This review not to go over the specs, movies, AI metering, FPS of the Nikon D7000; instead we will talk about the camera handling, auto focus, image quality, etc. I am not here to bash or stop you from getting the Nikon D7000. In fact you can order the kit here and the body only here.
My reason for getting a D7000 was for me to have a backup to my D700; in case of an emergency or just for casual use. I originally had a Nikon D90, however I found the auto focus lacking especially after using the D700. I know it’s not a fair comparison between those two, but once you get spoiled by the 51 point auto focus system it’s hard to go back. Furthermore the D90 had a huge front focusing issue with some of my lenses that drove me crazy.
Handling
After taking the D7000 out of it’s box; the camera did not feel heavy to me, instead it felt solid like my D700. I attached various Nikon f2.8 zoom lenses on the D7000 and the camera mount felt secure without feeling stressed. With a few heavy lenses on the D7000 my hands did not feel cramped like on my D90 but it still wasn’t the most comfortable for extended amounts of time.
Button Placement
The button placement is mostly identical to the D90 with the exception of a few new additions. The way to enter Live View is just the flip of the switch on the back by the red record button, I found this a lot easier to work with. The button on top of the AF/MF switch by the lens mount now acts as the way to change AF modes. Press the button on the switch and rotate the dials to change the modes and behaviors. This had me tricked for a few minutes since I was used to the button on top of the D90.
I am however extremely happy Nikon has removed the sliver covering from the shutter release button but I am disappointed that the shutter release button is a bit mushy. The D700 has a stiffer feel to it which helps me to get sharper shots at slower shutter speeds. The knob to change the camera modes are like the D90 with the addition of the User Modes. Now I am happy that they have a dial under the knob for changing the shooting and trigger modes.
Shutter
The shutter is a lot quieter than the D700, especially when you use the Q mode to slowing release the mirror after the shot. As I stated before I genuinely wish the shutter release button was a bit stiffer for me to get sharper images at slower shutter speeds. To be more specific, with a mushy shutter release button you need to push down further in order to take an image. I roll my finger onto the shutter release but with the additional pressure I apply causes the D7000 to move more than I would want it.
Auto Focus
The auto focus is definitely a step above the D90 however, please do not expect CAM 3500DX/FX performance from it. You will be disappointed! The auto focus is fast in good light but it does not have the speed of the more expensive Nikon bodies in terms of tracking. Specifically meaning that it does not readjust focus as fast to you and/or your subject’s movements. The D7000 finally has the option for changing the “focus tracking with lock-on,” how long it takes to readjust focus after something comes in the way of what you were tracking. Another plus would be the option to select AF-C priority selection to focus now instead of only release like on the D90.
I tested the D700 and D7000 on the same dimly lit scene to see the differences between the two. The D700 was able to pick up the my selection easily with both the outermost AF points and the central points. On the other hand the D7000 was able to follow the D700’s feat using the central points but not using the outer most points. The lens hunting a lot using the outermost points, please do not mistake this for never being able to lock focus because it was able to when you know how to work around it’s shortcomings. In this regard, it’s better than the D90.
Image Quality
This is a tough one. The D7000 comes with more pixels than a D700 and it even has more pixels than the D90. In fact it has the most pixels of any Nikon DX camera available on the market now. So with that said, let’s start with the good:
I strongly believe that the dynamic range of the D7000 is a step above other Nikon DX cameras. I am getting much fewer blown highlights and the shadows have details in them; this could also be attributed to the new metering system but even in manual mode I was getting fewer blown highlights yet the image still had a lot of contrast. I always thought the contrast on the D90 was low, especially compared to the D700. The D7000 also captures a lot of details within the scene. That is the good part.
click image for full resolution file.
ISO 100
Aperture Priority
Nikon 24-70mm at f8
Shutter: 1/60
Now the bad. At this point I am generally not satisfied with the sharpness of the images from the D7000, the files tend to be mushy when looking at the details up close. In order to get files that are acceptably sharp, you need really good technique with fast shutter speeds. I think a lot of people will be complaining about this very soon. The slightest shift will become obvious when reviewing your files, you do not need to zoom into 100% to see these imperfections. A mystery to me is; I put the D7000 on a tripod using the self timer, exposure delay mode, manual mode, all noise reduction off and I shot from ISO 100 up to 6400. Even at ISO 100 I didn’t feel I was getting the proper sharpness. Keep in mind I was using the Standard Picture Control with sharpening increase to 5 out of 9. I just found the details to not be acceptably sharp as I am used to with the D700 or D90.
Click image for full resolution file.
ISO 100
Manual
Nikon 14-24mm at f8
Shutter: 1.6
Click image for full resolution file.
ISO 6400
Manual
Nikon 14-24mm at f8
Shutter: 1/40
Click image for full resolution file.
ISO 100
Manual
Nikon 14-24mm at f8
Shutter: 4
I was not expecting much from the ISO 6400 image, I was expecting a lot from the ISO 100 file. The sharpness is just not there. I am sure there will always be people complaining about how I did my test, but this is the way I do my long exposures and I have extremely sharp files from the D700 to back it up. I am happy that the ISO 100 files kept the blacks black and not grainy.
Here is a sample image from the Nikon D700, this is not a comparison between the two cameras:
Click image for full resolution file.
ISO 200
Manual
Nikon 70-200mm VRII at f13
Shutter: 25s
High ISO
You can view full resolution samples of the shots above from ISO 100 to ISO 6400. Please do not expect D700/D3 like high ISO performance from the D7000, but do expect it to be better than the D90 throughout the ISO range.
Pros
- The D7000 does deliver in a being a better auto focus performer than the D90.
- The D7000 has a much needed contrast boost in the images.
- The high ISO performance is better than the D90 but less than the D700, a good compromise.
- Increased dynamic range versus other Nikon DX cameras.
- Definitely better auto exposure metering compared to the D90.
Cons
- The sharpness of images are definitely an issue.
- Mushy shutter release button.
- Peripheral auto focus points that are not the most sensitive in low light situations.
You can buy Nikon lenses and the D700, D7000 or D90 by clicking the links from Amazon.
Just released for preorder is the Nikon D800 and D800E with 36 Megapixels.
If you do buy through Amazon, drop me a line! I’d love to hear about what you picked up.
Nikon just released a firmware update to the D7000 June 30, 2011.
Comments (249)
[…] Another new D7000 review. (function() {var s = document.createElement('SCRIPT'), s1 = document.getElementsByTagName('SCRIPT')[0];s.type = 'text/javascript';s.async = true;s.src = 'http://widgets.digg.com/buttons.js';s1.parentNode.insertBefore(s, s1);})(); […]
[…] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Nikon Rumors, Andrew Zeitz, Norwin Mujica, Carlos E Ramírez, Mesut Şahin and others. Mesut Şahin said: RT @nikonrumors: another new Nikon D7000 review: http://bit.ly/bsoMdF […]
Thanks for the review. I wanted this for a walk-around camera but may cancel my pre-order if I see more soft focus issue problems.
Are you sure you don’t have a bad camera copy ? I’ve had to return different camera lenses or bodies that have had focus issues in the past.
Linda
Linda,
There is always the possibility of a bad body. The review and impressions were from what I had available. Furthermore; I would not call it soft focus, the photos were taken at f8 and 14mm.
That’s probably the problem: f/8 might lead to diffraction issues due to the high pixel density. The 14-24mm lens is almost certainly up to the task (but remember this is the highest pixel density Nikon has shipped to date), but you might need to shoot at f/5.6 or wider. Ideally, use a 50mm lens at around f/4, or some other spectacularly sharp lens – the longer the better, so if you have a 135mm or 200mm somewhere, that would be ideal.
If this isn’t the problem, then it simply means that the AA filter is very strong. I would be surprised, since higher pixel counts do not require such strong AA filters. Try sharpening the image to see how far it will go before it begins to halo – if the AA filter isn’t strong, it won’t be able to do as much.
Oh, and just to say – any shutter speed from 1s to 1/60s is likely to produce unsharp images on a tripod. This is an area to avoid – and you are pretty close to these margins in your test shots.
Why are you using Zooms, why aren’t you using Primes test?
You should check out the Nikon 14-24mm f2.8 and see how it compares to primes in the range it covers.
Because the zooms he’s using are sharper than most primes (besides the new Nano coated gems)
It is pretty normal that pixel sharpness i way beyond D700 and also little beyond D90. It is due to optical laws; D7000 has a half smaller sensor than D700 and on the same time much more pixels on it, so pixels are much much smaller. Also, antialiasing filter is probably bit stronger that will give little bit additional softening.
The real question is; how sharpness compares to D700 when you print images from both camera, the same size! This is only test that can give an answer what camera is sharper. You can do simulation of that test, by comparing images side-by-side on your screen, but first, downsize both them to say, 3000px wide. Then compare the sharpness, not while looking at 100% view from full sized images.
Hey there, it’s me again. I can’t believe that you managed to get a copy of this camera before it was up for sale. Nice write up. I’m not sure if you do this regularly, but this was a pretty professional looking review. Good job!
Thanks Adrian,
I plan to do more reviews in the future. Be sure to subscribe for the latest.
I sure will. Looking forward to some more of your reviews in the future.
question on image sharpness — is this the effect of a strong anti-alias filter or camera shake? The review seems to suggest that sharp image is possible “… need really good technique with fast shutter speeds …”. can Mr. Bromfield shed more light on the image sharpness issue?
The images were taken on a tripod. It could be the result of a strong AA filter. I think it will be harder to get sharper images handheld, which could lead to some frustration for some users.
On the issue of image sharpness, can you test for mirror slap? Set it on the tripod and use mirror up and test that way. Sounds to me that may be a possible issue on a 16MP DX sensor.
Zach,
The images were taken using exposure delay mode. Mirror slap would not be an issue in this instance.
I too might be canceling my pre order. Want to see a comparison to the d300s.
How is the D7000’s sharpness in comparison to the D90?
This is just from eyeballing it. I would say the D7000 has more contrast, dynamic range but the D90 files are sharper.
I was wondering whether the lack of comparable sharpness is the result of the image being shot as JPEG on camera. From my experience and from all dpreview takes on all nikon cameras of the past 2 years (at least), the in-camera image processing creates images on the soft side. This is very easily seen if you shoot a RAW and visualize the embedded JPEG and the RAW conversion in viewNX. Of course, you’re bumping the sharpness of the picture control, but then again it is not going to sharpen something that is fuzzy enough.
If the in camera processing produces images that are soft even after increasing sharpness. Then shooting jpg would be a disadvantage for users who want a quick image.
I only shoot RAW.
Hey Robert,
Thanks for the review and the sample images. I have been comparing them to the ones Chase Jarvis took. He states they are right off the SD card, opened in Capture NX and turned off Active D-Light. How do these images compare to the ones you are seeing? Here is the link.
http://blog.chasejarvis.com/blog/nikon-d7000-preview-images/
Thanks again. Lance
I have the seen the images on Chase’s blog before. He had a beta software which is not publicly available.
Thanks for the review. It’s interesting and worrying to hear that the sharpness is an issue.
Personally, up to ISO 1600 looks very usable if image quality is needed. Just wondering if you had any NR applied to the images of the pool.
Noise reduction was not applied to any image. I do not use noise reduction at all, however all cameras do tend to do some on it’s on regardless if the setting is off.
[…] at this ISO 3200 sample here posted by Flickr user Workodactyl. And another review is available here by Robert Bromfield. There are also high ISO full size images available for download. One of the […]
thanks for the review.
manual page 205 bottom – High ISO NR
High, Norm, Low & Off (Noise reduction is only performed at ISO sensitivities of ISO 1600 and higher. The amount of noise reduction is less than the amount performed when LOW is selected for High ISO NR.)
Thank you for review. Perhaps the sharpness issue could be easily solved by using prime glass or in post processing.
The Nikon 14-24mm is sharper than all Nikon AF-D primes. You can also only sharpen a picture so much, do you intend to sharpen every single photo you take?
First, yes, I post-process and sharpen every image I take (well, either that or it’s the delete button). And second – if you look at the photozone.de test, you see that even a D200 with an excellent lens is diffraction-limited at f/5.6, so a 16 MP DX camera at f/8 is strongly diffraction limited. You have not really been testing the capabilities of the camera, and I’d tend to say that your conclusions are flawed.
If you are saying the camera is strongly diffraction limited at f8, how will someone take a landscape image? With landscapes you need a minimum of f8, do you plan to take your landscapes, macros, studio strobe lit and sunset photos at f4?
Welcome to diffraction land. Us Canonites have been here since, ohhh, maybe 2009? You’re just joining the party, and with better high ISO performance than we have (1D4, for instance, is just 5D2 sensitivity scaled down to a 1.3x crop system).
On 15mp, you should be diffraction-limited around 7.1, so the highest you shoot without diffraction penalties is 6.3. Other Canon fanboys tell me that the increased resolution should offset the loss of sharpness from diffraction, so if you want to do an experiment, shoot both the D90 and D7000 at f/11, then sharpen the D7000 picture until it looks as though it has the same sharpness as the D90, then resize down to 12 MP. Then compare for detail. If the amount of detail on the D7000 is equal or better than the D90, then the Canon fanboys are right about diffraction; that the increase in detail from the increase in resolution offsets the decrease in sharpness from diffraction.
You can test it over various diffraction-limited apertures to see if the D7000 outperforms the D90 at all of these apertures. As for us, we’re going back to waiting for Canon to meet or beat Nikon in the high-iso front. People may say it doesn’t matter, but the reality is, for a walk-about shooter using APS-C, you get hosed by your inability to shoot at night or with high shutter speeds.
I think this is a decent explanation of resolution versus diffraction…
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=747761
DLA for the D7000 should be approximately f/7.6, about the same as the 500D as they have about the same pixel pitch. In my experience, however, 6.3 is better than 7.1 on the 500D, but that just may be user error (focusing, using excessively low shutter speeds, actually you should use speedx2 without VR/IS for maximum sharpness on modern cameras due to increased resolution). DCF, which is the point where diffraction becomes so severe it cuts off resolution advantages, on the other hand, should be around 20 or 21 something.
Last comment: I own an RB67; I wish I owned a Mamiya 7II, but don’t have the money. We’re discussing wide-depth of field, right? Out here in MF-land, we’d need to stop down to f/24 to get comparable depth of field to your f8. Your f/7.1 max “ideal” aperture is equivalent to f/21 to us. For us, f/32, which is the common minimum aperture, is equivalent to f/10 in DX-land, so if you, for some reason need more than that, just remember we’re screwed over more than you since we would need tele-converters just to get narrower depth of field.
Wait, you don’t sharpen every photo you take? It’s such an easy procedure in aperture/lightroom…
I do not use Lightroom, I do not like the way it renders files.
I will be answering questions this evening or you can find me on twitter @robertbromfield
Before you all go canceling orders, you might want tot see what others are saying. Of course this camera won’t be the best thing since sliced bread, that will be the D800 or D4. Remember folks, this camera was to replace the D90, not the D700, or even the D300s. If you want something that competes with the D700, just wait until next year when the D800 hits the market.
Regarding the images not being as sharp as you want, have you increased the sharpness in the image control menu? I have the same issue with the D90 which gives me blurry images unless I increase the sharpness in the menu.
I think the high-ISO images look really good!
The sharpening on the Picture Control was upped to 5. I tried higher settings but they magnify noise in the images.
Robert,
Well executed review, I think you put the body through the paces quite well. Good luck!
Why would anyone cancel their order off of one review?? Not doubting your abilities Robert, but its a little…well a lot premature to cancel an order off of a few samples and one person’s opinion. In addition, this camera is replacing the D90, and has little to do with the D700, so why would you continue to mention in your review? A cameo here and there citing some differences of the D700 is appropriate, but I could have two D7000’s for the price of a D700. Let’s put this all in perspective.
I think that once the reviews of the camera come out from dpreview and some other notables, then we’ll see the true nature of the camera and what it is capable of doing.
I strongly suggest others wait/read other reviews before they make their decision. This is only my point of view, I’m sure others will have differing and consenting points of view.
I wonder if the problem with ‘mushiness’ is more related to the pixel count than the camera performance itself. At 100% at a higher pixel count, wouldn’t you expect more fuzziness than if you took the same shot (same conditions) at a lower pixel count and zoomed to 100%?
You’ve got more pixels to show flaws, which might not show up on a lower resolution camera.
I agree with you that more MP show more flaws in a lens, but if a Nikon 14-24mm looks like that, then what about lesser lenses?
Hi Robert — Thanks for sharing your early experience with the D7000. Your comments on lack of pixel-level sharpness remind me of my own experience with the Canon 50D. I purchased the 50D when it was first released, but was disappointed by the lack of sharpness when looking at images at actual cature resolution on my computer. I wrote to Canon support, and their reply stated that my 50D was working “as designed”, and suggested that I should stop “pixel peeking”. I return it the next day.
The 50D packs 15.1 M pixels onto a DX-sized sensor. The reviewers at dpreview.com concluded that perhaps 15.1 M is too many pixels to pack onto a DX-sized sensor. Seems you are having a similar experience with the D7000 which tries to pack 16.2 M pixels onto a DX-sized sensor. It’s hard for me to believe that Nikon would design a sell a camera that would not deliver a sharp image with one of the best lens (the 24-70mm zoom) at f/8.
I replaced the Canon 50D with a Nikon D90 and it’s been great. The RAW images from the D90 were always somewhat soft however, and I’ve needed to use a sharping filter in my workflow before I get a finished image that looks crystal clear. I was afraid that the D7000 would produce noiser pixels (since they are smaller and hence gather fewer photons), but your tests suggest that is not the case. Perhaps better electronics and image processing algorithms in the D7000 than the D90?
I do hope that Nikon announces the D400 before too long. It would be nice to see how good Nikon can make DX images with today’s electronics.
Thanks, Jim
Jim,
What I have been noticing about the D7000 high ISO images from other users, is that their images lack detail. The images looks too smooth, which reduces the grain but at the expense of sharpness.
I do agree with you that Nikon has definitely improved there electronics and processing algorithms. The dynamic range of the D7000 is way better than the D90.
Did you try to tweak your d7000?(sharpness to 8 or 9) try to adjust that from your camea and tell us the difference. Thanks
Mike,
The sharpening on the Picture Control was upped to 5. I tried higher settings but they magnify noise in the images.
Perhaps this is very old-fashioned of me, but have you tried printing any of these supposedly soft images from your D7000? Just because you have the subjective impression that something looks “soft” when enlarged to 100% on your screen does not mean it won’t produce a stunningly sharp 16 x 20-inch print. Smaller prints will look just as good if not better.
As for those commenters would cancel a pre-order based on a single review, please do so immediately and do not change your mind. It will make the time I have to wait to get mine that much shorter.
I have not tried printing an image. I normally make 20×30″ prints from my D700, that large requires excellent sharpness. From the D7000 I would be worried large prints would not be as sharp as they should be.
Hi Robert, I’ve just noticed that the pictures from the d7000 are JPEGs straight out of camera, while that one from the D700 was shot in RAW format. So, could you please post some RAW shots from the D7000? Does capture handle them?
Thank you in advance!
At this moment Capture NX2 does not handle the D7000 NEFs. You would need View NX 2.0.2 which is included in the package.
Robert – Nice initial review. On hte sharpness issue, how are you processing your RAW images. View NX2 – from Nikon – is probably the most reliable for the purpose of a test. Photoshop and Lightroom might not have the RAW processing tweaked with enough sharpening – and your routines from other cameras would not be appropropiate. In View NX2 you can also adjust the Picture Control settings if needed.
I’m not suggesting you use View NX2 for all post processing – just that as a quick review like this it has strengths and removes variables.
These were JPEGs as you cannot open NEFs in anything but View NX 2.0.2 which is included in the packages. I did not know this at the time when conducted the test.
[…] can check his quick review and impression here . According to Robert , there are some issues with sharpness quality even at lowest ISO setting […]
[…] This post was Twitted by thesullster […]
Thanks for the review. With all this discussion on sharpness, I ran your test images through PS and ran a bit of unsharp mask on them. Your ISO 100 fall-scene example has considerable detail and with a bit of unsharp mask applied, the image is extremely sharp which validates your test technique and equipment.
Do you have a sample of images at each of the sharpness settings in the Camera Control? I believe in your comments you indicate that these are all RAW images, so the image samples at the sharpness settings may not reveal anything. However, that leaves the choice of sharpness degree in post processing. So I’m a bit puzzled as to why there is a sharpness issue, it seems to me to be a sharpness choice.
Best Regards,
Roger
When the D90 came out the reviews knocked its lack of sharpness just like the D7000 is being criticized now. The problem was that Nikon’s default settings for sharpening was lower than competing cameras. After everyone figuring out that increasing PC sharpening a notch or 2, no one thought the D90 was anything less than excellent and class leader.
Now the same people are complaining about the D7000. Yet the people who upgraded from the D90 this week who are posting image with sharpening set at 6 or sometimes 7 in PC were posting image that showed that the D7000 with its improved AF and metering is without a doubt the new DX class leader.
The review sites that left sharpening flat will continue to knock the camera but those who actually use it, and make that simple adjustment will be very happy. I have a D90 and shoot raw, so my NX2 and Lightroom3 import pre-set profile include a modest base sharpening, like the JPG PC in-camera settings, and get excellent results. Those who cancel orders and move to 60D or whatever will be the big losers over this issue. For now, until the D400 comes out next year, the DX camera with best IQ is the D7000.
Stan, do you have any examples of these posted images w/ sharpening at 6 or 7 you can share here? I have pre-ordered this camera as an upgrade from my D40x. I’m no pro, and still mastering the craft, but this is a hobby and $1500 is a lot of money to throw around for me for a camera which may or may not fall short of the mark it’s reaching for. The more examples I can find the better, so if you have a few at hand, that’d be much appreciated.
Robert, nice work on the review, though I wish you’d drawn different conclusions. I was excited about this camera, now I’m not so sure. Not that I’m canceling my pre-order (yet).
[…] Nikon D7000 review and impressions […]
Hi Robert,
You should not use JPEGs to evaluate the sharpness of the camera, and comparing D7000 JPEGs vs D700 RAWs is quite unfair!
The comparison should be:
– D90 vs D7000 in RAW (D700 is another world)
– 14-24 at its sharper focal (@f5.6 max to avoid diffraction, but it should start to affect the quality until f7 or something like that)
– Rescaling D7000 to D90 file size would help to make a fair comparison, otherwise, it’s obvious the D7000 should record more detail, but flaws in sharpness will be obvious too.
Two things about this discussion.
I don’t like the way Nikons produce JPGs and may be the JPG-processing inside the D7000 is somewhat of a problem, may fixable in the future. How are the file in RAW? I did not like the JPGs of D70, D60, D200, even did not one with D300.
The file sof D300, even more D200 need sharpening, that could also help you.
My two cents.
Best Axel
People need to read all the preceding posts before making comments, you’re not only wasting Robert’s time, but everyone else who is reading this blog as well.
Robert…thanks for your review. I would love to see side-by-side JPG (since NEF is not available via NX2) comparisons of both the D90 vs D7000 without any sharpening. It would also be nice to see some shots taken in the daylight.
Cheers.
[…] Today, 04:42 PM Here's the online post that I referenced that talked about "soft" images from a brand new D7000: Nikon D7000 Review and Impressions ? Atlanta | RBromfield Photography […]
[…] an online post that I found that talks about "soft" images from a brand new D7000: Nikon D7000 Review and Impressions ? Atlanta | RBromfield Photography Anyone have a D7000 now who can confirm – or deny – these comments? I – for one – would sure be […]
it is still early times, i look forward to seeing the “mass reviews” when the d7000 hits the stores. I am a bit surprised about the sharpness compared to d90.
Hi Robert,
Thank you for your insight. If you don’t mind, may I ask what software you used to convert the RAW files from the D7000 for this test?
Thank you Robert for this excellent little review. You covered all the aspects I find important in a camera. Your test was performed excellently despite some comments from others that seem to nit-pick everything. For my needs as a sports photographer, a second D300s is clearly the better choice. Thank you!
I agree especially if you do sports, the D300s is a better choice.
[…] Nikon D7000 Review and Impressions by Robert Bromfield Pros […]
Funnily enough I remember this happening when ‘upgrading’ from a Nikon D2H to a D2X. Despite the sensor having many more pixels, getting a sharp image at slower shutter speeds became more difficult. Nikon never did adequately explain why. Having used every professional Nikon digital camera from the D1 (under 3MP!) I’ve got to say I think the D700 is still the camera to beat, it allows me to shoot intuitively and naturally for the first time since giving up film 10 years ago. Here’s hoping its replacement doesn’t screw up a winning formula.
Hi Robert,
thank you for your review;
I was a little bit nervous about your described sharpening performance of the Nikon D7000 jpegs;
so i simply uploaded your wonderful tree picture – added it to lightroom 3 , applied Sharpening 60 (35%)
and now i see detail in the pictures which I have not seen before – and i am really impressed;
and this indicate that the D7000 are not simply soft – but missing an effective sharpening processs
at the end.
Here the link to the Screen-Copy
http://spinthma.zenfolio.com/d7000_lr3_sharpening
now I can sleep again 😉
/Karl
https://www.xing.com/app/forum/seoparser/nikondslr
Dear Robert,
Thanks so much for such a helpful, clear, and practical review. I would like to see more of your reviews- I think you are good at them. Personally, I’d rather trade little sharpness for more contrast and better high ISO’s- I don’t really look at photos with a magnifying glass and I don’t really think my clients do either- but other things like usability at high iSOs , and the overall look of the photo (i.e contrast) are much more important.
Robert,
Thank you on a job well done reviewing, and ever since the announcement of the D7000 I have been waiting for such a review covering D7000 Image Sharpness at higher F-stop
My curiosity started with the blogs discussing 50D and 7D lacking image sharpness at the higher F-stop, while my classmates were taking tag sharp images in the studio with lower F-stop. Then the famous or to some infamous 7D review by Darwin Wiggett, which leads to the theory of Diffraction Limited Aperture by some photography websites and then the frenzy disproving by the loyal Canon supporters
http://darwinwiggett.wordpress.com/2009/11/11/the-canon-7d/
The pure Canon equipments review site below actual list the theoretical DLA for a given camera/Image Pixel Size, and the reason I thought Nikon will not venture too far from the conservative 12MP, but the D7000 surprises me that Nikon diving back into the MP race or rather catch up again
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/Canon-EOS-7D-Digital-SLR-Camera-Review.aspx
There is a page on this site allows comparing the image taken with specific Canon camera model, lens and F-stop for image sharpness (with mouse pointer over for viewing the differences). It is just too bad that I have not found anyone covering the Nikon gears in the same way
http://www.the-digital-picture.com/Reviews/ISO-12233-Sample-Crops.aspx?Lens=458&FLI=0&API=4&LensComp=458&FLIComp=0&APIComp=6&Camera=474&CameraComp=474&Sample=0&SampleComp=0
Your thoughts on this darn DLA shall be greatly appreciated. Thanks.
But like I said, this is the correct experiment. Photograph two high-detail subjects with a high MP and low MP system a bit over the DLA of the high MP system. Adjust and resize the high MP shot until it has the same subjective sharpness as the low MP shot. Then check whether the amount of detail retained is equal or superior to that of the low MP system.
Detail is what really matters; everything else can be digitally removed or improved, usually at the cost of detail and color accuracy, but while there are programs to “fake” detail, you can’t really restore detail that wasn’t in the photo to begin with.
Thanks Inst, your comment is greatly appreciated
Thank you Inst. I was just planning to try some tests between my D90 and new D7000, to decide if I want to keep the D7000 or get a refund. I am currently leaning towards keeping it, but want to do some IQ comparisons to see for myself, since there is so much conflicting info out there and the reviews from photozone, dpreview etc haven’t come out yet. What you suggest is similar to what I was planning, except I thought I was just going to see how far I would have to resize the images from the D7000 down to where they had the same sharpness as the D90. After resizing to that point, if the D7000 was still a higher res / larger picture than the D90, then I would keep my new D7000, which I am very happy with so far. Thanks to you I will pay more attention to the detail as well. Though I suppose tweaking metering such as using Active D-Lighting would alter the amount of detail, so will try to use the same settings.
Robert,
I’m with you on the sharpness issue. I have shot in both jpeg and RAW and compared to my D5000. The D5000 wins every time.
Like you said, increasing in-camera sharpness beyond 6 only increases noise. In post-processing, adding sharpness or unsharp is only slightly better. I have taken some bird and cat photos and there is noticeably less detail in the feathers and fur compared to the D5k. Right now I’m debating returning the D7k and getting a D300s.
Tried local contrast settings? In Lightroom 3, it’s called clarity, which affects local contrast between adjacent pixels. Use that as your main sharpener, then use noise reduction to get rid of pixel noise.
It’s great to be a able to post process your files but you should not have to post process all your files just to get acceptable results.
Especially if you are birding, the D300s would be better for you. I have seen some forum post on auto focus of the D7000 not fast enough to keep up.
Will you be reviewing Canon60D??
I do not have access to a Canon 60D.
Hi,
I was planning to buy the d7000.. Should I just buy the d300s and stay
away from this additional features/pixel race ?
Thanks,
sam
You also have to take into account what you plan on shoot? Sports and low light photography, the D300s. The D7000 isn’t a bad camera but do not expect it to be a D300s.
Thanks Robert ,
Happy shooting..
Samir
I think the biggest difference and perhaps deciding factor lies in what you plan to shoot. The auto focus system of the D300s should be better than the D7000 so it could be the main consideration if sports or wildlife is your main concern 🙂
Thanks gnohz,
Samir
View NX 2.0.3 and Camera Control Pro 2.8.0 can be found here: http://alturl.com/2zex2
It adds support for the D7000 and P7000 NEFs.