Test: Nikon D7000, the "baby D3s"
The D7000 is more like an entry-level pro camera than a top-end amateur.
Nikon has been busy expanding its DSLR range this year, adding choice and breadth to the D series, exemplified by the latest arrival, the D7000. Richard Kilpatrick tests the “baby D3s”, and finds it’s definitely a pro contender.
Author: Richard Kilpatrick
09 Feb 2011 Tags: NikonDslrNikon d7000
As Nikon’s DSLR range heads into a second decade of production, it’s running out of number designations for new models. Commercial priorities dictate that nomenclature is diluted to maintain a strong identity for each product, but the single-, double- and triple-digit arrangement seems to have been exhausted. Providing a hint to Nikon’s solution, the entry-level 10.2-megapixel D3000 appeared as a replacement for the D40x/D60, soon followed by the 12.3-megapixel D5000 and 14.2-megapixel, 1080p video-capable D3100 models. As such, the newly introduced D7000 ends up being likened to a D90 replacement – something Nikon assures me is not the case.
“Nikon’s product range during the film era covered all customer requirements,” Jeremy Gilbert of Nikon told me recently. “We had a lot of variants available to suit the buyer, and the digital market is becoming very similar.”
Maybe there’s a D90 replacement coming, or it could be that there’s still stock of the D90 in the retail network, and they’d rather it remained marketable? At present, the entry price for Nikon DSLR ownership is much higher than in 2008, when the D40x was threatening the high-end compacts, so there is room below the D3100 for double-digit models to return.
D3s in miniature
The moment I put my hands on the camera and started looking through the menus, I felt I’d taken hold of a baby D3s. With frequent trips to central London making me look at the bulk of both my car and my kit, I can sympathise with the idea that “smaller” shouldn’t really equate to “less professional or prestigious”. In the same way that a Fiat 500 or Citroën DS3 gives me the style and specification I want without having a 16-foot liability to park, the D7000 seems to offer the control and flexibility I value in the pro Nikon, but without the weight and size penalty.
Small sensor and slower burst speeds aside, everything else seems just right. The 39-point AF feels naturally proportional beside the 51-point coverage of a full-frame system, the magnesium body, twin card slots (albeit SDXC rather than CF) combine with the VGA three-inch LCD to complete the impression that this is my familiar pro body – only much, much smaller. D300s and D3s owners can be forgiven for giving the D7000 a bit of the evil eye – the new 16.2-megapixel sensor gives the upstart camera a real advantage on the spec sheet, and the on-paper spec heads up to ISO 6400 before hitting the extended modes (up to 25,600); the same headline-grabbing figure the original D3 won over a massive group of professionals with.
It’s an interesting contrast with the older consumer lineup, which tended to inherit sensor technology rather than pioneer it – the 12.3-megapixel sensor first appeared in the D300, then the D90 (where it acquired video, later to come to the D300s) before ending up in the flexible consumer D5000. Likewise, the 12.1-megapixel FX sensor has yet to make it to a smaller body with video, and the 24-megapixel FX sensor remains unique to the D3x. The rapid appearances of the 14.2-megapixel D3100 and 16.2-megapixel D7000 point at a greater diversity of resolution in Nikon’s future product plan.
As you’d expect at the £1099 price point, both the software and hardware are well engineered. The familiar menu system reveals support for the wireless transmitter (although at £750, that remains a very specialised option) and, unlike the lower-level consumer models, the info display presents only in the professional, LCD-like layout. With the big improvement of direct access to custom modes, there’s still a scene-type control beside them on the dial – consumers and professionals are able to have their cake and eat it here. Even early AI lenses are supported, giving access to the lens catalogue back to the late 1970s. As with the pro bodies, the specifications of nine non-CPU lenses can be specified to allow colour matrix metering to work.
Accessible without the vertical grip, the 6fps maximum speed (the shutter is a 150K-rated, 1/8000s unit) and 100 percent coverage glass pentaprism with switchable gridlines bulk up those pro credentials, while two assignable function buttons and a viewfinder-visible virtual horizon reinforce the D3s similarities. Nikon’s new AF mode selector brings all related functions to one location, including live view/video constant AF – with the loss of the AF-On button being compensated for by making it assignable to other controls.
It’s easy to select an AF mode even without referring to the top LCD, thanks to the viewfinder display and illuminated AF points. There is a degree of weatherproofing on the body as well; although the lens provided in the 18-105mm kit isn’t weatherproof, the new magnesium-alloy MB-D11 grip has good sealing.
Nikon further enhances the baby-pro feel with a locking drive wheel below the mode selector, (which moves to the left of the body due to the large top LCD, as per the D90); true mirror lockup and quiet shutter mode are instantly accessible. In fact, bar the presence of a flash synch socket or the pro-level accessory connections (the D7000 shares the new mini connector for GPS and wired remote, while supporting the IR ML-3 unit), it’s hard to find any reason for this not to be part of the professional lineup. Yet it won’t count towards NPS status or qualify for NPU, while the D300s does…
The in-camera adjustments of the D7000 aren’t going to match the breadth of corrections and controls available through a computer but, for on-location corrections, quick shots and reporting, it’s possible to straighten buildings, correct distortion and colour. Here, the lifts at Aldwych Station have been corrected in-camera. Image © Richard Kilpatrick
Image quality
The new sensor is something of a mixed blessing. Nikon’s approach to the camera means that 14-bit capture for raw is provided, the resolution makes the system more competitive on paper, and the new metering and AF make for a better camera overall – yet it’s hard to see a benefit from the 16.2-megapixel chip once you breach ISO 3200. Where the D300 and D5000, with their 12.3-megapixel chips, deliver strong native results up to ISO 3200 and usable results up to ISO 6400, the D7000 needs more attention post-processing to remove the noise in raw files.
For output purposes, the D7000 is a very strong performer – it’s only in the pixel-peeping assessment of technical capability where it’s not racing ahead, and it’s certainly very close to the original output of the D3 at pixel level. JPEG files out of the camera are well processed, although detail is sacrificed by noise reduction and, as with any high-density sensor, diffraction can be an issue with some lenses. Colour rendition and perceived “separation” of objects remains excellent, although I’m aware that this is a matter of taste for many photographers. As a Nikon user myself, the results are consistent with my other cameras.
The in-camera processing follows on from the earlier models, and delivers some artistic and quick-fix corrections, including a tilt-shift effect, multi-shot and colour adjustments, plus outline, paint and other “art” styles. Usually I wouldn’t venture into these menus but they’re actually a lot of fun and, in the case of distortion and perspective corrections, incredibly useful. Video capability relies on the same format as the D3100, moving from the single-frame-based Motion-JPEG to a true 1080p 24fps H.264 stream. It’s a good balance between quality and compression and, as with the D300s video, can be stored on one card, with stills on the other.
One benefit of the magnesium-alloy body is excellent heat dissipation – despite offering a recording time of 20 minutes, the camera remained cool and showed no signs of image degradation either on live view or recorded material for that full duration. The only sign of warmth was near the card slot during write access.
Compared to its competition, the D7000 performs very well. However, Nikon users accustomed to D3s-style results at ISO 3200 onwards will be weighing up the benefits of more pixels versus less noise, until the next body comes along to show where the rest of the range will take the sensor.
It’s worth noting that the first Nikon DSLR’s sensor architecture remained (through refinement) current for a decade, as the D1’s 2.7-megapixel unit was actually a 10.8-megapixel APS-C CCD with the same pixel pitch as the D3000’s unit.
Over 2010 we’ve seen a gradual improvement in Nikon’s resolution; that and the new metering suggests that big things are coming for the professional line. The 2016-segment 3D Colour Matrix metering is the first major upgrade since 2004’s D2x – which carried an evolution of the F5’s sensor. Though it offers some real improvements in the performance of the 3D AF (and seems to provide a more versatile white balance control, adding an “ambient” function to try and preserve lighting colour), it should also assist exposure calculations for wider dynamic range sensors, allowing near-HDR quality capture. It’s hard to see the D300s remaining in the range for long without updates to match the metering and resolution – particularly when the D7000’s construction and feature set eradicate the advantages over the D5000 that the D300s enjoyed.
Conclusions
With an RRP of £1099, the D7000 isn’t replacing the D90 just yet – that video-DSLR pioneer sells for considerably less, remaining competitive. The D7000 sits at the top of the consumer-level tree while providing professional feel and flexibility; the filter and effect functions feel like they’re added to a professional starting point rather than pro-body features tacked on to a consumer-level camera. Client perception of a “non-pro” body aside, I’d have no fears taking this for a paid shoot. As a backup to a medium-format or D3x setup, it’s a bargain; as an introduction to Nikon’s pro range, it’s perfect.
Visit: www.nikon.co.uk
Comments
It’s worth noting that the first Nikon DSLR’s sensor architecture remained (through refinement) current for a decade, as the D1’s 2.7-megapixel unit was actually a 10.8-megapixel APS-C CCD with the same pixel pitch as the D3000’s unit.
I read this in disbelief because I require a reason or reasons for why the D1 was only 2.7MP. I think we ALL deserve that, because this statement that it was in fact a 10.8MP CCD is rewriting history, surely.
We have folks tell us that they interpolate up and that a 24MP sensor is really only 6MP, and that a 16.7 MP 1Ds Mk 2 sensor is really only an interpolated ID sensor and that the 5D2 sensor is a reworking of the 1Ds Mk 1 sensor and on and on; so I would like the manufacturers takes on these claims, especially the above, as they make no sense to me, and anyway the D7000 sensor is CMOS (I think). Dont journalists have to actually give evidence of such claims?
Hi Peter,
Of course these statements need to be backed up with facts - a quick google will clarify matters, but in essence the D1's sensor is a 10Mp CCD array with a 2.7Mp Colour Filter Array - four sensels per pixel, if you wish.
http://imaging.nikon.com/products/imaging/technology/scene/12/index.htm
Technically it was - at least according to statements from people involved with the development - to improve the sensitivity of the camera. I'm fairly sure that handling the final files would have been quite a burden on 1999 technology too, had they been the full available resolution.
The CFA was later revised to give rectangular pixels, incidentally, as seen on the D1X.
Please note that the term sensor architecture relates purely to the electronics; over the lifetime of a sensor difference CFAs (colours, densities and materials), microlenses and other components may be revised, as well as improvements in fabrication and pipeline.
I don't believe there's anything in the article to imply the D7000 sensor is CCD, unless you're referring to the D3000 there - in which case, I'm afraid that it is indeed a CCD sensor (the D3100 is CMOS).
So you're saying that the D7000 has poorer high ISO performance than its more modestly priced stablemates? That's the first time I've seen that observation. Most Have commented that the D7000's low light ability is bested only by Nikon's full frame models. If you put any trust in their figures, this is also supported by DxO Mark's ISO figures for these cameras. Also don't forget that sensor noise is less apparent in images at higher resolutions. If you're zooming at 1:1 in each case, that's not really a fair comparison, as you're effectively over-magnifying the noise in the D7000 by comparison.
SLRist:
It depends on what you're assessing. If you're looking for technical advances, improvements in sensor performance - in other words, if your expectations are that the headline resolution gains are going to translate into an absolute advantage over the 12Mp models for output size and sharpness - then increased noise at 1:1 reproduction is an issue. Some people look at 16Mp and assume they've got greater leeway for composition and cropping. Given the wide variety of users and workflows, the technology is the only bit that can be assessed fairly.
Readers can make their own judgements if the balance of compromises needed suits their output and work. It's a minor point in the overall package of the camera, and I'm far from unique in making the comment; I think Nikon made the right choices given the clarity the camera CAN deliver and the article's conclusions reflect that.
Advances in processing raw files also contribute; the D7000 can deliver better results in 2011 than say, a D200 in 2007 in part due to progress made there - revisiting older raw files with the latest versions of Lightroom can be very rewarding!
Finally, low-light capability is not necessarily the same as high ISO.
Some cameras, the D7000 included, have enough dynamic range to severely push/pull under or over exposed images with little degredation, but increasing the ISO (for a faster shutter speed for example) introduces noise.
I am looking at investing in a d7000 to use for paid wedding photography shoots. I am going to be new to shooting weddings being a studio photographer and feel that this camera will do the job just fine while I'm building up my business. The duel card slots will give me the peace of mind as I will use the 2nd slot for instant back up. Also the quiet shutter mode will obviously be much used.
I currently use canon and I'm tempted towards the 7D, but I feel this nikon offers so much more and somehow is more suited to weddings..?
I will be aiming toward a d3x as I earn enough to buy one and the d7000 will become my backup. I no its a backwards way of starting out.. but the d7000 kit on 12months intrest free at a well known photography store will help me break into the wedding industry with not much money up front.
Any comments on my plans welcome :)
Chris: First of all - the tools are less important than the interaction, shooting plan and of course, results when doing weddings. As a wedding photographer you can benefit from better tools, as a studio photographer - particularly if you've focused on products/commercial rather than social - the environment is so different that the gear won't save you if you're on unfamiliar territory.
This is a general comment and not aimed at you personally - I have no idea what your experience is - but I do want to make it clear that no camera is a magic bullet for a given style of photography - and weddings require a unique degree of control or awareness to deliver good results; you can't go back and do it again, whilst having emotionally charged clients!
Having said all that, the D7000 will not present a barrier when shooting a wedding - it's unlikely to miss focus, have a full buffer or find it too dark to deliver good results. Get some good fast (stabilised) glass on it and take your existing Canon along as a backup; you'll want two cameras. I'd suggest looking at Sigma's 8-16 for interior shots, any number of lenses for the mid range, and Nikon or Sigma's 70-200 stabilised options for the reach.
The camera that is most suited to a wedding is the one you're confident and comfortable using. The D7000 is a natural fit for me as a D3S owner and I consider the controls very intuitive even disregarding that familiarity (I use many, many cameras after all); if you want the resolution, speed and colour of a D7000 get one and get comfortable with it!
Thanks Richard for your reply post.
I will have a look into the lenses you suggest... good glass will out live the body I imagine.
My current day to day studio photography is very busy, meeting around 15 different clients everyday in venture style kind of shoots. A wedding will of course be very different but I'm up for the challenge.
Back to the camera... I'm so tempted to go full frame, maybe with a d700.. but I totally understand your comment on how the tools are less important. So maybe the d7000 might be a winner for me while starting off.
Hi Richard.
Thanks for a very informative review. At the moment, I lug a Mamiya 645 about but that’s becoming more difficult as bits of me start to fail with age. I want to keep taking photographs (police and NetworkRail jobsworths permitting), and this high-end digital looks just about perfect. Just two questions:
• How does the Nikon digital image compare with medium format? Would you say it’s somewhere between 35mm and medium format, or getting close to medium format standards? I’m reluctant to sacrifice image quality for ease of use.
• How much does the Nikon weigh? Hopefully, it’s noticeably lighter than the Mamiya.
Best regards.
Jonathan Allen
Jonathan: The D7000 is lighter than a Mamiya 645, depending on your model and lenses of course. The D7000 body is just under 800g, the 645 Super (for example) is just under 900g - but the 645 lenses are much larger and heavier.
Helping that impression the package will feel smaller and less bulky.
Image quality compared to a film MF, now there's a question! Are you going to sacrifice image quality? On a "feel" basis, yes, absolutely - it's a smaller sensor than 35mm film; you're going to lose the feeling of space when framing and how that affects your photography (live view can help there) and the apparent DoF will be different, in part due to the crop factor and in part due to the higher apparent resolution & accuracy of focus.
However, the accuracy of focus, modern lens technology and the good colours the D7000 produces will probably mean you'll be happy with the technical "quality" of the image.
The intangibles will change, and the theory is that film is MUCH higher resolution; but the lenses and scanners to capture that are immensely expensive.
If you want to retain some of the feel from medium format whilst going digital, it's worth looking at the D700 full-frame option (which is currently enjoying some discounts), Sony's full-frame Alpha models, or Canon's 5D/II.
Realizing that screen grids disguise image quality I bought a 27" iMac (which has to go back as it overheats and flickersinsanely),
BUT I have been using Aperture 3. The low noise in the shadows this machine claims is possibly the result of setting the black point lower down.
Cameras and software introduce an awful lot of noise that is in fact not present in the image file itself, by setting as black a very dark grey. (dont argue!!)
Now, the latest flavour of Aperture 3 which has an immense arsenal of image modifications, but strangely none for lens distortions, does have a black point setting of 0, like Photoshop and Lightroom etc, but it goes a whole lot further into the dark side by allowing you to slde back down a ways to MINUS FIVE.
This of course lightens your darkness maybe more than you want it to, but it also allows you to slide back the exposure slider as well, bringing back those oh so hard to come by highlight details without flattening your curve.
What I like is that I can now see in colour and see the coloured shadows that much better because there's no blocking up of the darker areas with the noise we all believed the files themselves had.
I do not have a D7000 to fool around with unfortunately, but if Nikon send me one, I'm pretty sure I can get results from it with Aperture 3 that match a 1Ds Mk2's files, as they were before Aperture 3.
Revolutionary, yes. We may well soon see image quality at APS-C size that does equal a full-frame sensors output.
Realizing that screen grids disguise image quality I bought a 27" iMac (which has to go back as it overheats and flickersinsanely),
BUT I have been using Aperture 3. The low noise in the shadows this machine claims is possibly the result of setting the black point lower down.
Cameras and software introduce an awful lot of noise that is in fact not present in the image file itself, by setting as black a very dark grey. (dont argue!!)
Now, the latest flavour of Aperture 3 which has an immense arsenal of image modifications, but strangely none for lens distortions, does have a black point setting of 0, like Photoshop and Lightroom etc, but it goes a whole lot further into the dark side by allowing you to slde back down a ways to MINUS FIVE.
This of course lightens your darkness maybe more than you want it to, but it also allows you to slide back the exposure slider as well, bringing back those oh so hard to come by highlight details without flattening your curve.
What I like is that I can now see in colour and see the coloured shadows that much better because there's no blocking up of the darker areas with the noise we all believed the files themselves had.
I do not have a D7000 to fool around with unfortunately, but if Nikon send me one, I'm pretty sure I can get results from it with Aperture 3 that match a 1Ds Mk2's files, as they were before Aperture 3.
Revolutionary, yes. We may well soon see image quality at APS-C size that does equal a full-frame sensors output.
Related Articles
BJP Daily
Most Popular Articles
Updating your subscription status 
About us
British Journal of Photography is the world’s longest running photography magazine, established in 1854, and online since 1997. A high-quality monthly printed edition is available as a subscription or from selected newsagents in the UK and around the world.
Jobs
Customer Care & Technical Support
To provide the very highest standard of Customer Care and Technical Support for all UK Hasselblad customers and potential customers as a member of our "Hasselbuddy" team.
Photographer Wanted
Imagethirst Photography is an exciting photography studio in Central London specialising in family portraiture. Our standard of excellence and absolute client confidentiality has established us as London’s leading family photography studios.
Photographer in Dubai
We are seeking a creative and confident photographer at a licentiate level with a minimum of two years studio experience.
Popular Topics
