Thanks mate, appreciate the support :-) Tbh the quality of the lens is what really determines the quality of the picture, if you use an average lens with a great body the picture will not be as good a great lens with an average body. The FX will perform better in low light and will give you the true focal length of the lens, but it won't have any significant advantage on the quality of the image. Hope that helps
Thanks. DX lenses will work on the D600, you will just get a 1.5x crop. So instead of 24.1mp, you will get around 16mp images with DX lenses. Hope that helps
Hey thanks for the feedback, appreciated :-) Personally I am not a fan of kit lenses, i would go for body only and stick with the ones you have for now then invest in some nice FX lenses when you have the cash. I mean even with the DX lenses you will still be getting shots at roughly 15megapixels, which is usually more than enough and will still be able to shoot full 1080p video too.
Hey, that's not my channel. The guy has been stealing my videos. Have reported it and looks like RUclips have blocked the channel now. Thank you so much for letting me know.
yes it really does depend on preference. A sports photographer commented before saying how the extra 1.3 crop would give them almost double the focal length at 15MP as well as 7fps which was ideal for sports photography.
Hi Phil, I based my opinion on the specs and experience with DX and FX bodies but did mention in the video that for a true comparison they would have to be seen side by side.
If you are new to photography then my advice would be to go for the D7100 after a few months (when the price is more reasonable) and spend the money saved on some nice lenses. All the best
Just ordered D600. - Full-frame sensors offer a 1.2 to 1.4 stop advantage in noise. This means that a FF ISO 250 image has about the same noise as a crop ISO 100 image. - Full-frame sensors offer better detail at any given f-stop due to lower diffraction effects. This improves image detail, color detail, and contrast. - The feature that full-frame provides is better images...plain and simple.
I bought the D7100 and am very happy with it. The viewfinder is nice and bright. The 51 point AF is very fast and accurate, 1.3 crop mode is more useful than I thought. Brings up the fps to 7 and gives me 1080p 60i video. All the images coming from this camera are super sharp with nice dynamic range. The body is very well built and the grip is nice and sticky. I was looking at the D600 [price didn't matter to me] and I was very discouraged by all the negative talk of oil & dust.
i also do events and landscapes etc.. And especially when I am using a wide lens, something like the 14-24mm, I want 14mm wide rather than a DX crop which will roughly be 21mm equivalent. But yes it obviously varies from person to person.
I agree that a DX is fine for most situations. But considering the small price difference right now, I personally think you may as well go for the full-frame.
Well if you have some FX lenses they should work a treat with the D600. And any DX lenses you have should still work on the D600 (it will just use the 1.5x DX crop) so the images will be around 15 megapixels rather than the full 24.3.
Thanks Mark, what is the difference in euros between the D7100 and D600? If it's as little as here in the UK (just £300-350) then I think full-frame is definitely the way to go.
Nikon just issues a press release today, have a search on their website. I think they have suggested a solution or you can take it to the nearest Nikon service center.
thanks! Currently Using a Red Nikon D3200 with 4 Lenses (18-55mm DX, 55-300mm DX, 55mm F1.2 Prime & 500mm F8 Prime) and you have Given me the Information i need for the Next Body, thanks you much! D600 here i come!
I have the same setup (D7000,nikor 10-24,tamron 17-50 and 70-200 2.8). I recently bought D600. The good news is all lenses will work on the D600 in crop, except for the 70-200 which will work full frame! The reduced noise is also definitely impressive! BAD NEWS ARE, the autofocus will get on your nerves for a while. The 39 af points are in the middle of the screen. Also, each focus point is half size of D7000, making it way harded to find contrast and therefore to focus.
at 5:00 it's not true the D7100 has better features because its a newer camera. Nikon could put the same features in the D600 but did not because the D800 would not get any advantages above the D600.
Decided to go for the D7100 and use the money I saved to add to the kitty for a prime lens. After all, the glass makes the greater difference. Am thrilled with the camera and the lens and have just finished my first photo shoot with the combination. Results were terrific. Was shooting macro images of antique Irish salmon flies for magazine and book. The video capability will be tested out the next time. Happy Snappin.
I just got my d600 and absolutely love it! No more dx for me. If the sensor gets dirty, clean it! Any one that's ever done it knows it's easy. Crop factor moved me toward fx because I primarily do portrait photography.
Im thinking of the exact same thing. I actually have a D600 (got it brand spanking new at BH in NYC for $2000 with a 24-85, a monopod, extra batterym, 32gb card and a small caring bag... sweet deal!), and i have a D7000 as a backup. Im thinking of selling the D7000 to get the 7100. Getting a 1.3 crop at 18mp with no low pass filter and 7fps with virtualy full coverage AF system seems awesome for daylight sports!
Well I guess the choice between these two cameras will depend on what kind of photography are you going to do? For nature, action, sports, and general the D7100 is a great and better choice...also you save money for lenses.
just got my D7100 today to complement my D700. instead of paying $2400 for a D600 with the kit lens, I was able to get my d7100 with a sigma 70-200 f2.8 OS..one huge advantage of owning a DX format camera is that my 70-200 will be 105-300mm f2.8. Obviously FX will have far superior low light performance but if you're a hobbyist who does not make a living out of photography, get the D7100 and buy good lenses. Future-proofing wise owning a good glass definitely help you in the long run.
Not only is the D600 quite a lot more expensive than the D7100. But I would have to buy all new lenses as well. All my lenses are DX. I have a Sigma 18-200 mm, a sigma 10-20mm and a Nikkor 35mm. I could probably use them on an FX body, but there would be problems with vignetting. I'm an amateur photographer on a budget, so I think the D7100 is going to be my next upgrade. At the moment I'm using a D40.
From a sports perspective, it's pretty useful. Nevermind the burst rate, which you already mentioned. But it also means that your focusing points very nearly span the entire frame, with the center fifteen as cross-type focal points. What this really means is that your action is very easy to capture. Another point is that it gives you a nice buffer in the viewfinder to help you set up the shot. When the person runs out of frame, you can still see them in the viewfinder.
I've been using an Olympus E-520 for the past four years! You aren't alone! :) You sound like you're in the same predicament as I am. I think the best bet would be the D7100 or D5200. Both of those are good, I think!
I'm looking to upgrade this summer from my D90, and I've been back and forth between the D600 and the D7100. I'm currently in school for photography but also work as a photographer shooting sports, different plays and starting to get into concerts. Was wondering your insite of what to choose. Also I've heard a lot about oil spots with the D600, would you happen to know anything about that?
hey buddy, interesting and informative video but i would like to know, i am not a serious photographer but how long do you think before DX cameras become obsolete..
I'm about to buy the D7100, I'm still an amateur so the extra money I'd spend on the 600 for me are more useful to get maybe a new lens. With that being said of course now in the market there is also the D610 much better than the 600, but still to expensive for my use! Amazing comparison as always!
I'm a Pro Photographer . I've been doing photography for many years for a living... Full frame or DX camera such as the D7100... They haven't mastered the high ISO issues to be bragging about Full frame is better... All suck past 6400 ISO... That feature is mute, not even a issue when comparing the 2 cameras.. We photographers would love to see a digital camera that can take photos or video in low light or use high ISO that really work. Photos with no Noise or not "Grainy" at a concert or play
currently the D7100 is £450 new......I'm a freelance photographer for a nation motorbike magazine, I have used the D610 and hated it, I own the D7100 and cant recommend it enough. As soon as anyone says DX is and amateur or intermediate sensor camera and a FX sensor camera is a pro camera.........stop listening. If you want a "pro" big sensor camera buy a medium format or large format camera just don't shoot sports with it ;)
You are saying that DX is not amateur yet you are saying that if you want to go "pro" then do not go for Full Frame but go to Medium format or Full format?.
No I was being sarcastic, there is a train of thought that pros must use full frame because there bigger than DX.....using that logic, to be pro you must shoot hasselblad or phase 1 medium format because it's bigger than FX or full frame........Which is a nonsense, many shoot smaller than DX, I have a friend who shoots fashion and fantasy sets including a couple of album covers using a phone camera and instamatics. I think Jarred Pollin recently did a shoot with a Nikon D1x for a youtube video. I'm currently using a D700 fx and a D2x dx and a lot of film cameras as well. The cameras just a tool, for certain jobs a big sensor is the right tool and for others a small sensor is right. People can get hung up on the marketing hype of huge megapixel and iso numbers and big sensor sizes, but ultimately it's the photographer making the image not the tech. But back on subject the D7100 for the money is a fantastic bit of kit.
Hi Saf, I’ve upgraded from the D5200 to the D7100 but unfortunately the first unit I received came with a few oil spots on the sensor. Last week I received a replacement and realized that there oil spots on the replacement as well. Would you recommend sending it back or buying the Sensor cleaning kit and give it a shot? I’d really appreciate if you could let me know. Thanks in advance!
What do you think how much the D7100 will cost in September? I bought the D5100 last year to start with DSLR photography and I want to buy a better DSLR this year, but still keep my lenses I bought for the DX sensor size.
I'm an amateur photog who's gotten some pro work here & there, & I've been shooting with a d70 for about 8-9 years. It's great quality shots, & a tough, durable camera. It's a dinosaur though & dying a slow death. I'm looking to upgrade by April. From a financial standpoint, is it worth it to go for the d600 over the d7100 (for the FX quality) when I'll have to get all new lenses, too? Interested to hear your thoughts. Thanks.
Your point is valid about it being preference but for just slightly more money one can get the Full Frame Sensor. It really boils down to, do I want a pro sensor with less features or a consumer sensor with more features. The only qualm I have with that standpoint is that if you really are "going pro" with your photography you had better be able to afford glass, and I would assume, someday, a better body than the D600. So I side with either getting the D7100 and enjoying a DX or a higher up FX.
very well explained! given the advantages of an FX, the D600 is surely the way to go to upgrade my D300. please tell me if it will be a gamble to buy the D600 at this time given the dust/oil problem complaints appearing on several nikon forums. thank you.
That's an object lesson in why you should always buy great glass. Before upgrading from DX, I made sure I had the FX glass in my grubby little hands for when I made the leap!
depends on what you shoot. I have the D7000 and D600. D600 is great in low light as you can bump iso at 3200 with virtually no noise! The desadvantage is that the AF system sucks! It covers very little of the screen. Also, keep in mind you will need to invest on good quality full frame lenses if you want to take full advantage of the sensors potential. If u shoots alot of indoors or low light stuff, go for D600.
I'm in a very similar position. I use a D3100 for all my shooting and feel that I am also outgrowing the camera as well. Personally the best piece of gear I have is a Tamron 60mm F2 Macro lens which I use for portraits. 10-24 is pretty wide. I've found that when I shoot with my other lens (the standard 18-55) I'm usually right around 35-40mm for group photos. A prime 35mm dx lens would be nice. As for DX or FX in my opinion FX isn't worth the extra cost. I'm gonna go with the D7100.
great video with great info and insights of both model. I have been considering to upgrade from my current entry DSLR to either a FX or DX. Before the launching of the 7100 I was opting for the D600 as it will make the most sense as going from a DX to FX. However with the D7100 whether the price range or the features it start to make me sway to stick with the DX. Another reason is that I will still be able to stick to my DX lenses rather having to invest again the buying FX lenses for the D600.
Very informative. I have a D7000 which I love and a collection of mostly DX lenses so moving up to an FX would cost quite a bit as my 10-24, 17-50 and 70-200 are all DX. If I were starting from scratch an FX would be a great way to go.
I'd go for the D7100. $800 is not a small difference especially if you are not making money from your pictures. Additional features that most reviews don't mention are HDR and bracketing capabilities which I have been waiting for for a while. I love HDR pictures, but I don't know how to make them. I was hoping to see a review of this functionality, but most of the D7100 reviews just go through the specs. I would like to see a real test.
They will "work". But you will be getting the 1.5 crop and corresponding reduction in resolution. There is also - at least at my favorite camera store here - the possibility of trading in those DX lenses while buying something more expensive. They will often give you a better trade in price than you expected if by doing so they can persuade you to buy a more expensive item. Well worth a try!
What about dx vs fx glass price tag, I could probably afford a d600 and maybe a 50mm ? I've already got a small dx glass collection so for this reason alone I'll be getting the d7100. The lure of a full frame sensor just isn't enough, I see the d600 like the d3200, awesome! But entry level. The d7100 seems a lot more "feature rich" Nice comparison video :)
I bought the D600.. Definitely not mad! FX over DX any day, but then of course it does depend on what you're using it for.. I also have FX glass, so if you have DX glass, or can`t offer better glass such as primes or 2.8, then 7100 might be better!
I've been waiting for this as an appropriate upgrade from my D90 I'll wait a little longer after release to ensure no issues like with the D600 (oil/dust) - but looks like a great camera.Its A Hard Choice Between The D600 And The D7100
The Nikon D610 and the Nikon D7100 have nearly the same number of pixels. You can take large photos with both cameras, but: in low light conditions, with the D7100 you'll use more iso(in any case the D710 is fantastic up to 1500 ISO. The D610 is great up to ISO 3000!!! Much better than the Canon 5DmkIII). The D610 has a better dynamic range. Important: the Nikon D7100 offers more depth of field for macro shooting, because the sensor is DX(same number of pixels as the Nikon D610, but less millimeters). For portraits, Architecture and landscapes: D610. For nature and macro: D7100! The Nikon D800? The Nikon D800 is unmatched on this planet, it is the best camera in the world....especially if you want gigantic huge photos and you don't want use a destructive interpolation.
I have a Nikon D3100 and thinking to move to the D7100, I have the kit lens 18-55mm, a zoom 55-200 and a 35mm 1.8. If I decide to buy the d600 i have to sell all my lenses too. What do you think? Peter from AR
nice comparison, maybe you left out the low light performance aside which is a big difference, even though the d7100 performs very well for a DX. And also when you talk about prices you should keep in mind that DX lenses are cheaper and there are more options. thanks for your great video!! :)
Easy answer. Yes the D7100 looks promising, and after seeing it and how it works, it will be a great camera, but The D600 has a full frame sensor which way more desirable in professional photography. I also like how Nikon FINALLY admitted to saying the D7000 sensor was crap, due to auto focus issues. Yes I have sent in two of D7000 bodies for repair (which was warrantied but still) A full frame is where you want to be with sharpness no low light capabilities.
sure, as a hobbyist the D7100 will do you just fine. the D600, that's a whole other league. Full frame rules. D600 and D800 is teh ones that get compared, with the D600 often winning. D7100 is base model, entry level.
Great Video.... I have a D90 and thinking about an upgrade. The D600 seemed like a great option and is available for €1500. The D7000 was my other option though I suspected this upgrade was coming. Now what? I think your on the mark if your serious you have to go full frame.
It's a simple question afterall！you have to understand the position and the purpose of these two dslr. D7100 is very suitable for sports photography and macro photography, as the crop options are great to do so. If you have a 300mm f4 lens, you are going to have nearly 600mm f4 without losing image quality and decrease the f-stop like using tele converter. And how much is a 600 f4? 15megapixel still awsome !
Personally on pricing and feature and practicality all depends on the user, for me i shoot mainly corporate event and commercial related photography and have been using D7000 for both photo and video. Great camera, now with technology advancing on low light performances smaller sensors seems to be able to match full frame sensors one generation behind. So is it worth getting that full frame/pro camera, probably not. Its like comparing a D800 & HD40, very marginal different in the end.
For those who have limited funds, but want great pictures, definitely get the D7100; the differences are trivial for the price. If you want to split hairs, or just want to say you have a pro camera, by all means pay the extra $1050.00. Now, if you want a pro camera, well you're going to pay pro prices. Don’t get excited, Nikon makes a great pro DSLR for just $2800. A 36.3MP, HD video: 1080p! For the money, well it’s just a great choice. No splitting hairs here…
Salesman: "This camera can shoot at (ridiculous high) speed. Me: "When will I ever need to shoot at that speed"? Salesman: ??? "Well, uh, uh... you'll have that option if the need arises..." Me: "I don't buy cameras for features and options I can't use or won't ever use."
Hi, I´m a graphic designer. Next year I´m planning to start a master in branding and publicity in NY. I wanna be prepare for that moment and I´d like to know your suggestion about a good camera for me. I was thinking of a Nikon D7000 or D7100 but maybe could be more options.
Thank you for watching, that's an excellent idea, the D7100 would be great as a second body
Thanks mate, appreciate the support :-) Tbh the quality of the lens is what really determines the quality of the picture, if you use an average lens with a great body the picture will not be as good a great lens with an average body. The FX will perform better in low light and will give you the true focal length of the lens, but it won't have any significant advantage on the quality of the image. Hope that helps
Thanks for watching and the feedback buddy :-) All the best
Thanks. DX lenses will work on the D600, you will just get a 1.5x crop. So instead of 24.1mp, you will get around 16mp images with DX lenses. Hope that helps
Hey thanks for the feedback, appreciated :-) Personally I am not a fan of kit lenses, i would go for body only and stick with the ones you have for now then invest in some nice FX lenses when you have the cash. I mean even with the DX lenses you will still be getting shots at roughly 15megapixels, which is usually more than enough and will still be able to shoot full 1080p video too.
Hey, that's not my channel. The guy has been stealing my videos. Have reported it and looks like RUclips have blocked the channel now. Thank you so much for letting me know.
yes it really does depend on preference. A sports photographer commented before saying how the extra 1.3 crop would give them almost double the focal length at 15MP as well as 7fps which was ideal for sports photography.
Hi Phil, I based my opinion on the specs and experience with DX and FX bodies but did mention in the video that for a true comparison they would have to be seen side by side.
Thanks for watching, glad it was useful :-)
Yes it's always best to wait a little while for the issues to be ironed out and also for the price to drop, all the best
If you are new to photography then my advice would be to go for the D7100 after a few months (when the price is more reasonable) and spend the money saved on some nice lenses. All the best
Thanks Paul, really glad it was helpful and appreciate the feedback. All the best mate :-)
Just ordered D600.
- Full-frame sensors offer a 1.2 to 1.4 stop advantage in noise. This means that a FF ISO 250 image has about the same noise as a crop ISO 100 image.
- Full-frame sensors offer better detail at any given f-stop due to lower diffraction effects. This improves image detail, color detail, and contrast.
- The feature that full-frame provides is better images...plain and simple.
It's useful for video, because you can still get full 1080p in crop mode (in essence giving you more zoom from your lens)
Thanks for watching, glad it helped :-)
I bought the D7100 and am very happy with it. The viewfinder is nice and bright. The 51 point AF is very fast and accurate, 1.3 crop mode is more useful than I thought. Brings up the fps to 7 and gives me 1080p 60i video. All the images coming from this camera are super sharp with nice dynamic range. The body is very well built and the grip is nice and sticky. I was looking at the D600 [price didn't matter to me] and I was very discouraged by all the negative talk of oil & dust.
i also do events and landscapes etc.. And especially when I am using a wide lens, something like the 14-24mm, I want 14mm wide rather than a DX crop which will roughly be 21mm equivalent. But yes it obviously varies from person to person.
Hey sorry for the confusion I actually meant "Wide Viewing Angle" LCD screen! It is not a swivel out screen like the D5200
I agree that a DX is fine for most situations. But considering the small price difference right now, I personally think you may as well go for the full-frame.
waste of money.
Well if you have some FX lenses they should work a treat with the D600. And any DX lenses you have should still work on the D600 (it will just use the 1.5x DX crop) so the images will be around 15 megapixels rather than the full 24.3.
Hey sorry I actually meant "Wide Viewing Angle" LCD screen! It is not a swivel out screen like the D5200
Thanks Mark, what is the difference in euros between the D7100 and D600? If it's as little as here in the UK (just £300-350) then I think full-frame is definitely the way to go.
Yes definitely, it does come down to the sort of photography you do
Nikon just issues a press release today, have a search on their website. I think they have suggested a solution or you can take it to the nearest Nikon service center.
Yes I did mention that in the video, amazing feature
Reviews should be like this.. well done supersaftv
Thanks buddy, appreciate the feedback :-)
Very good points there
Me too, good choice
thanks! Currently Using a Red Nikon D3200 with 4 Lenses (18-55mm DX, 55-300mm DX, 55mm F1.2 Prime & 500mm F8 Prime) and you have Given me the Information i need for the Next Body, thanks you much! D600 here i come!
I have the same setup (D7000,nikor 10-24,tamron 17-50 and 70-200 2.8). I recently bought D600. The good news is all lenses will work on the D600 in crop, except for the 70-200 which will work full frame! The reduced noise is also definitely impressive!
BAD NEWS ARE, the autofocus will get on your nerves for a while. The 39 af points are in the middle of the screen. Also, each focus point is half size of D7000, making it way harded to find contrast and therefore to focus.
at 5:00 it's not true the D7100 has better features because its a newer camera. Nikon could put the same features in the D600 but did not because the D800 would not get any advantages above the D600.
Decided to go for the D7100 and use the money I saved to add to the kitty for a prime lens. After all, the glass makes the greater difference. Am thrilled with the camera and the lens and have just finished my first photo shoot with the combination. Results were terrific. Was shooting macro images of antique Irish salmon flies for magazine and book. The video capability will be tested out the next time. Happy Snappin.
I just got my d600 and absolutely love it! No more dx for me. If the sensor gets dirty, clean it! Any one that's ever done it knows it's easy. Crop factor moved me toward fx because I primarily do portrait photography.
Is that so? Was not aware of that, that is a but of a shame
Clear and essential explanations. Thanks a lot Saf !
I bought a D7100 last month :-) Bye !
Thanks Jamie, glad it was helpful :-)
Lol not necessarily, but obviously depends on each individuals preference
Not 100% sure about that mate
So much more informative and useful than Digital Rev's review. Great job!
Im thinking of the exact same thing. I actually have a D600 (got it brand spanking new at BH in NYC for $2000 with a 24-85, a monopod, extra batterym, 32gb card and a small caring bag... sweet deal!), and i have a D7000 as a backup. Im thinking of selling the D7000 to get the 7100. Getting a 1.3 crop at 18mp with no low pass filter and 7fps with virtualy full coverage AF system seems awesome for daylight sports!
Well I guess the choice between these two cameras will depend on what kind of photography are you going to do? For nature, action, sports, and general the D7100 is a great and better choice...also you save money for lenses.
just got my D7100 today to complement my D700. instead of paying $2400 for a D600 with the kit lens, I was able to get my d7100 with a sigma 70-200 f2.8 OS..one huge advantage of owning a DX format camera is that my 70-200 will be 105-300mm f2.8.
Obviously FX will have far superior low light performance but if you're a hobbyist who does not make a living out of photography, get the D7100 and buy good lenses. Future-proofing wise owning a good glass definitely help you in the long run.
Not only is the D600 quite a lot more expensive than the D7100. But I would have to buy all new lenses as well. All my lenses are DX. I have a Sigma 18-200 mm, a sigma 10-20mm and a Nikkor 35mm. I could probably use them on an FX body, but there would be problems with vignetting. I'm an amateur photographer on a budget, so I think the D7100 is going to be my next upgrade. At the moment I'm using a D40.
starchildfan83
From a sports perspective, it's pretty useful. Nevermind the burst rate, which you already mentioned. But it also means that your focusing points very nearly span the entire frame, with the center fifteen as cross-type focal points. What this really means is that your action is very easy to capture.
Another point is that it gives you a nice buffer in the viewfinder to help you set up the shot. When the person runs out of frame, you can still see them in the viewfinder.
Well presented.. made a lot of sense, minus the confusion.. btw, I've made up my mind on the D7100.. good show, friend.. cheers..
I've been using an Olympus E-520 for the past four years! You aren't alone! :)
You sound like you're in the same predicament as I am. I think the best bet would be the D7100 or D5200. Both of those are good, I think!
I'm looking to upgrade this summer from my D90, and I've been back and forth between the D600 and the D7100. I'm currently in school for photography but also work as a photographer shooting sports, different plays and starting to get into concerts. Was wondering your insite of what to choose. Also I've heard a lot about oil spots with the D600, would you happen to know anything about that?
Thanks for watching :-)
Just got my d7100 today.. Very pleased with it
hey buddy, interesting and informative video but i would like to know, i am not a serious photographer but how long do you think before DX cameras become obsolete..
I'm about to buy the D7100, I'm still an amateur so the extra money I'd spend on the 600 for me are more useful to get maybe a new lens.
With that being said of course now in the market there is also the D610 much better than the 600, but still to expensive for my use!
Amazing comparison as always!
I'm a Pro Photographer . I've been doing photography for many years for a living... Full frame or DX camera such as the D7100... They haven't mastered the high ISO issues to be bragging about Full frame is better... All suck past 6400 ISO... That feature is mute, not even a issue when comparing the 2 cameras.. We photographers would love to see a digital camera that can take photos or video in low light or use high ISO that really work. Photos with no Noise or not "Grainy" at a concert or play
currently the D7100 is £450 new......I'm a freelance photographer for a nation motorbike magazine, I have used the D610 and hated it, I own the D7100 and cant recommend it enough. As soon as anyone says DX is and amateur or intermediate sensor camera and a FX sensor camera is a pro camera.........stop listening. If you want a "pro" big sensor camera buy a medium format or large format camera just don't shoot sports with it ;)
You are saying that DX is not amateur yet you are saying that if you want to go "pro" then do not go for Full Frame but go to Medium format or Full format?.
No I was being sarcastic, there is a train of thought that pros must use full frame because there bigger than DX.....using that logic, to be pro you must shoot hasselblad or phase 1 medium format because it's bigger than FX or full frame........Which is a nonsense, many shoot smaller than DX, I have a friend who shoots fashion and fantasy sets including a couple of album covers using a phone camera and instamatics. I think Jarred Pollin recently did a shoot with a Nikon D1x for a youtube video. I'm currently using a D700 fx and a D2x dx and a lot of film cameras as well. The cameras just a tool, for certain jobs a big sensor is the right tool and for others a small sensor is right. People can get hung up on the marketing hype of huge megapixel and iso numbers and big sensor sizes, but ultimately it's the photographer making the image not the tech. But back on subject the D7100 for the money is a fantastic bit of kit.
You are absolutely right!. The photographer is what it counts. The other is secondary and only improves what you consider you do best.
Hi Saf, I’ve upgraded from the D5200 to the D7100 but unfortunately the first unit I received came with a few oil spots on the sensor. Last week I received a replacement and realized that there oil spots on the replacement as well. Would you recommend sending it back or buying the Sensor cleaning kit and give it a shot? I’d really appreciate if you could let me know. Thanks in advance!
Thnxs for the features & specs explanation for both cameras !, both are great deal of DSLR Csmera but I'll go with D7100 !
What do you think how much the D7100 will cost in September?
I bought the D5100 last year to start with DSLR photography and I want to buy a better DSLR this year, but still keep my lenses I bought for the DX sensor size.
I'm an amateur photog who's gotten some pro work here & there, & I've been shooting with a d70 for about 8-9 years. It's great quality shots, & a tough, durable camera. It's a dinosaur though & dying a slow death. I'm looking to upgrade by April. From a financial standpoint, is it worth it to go for the d600 over the d7100 (for the FX quality) when I'll have to get all new lenses, too? Interested to hear your thoughts. Thanks.
Your point is valid about it being preference but for just slightly more money one can get the Full Frame Sensor. It really boils down to, do I want a pro sensor with less features or a consumer sensor with more features. The only qualm I have with that standpoint is that if you really are "going pro" with your photography you had better be able to afford glass, and I would assume, someday, a better body than the D600. So I side with either getting the D7100 and enjoying a DX or a higher up FX.
very well explained! given the advantages of an FX, the D600 is surely the way to go to upgrade my D300. please tell me if it will be a gamble to buy the D600 at this time given the dust/oil problem complaints appearing on several nikon forums. thank you.
That's an object lesson in why you should always buy great glass. Before upgrading from DX, I made sure I had the FX glass in my grubby little hands for when I made the leap!
depends on what you shoot. I have the D7000 and D600. D600 is great in low light as you can bump iso at 3200 with virtually no noise! The desadvantage is that the AF system sucks! It covers very little of the screen. Also, keep in mind you will need to invest on good quality full frame lenses if you want to take full advantage of the sensors potential.
If u shoots alot of indoors or low light stuff, go for D600.
I'm in a very similar position. I use a D3100 for all my shooting and feel that I am also outgrowing the camera as well. Personally the best piece of gear I have is a Tamron 60mm F2 Macro lens which I use for portraits. 10-24 is pretty wide. I've found that when I shoot with my other lens (the standard 18-55) I'm usually right around 35-40mm for group photos. A prime 35mm dx lens would be nice. As for DX or FX in my opinion FX isn't worth the extra cost. I'm gonna go with the D7100.
great video with great info and insights of both model. I have been considering to upgrade from my current entry DSLR to either a FX or DX. Before the launching of the 7100 I was opting for the D600 as it will make the most sense as going from a DX to FX. However with the D7100 whether the price range or the features it start to make me sway to stick with the DX. Another reason is that I will still be able to stick to my DX lenses rather having to invest again the buying FX lenses for the D600.
gr8 comparison :) i was wondering if there is a comparison between the d7100 and the 5D Mark II ??
Very informative. I have a D7000 which I love and a collection of mostly DX lenses so moving up to an FX would cost quite a bit as my 10-24, 17-50 and 70-200 are all DX. If I were starting from scratch an FX would be a great way to go.
I had a D90 for 4 years and upgraded straight to a D700, full frame is the only way to go after such a great camera as the D90.
You did a good job explaining the features...
My OCD kicked in while watching this video.
Your right sleeve is slightly folded, while the left one isn't....
Great video BTW :D
Hey Saf, great comparison. At 5:21 you state that both the D600 & D7100 have vari-angle LCD monitors (ie. tilty-swivelly screens). Error, no?
I wish they would come up with a D7100 with an FX sensor!
I'd go for the D7100. $800 is not a small difference especially if you are not making money from your pictures. Additional features that most reviews don't mention are HDR and bracketing capabilities which I have been waiting for for a while. I love HDR pictures, but I don't know how to make them. I was hoping to see a review of this functionality, but most of the D7100 reviews just go through the specs. I would like to see a real test.
They will "work". But you will be getting the 1.5 crop and corresponding reduction in resolution. There is also - at least at my favorite camera store here - the possibility of trading in those DX lenses while buying something more expensive. They will often give you a better trade in price than you expected if by doing so they can persuade you to buy a more expensive item. Well worth a try!
Thank you!! Think will go for the D7100 because of the video-features!
What about dx vs fx glass price tag, I could probably afford a d600 and maybe a 50mm ? I've already got a small dx glass collection so for this reason alone I'll be getting the d7100. The lure of a full frame sensor just isn't enough, I see the d600 like the d3200, awesome! But entry level. The d7100 seems a lot more "feature rich"
Nice comparison video :)
Good review. Thank you. I've got the D600 but am thinking about a D7100 when the price comes down as a second body.
I bought the D600.. Definitely not mad! FX over DX any day, but then of course it does depend on what you're using it for.. I also have FX glass, so if you have DX glass, or can`t offer better glass such as primes or 2.8, then 7100 might be better!
I've been waiting for this as an appropriate upgrade from my D90 I'll wait a little longer after release to ensure no issues like with the D600 (oil/dust) - but looks like a great camera.Its A Hard Choice Between The D600 And The D7100
I need a professional opinion, i own now a D5100 and i think it is time for me to upgrade . should i go with the D600 or the new D7100 ??
Wow. Love that 60fps though! Geez this is a good comparison.
I like the D7100 A LOT, but the Dx sensor is really confusing me I mean, will I not be able to take pictures big as the D600 or 800?
The Nikon D610 and the Nikon D7100 have nearly the same number of pixels. You can take large photos with both cameras, but: in low light conditions, with the D7100 you'll use more iso(in any case the D710 is fantastic up to 1500 ISO. The D610 is great up to ISO 3000!!! Much better than the Canon 5DmkIII). The D610 has a better dynamic range. Important: the Nikon D7100 offers more depth of field for macro shooting, because the sensor is DX(same number of pixels as the Nikon D610, but less millimeters). For portraits, Architecture and landscapes: D610. For nature and macro: D7100! The Nikon D800? The Nikon D800 is unmatched on this planet, it is the best camera in the world....especially if you want gigantic huge photos and you don't want use a destructive interpolation.
Thanks buddy :-)
Thank you very much SuperSaf! This review helped me a lot!!!!!!
I will go for D7100! =)
I have a Nikon D3100 and thinking to move to the D7100, I have the kit lens 18-55mm, a zoom 55-200 and a 35mm 1.8. If I decide to buy the d600 i have to sell all my lenses too.
What do you think? Peter from AR
nice comparison, maybe you left out the low light performance aside which is a big difference, even though the d7100 performs very well for a DX. And also when you talk about prices you should keep in mind that DX lenses are cheaper and there are more options. thanks for your great video!! :)
Easy answer. Yes the D7100 looks promising, and after seeing it and how it works, it will be a great camera, but The D600 has a full frame sensor which way more desirable in professional photography. I also like how Nikon FINALLY admitted to saying the D7000 sensor was crap, due to auto focus issues. Yes I have sent in two of D7000 bodies for repair (which was warrantied but still) A full frame is where you want to be with sharpness no low light capabilities.
Hi, good video. If you already own Dx lenses there is no point of getting D600, correct? Simply it won't work on FX.
sure, as a hobbyist the D7100 will do you just fine. the D600, that's a whole other league. Full frame rules. D600 and D800 is teh ones that get compared, with the D600 often winning. D7100 is base model, entry level.
thank you :-)
Great Video.... I have a D90 and thinking about an upgrade. The D600 seemed like a great option and is available for €1500. The D7000 was my other option though I suspected this upgrade was coming. Now what? I think your on the mark if your serious you have to go full frame.
It's a simple question afterall！you have to understand the position and the purpose of these two dslr. D7100 is very suitable for sports photography and macro photography, as the crop options are great to do so. If you have a 300mm f4 lens, you are going to have nearly 600mm f4 without losing image quality and decrease the f-stop like using tele converter. And how much is a 600 f4? 15megapixel still awsome !
thank you so much for this video! ill share to my facebook groups! thanks man!
Thanks for the video ..
But are u sure about the Vari Angle LCD Screen in the D7100 ???
Personally on pricing and feature and practicality all depends on the user, for me i shoot mainly corporate event and commercial related photography and have been using D7000 for both photo and video. Great camera, now with technology advancing on low light performances smaller sensors seems to be able to match full frame sensors one generation behind. So is it worth getting that full frame/pro camera, probably not. Its like comparing a D800 & HD40, very marginal different in the end.
For those who have limited funds, but want great pictures, definitely get the D7100; the differences are trivial for the price. If you want to split hairs, or just want to say you have a pro camera, by all means pay the extra $1050.00. Now, if you want a pro camera, well you're going to pay pro prices. Don’t get excited, Nikon makes a great pro DSLR for just $2800. A 36.3MP, HD video: 1080p! For the money, well it’s just a great choice. No splitting hairs here…
Salesman: "This camera can shoot at (ridiculous high) speed.
Me: "When will I ever need to shoot at that speed"?
Salesman: ??? "Well, uh, uh... you'll have that option if the need arises..."
Me: "I don't buy cameras for features and options I can't use or won't ever use."
Hi Saf, just to be sure neither D600 nor D7100 have built-in image stabilization motor (in body) ?
Hi, I´m a graphic designer. Next year I´m planning to start a master in branding and publicity in NY. I wanna be prepare for that moment and I´d like to know your suggestion about a good camera for me. I was thinking of a Nikon D7000 or D7100 but maybe could be more options.
Hi.Which one would you prefer for shooting oil paintings to be printed out in large size?And which lens?Thanks.
What do you guys think of the 18-140mm lens? Is it good?
MriDuffy nope