Nikon D7100 - 24MP, 51AF points = $1200

[Syborg1211]

50mm f1.8D and 50mm f1.8G.

Sorry, I should have specified a zoom lens that would conceivably be distributed with the D7100 as a kit instead of the 18-105mm. Comparing a prime lens to a zoom is just an unfair comparison on an image quality or aperture basis.

 

[blastingcap]

16-85mm vr is pretty good for a zoom, if you can live with its aperture range

 

[destrekor]

Go...around the Net...and you might notice - people, who are into photography, amateurs or pro, would never ask about cameras - they are focused on taking pics with cameras they have...

I have no idea how you even reach this conclusion.

Yes, the prime subject of talk, when it comes to pros and pro-inspired amateurs, typically falls to lens choice, but the body gets discussed at some point too.

It USED to be the case that the talk of body choice was a fairly moot point, back when all SLRs were film. Unless you needed crazy AF for sports photography, a film body was a film body.
Today, the "film quality" in built into each SLR, and is constantly improving.

Sensor quality is constantly getting better, and it's a huge point of discussion for anyone who is truly into photography to any degree beyond a passing hobby.

 

[iGas]

I have no idea how you even reach this conclusion.

Yes, the prime subject of talk, when it comes to pros and pro-inspired amateurs, typically falls to lens choice, but the body gets discussed at some point too.

It USED to be the case that the talk of body choice was a fairly moot point, back when all SLRs were film. Unless you needed crazy AF for sports photography, a film body was a film body.
Today, the "film quality" in built into each SLR, and is constantly improving.

Sensor quality is constantly getting better, and it's a huge point of discussion for anyone who is truly into photography to any degree beyond a passing hobby.

I agree, but IMHO sensor technology hasn't improve that much since 2004 to now. I think sensor has improved the same or less than the different in quality of ISO-100 vs. ISO-200 films. Hence, camera body is not important as sensor size, and lenses.

 

[randomrogue]

I agree, but IMHO sensor technology hasn't improve that much since 2004 to now. I think sensor has improved the same or less than the different in quality of ISO-100 vs. ISO-200 films. Hence, camera body is not important as sensor size, and lenses.

2004. Nikon didn't have a Full Frame camera yet. I thought the D2x was full frame but it's not. So we can compare to the Canon EOS-1Ds Mark II

http://snapsort.com/compare/Canon-EOS-1Ds-Mark-II-vs-Nikon-D600

1 stop better high ISO and 30% better image quality for the D600. 2.9 stops better dynamic range. Also, in 2004 you were shooting at max ISO1600 and today I can shoot very comfortably at ISO6400 with negligible noise.

 

[iGas]

2004. Nikon didn't have a Full Frame camera yet. I thought the D2x was full frame but it's not. So we can compare to the Canon EOS-1Ds Mark II

http://snapsort.com/compare/Canon-EOS-1Ds-Mark-II-vs-Nikon-D600

1 stop better high ISO and 30% better image quality for the D600. 2.9 stops better dynamic range. Also, in 2004 you were shooting at max ISO1600 and today I can shoot very comfortably at ISO6400 with negligible noise.

You are talking low light capability of the sensor, not resolving power (line pairs...not pixels), and dynamic range of DSLR but not the true dynamic range of film (Zone System).

And, currently no sensor come near the dynamic range (Zone range) of film.

And that was 2004, and improvement from 2007~2008 till now is so little that there shouldn't be much or a concern.

I purchased a new Canon 5D mkII less than 30 days before the 6D came out, and didn't care to return the 5D mkII for the 6D or the D600, because it was more important for me to learn how to use the camera and I wanted to use Canon L lenses hence I kept the 5D mkII (in 30 days I purchased 1 FF body, and 4 lenses...and 3 of them was L lens).

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/dxomark_sensor_for_benchmarking_cameras2.shtml

 

[Krioni]

Well this is a camera forum not a photography forum


Maybe you should start a thread where we can post our BEST pics and list the equipment, for the sake of comparison

+1000

I agree that people tend to focus more on gearing up than on improving technique. However, "TECH" is in the name of this site (which I have frequented for 13+ years). So, I completely expect that people are going to focus on the "tech" side of photography... and I enjoy it. If I want to discuss hardcore photo technique (a different "tech") then I will fire up a thread about it or go to another site that is more focused on that second tech(nique).

OK, that aside, I have a D7000 and love it. I would love to have the D7100, but frankly the D7000 is still far more capable than I am. When I start feeling limited by my camera more than my ability, i'll look to upgrade.