certain month increase markably due to new camera reviews. No I will not be buying a new D7000, certainly not in the current unsettled times. I just like a fair and balanced review.

[Eyeayen]

Interesting to see that 'What Digital Camera' has just scored the D7000 at 92% !

[pburness]

I had a play with one a few weeks back in Manchester airport. Next to it was a D300 - if Nikon put the D700 sensor in the D300 body then I'm having one.
The D300 body just felt so much better, yet the noticable difference was the non-hand grip side which seemed to be a bit wider and felt more comfortable in my hands.
The reviews of the D7000 are all favourable, but you just can't whack the practical side of trying one for yourself...

Phil

[Sue Allen]

I assume the D7000 is similar to the D90 handling wise. Having used a D300 and D300s for most of the last year or so I agree the body/handling is definitely a class above - and you can currently get a D300s for £90 less than a D7000 at WE - bit of a bargain really.

[amk1977]

From reading quite a few places on the web, the D300 and D300s are pretty much redundant when compared to the D7000. The D300 has been out since August '07 and and the D300s, 18 months old technology.

When you compare the prices in respect of the camera specs, especially the sensor perfomance you can see the huge improvement that an additional £90 buys you.

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/en/...rand3%29/Nikon

The D300 and D300s are still both good cameras in their own right but, they really aren't that much of a bargain at that price when up against the D7000. In fact, RGB Photo has the D300s at £979 and the D7000 at £949! I know where my money would be going...... If I had £950 to spare

[Sue Allen]

Depends what you want it for I suppose. We all buy into the idea that digital camera technology goes on at such a pace that a camera is redundant only months after its release - that's what keeps the manufacturers in profit I suppose. The DXO mark for the K-5 i've now got is even better than the D7000 but it's not a massive leap forward from the D300s or D90 in real world shooting...good for pixel peepers though When you read reviews of new cameras these days so many of the 'improvements' centre around live view and video etc. which are only of interest to some. Think I might still prefer the D300s for its solid body, ergonomics,controls and lightning fast af and fps for action and BIF....as i said, it depends on your subject matter. Mine just became too big [old age!] ...have'nt found the K-5 too much of a compromise so far.