[viggen]

Was waiting for the next iteration of Nikon's "best DX camera".  Instead, we get a D7100 with wifi.  At least it probably won't experience any recalls since it's essentially the same as the old camera save a new focus system (I only want 1 focus point anyways) and a minor improvement on the chip.  I really wanted to stick with DX because I love my 17-55mm 2.8.  Why not a D400s or a D9300?  Nikon, you're literally driving me away to one of your competitors.

Sony A99 or Canon 6D, here I come!

[thunderbrick]

OK.  I'll give you $500 for your 17-55.  And you pay shipping.   

[Bob2]

I went with the Canon 6D because I wanted a full frame sensor.....
You would like it I'm sure..

[Early B.]

What else do you want in a DX camera while keeping it under the $1,200 price point??   

[Jon L]

Was waiting for the next iteration of Nikon's "best DX camera".  Instead, we get a D7100 with wifi.  At least it probably won't experience any recalls since it's essentially the same as the old camera save a new focus system (I only want 1 focus point anyways) and a minor improvement on the chip.  I really wanted to stick with DX because I love my 17-55mm 2.8.  Why not a D400s or a D9300?  Nikon, you're literally driving me away to one of your competitors.

Sony A99 or Canon 6D, here I come!

As a Canon shooter, it's somewhat amusing to see Nikon people complain about the "same sensor in new package" thing Canon users have been complaining about for years. 

Frankly, if I had to choose today, I would still choose D7200 over 7D II and D750 over 6D.  Or.. the Samsung NX1 with the excellent BSI sensor. 

I did pick up a Sony A7R, which has the nice 36 MP sensor, but its AF is next to useless in low light, forcing me to break out my 5D III anyway 

[JohnR]

What else do you want in a DX camera while keeping it under the $1,200 price point??

I also am curious as to what viggen was hoping for? (I don't understand what "Why not a D400s or a D9300?" really means).

[viggen]

I will send you the 18-140mm kit lens I got with the D7000 for that price.   

OK.  I'll give you $500 for your 17-55.  And you pay shipping.   

[viggen]

Always wanted full frame but was avoiding it because of how much heavier and more expensive the lenses are.

I went with the Canon 6D because I wanted a full frame sensor.....
You would like it I'm sure..

[viggen]

I want a prosumer DX camera.  Something as good as D800/D750 but in crop sensor format and D700 form factor.

Honestly, coming from a D7000 which came out in 2010, there's no reason to upgrade to D7200.

What else do you want in a DX camera while keeping it under the $1,200 price point??

[viggen]

Grass is always greener on the other side I guess. 

Really like the A7 cept I didn't like the Fuji X100 and think I might not like the A7 for the same reasons namely evf and focusing issues.

As a Canon shooter, it's somewhat amusing to see Nikon people complain about the "same sensor in new package" thing Canon users have been complaining about for years. 

Frankly, if I had to choose today, I would still choose D7200 over 7D II and D750 over 6D.  Or.. the Samsung NX1 with the excellent BSI sensor. 

I did pick up a Sony A7R, which has the nice 36 MP sensor, but its AF is next to useless in low light, forcing me to break out my 5D III anyway 

[viggen]

A reason to upgrade from my D7000 while staying with my beloved 17-55mm.  Super low noise chips seem to be ubiquitous now.  But, D7200 doesn't seem to improve on image quality compared to D7100 just like D7100 wasn't much of an upgrade over D7000.  I surmise Nikon wants to push people like me who are just a level above amateur to step up to full frame.

I also am curious as to what viggen was hoping for? (I don't understand what "Why not a D400s or a D9300?" really means).

[dex67]

I've had my D300 for quite a while now...nothing wrong with it...but the upgrade bug bit me...I have the 17-55 2.8 lens and a 18-200 lens...is it worth going to D7000? I don't plan to shoot videos with it...or maybe I should just keep the D300 and spend the money on more music?...

[viggen]

My guess is D300 and D7000 is pretty much the same camera but main reason why I upgraded from D90 to D7000 was for that extra bit of clean ISO I can get for indoor shots which is something I think you'd benefit from too by upgrading to the 7K series.  I needed it because my newborn occurred about two years ago and wanted to make sure I can get clean indoor shots when she woke up in the morning etc.  If you don't need this last bit of clean high iso, then stick with the D300. 

I've had my D300 for quite a while now...nothing wrong with it...but the upgrade bug bit me...I have the 17-55 2.8 lens and a 18-200 lens...is it worth going to D7000? I don't plan to shoot videos with it...or maybe I should just keep the D300 and spend the money on more music?...

[Early B.]

I've had my D300 for quite a while now...nothing wrong with it...but the upgrade bug bit me...I have the 17-55 2.8 lens and a 18-200 lens...is it worth going to D7000? I don't plan to shoot videos with it...or maybe I should just keep the D300 and spend the money on more music?...

I used to own the D300 and now I have the D7000. The D7000 is in another league compared to the D300. Better in every way (except build).

Viggen -- I suppose what you want is a D7200 inside a D300 body. If you want a better camera, just go with the D750 and a 24-70mm lens. This lens will be just as good as your 17-55mm. 

[dex67]

So the D300 has a better body than D7000? what do you mean that it's better except the built? it looks like i'll stick with my D300 then...

[Early B.]

So the D300 has a better body than D7000?

Yeah, I think the D300 feels heftier, is larger, of course, appears to be better built. However, unless you're a pro photographer and using your camera daily and in harsh conditions, it really doesn't matter. I added a battery grip on my D7000 to make it larger and easier to hold. The D7000 takes significantly better images than the D300 -- better color, much better in low light, and better dynamic range.

[viggen]

Viggen -- I suppose what you want is a D7200 inside a D300 body. If you want a better camera, just go with the D750 and a 24-70mm lens. This lens will be just as good as your 17-55mm.

money doesn't mean anything to you...

[Early B.]

money doesn't mean anything to you...

If you want more than what you already have, you gotta be willing to pay for it. Personally, I'm fine with my used D7000.

[Bob2]

Been a Canon user for 40 years.
When looking for a new camera I looked at the D7000. My son has one and it takes great photos.
In the end I wanted to take full advantage of some of the "L" glass.
So with the 6D I can use the lens. Not sure why there is a negative mindset for the 6D.
Has enough focus points and frame rate for anyone not shooting pro sports.
The 5D is really nice, faster frame rate, more focus points and more but it should for the price..

[Jon L]

Canon 6D actually as slightly better IQ than 5D III and has the highest IQ/price ratio in Canonland, so good choice

One thing some shooters may want to invest in is some good noise reduction software.  Even nice sensors like in Nikon D7xxx, Sony A7x, Canon 5xx eventually run into limitations when it comes to high ISO.  One morning, I saw a nice color at dawn, quickly dissipating, so I grabbed the 5D quickly and shot it, after which sunrise was gone.  I then realized, the settings were not where I thought I left them, and I accidentally shot at ISO 6400 with ridiculously fast shutter speed    The noise was annoying, which I could somewhat rescue with Noiseware. 

ACR default NR only

EOSE2864noNR by drjlo1, on Flickr

Noiseware (luminance slider to 7 out of 10)

EOSE2864Nsware by drjlo1, on Flickr