Nikon D7100 upgrade to D500?

colinuk

colinuk

colinuk

Soldato
Joined
27 Jan 2005
Posts
3,137
Location
Versailles
Hello all,

Had my Nikon D7100 for 3-4 years now. Got a few lenses for it. flash, hoods ect.

Really like the camera, how it feels, button placement. But one thing ive struggled on with it is auto focusing. Even to the point i paid $100 for a program to auto fix this with the fine tune built in. Works great for primes, no so good for zooms.

From about 100 shots, I would expect 30-40 to be just out of focus.

If i use live view, this drops to about 2 or 3.

Would you uprade to the D500 due to this issue? As i am told this camera doesnt have it, also started to do sports shots so the extra shots per sec would be welcomed.

Any one else moved from 7100 to 500 ?

TYIA

<C>
 
I'm not sure about the D7100 as never used one but my D7200 certainly doesn't suffer from that issue.

Depends on what your using it for, if it's sports or wildlife a D500 would be a good upgrade with the crop sensor otherwise maybe look at FX if you do more landscapes and portraits. The D750 is the same price as the D500, obviously the lenses are going to be more expensive and you have to start again. I'm doing weddings soon so actually trying to decide whether to buy the D750 or wait for the replacement later this year and then keep my D7200 as second.

It really comes down to what you're using it for.
 
I'm still really happy with my 7100.

I dont have problems with focus.

The focus systems on these cameras are so complex that it's taken me a long time to get really good with it.

I would consider hiring a d500 for a few days and see how you get on.

Most of my photos are wildlife so accurate focus is really important, especially birds in flight. The 7100 works great for me. Even birds in flight I'm getting closer to 100% in focus. If I miss focus now it's down to my own technique or I've set something wrong. I
 
have you sent your D7100 in to get checked out/ You should have a keeper rate of 90-99% depending on the lens and settings used.

As above, make sure you understand ow the AF system works, perhaps post some examples of what you think are failures with details of the photo.


As for the D500, its the best APS-C camera money can buy, perfect for sports an wildlife.
 
voidshatter said:
I would hold off and wait for the next generation of fullframe bodies :)
Click to expand...

I think I'll be waiting a very long time for whatever replaces the d500
Although it's better in almost every way, it's not a big enough upgrade for me (I'd rather put the money towards a 400 2.8)
If my 7100 develops a fault I'll replace it with a d500.

For wildlife I'm often cropping dx frames so full frame isn't appealing and I can't afford a longer lens (yet)
 
Thanks for the replies. I am looking at the D810 as well as i do love clouds and landscapes. The D7100 would be great, but the focus issue is really annoying. It may be me, so i am throwing more light on to subjects to see if its just me not knowing what i am doing. I willl test out all the types of focus on the camera and see how i go. If it was the same issue in live view i would point the finger at me. Alas, that is not the case, Could still be me though.

Not sure how you put photos up here from my pc.
 
colinuk said:
Thanks for the replies. I am looking at the D810 as well as i do love clouds and landscapes. The D7100 would be great, but the focus issue is really annoying. It may be me, so i am throwing more light on to subjects to see if its just me not knowing what i am doing. I willl test out all the types of focus on the camera and see how i go. If it was the same issue in live view i would point the finger at me. Alas, that is not the case, Could still be me though.

Not sure how you put photos up here from my pc.
Click to expand...


Live view is very different, the only use LV will have is indicating whether the lens is broken or not. There could be an alignment issue with the AF sensors and the lens mount or sensor, that can be fixed if you send your camera in to nikon.
 
Under what conditions do you have problems with focus?

Are you still under warranty?

If you want to post a photo upload it somewhere (I use Flickr) and post the thumbnail link.
 
Holst1981 said:
I think I'll be waiting a very long time for whatever replaces the d500
Although it's better in almost every way, it's not a big enough upgrade for me (I'd rather put the money towards a 400 2.8)
If my 7100 develops a fault I'll replace it with a d500.

For wildlife I'm often cropping dx frames so full frame isn't appealing and I can't afford a longer lens (yet)
Click to expand...

400mm f/2.8 on crop (1.5x factor) is equivalent as 600mm f/4.2.

Nikon D500 + 400mm f/2.8 E FL = £1729 + £10399 (760g + 3800g) = £12128 (4560g)
Nikon D5 + 600mm f/4 E FL = £5199 + £10015 (1405g + 3810g) = £15214 (5215g)

I can see your point - crop setup is indeed a bit cheaper and lighter, and still reach about the same image quality.
 
I recently went from a 7200 to a D500 and whilst the AF system is far better the IQ is pretty much the same, the main reason I changed though is the buffer and the use of XQD cards.
If you are not primarily using it for wildlife and action shots I wouldn't bother upgrading to a D500 as that's what it's made for really, perhaps going to a D7200 might suit better.
 
voidshatter said:
400mm f/2.8 on crop (1.5x factor) is equivalent as 600mm f/4.2.

Nikon D500 + 400mm f/2.8 E FL = £1729 + £10399 (760g + 3800g) = £12128 (4560g)
Nikon D5 + 600mm f/4 E FL = £5199 + £10015 (1405g + 3810g) = £15214 (5215g)

I can see your point - crop setup is indeed a bit cheaper and lighter, and still reach about the same image quality.
Click to expand...

The 400 2.8 was my choice as they are more affordable second hand (im looking to get the afs for under £4000)

I won't save that much for several years, d500 replacement might be out by then :)

Unless I win the lottery I'll never be able to buy that sort of lens new.

Were I not shooting wildlife I would have gone full frame from the beginning.
All my lenses are full frame apart from the 16-80.
 
A lot of pros will use the 600mm on the D500 for wildlife, on FF you will be cropping away to get the same reach. For togs shooting small birds the 800mm on the D500 is pretty common, FF wouldn't make sense at all.
 
Holst1981 said:
I will rent or borrow one before I buy.
I would love one of the new lenses as they are much lighter but they are almost twice the price of my car :)
Click to expand...

After years of gearhead faggotry life, I have realised that the best lens is not the sharpest one, but the one I have by my hand when I need it! A heavy lens for me, is most likely sitting at home as non-performing asset for 99% of its lifetime without seeing the sun, only to suffer from depreciation in my hand without good justification for purchase.

I got rid of all my heavy gear, and now only keep the light ones which I would be happy to take with me when I travel.

As for telephoto lenses, I would probably get the 400mm f/2.8 only for astrophotography (for its transmission) for sitting in my garden, but use the 300mm f/4 PF (light-weighted) lens outdoors.
 
I already have the 300 f4 AFS with 1.4 tc
It is a great combination and I'm getting better photos with it every year.

If I'm moving around it's perfect.

You might be right that giant lenses aren't worth it. But several times this year I have taken shots that would be much better with a longer lens.
If I buy second hand I could sell it after a year without losing loads of money.

Sorry for completely dragging your thread off topic Colin :(
 
Not an issue Holst1981, it has answered some of my other questions :)

For me, im kind of in a odd situation. I love landscape and skyline photos. Love doing the cosplay photos , mainly one person shots / face. And now sometimes go to rugby and take photos there. So, a little of everything.

I find though that the guy next to me with the Canon, when we compare shots, he has a lot more in focus than I. It could be im using the wrong mode. I will need to double check the settings and go from there.

Lens wise, my workhorse is the 17-55mm. Backed up with a nikon 10-24 and a 70-200 VR. I will get some photos done this weekend, no editing and try to show them. See what people think and go from there. If i dont have to upgrade and it is me doing something silly, i can live with that. Saves me money! Any excuse to get out and do more photos right ;)

<C>
 
Last edited:
voidshatter said:
After years of gearhead faggotry life, I have realised that the best lens is not the sharpest one, but the one I have by my hand when I need it! A heavy lens for me, is most likely sitting at home as non-performing asset for 99% of its lifetime without seeing the sun, only to suffer from depreciation in my hand without good justification for purchase.

I got rid of all my heavy gear, and now only keep the light ones which I would be happy to take with me when I travel.

As for telephoto lenses, I would probably get the 400mm f/2.8 only for astrophotography (for its transmission) for sitting in my garden, but use the 300mm f/4 PF (light-weighted) lens outdoors.
Click to expand...


I love the 300mm PF, excellent lens for hiking. Buts too short for wildlife for the most part, even with the 1.4xTC. Well on APS-C its OK but I'm on FF

For the time being I have settled on the Sigma 150-600mm sports. It is very sharp, big but amnagabkle. I could afford the 600mm F/4 and although I don;t mind the weight in itself, it does become impactical at times. A lot of my best wildlife photogrpahy coems form flying to palces liek Yellowstone, but with the small regional planes I have to take the 600mm doesn't fit in the overhead bins so i would have to check it, which is scarying given the price.


I am excited about the Sigam 500mm f/4. The downside being 500mm on FF is not enough so how doe it perform with a 1.4xTC on it?
 
Last edited:
I've had my 7100 for a few years now. I bought the D500 at the end of last summer (big step up). I too was having problems with the 7100 focus and then found I needed to calibrate it with the lenses I had. After that it worked flawlessly. the D500 didn't need calibrating at all apart from my Sigma 150-600 pro. I would say have a go at calibrating the lens to see if it needs adjusting. I've calibrated the Nikon 18-200, 105mm, 14-24, 70-300, 300, 600 and the Sigma 150-600 pro. I also calibrated the 1.4, 1.7 and 2.0 tele's from both Nikon and Sigma. About upgrading .. well the only reason I did was for fast shooting .. the 7100 is still a great camera and I still use mine today. The D500 is a lot of money if your short
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom