Gerry's Nikon D7000 Review

[biggerry]

This is essentially my experience and thoughts about getting a new camera body (D7000), remember, it may not apply to you or your situation, it is written from my perspective for my photography level and for my upgrade path( from the Nikon D80)

So, its been pretty darn close to 4 years since I purchased my first DSLR unit, the Nikon D80, a cutting edge piece of technology back in early 2007 (from memory it was released mid 2006), this camera was an upgrade from my Sony DSC-V3 camera which, back then was the last of the 'Prosumer' compact cameras, I did love that camera and it did produce many a fine image for me.

I have been looking at the bodies as they got released over recent years wondering which direction I should take and what would be best suited to me, my photography level. Early on the the Nikon D90 and D300s were both worthy contenters for my attention, however at their release time there was no real justifiable reason for upgrading when my D80 was doing a perfectly fine job of capturing images. Interestingly enough, I think I have produced some of my best images to date with the D80 in the last year or so which has had me questioning the need for a upgrade. However there are a few niggling issues/aspects about the D80 that started to make me think more about upgrading the body recently, this coupled with great prices was making it hard to resist Essentially it came down to three key points, price, low light capability and manual lens support.

Price;

The D7000 up to January this year was pushing AUD1600 for an australian body from a brick and mortar store, the grey market options were not that much better and without a very tidy saving and the loss of the aussie warranty they were not looking good, even B&H who had it for USD1100 (which did not have stock for yonks) was not really an option unless I got someone to pick one up on their travels. Digitalrev did have them at AUD1600 when they were first released, however I am somewhat jaded with them and frankly would not buy from them with a real compelling reason.

Quite recently the aussie brick and mortar stores really brough the prices down on some Nikon items, in particular the D7000 and the D700,for example ryda.com.au had the D7000 body only for AUD1279 with a free bad and cleaning kit (better than a kick in the rear I say) and the D700 for AUD 2290. This pretty well galvanised my decision especially since I could very well drop down to my local ryda store (Parramatta road) and pick one up at my convience, no waiting, no postage cost, no photocopied manual and charging adapter. In a word...nioce.

Low light capability;

More frequently I found myself cursing the the inability of the D80 to push past iso 800 with decent results, even in situations where I just needed to push the shutter up just a bit to get me over the line I found it struggled, this coupled with the fact I do tend to and like to slightly under expose my images. The D7000 was at the fore front in this department when compared to D90, D300s and D700 (well maybe).

Manual Lens Support;

I love my manual lens, I have a 105mm f2.5 which I really love, a great piece of nikkor engineering, a lens that produces contrast second to none in my lens line up, the only one that gets very close is the AFS 300mm f4. I also have a 105mm micro f4 which does not see much use now and also a 100-300mm f5.6 which is kinda obsolete now I have the 300mm f4, however they both get pulled out every now and then, the 100-300 has really nailed me some magical images in my eyes albeit with a pretty low strike rate. The D7000 promised manual lens support, most importantly, metering! (apply a suitable hallelujah sound here), man, imagine it, no more chimping my ass off with my 105mm! this could only do wonders for my strike rate. It also had the focusing assist for manual mode, the little green dot and Left and Right arrows to assist in obtaining the focus. An interesting side note, I notice the D80 has only the green dot to indicate focus has been achieved (on a manual lens also), man, never realised this...doh, insert forehead slap here.


So, here I am, a week and half into the ownership of a Nikon D7000 camera. I have clocked up 1080 images, used it for going to the park and chasing chaos around, some low light helichopper work, portraits of chaos and big nan, avalon airshow and a cockatoo island session. I have read only a smattering of the excessively thick manual (that said the index is pretty good) but thought I would share my personal review from the perspective of a D80 abuser to that of a D7000 user. There are plenty of better and complete reviews out there like Dpreview so I will not repeat the 15 pages of tech spec comparisons, as mentioned its just my user experiecne from the D80 to the D7000 and some of the pros and cons that I found important.

Gerrys Pros Summary;

1. Manual Lens support
2. AF tune
3. Low Light capability
4. More megapixels (yeah yeah I hear ya already...pipe down and read the rest)
5. Weather sealed body

Gerrys Cons Summary;

1. Ergonomics
2. Raw file size
3. Over exposure
4. No 'one click' zoom

Pros Details

1) Manual Lens Support

Well as already mentioned, the manual lens support is just divine, you can record up to 12 (i think from memory) manual focus lens which you can recall with a preset number, its just a matter of setting up the focal length and maximum aperture and your away. I have the function button on the front currently setup to cycle through the manual lens presets.

The manual lens now meters! unlike the D80 which gave you no clue whatsoever, the D7000 provides feedback in the HUD (thats my acronym for the viewerfinder display) with regard to the f-stop your at and the usual metering bars +/- - i mean wow, I am still coming to grips with this!

An image from Cockatoo Island Last week (105mm f2.5), about 4 images taken all nicely exposed and focused!


The manual lens also has the manual assist indicators, this is on the left hand side of the HUD and consists of a single green dot and a arrow on either side, basically the arrows give you feedback to which direction you need to rotate the focus ring to achieve the correct focus. This seems pretty darn accurate and I have only had it struggle a bit at f2.5 on the 105 and this could be well be user error where i had the focus point on the wrong part of the subject. I am now in the habit of using this focus assist and also glancing at the subject before pressing the shutter and it is working pretty nicely, strike rate is already looking better.



1) AF Tune;

This is a very very handy feature, I recently realised that my Nikkor 28mm f2.8 was a bit out of focus (probably had something to do with my oily aperture blade clean, lol) I spent a few minutes one evening playing with this lens and the AF tune feature and found that with a AF tune setting of -16 resulted in my 28mm f2.8 being dangerously sharp again. I mean how cool is that, that is such sensible and useful function.

3) Low Light Capability;

Well there are plenty of examples of this across the net, but all I can say is the high iso is light years ahead of what my poor D80 is. There are plenty of situations where using a disturbingly large iso 2000+ is warranted and now if the image is nicely exposed, the image (with the in camera NR) becomes quite usuable - A secondary effect (more important for me) of the good high iso capability is the ability at lower ISOs to recover details from shadows with a significantly reduced amount of noise appearing, as mentioned I typically slightly under expose rather than over expose so this is one nice aspect for my style.





Heres one example above, from the other week after leaving the pool, ISO 1600 with lots of shadow, some post processing to recover some shadows and there is minimal noise, no NR on this one. This kind of mid range range ISO clean-ness really suits my photography and fits in well to my work flow.

Another example is the Sikorsky S-64 image below, a handheld pano shot using three images at ISO 1000, it has had quite some work to recover the shadows but the noise was definitely minimal, this was also with an exposure to suit the sunset rather than the subject. With the D80 there would have been no hope unless I had a tripod and the ability to freeze time, in this case there was no time to setup a tripod after zipping out onto the airfield and would have missed it anyway!


4) More Megapixels;

I can hear the groans already, well sometimes a megapixel increase is not such a bad thing, I did not choose this body for the increase in the pixel count, however after visiting the airshow and being a bit short on the focal length it meant I had some usuable cropped images which would have never been possible with the D80. Obviously this is a two edged sword, this means bigger file sizes, more storage required and more grunt required in the PP computer, however its probably something I can deal with, especially if it means I can crop images like below. The original uncropped version is below also.



5) Weather Sealed Body;

Well so they say, I think this is really more of a gimmick and can lead you into a false sense of security, there are plenty examples of nikon 'weather sealed' bodies corroding away from the inside, I think the key is a bit like watches that say 'water resistant' and those that say 'water proof', 'weather sealed' really means 'water resistant'. Nonetheless I will put this on the list of pros for me, especially since I do a fair amount of outside stuff...

So onto the Cons;

1) Ergonomics;

In a nutshell this camera is not as good as my D80. A couple of aspects make it so, firstly the shape of the grip, it is definitely more square and not as contoured as the D80's grip, this is detrimental to the comfortability( for me). Secondly, there is less 'land' on the back of the camera due to the increased sreen and hence the shuffling across of the RHS controls, this means less land for the thumb and thumb portion of the palm (I am sure there is technical term for that bit of ya hand!) this makes the camera feel less secure in my hands, particularly as I tend to walk around with the camera in my right hand. Thirdly, the finger wrap around part of the grip is shallower then the D80 meaning you essentially have less to grasp onto. This was probably the biggest disappointment about the D7000 for me and having rather large hands meant this was of a real concern. However, for me I wanted a camera that was relatively small, something comparable to the D80, something that I could happily stick in the pack and go hiking or carry for a day without needing a physio session, so this was the compromise. At the end of the day I will get used to it and it is certainly not a show stopper.

(I must insert some comparsion images of the D80 and D7000)

2) Raw file Size:

I nearly fell off my chair when the camera told me I had only 144 shots odd on my old 4gb card, holy crap, at nearly 20 mb for each raw this was gonna be disk consuming excerise! Admittingly this was with full raw files at 14-bit on a 16.2 megapixel sensor. So why's this a con you say? Well it is at the moment, possibly it may change down the track, however at this point it is chewing up disk space like a little 19 month old toddler that I know eats, or should I say, inhales dinner.

The second disadvantage to the raw file size is processing time. This combined with Capture NX2 inability to not crash when sitting there doing sweet 'f' all is making my post processing a real drag. Working with NEF's from the D7000 will guarantee a crash about every 5 minutes, usually when saving the edited file, but sometimes in the midst of just do a few simple edits. Now to be fair its a new camera and the software has probably not quite caught up and I am only using a 32 bit, dual core processor with 4gb RAM, but man, the performance is abysmal and is causing me to do some serious cursing.

3) Over exposure (on bright scenes);

This was the second con after the ergonomics, and this could well be user error here and would love for someone to point out what I am doing wrong 'cause I been doing it for a while on te D80 . However there is also evidence out there in the web of people experiencing the same issue (not really a issue more of characteristic!). Its not a design flaw or a reason not to buy the camera imo (and you will see plenty of peeps on dpreview banging on that they wont buy it because of this?!), I think its more of the way the camera is setup to correctly expose common scenes, ie maybe to correctly expose faces at the expense of the overall scene?

Anyway the important point is, given the way the D80 and the D90 exposures it appears to be design direction by Nikon and well, I am used to the D80 and its metering system and quite frankly, at this point, the D7000 does a very similiar job! I typically use the manual mode and always have the exposure on the - side a fraction, if working in other semi-auto modes, I just dial in -0.5 on teh exposure compensation, just like I did on the D80.

4) One Click Zoom;

I think the D300s has this and the D700 does too I am pretty sure, basically its a one button press to get the preview image on teh LCD zoomed into the max, this is a really handy feature when using manual lens and you do alot of focus checking. With that said the D7000 zoom button is at least a crapload fastener than the D80. Not as good as a single press option but adequate I guess. Little things like this where they may leave off features to maintain the features of the higher models just shits me too by the way.

Gerry's Conclusion;

Well, all in all, I think this is the perfect upgrade path for me, I have (in my mind) got my moneys worth out the D80 and it will also continue to serve as a second body, hopefully for many years. The 4 year period for the upgrade feels appropriate and I have obtained better glass in the years after getting the D80 rather than look at a new body. Whilst there are few lens I am definitely wanting to get the D7000 has filled a number of key holes for me, low light capability and manual lens support are the two aspects that I will undoubtly see an increased improvement in my photography, not necessarily in quality but more importantly an improved process in capturing them and better strike rate.



no excuses for good images now eh?!

[Remorhaz]

Very nice review Gerry - and I am so sorely tempted (to upgrade from my D90 - after all it's now salt ridden surely and ready to corrode away in a few weeks time.... I must keep telling myself this ) - not such a big jump for me but there are a few features I really would like (perhaps strangely not exactly the ones you mentioned).

Anyone looking at my Street Photography 52/2011 photostream may have noticed I did in fact include some pics taken with a D7000 (I borrowed a friend from the office's new D7000 for a few days and gave it a spin).

You didn't mention things like vastly increased auto focus points (now I guess this depends on how you shoot - but I'm often (read more than 50% of the time) in single point focus mode and moving the focus point to the place I want to focus in the frame) - I'm not a focus and recompose type person . And that button on the front next to the lens to hold down and spin the dials to change the auto focus and AF-area modes is genius - on my D90 I had to program my function button to the AF-area mode menu because I use that so freakin' often but I have to look at the screen to see the changes.

I also like the user program slots (U1 and U2) - I could see myself using this programming a bunch of settings for one type of shooting vs another - e.g. at the moment I'd program one of them to the settings I'd want for street photography which would be different to my other more "normal/default" shooting settings - which is what I did with my friends D7000 when I used it.

I also hear you on the ergonomics - it's not a nice as my D90 - and I'm always just walking around with the camera just in my right hand (especially with my street and school photography) - however I too started to get used to it after a few days. I'm also with you on the one touch zoom - I bet they had to program that feature OUT of the firmware to remove it rather than the other way around to make the camera "less" than the semi-pro and pro models.

Something else I noticed was how touchy the shutter release was - I leave my camera in continuous high - one press for a single shot and hold down for more - with the D7000 at first I was getting bursts all the time

With the weather sealing - I expect this might be more useful if one used the pro weather sealed lenses however without that even light water is likely to seep in from the lens mount anyway (not to mention killing the lens) - I've yet to see the eventual results on my Sigma 8-16mm UWA after it's Coogee experience

How do you find the default base ISO switch from 200 now down to 100 (kind of like almost losing a stop of light by default)? Just thinking if you are used to certain shutter/aperture combos with certain light conditions @ ISO 200 and now...

[biggerry]

You didn't mention things like vastly increased auto focus points (now I guess this depends on how you shoot - but I'm often (read more than 50% of the time) in single point focus mode and moving the focus point to the place I want to focus in the frame

To be honest, I am still coming to grips with the focus options, the increased focus points are very nice and really give more control over your composition and focus, however I never really felt that limited by the D80's limited number of focus points

And that button on the front next to the lens to hold down and spin the dials to change the auto focus and AF-area modes is genius

Yes it certainly is, I used to have my function button setup to do this on the D80, having a dedicated button is a smart move and what is smarter, is that they have done with out introducing a new button position (so to speak) by using the AF selector, it took me a good half an hour to work what button the bloody manual was on about 'cause I thought it was just the AF on/off switch! When I finally realised it was, 'wow smart move Nikon'.

I also like the user program slots (U1 and U2)

yeah this ones a bit of no brainer tho, its not something that would be a major driving factor for an upgrade in my books. The custom settings are very good and I have yet to really fully utilise them, however I can really see them getting used in the future.

I bet they had to program that feature OUT of the firmware to remove it rather than the other way around to make the camera "less" than the semi-pro and pro models.

Something else I noticed was how touchy the shutter release was - I leave my camera in continuous high - one press for a single shot and hold down for more - with the D7000 at first I was getting bursts all the time

THis was one aspect I was worried about, I really like the D80 shutter button, and everytime I tried a D300 I always came away thinking the shutter release button was crud (Cameron will atest to my continous whinging about this) - However after a couple of days using it I find I prefer it over the D80 shutter button now, I was always sure I would just get used to it, so no probs.

How do you find the default base ISO switch from 200 now down to 100 (kind of like almost losing a stop of light by default)? Just thinking if you are used to certain shutter/aperture combos with certain light conditions @ ISO 200 and now...

the D80 has ISO 100 and so does the D7000, am I missing something here?

[ATJ]

Great review, Gerry, but it comes just after I'd talked myself out of getting a second and now I'm thinking about it again.

[Remorhaz]

How do you find the default base ISO switch from 200 now down to 100 (kind of like almost losing a stop of light by default)? Just thinking if you are used to certain shutter/aperture combos with certain light conditions @ ISO 200 and now...

the D80 has ISO 100 and so does the D7000, am I missing something here?

The base or default ISO on the D90 is 200 (you can go down to Lo1 or something to get to 100 but thats detrimental to quality). So I guess I'm used to shooting at ISO 200 (normal).

[biggerry]

Great review, Gerry, but it comes just after I'd talked myself out of getting a second and now I'm thinking about it again.

lol, I can't think of better options out there at the moment and the local brick and mortar prices are just too tempting...

The base or default ISO on the D90 is 200 (you can go down to Lo1 or something to get to 100 but thats detrimental to quality). So I guess I'm used to shooting at ISO 200 (normal).

ahh, I understand now, nope no change for me from teh D80

[Matt. K]

Gerry
I can't let your comments about the Nikons weather sealing slip by without a little rebuke. I've had my D300 for nearly 3 years now and I haven't seen a single drop of water come out of it.

[biggerry]

Gerry
I can't let your comments about the Nikons weather sealing slip by without a little rebuke. I've had my D300 for nearly 3 years now and I haven't seen a single drop of water come out of it.

come along to the next seascape sunrise seesion and we can sort that issue out for ya

[Remorhaz]

Gerry
I can't let your comments about the Nikons weather sealing slip by without a little rebuke. I've had my D300 for nearly 3 years now and I haven't seen a single drop of water come out of it.

come along to the next seascape sunrise seesion and we can sort that issue out for ya

Just shoot from where I shoot from and we'll soon have you sorted out

[ATJ]

Gerry
I can't let your comments about the Nikons weather sealing slip by without a little rebuke. I've had my D300 for nearly 3 years now and I haven't seen a single drop of water come out of it.

come along to the next seascape sunrise seesion and we can sort that issue out for ya

I bet my D300 has been under a lot more water than all of your seascape sunrise sessionists put together.

[aim54x]

How do you find the default base ISO switch from 200 now down to 100 (kind of like almost losing a stop of light by default)? Just thinking if you are used to certain shutter/aperture combos with certain light conditions @ ISO 200 and now...

the D80 has ISO 100 and so does the D7000, am I missing something here?

The base or default ISO on the D90 is 200 (you can go down to Lo1 or something to get to 100 but thats detrimental to quality). So I guess I'm used to shooting at ISO 200 (normal).

Actually, I think what Gerry has missed is the fact that the Nikon 12MP CMOS cameras (both DX and FX) start at 200 ISO with a Lo 1 boost, wheras the D80 and all the other 10MP CCD cameras (D40X/D60/D80/D200) didnt have a Lo 1 boost, but started their ISO range at 100.

[biggerry]

Actually, I think what Gerry has missed is the fact that the Nikon 12MP CMOS cameras (both DX and FX) start at 200 ISO with a Lo 1 boost, wheras the D80 and all the other 10MP CCD cameras (D40X/D60/D80/D200) didnt have a Lo 1 boost, but started their ISO range at 100.

ahh so they are all basically the same just different naming convention?

[aim54x]

Actually, I think what Gerry has missed is the fact that the Nikon 12MP CMOS cameras (both DX and FX) start at 200 ISO with a Lo 1 boost, wheras the D80 and all the other 10MP CCD cameras (D40X/D60/D80/D200) didnt have a Lo 1 boost, but started their ISO range at 100.

ahh so they are all basically the same just different naming convention?

Not quite, Lo 1 is an artificial extrapolation of ISO hence the name. It is essentially "roughly" 1 stop less sensitive than the base ISO (or calibrated ISO point). Using Lo 1 is, as Rodney stated, detrimental to image quality

[colin_12]

This is a good read Gerry,
Thanks for taking the time and including shots.

[gstark]

Gerry,

Thanks for posting this for us.

It's a great review, and in many respects, way better than the ones that we might see posted elsewhere, because it provides a personal perspective on your buying decision, the underlying thoughts behind that, as well as how you use the camera.

This is very valuable stuff, and it's what gives this review so much added value.

[chrisk]

Actually, I think what Gerry has missed is the fact that the Nikon 12MP CMOS cameras (both DX and FX) start at 200 ISO with a Lo 1 boost, wheras the D80 and all the other 10MP CCD cameras (D40X/D60/D80/D200) didnt have a Lo 1 boost, but started their ISO range at 100.

ahh so they are all basically the same just different naming convention?

Just to add to cams explanation, the reason the "base" iso is now iso200 is cos nikons new gen sensors are geared towards light sensitivity and the camera extracts its best dynamic range north of iso100. I think from memory peak output is iso400. So setting the camera to base iso of 100 didnt make any sense. I know for a few guys this is not a good thing as they have to comprimise shutter speed.

Nice review. I dont know that id consider file size to be a con though. I think thats the nature of the beast in high mp cameras. A bit like saying a con of a 911 is that its too fast. I loved using the d7000. Fst, responsive, unfettered, accurate. Just loved it despite its tendancy to OE.

[Remorhaz]

Just to add to cams explanation, the reason the "base" iso is now iso200 is cos nikons new gen sensors are geared towards light sensitivity and the camera extracts its best dynamic range north of iso100. I think from memory peak output is iso400. So setting the camera to base iso of 100 didnt make any sense.

Which was why I was surprised that the new D7000 went back to a base ISO of 100.

[biggerry]

Not quite, Lo 1 is an artificial extrapolation .....

Just to add to cams explanation, the reason the "base" iso is now iso200 is cos nikons new gen sensors ....

cool, that makes sense now - now I can purge this knowledge from my brain knowing it will be hidden deep on dslrusers!

Nice review. I dont know that id consider file size to be a con though. I think thats the nature of the beast in high mp cameras. A bit like saying a con of a 911 is that its too fast.

for me, at this point, it certainly ain't a positive give an ageing computer and disk space at a premium.

[ATJ]

Nice review. I dont know that id consider file size to be a con though. I think thats the nature of the beast in high mp cameras. A bit like saying a con of a 911 is that its too fast.

for me, at this point, it certainly ain't a positive give an ageing computer and disk space at a premium.

I'm with Chris here. You can't list more megapixels as a pro and then complain about the file sizes. The two go hand in hand.

[gstark]

Nice review. I dont know that id consider file size to be a con though. I think thats the nature of the beast in high mp cameras. A bit like saying a con of a 911 is that its too fast.

for me, at this point, it certainly ain't a positive give an ageing computer and disk space at a premium.

I'm with Chris here. You can't list more megapixels as a pro and then complain about the file sizes. The two go hand in hand.

And storage is cheap these days.

[chrisk]

for me, at this point, it certainly ain't a positive give an ageing computer and disk space at a premium.

Gerry, I can totally understand where you are coming from and I don't necessarily disagree with your sentiment, I just don't think i'd consider that it's a con of the camera itself.

What is the size of the compressed raw files and how much quality do they lose ?

[Remorhaz]

You could always switch to JPEG SMALL BASIC - problem fixed

[surenj]

I use small RAW on my camera. It's about 10 Mpx which is acceptable. I assume it's the 'same' noise quality with reduced resolving power. There is an option of teeny RAW which is 4mpix which is less desirable.

[biggerry]

Gerry, I can totally understand where you are coming from and I don't necessarily disagree with your sentiment, I just don't think i'd consider that it's a con of the camera itself.

yeah thats cool, maybe a con of my computer?!

What is the size of the compressed raw files and how much quality do they lose ?

ok, the raws I am using are 'Lossless compressed', these are typically 19mb SOOC. These grow to typically 25mb with a few simple edits.

compared to the D80, the raws are 12-bit (and I assume lossless compressed) these are 8-9mb SOOC and these grow to about 9-10mb after a few edits.

Jpegs are compressed at around 80% quality and these are around the 3mb mark compared to 1.8mb for the D80

How much quality do they lose when going to jpeg?

dunno to be honest, I assume it depends on quality settings and stuff (thats a technical term btw) more than anything else.

I use small RAW on my camera. It's about 10 Mpx which is acceptable. I assume it's the 'same' noise quality with reduced resolving power. There is an option of teeny RAW which is 4mpix which is less desirable.

yeah, I noticed canon had that, unfornately Nikon (at least the two I have owned) do not have this option. The D7000 gives options for RAW+various jpegs and choice between 14 and 12 bit, lossless compressed and compressed raw files.

You could always switch to JPEG SMALL BASIC - problem fixed

And storage is cheap these days.

so are alot of things

[biggerry]

Another aspect that is definitely an improvement and only something that I have become away of when going back to the D80, is the thumbpad and the 'OK' button - much better design than the D80 and its daft placement of the 'OK' down below the lock lever.

[ATJ]

ok, the raws I am using are 'Lossless compressed', these are typically 19mb SOOC. These grow to typically 25mb with a few simple edits.

compared to the D80, the raws are 12-bit (and I assume lossless compressed) these are 8-9mb SOOC and these grow to about 9-10mb after a few edits.

This is one of the many things I love about Lightroom. It doesn't touch the raw files at all. It just stores all the "edits" in the catalog. My catalog is only 650MB and I have over 50 thousand images in the catalog.

[aim54x]

Another aspect that is definitely an improvement and only something that I have become away of when going back to the D80, is the thumbpad and the 'OK' button - much better design than the D80 and its daft placement of the 'OK' down below the lock lever.

TOTALLY AGREE!!!

I use small RAW on my camera. It's about 10 Mpx which is acceptable. I assume it's the 'same' noise quality with reduced resolving power. There is an option of teeny RAW which is 4mpix which is less desirable.

yeah, I noticed canon had that, unfornately Nikon (at least the two I have owned) do not have this option. The D7000 gives options for RAW+various jpegs and choice between 14 and 12 bit, lossless compressed and compressed raw files.

I dont understand why anyone would shoot in lower resolution RAW, why would you choose to not utilise the available resolution to its maximum?

[surenj]

I dont understand why anyone would shoot in lower resolution RAW, why would you choose to not utilise the available resolution to its maximum?

Yeah I thought about this. I haven't decided conclusively but for family snaps, I usually go for 10mpx as I am pretty unlikely to enlarge or crop them alot. Landscapes are usually shot at 18mpx. (So I can crop easily) The humongous RAW files (nearly 30 megs!) makes my computer struggle alot (despite 6gigs of RAM etc).

[biggerry]

I dont understand why anyone would shoot in lower resolution RAW, why would you choose to not utilise the available resolution to its maximum?

when you have to wade thru a couple hundred images on a fairly slow machine I reckon this is enough of a reason to push the res down, especially when you talking about toddler images

The humongous RAW files (nearly 30 megs!) makes my computer struggle alot (despite 6gigs of RAM etc).

[gstark]

Well ....

I've just had a D7000 kit wander in to the office, accompanied by a Coolpix L23.

The D7000 kit includes the 18-105 VR lens, and first impressions ... I like it.

[ATJ]

I've just had a D7000 kit wander in to the office, accompanied by a Coolpix L23.

Is that one more pro and one more con?

Pro:

Self mobile

Con:

Makes friends with PHDs.

[aim54x]

I dont understand why anyone would shoot in lower resolution RAW, why would you choose to not utilise the available resolution to its maximum?

when you have to wade thru a couple hundred images on a fairly slow machine I reckon this is enough of a reason to push the res down, especially when you talking about toddler images

The humongous RAW files (nearly 30 megs!) makes my computer struggle alot (despite 6gigs of RAM etc).

Surely your machines could not be slower than my AMD Athlon X2 2.2GHz, 3Gb RAM unit that I retired last year??? i have had NEF files come off the camera at almost 40mb, and my average D300 NEF is 27mb straight off the camera. I do admit, Phenom II X4 3.4ghz + 8gb RAM does make things easier to manage. At the moment I wouldnt mind a bit more resolution but more importantly more usable ISO

[chrisk]

my average D300 NEF is 27mb straight off the camera.

huh??

[biggerry]

Surely your machines could not be slower than my AMD Athlon X2 2.2GHz, 3Gb RAM unit that I retired last year??? i have had NEF files come off the camera at almost 40mb, and my average D300 NEF is 27mb straight off the camera.

marginally better, but not by much

nef files at 40mb...wowsers...

[surenj]

marginally better, but not by much

Same here.

[biggerry]

marginally better, but not by much

Same here.

spent all my money on some new fangled camera when I shoulda got a new puter...

[aim54x]

my average D300 NEF is 27mb straight off the camera.

huh??

14-bit uncompressed NEF......

[biggerry]

uncompressed NEF......

whats the difference between compressed and uncompressed nef's is there really an advantage to using uncompressed ones? I am considering going to the compressed ones ...

[ATJ]

whats the difference between compressed and uncompressed nef's is there really an advantage to using uncompressed ones? I am considering going to the compressed ones ...

When I looked into this for my D300, I saw absolutely no benefit of uncompressed over lossless compressed. In fact, I see uncompressed as having a number of disadvantages:
1) File size is 20-40% larger - takes up more space on the card (so less photos) and more space on the HDD
2) Recording time increases
3) Transfer time increases

There appear to be no advantages at all. The only one I could think of is that it make take slightly less time to process the image as it doesn't need to uncompress the image, but as I don't see delays in processing, it is not an advantage to me.

[aim54x]

I just like the idea of uncompressed files....

We have had similar discussions about 14-bit vs 12-bit....and at the time a lot of people saw no difference...I wonder if that is still the consensus?

[ATJ]

We have had similar discussions about 14-bit vs 12-bit....and at the time a lot of people saw no difference...I wonder if that is still the consensus?

There is (at least potentially) a difference in the information stored between 14 bit and 12 bit. There is no difference in the information stored between lossless compressed and uncompressed.

[biggerry]

An interestign out of camera gimmick on the D7000 is the miniaturisation effect, is it useful? probably not, will I ever use it again? probably not..

[surenj]

Gerry can you control the width of the effect?

[biggerry]

Gerry can you control the width of the effect?

nope and you can't control teh height of it either

the only control is the position of the effect

[surenj]

can't control teh height of it either

yeah that's what I meant!
Yeah same here, I've got it as well but can't control the height of it so useless really.