Any Nikon D7000 users please?

[KentYeti]

OK. Tomorrow it will be a month since I started photographing birds.

My, "I'll use it for six months and see how I get on", philosophy with my new Nikon 70-300mm VR lens lasted until yesterday, when I got a Nikon F4 300mm and 1.4 TC. The lens looks quite good, the jury is still out on the TC.

Now I'm looking at whether a body upgrade will help me. Camera body that is, my own is past help.

I'm on this crusade for sharper and clearer images that can be cropped to bring distant birds closer, (aren't we all), so will a Nikon D7000 help me? Same physical size image sensor as my D80, (or very close), but a great deal more pixels. i.e 16.3 Mega thingys compared with about 10 for the D80.

Any advice on this welcomed.

Oh. Yes, I do know. I will have to face up to the fact that I will eventually run out of options with camera/lens combinations and will have to work on my fieldcraft to get physically closer to the little loves. I did try yesterday at Capel Fleet, but I think the sight of a Yeti thundering across the footpath in the "owl field" was too much even for the still regularly visiting Short Eared Owl. Although it did come back for several more hunting forays. Presumably so it could tell it's mates, "yes, it was definitely a Yeti I saw".

[Lancashire Lad]

Hi yeti,

Perhaps not what you might want to hear, but I'd suggest that if you can't get pin sharp photos with your D80 and the two lenses you have, then you won't get pin sharp pictures with a D7000 or anything else.

Yes, in theory, you should be able to crop further from a 16-megapixel image than you would from a 10-megapixel image, but it isn't just as simple as that, and the extra 6-megapixels would only equate to maybe a ten percent bigger crop overall. - To be able to crop such that a subject size was doubled on the image, (with respect to an image made with a 10-megapixel sensor) would need a 40-megapixel sensor.

I'm of the opinion that lots of people get hung up about megapixelmania, when better fieldcraft, and better post camera tweaking would prove far more effective. (And a darned sight less costly )

Cropping of distant subjects isn't the real solution. The best option by far is to get nearer. - An £8K Nikon 600mm prime will only double the subject size in the viewfinder, so even that won't necessarily bring things up to full frame.

Regards,
Mike.

[Simon Davey]

Have to agree with Mike about the megapixel quantity not always equating to huge crops.

However, the D7000 is much more than just more pixels.
There's a vast difference in image quality through a better, newly designed sensor and the focus systems is light years ahead of the D80.

Your new glass will do a D7000 serious justice, but, it'll also make a vast image improvement compared to the 70-300 if used on the D80.
Give the new glass a good go on the D80.

It's always been said (and it's true) that quality glass will make the biggest difference in image quality, it's always a surprise to find out for yourself though.

I'm sure though, you'll just go out and upgrade the camera anyway

[Endrick]

Very heavy cropping of distant subjects is a big problem. You will find that even with the best lenses and camera, picking a two inch subject out of a frame will result in a lot of poor images.

Even with my d700 and 400 f2.8 (borrowed) these severe crops aren't good. I also have the 300 f4 and 1.4 TC and the same is also true. Don't get me wrong the 300 f4 is a very good lens but sharpness and quality is more down to you than the lens.

I have taken pin sharp pictures taken with the 70-300 (and the 18-200) on my old D40 and some seriously bad ones with the d700 and 400 2.8.

[KentYeti]

Some very useful comments there guys. Thank you.

I probably will invest in a D7000 at some stage, as suggested, but knowing it is not going to cure any photo taking shortfalls that I need to address. Or the need to get closer to the subject. I'll get it more for the other improvements over the D80 mentioned above. Better focussing and a quicker "burst rate" will help. With a bonus of a better image.

I would say that I have just been lucky enough to get a very fair comparison between the 70-300mm lens and the F4 300mm on the D80. Of a subject at extreme range.

Two days running on Sheppey, same time of day, same lighting conditions, same bird, (short eared owl), and that bird in virtually the exact same place in flight! And near enough the same camera settings.

A good number of shots from both on the two days, (70-300mm on Monday, 300mm prime lens yesterday), shows the Nikon prime lens producing shots that can be cropped very hard for a reasonable, (but not outstanding), result.

But the same cropping with the 70-300mm zoom lens producing almost unuseable results. (But I will say that on close up images that zoom does give very good results even at 300mm and F5.6).

I think my current priority, (using your comments guys), is to wait for the D7000 a little while, and work on my technique with the D80 and F4 300mm lens. As well as learning how to get closer to the owls, marsh harriers etc.

Gonna be a long haul I think.

I'll stick a Marsh Harrier photo up for critique when I've worked on it a bit more to hopefully get bit more advice.

Cheers,

Bryan

[Stevio125]

I upgrade from a D60 to a D300s last year, and as far as basic image quality is concerned I was almost dissapointed !

The D300s is a much better camera in so many ways and I do get a lot more keepers frame rate is stunning, but thats not always the best way to get better pics.

The main things for me was the ability to use much higher ISO settings which is something I understand the D80 suffers from and just the ease of use, all the buttons and switches to make cahanging the settings quicker and easier.

Being able to customise all the settings to my own needs is also a major plus as it now works the way I want it to.

Its so easy to chase your tail with body upgrades so just ask yourself what a D7000 will do for you that the D80 wont.

How are you getting on with the 300mm? I've been looking for an upgrade for my bigmos so was looking at the 300 f4 or the sigma 120-300 f2.8 which seems to get some good reviews.

[nigel_b]

I think your zoom and prime are like chalk and cheese.

I don't think the new body will make any difference.

One of our (my son + self) best photos of all time was my son's taken with my old Fuji bridge camera. He got the framing right, pressed the shutter at the right time and captured a pin-sharp image.

I use a D200 with 300mm + 1.4x TC. For a long time I thought the magic elves must have been in the TC. I couldn't get a good shot without it for love nor money. Then I aced some otter shots with the 300mm by itself.

I think you've done the right thing upgrading the glass, but I honestly don't think the body will help (much).

[KentYeti]

More interesting and helpful comments.

The 300mm f4 prime lens is great on it's own. Giving very good images with the sharpness the lens is famed for. Add the Nikon 1.4 TC 11 and things change. Superb close ups of small birds. But so far with my testing, not good for distant birds in flight shots. Definition and sharpness suffer quite a lot. I need to work out the maximum distance from subject, beyond which the TC needs to be removed. Unless my further testing shows settings where I can get good results on long distance subjects.

Gonna read about the D7000 on DPreview.com. And if you haven't used that web site it is one heck of a review to read. It goes into incredible detail.

[nigel_b]

I'd like to try a D7000 myself when funds permit, but for different reasons.

I dislike and try to avoid changing lenses. A second body would be lighter on the back of the telephoto.

My view is if I can't capture a good image with the D200 then I won't with the D7000 either.

Keeper-rate doesn't really figure either. I can go out and take 500 shots of red kites, and only need one for the wall.

[KentYeti]

Originally Posted by nigel_b

I'd like to try a D7000 myself when funds permit, but for different reasons.

I dislike and try to avoid changing lenses. A second body would be lighter on the back of the telephoto.

My view is if I can't capture a good image with the D200 then I won't with the D7000 either.

Keeper-rate doesn't really figure either. I can go out and take 500 shots of red kites, and only need one for the wall.

I get worried about frequent lens changes too. It would suit me to keep my D80 for steam locos with the 50mm 1.8 or 18-135 kit lens. And a D7000 for bird work.

And re seeing no change to image, (another poster), I would have thought Nikon wouldn't have made the camera with a new imaging sensor if they didn't expect better results.

The best point made is re capturing a good image regardless of using the D7000.

Point well made. I've a great deal to do and learn there. Out of circa a thousand clicks of the shutter in my month of bird photography I've got maybe half a dozen shots I'm almost happy with.

For a start with my next stage I need to stay in the car when photting the Capel Fleet Short Eared Owl, for instance. I've got a lot of mediocre stuff, but wandering around in clear view will never get me anything close.

I did crouch down behind the woodwork on the footbridge over a dyke there yesterday for 4 hours. Got a heron full frame before it saw me, and if the owl had hunted to habit I'd have got a close one there. Met Snake there yesterday and he suggested a face mask and covering my hands when I do that next. I'll do that as that will get me a bit more hidden and legally to a spot much closer to the Marsh Harriers, who clearly use the next dyke across as a map! A couple came close but turned away when they could see a Yeti face between the woodwork of the bridge.