D7K good enough to make your lenses look bad?

Joined
Aug 28, 2008
Messages
682
Location
Colorado, USA
I'm a [content] D90 owner who thought he could sit out the D7000, but thinking that there's quite a few real upgrades that I shouldn't live without. I just read Thom Hogan's revue for the first time; quite a good read if you haven't already...
One thing that he points out is that entering the 16MP range, some of the mediocre lenses (i.e. kit and/or 3rd party zooms) that have been OK until now might start giving us mediocre images.
Any D7000 owners out there disappointed by their lenses with all these pixels?
My only zooms are the Nikon 12-24 and Nikon 80-200 2.8D. I'm not too worried about these. However, if I pick up a D7000 I was looking forward to getting it with the 18-105, which Thom specifically names (along with the 18-200) as being a bit wimpy.
Maybe skip the kit zoom and pick up a 30 Sig or a 35 Nikon DX...
Any thoughts?
 
Joined
Aug 15, 2010
Messages
2,967
Location
Sydney Australia
Personally my 18-200 performed very well on my D60 even at 200mm. When I got the D7K I was disppointed with it. Not to say that it was a bad lens or there is anything wrong with it, Im sure in better hands than mine it can perform well on the new body, for me however I couldnt get it to deliver at the longer end so I replaced it with a 70-300 that seems much better.
 
Joined
Aug 28, 2008
Messages
682
Location
Colorado, USA
Personally my 18-200 performed very well on my D60 even at 200mm. When I got the D7K I was disppointed with it.

The 18-200 might be a bad example. I had one when I was shooting a D40 and was pretty stoked on it. The day I put it on a D90, though, it lost it's magic. especially on the long end like you mentioned. I ended up selling it and getting an 80-200 2.8D, which has been nothing other than pure magic...
 
Joined
Aug 15, 2010
Messages
2,967
Location
Sydney Australia
The 18-200 probably isnt the best example but it serves the purpose I think. Using your example also the tech leap from a D40 to a D90 is fairly significant, it looked good to you on your D40 (as with me on the D60) because you had nothing to compare it to, when it got to the newer camera the lenses weaknesses were exposed. One of the many things I have learnt on here and in practice over the last 6 months or so is that quality glass is a worthwhile investement.
 
Joined
Jan 28, 2011
Messages
302
Location
hawaii
I may be mistaken but a friend had an 18-105 with his D7000 and I think he bought it as a kit. Don't think they would sell something together that wasn't compatible.

Focal length is only one aspect of covering range but you've got the 18-105 partially covered by two superior lens. You may want to fill the 24-80 gap with a prime such as the 35 you mentioned or a 55 micro? Really depends on how you shoot.
 
Joined
May 16, 2006
Messages
9,081
Location
Oregon
I've found that the D7000 requires very good technique with any lens. It will be interesting to see some real tests at the testing sites on this issue of which lens are out resolved by the 16 MP.
 
Joined
Nov 2, 2008
Messages
1,196
Location
Halifax, NS
If you are at all concerned about getting the most out of the D7000 (and your photography in general), I would avoid the kit lenses and go for the "mid-range" lenses or better. I would definately think about adding the 35 1.8 to your kit. Save up for the 24-120 if you want a quality mid-range zoom.
 
Joined
Jul 21, 2009
Messages
527
Location
Sweden
I've found that the D7000 requires very good technique with any lens. It will be interesting to see some real tests at the testing sites on this issue of which lens are out resolved by the 16 MP.

I have never seen any evidence that the D7000 outresolve any Nikon lens.
 
Joined
Nov 23, 2008
Messages
117
Location
Australia
After my recent experience, I suggest lens performance be judged using Liveview.

Softness in pics taken using the viewfinder may be an indication of AF issues in the camera or lens. These can be adjusted using AF fine of course.

In my case I had a severely backfocussing D7K. This was replaced yesterday. The new copy seems to be improved, but I can still see that my lenses need some adjustment.

Until going thru this process, I think any judgement on lens resolution etc. is premature.
 
Joined
Oct 7, 2008
Messages
2,550
Location
Littleton, Colorado
I've found that the D7000 requires very good technique with any lens. It will be interesting to see some real tests at the testing sites on this issue of which lens are out resolved by the 16 MP.

I must have good technique :biggrin:

I have not had to make any changes to my technique going from a D90 to D7000. If anything, its easier to get sharp crisp images from the D7k than it was the D90.

:eek:

I think that there were a bunch of bad D7000s released that had problems aquiring a good focus which led people to believe that you needed to have a special technique.

my own personal experience is quite the opposite, its sort of hard to screw up a shot with this camera. its a total ninja. it takes sharp images at 1/25th in a paint mixer. lol

none of the canon guys seem to have issues getting clean sharp images with thier 18mp 7D's.
 
Joined
Aug 15, 2010
Messages
2,967
Location
Sydney Australia
I must have good technique :biggrin:

I have not had to make any changes to my technique going from a D90 to D7000. If anything, its easier to get sharp crisp images from the D7k than it was the D90.

:eek:

I think that there were a bunch of bad D7000s released that had problems aquiring a good focus which led people to believe that you needed to have a special technique.

my own personal experience is quite the opposite, its sort of hard to screw up a shot with this camera. its a total ninja. it takes sharp images at 1/25th in a paint mixer. lol

none of the canon guys seem to have issues getting clean sharp images with thier 18mp 7D's.

Ed

I dont doubt you have no trouble getting sharp images. You have some quality glass listed there. I had some troubles with my 18-200 past about the 150mm mark. I dont seem to have the same issues with my 70-300 and certainly not with my 35mm. Of course camera shake is still a significant issue for me but that is specific to my situation and not the camera.
 
Joined
Oct 7, 2008
Messages
2,550
Location
Littleton, Colorado
I have never seen any evidence that the D7000 outresolve any Nikon lens.

+1

i think a decent number of bad units in the first production run caused this belief of resolving and technique requirements, plus on a forum board if somebody is having problems there are usually plenty of people to defend the potentially bad camera and blame the operator.

OP- "My lens broke in half in the middle of a shoot, the front half literally fell off"

Member 1 " Sounds like a faulty lens"
Member 2 "Did you attach the lens securely? sounds like user error"
member 3 "Yes, you must have not had the lens mounted correctly, that would explain the break in the middle"

OP- "No, the lens was mounted securely, the AF was working, then suddenly, klunk, the front just fell off"

Member 1 " I now agree this was user error, you probably need a tripod"
Member 2 " i agree, the problem here is technique"
Member 3 " have you tried using a shutter release cable?"
member 4 "My D300 is better than a D7k"

Op "How is this user error? it just broke in half unprovoked, it diddnt bump anything"

Member 1 "You clearly dont understand your camera gear"
Member 2 " Did you follow the sunny 16 rule? im sure you did not or this would not have happened
Member 3 "try a shutter release cable next time, but not the chinese knockoffs, get a real nikon cable and this probably wouldnt have happened. You should learn how to care for your gear"
Member 4 "The D7k is only PARTIALLY magnesium... so.... "
Member 5 "Hey would that lens make a good fit on my D3100?"
 
Joined
Oct 7, 2008
Messages
2,550
Location
Littleton, Colorado
Ed

I dont doubt you have no trouble getting sharp images. You have some quality glass listed there. I had some troubles with my 18-200 past about the 150mm mark. I dont seem to have the same issues with my 70-300 and certainly not with my 35mm. Of course camera shake is still a significant issue for me but that is specific to my situation and not the camera.

i cant speak for the 18-200 :(

The 35 1.8 and 50 1.8 both seem to give sharp images as much as they used to. Same with my Tokina 12-24, but the DOF on that lens is miles deep and camera shake is not much of an issue there... lol
 
Joined
Mar 23, 2008
Messages
3,129
Location
Santa Barbara, California, U.S.A.
Ed

I dont doubt you have no trouble getting sharp images. You have some quality glass listed there. I had some troubles with my 18-200 past about the 150mm mark. I dont seem to have the same issues with my 70-300 and certainly not with my 35mm. Of course camera shake is still a significant issue for me but that is specific to my situation and not the camera.

The 18-200 VR is notoriously soft past 120mm. I was initially happy with that lens when I still had the D70s, but after I switched to the D80 I started seeing it. No wonder you're not happy on a 16 MP body!

Cheers

Mike
 
Joined
Aug 15, 2010
Messages
2,967
Location
Sydney Australia
The 18-200 VR is notoriously soft past 120mm. I was initially happy with that lens when I still had the D70s, but after I switched to the D80 I started seeing it. No wonder you're not happy on a 16 MP body!

Cheers

Mike

Thats the thing. I dont think the D7K out resolves a lens perse I think it just highlights any weaknesses that a lens may have. A good lens will certainly shine on this body as much as any other.
 
Joined
May 16, 2006
Messages
9,081
Location
Oregon
Ed:

For me, I'm talking about lenses that need good long lens technique, that's the 300 with either the 1.4 or 1.7. I haven't noticed much difference with 200mm and below.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Latest posts

Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Nikon Cafe is a fan site and not associated with Nikon Corporation.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Forum GIFs powered by GIPHY: https://giphy.com/
Copyright © Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom