Nikon 7100 has been anounced

[Loswr]

Hopefully Canon is very scared - and taking Nikon's recent R&D push seriously. They need to respond immediately...

Respond to what? Sorry, but no, they really don't. To those who say, "Nikon is handing Canon their asses," or "Canon should be scared," understand that at the most fundamental level, camera sales are what matter. The finance and marketing divisons within a major corporation, especially a conservative one like Canon, are the voices that determine the ultimate output from the R&D side of the organization, in part because they control the input (i.e. funding) into that R&D.

As long as Canon continues to sell more cameras and lenses than Nikon, the finance and marketing folks will continue to say that the ship is sailing along fine, it ain't broke and there's nothing to fix. Is that short-sighted? Possibly. But as I've pointed out before, DxOMark has some pretty convincing data showing that from a sensor IQ standpoint, Nikon/Sony have been spanking Canon for several years now. Has that pushed Canon to 'wake up'? No - despite their 'crap' sensors, Canon has gone right on gaining market share at Nikon's expense.

What Canon has done, consistently and successfully, is sell entry level (Rebel/xxxD) cameras to more people than Nikon. We can debate up the wazoo about which $1200, $3000, or $6500 camera is "better" (whatever the hell that means, if it's even relevant since many of the people debating this aren't buying these cameras anyway). But both Canon and Nikon sell far more entry level cameras than everything higher up in the lineup combined. The fact that Canon is winning at the base of the pyramid means that more people are buying into their system, and that translates right on up the lines. A bigger base means a taller, more massive pyramid. While I'm sure there are exceptions, very few first-time dSLR buyers buy a $1200, $3000, or $6500 camera. But they may spend that much on their second dSLR, or their third...and if their first one was a Canon (which by the numbers, it is for a majority of the market), odds are their subsequent (more expensive) dSLRs will also be Canon.

 

[Zlatko]

Canon is having their asses handed to them.

By spec alone, this cam outshines canons entire set of middle ground/enthusiast/semi pro cameras- including the weak spec'ed 6D, and quite easily at that. And the body for only 1200? Thats less than an almost 4 year old 7d. the 60d is 'history'. Canon actually markets the 6d as an entry level landscape camera...for 2k. One cross point. Even the 650d has 9 cross points. Wither, canon.

The D7100 specs look great. However, despite their specs, Nikon also dominates in consumer dis-satisfaction. Check Amazon.com for all of the 1-star [worst] ratings that Nikon is getting from buyers of the D600 and D800. So far, about 17% of reviewers are giving them just 1 star for these cameras. By comparison, so far just 2% of reviewers are giving the 5DIII 1 star, and 0% of reviewers are giving the 6D 1 star. With all of the value Nikon is providing in their specs they should be leading in consumer satisfaction, but clearly they aren't. In fact, for those specific models, it's not even close.

 

[Marsu42]

Check Amazon.com for all of the 1-star [worst] ratings that Nikon is getting from buyers of the D600 and D800.

I often read Amazon reviews, but you have to forget about 5-star ratings ("everything is great! I'm the next employee of the month in viral marketing!") and 1-star ("I couldn't find the power switch" or "I was too dumb to read the specs!").

So I just had a look at German Amazon 6d & d600: The few factual complaints about the 6d were the known weak specs, and about the d600 concerning the oil smeared sensors - but overall both rated very positive, because of course both are excellent cameras if you ignore the "value" and "is it worth it" aspect.

 

[Rienzphotoz]

With the Nikon 18-300mm lens this could be a great camera for travel.

 

[Zlatko]

Check Amazon.com for all of the 1-star [worst] ratings that Nikon is getting from buyers of the D600 and D800.

I often read Amazon reviews, but you have to forget about 5-star ratings ("everything is great! I'm the next employee of the month in viral marketing!") and 1-star ("I couldn't find the power switch" or "I was too dumb to read the specs!").

So I just had a look at German Amazon 6d & d600: The few factual complaints about the 6d were the known weak specs, and about the d600 concerning the oil smeared sensors - but overall both rated very positive, because of course both are excellent cameras if you ignore the "value" and "is it worth it" aspect.

Sure, some reviews can be dismissed because the reviewer doesn't own the product or has a fundamental misunderstanding. This is the case for both brands and for others. But the reviews do indicate something. It is similar to how we check reviews of stores on Resellerratings and sellers on eBay.

Of course, all of these cameras are very good and pleasing to the majority of their buyers. I fully expect the D7100 to rock for most buyers. Nevertheless, I was surprised at the dissatisfaction level with two current highly-spec'ed Nikon models.

 

[RS2021]

I don't want to bash Nikon as I know some great photographers use it...and Nikon makes and have made great cameras. But watching a friend work with his images from his D800E on his computer screen left me glad that I am a Canonite.

I had previously thought the green hue issue was just an LCD thing, but the images opened on his CaptureNX2 before he started work on them also looked odd to me...there is something very wrong with the color palate of this camera...again, this is just a cursory encounter and opinion. No offense to any Nikonians lurking.

 

[ashmadux]

Canon is having their asses handed to them.

By spec alone, this cam outshines canons entire set of middle ground/enthusiast/semi pro cameras- including the weak spec'ed 6D, and quite easily at that. And the body for only 1200? Thats less than an almost 4 year old 7d. the 60d is 'history'. Canon actually markets the 6d as an entry level landscape camera...for 2k. One cross point. Even the 650d has 9 cross points. Wither, canon.

The D7100 specs look great. However, despite their specs, Nikon also dominates in consumer dis-satisfaction. Check Amazon.com for all of the 1-star [worst] ratings that Nikon is getting from buyers of the D600 and D800. So far, about 17% of reviewers are giving them just 1 star for these cameras. By comparison, so far just 2% of reviewers are giving the 5DIII 1 star, and 0% of reviewers are giving the 6D 1 star. With all of the value Nikon is providing in their specs they should be leading in consumer satisfaction, but clearly they aren't. In fact, for those specific models, it's not even close.

I dont disagree here. One of the reasons i went with canon in the first place was for the customer service. i will not buy a multithousand dollar product from a company without a good CS system behind them. I will also not buy a dumbed down product that i feel like im being shafted. The 6d is that, imho.

But it will be VERY interesting to see what canon does here- both the 7d2 and the 70d will have to differentiate from each other- how will they do it? the 70d is likely to get the gps/wifi, probably the same 9/11 point all cross Af. while the 7d2 will get the dual card slots. Also, both of them have to live between the 1200-200 dollar range. Canon is pretty screwed here- maybe.

I wouldn't be surprised if canon set the 7d2 at 2099, and differentiate it with speed over the slow lethargic full frame 6d. It makes sense to me. I kind of sort it out like this:

7d2= more features, speed, dual slots, built well the machine gun
6d= less features, less af, better images, +wifi/gps the slow and steady tool
70d= super powered rebel, decent build, baby 7d modern with a bit extra potential
t5i= (what else is left to do with this camera? its basically got everything) resetting the 'standard' expectation

thats my take. Im loving this conversation..competition is good, and it sucks to see Nikon with the canon that i want.

 

[helpful]

Update: this does sound off-topic, but I wrote it to respond to the conflict that was beginning about the "color palates" of Nikon vs. Canon, a conflict that is fundamentally flawed.

The "color palate" of cameras, lenses, and LCDs which I hear about so often is a figment of photographer's imaginations. The only thing a lens has to do with color is separating between color contrasts (low chromatic aberration). The only thing a camera has to do with color is its AWB. The only thing an LCD has to do with color is its calibration (and color spectrum coverage); miscalibration might result in the color being displayed improperly during playback but has zero to do with the actual image, as someone correctly noted by distinguishing between the LCD and the monitor (although the monitor might also be calibrated improperly).

By setting the white balance manually, using both axes that Canon and Nikon make available, not just a one-dimensional Kelvin scale, you can make the colors perfect in the actual image that is recorded digitally. (The reason there are only two axes but three colors is because the third color is determined by exposure, so it is only necessary to control with two variables the proportion between the remaining colors. It is just like the degrees of freedom in statistics, which for a one-sample student's t distribution is one less than the number of data points.)

There is no such mysterious thing as one brand of lens having "warmer colors" or all this other nonsense. Colors are a completely relative thing with digital photography, and even the RGB simulation of color is just a representation of the color spectrum which is actually an interval of the wavelengths of light. RGB colors are unnatural compared to sunlight, and it is just a blessing that our eyes and brains are complex enough to create the illusion of full color from a mixture of RGB.

So since colors are completely relative and white balance completely controls them (except for chromatic aberration), there is simply no such thing as a color palate of a camera or lens, or anything else.

The only thing that might be partly true to say is that the AWB doesn't work the way you see things with your eyes. But that's what you deserve if you are using AWB anyway--it gives someone else's interpretation of color rather than your own. If you want your photography to be determined by the color tastes of an engineer in Japan, then go ahead and use AWB.

And even then you can't blame AWB, because AWB can be fully adjusted so that it delivers your color tastes but still automatically adjusts for different lighting contexts (within the imperfect limitations of technology to detect such things properly, of course).

It's just a shame to see people believing that cameras have "color palates," when it is actually fully under the photographer's control.

Even among professionals, those who are willing to learn to get color right are in the minority. I see so many "great" pictures that are just terrible because those who processed the RAW files don't know anything about white balance, and because the photographer didn't do their job on site to set (or even take any photos of subjects that would have provided the needed data for) the proper white balance.

For example, there was a photo of a bee and sunflower on here. The white balance on that was not quite right. I have done extensive sunflower photography jobs and know quite a bit about it. The bee was OK, but not the background and colors. (I shouldn't judge this though. On the original user's monitor they may have been perfect, but on my precisely calibrated screen they were considerably off.)

P.S. The way to assess "perfect" white balance as I alluded to, is simply to hold a print from your photo next to the original subject. If the colors are not the same, then the white balance is off.

 

[glongstaff]

Well according to Wex Photgraphic website stock is due at the end of March and they're take pre-orders (looks like they've beaten Canon to the market place again:

http://www.wexphotographic.com/buy-nikon-d7100-digital-slr-camera-body/p1536185?go=kits_bundles

 

[coreyhkh]

This looks like a awesome wildlife camera much better then 7D and even 1d mk4.

 

[unfocused]

Hopefully Canon is very scared - and taking Nikon's recent R&D push seriously. They need to respond immediately...

Respond to what? Sorry, but no, they really don't. To those who say, "Nikon is handing Canon their asses," or "Canon should be scared," understand that at the most fundamental level, camera sales are what matter. The finance and marketing divisons within a major corporation, especially a conservative one like Canon, are the voices that determine the ultimate output from the R&D side of the organization, in part because they control the input (i.e. funding) into that R&D.

As long as Canon continues to sell more cameras and lenses than Nikon, the finance and marketing folks will continue to say that the ship is sailing along fine, it ain't broke and there's nothing to fix...

Neuro, you had me up until that "ship is sailing along fine..." stuff.

Not trying to single you out, because I know you know better and I know you aren't guilty of the sin I'm about to attack. But, I can never figure out why otherwise intelligent people think a multinational, multi-billion dollar, profitable company is stupid.

Canon is successful because they produce excellent products and they do so at a price that customers view as good value for the dollar/yen/euro,yuan etc. I can't understand anyone who buys Canon products and then says they are "crap" etc. What kind of consumer are they if they buy stuff they don't like. Everybody makes a few mistakes, but for the most part, I like the stuff I buy. I wouldn't buy it if I didn't.

I also don't understand people who whine about marketing. It's particularly funny when photographers complain about marketing, since photography is pretty much all about marketing. If you take pictures to express beauty -- that's marketing. If you take pictures to convey an idea -- that's marketing. If you take pictures to entertain -- that's marketing. If you take pictures to share memories -- that's marketing. And, of course, if you ever take a single dime for a picture, that's marketing. It's ALL MARKETING. That's what we do.

On a more practical level, what kind of products do you think Canon would be producing if it weren't for their marketing divisions? I can guarantee you that if it were left to the engineers, not one of us would want what they produce. It's that market research that allows them to develop products that people want to buy.

Finally, I don't understand all the Nikon vs. Canon hate stuff – both the self-haters who buy Canon gear and participate in a Canon forum and then constantly complain about Canon. Nor do I understand those who act like Nikon is the worst thing ever and get all upset when Nikon produces a good quality product at a good price.

Personally, I've loving the D7100. I will never buy one, but I know that Nikon's aggressive strategy toward both features and pricing will put pressure on Canon to give us more for less. Why do people think the street price of the 5DIII has dropped since introduction – competition.

Congratulations Nikon, you've introduced a fine camera.

 

[rh81photo]

Update: this does sound off-topic, but I wrote it to respond to the conflict that was beginning about the "color palates" of Nikon vs. Canon, a conflict that is fundamentally flawed.

The "color palate" of cameras, lenses, and LCDs which I hear about so often is a figment of photographer's imaginations. The only thing a lens has to do with color is separating between color contrasts (low chromatic aberration). The only thing a camera has to do with color is its AWB. The only thing an LCD has to do with color is its calibration (and color spectrum coverage); miscalibration might result in the color being displayed improperly during playback but has zero to do with the actual image, as someone correctly noted by distinguishing between the LCD and the monitor (although the monitor might also be calibrated improperly).
.
.
.
Abbreviated
.
.
.

For example, there was a photo of a bee and sunflower on here. The white balance on that was not quite right. I have done extensive sunflower photography jobs and know quite a bit about it. The bee was OK, but not the background and colors. (I shouldn't judge this though. On the original user's monitor they may have been perfect, but on my precisely calibrated screen they were considerably off.)

P.S. The way to assess "perfect" white balance as I alluded to, is simply to hold a print from your photo next to the original subject. If the colors are not the same, then the white balance is off.

sorry but this is way off topic and in many regards not entirely correct. nikon and canon use different color filters in their RGB-colorfilter array. Thus they cover slightly different colorspaces. This is not just AWB settings that somehow are a bit off. It is about measuring all visible colors with just three representations where Nikon and Canon have diffrent views on how this is done. I bet with some work both systems can get close in regards to color, but it would surprise me if they just slightly capture colors just so that you cant match each others outputs. a strong indicator is that the colormatrices for both systems are VERY different from each other.

On topic: Im truly amazed by this D7100, especially for that price! With the D600 I already was close to switching brands. Fiddling with it at Photokina left me with mixed feelings, changeing the settings was astoundingly counterintuitive. The D7100 is taking the Flak at nikonrumors for having a small buffer(6 pics) and being not completeley magnesium alloy body and other to me minor complaints. I'm eager to see what Canon comes up with in their 70D and 7DmkII.
Of course they can choose to not react and keep selling their "conservative" cameras e.g. a 70D with again 9AF-points or the old 18MP sensor. But this nikon offering makes me again rethink what actually keeps me in the Canon system.
Some, but few!, L-lenses is one thing, handling of the Cameras another and finally: alot of people around me with Canon Glass that can be borrowed if needed. The last two points are very weakly rated by myself.

exciting times for photographic gearheads

 

[unfocused]

Update: this does sound off-topic, but I wrote it to respond to the conflict that was beginning about the "color palates" of Nikon vs. Canon, a conflict that is fundamentally flawed...

...For example, there was a photo of a bee and sunflower on here. The white balance on that was not quite right...On the original user's monitor they may have been perfect, but on my precisely calibrated screen they were considerably off....

While you may be correct, I have to add that you have also illustrated why trying to achieve perfect white balance in anything other than print is pretty much a fool's errand. Most images today will live only on a computer screen. They will never be printed.

The only way to achieve perfect color balance is to go around the world and personally adjust the monitors of every single person in the world. And, while doing that, you would also need to adjust their phones and tablets. (That's not to say that we shouldn't all take more care to try to get the color balance correct, or at least get it to match what we envision).

Seeking perfect color balance on a perfectly calibrated monitor is one strategy and works fine if you don't intend to ever share your images with anyone. I think a better strategy is to follow the model used by web designers and test your images on as many different devices and under as many different conditions as possible to try to achieve the most appealing "average" appearance.

 

[Meh]

I can't understand anyone who buys Canon products and then says they are "crap" etc. What kind of consumer are they if they buy stuff they don't like. Everybody makes a few mistakes, but for the most part, I like the stuff I buy. I wouldn't buy it if I didn't.

In general the votes that count the most are the ones we make with our money. On the other hand, although rarely, people might with full awareness buy something they don't like if they have some other reason to do so... best available, can't afford what they do like, needs to be compatible with another product, etc.

Finally, I don't understand all the Nikon vs. Canon hate stuff – both the self-haters who buy Canon gear and participate in a Canon forum and then constantly complain about Canon. Nor do I understand those who act like Nikon is the worst thing ever and get all upset when Nikon produces a good quality product at a good price.

The answer to this is that it's not really hate just Internet whining, a need to justify one's own choices, they are trolls who just want to stir it up for fun, etc.

 

[sdsr]

The D7100 specs look great. However, despite their specs, Nikon also dominates in consumer dis-satisfaction. Check Amazon.com for all of the 1-star [worst] ratings that Nikon is getting from buyers of the D600 and D800. So far, about 17% of reviewers are giving them just 1 star for these cameras. By comparison, so far just 2% of reviewers are giving the 5DIII 1 star, and 0% of reviewers are giving the 6D 1 star. With all of the value Nikon is providing in their specs they should be leading in consumer satisfaction, but clearly they aren't. In fact, for those specific models, it's not even close.
[/quote]

Besides that, better specs don't matter if they don't improve some feature that matters to whoever buys the camera. In most ways the Nikon D600 has better specs than the Canon 6D, but when I rented and compared them side-by-side (I was rather looking forward to owning a FF Nikon in conjunction with my 5DII) the results I got from the D600 weren't better than the results I got from the 6D (taking lens differences into account, they probably weren't worse, either) but I found the D600's controls awkward to use, didn't like its viewfinder, and it doesn't focus as well in low light. For some (most? who knows?) the D600 may well be a better camera, but it wasn't for me, so I bought an "inferior" 6D instead.

 

[bluntforcetrauma]

I have never owned a Nikon but this 7100 really looks like a nice entry level step to take if one wants to try Nikon? I put that as a question to see if what others think?

I am thinking of getting this Nikon 7100 with maybe the 18-300 lens could be a good match.

I have not really liked shooting with the canon 5D Mark III,I cant really give a solid objective reason other than shooting inside shots seems to be much work.

any canon users thinking of getting this camera?

I am also thinking of the EOS 1 DX-- as my high end camera choice for low light, speed and indoor use?

anyone who has a EOS 1 DX--what are your thoughts on the camera?

thanks

this Nikon for the price and specs seems like a nice match.

thanks

 

[justsomedude]

Hopefully Canon is very scared - and taking Nikon's recent R&D push seriously. They need to respond immediately...

Respond to what? Sorry, but no, they really don't. To those who say, "Nikon is handing Canon their asses," or "Canon should be scared," understand that at the most fundamental level, camera sales are what matter. The finance and marketing divisons within a major corporation, especially a conservative one like Canon, are the voices that determine the ultimate output from the R&D side of the organization, in part because they control the input (i.e. funding) into that R&D.

Neuroanatomist,

I usually agree with the majority of your posts on here, but with this one I have to vehemently disagree. I have one word for you... "Microsoft." They sat on their laurels for years, why? Because according to you, "the ship [was] sailing along fine." That's exactly when competition (eg, Apple, Google, Facebook, Firefox, etc.) comes and bites you in the ass.

Yes, Canon may still be a profit machine, but their products aren't what they once were. The competition has noticed, the professional shooter has noticed, and better, more cost effective solutions, are starting to hit the market and make a legitimate fight for share.

If Canon doesn't start mounting a serious defense, and that right soon, they may find themselves wandering around lost like Steve Ballmer at an app-developer conference.

 

[justsomedude]

I can't understand anyone who buys Canon products and then says they are "crap" etc. What kind of consumer are they if they buy stuff they don't like. Everybody makes a few mistakes, but for the most part, I like the stuff I buy. I wouldn't buy it if I didn't.

Unfocused,

You make a valid point, but one that requires a little more nuance to explain in detail. You have to remember, the majority of pro shooters don't just have a 60D or a single 7D body. They have numerous bodies and an extensive collection of lenses and accessories. Switching systems is a massive undertaking, both from a time and energy standpoint, and a financial resources one as well. Fully switching brands must be a well thought out decision, and sometimes it simply isn't worth it - even when new product releases are inferior to the competition's.

But with that said, and as an owner of both the 5D3 and the D800, I can honestly say that I will not be making any additional Canon body purchases without some significant improvement in sensor performance or a very real indication from Canon that they care about the pro shooter AND innovations in digital photography. Simply cranking out new bodies every three years with a few tweaks just doesn't cut it anymore; Nikon has made this point as clear as crystal.

Looking at the bigger picture, the market is what it is. If Canon wants to rely on mid-level dSLR sales to hobbyist and part-time shooters to fill it's coffers, and build their reputation on that, that's just fine - I just probably won't be hanging around at that point. To think of it from the personal computer perspective... If Canon wants to turn themselves into the Dell of dSLR manufacturers, that's certainly their prerogative, I'd just rather be shooting with an Apple.

Agree to disagree.

 

[Loswr]

Neuro, you had me up until that "ship is sailing along fine..." stuff.

Not trying to single you out, because I know you know better and I know you aren't guilty of the sin I'm about to attack. But, I can never figure out why otherwise intelligent people think a multinational, multi-billion dollar, profitable company is stupid.

Far from it. My point is that Canon's current strategy is working. They are doing their R&D, developing new cameras with improved features, releasing them into the market, and those cameras are selling like gangbusters. I don't understand why otherwise intelligent people are clamoring for Canon to do something different, and be more like their competitor that isn't doing as well as they are in the market.

My point was not "the ship is sailing along fine," so Canon should be complacent. They clearly have a strategy (ship), and are executing on that strategy (sailing), and are successful at it (sailing fine).

Also, do note that I did suggest that behavior might be short sighted. I'm well aware of the parallels to Microsoft, another conservative company. Just because it happened once, doesn't mean it will happen again; by the same token, just because it happened to another company doesn't mean Canon will learn from that lesson. Usually, changes like this don't happen overnight. Obviously, Microsoft did not respond to those changes appropriately for their business. It remains to be seen how Canon will respond to a declining marketshare, but of course, first that marketshare has to actually decline.

We heard all of these arguments about the D800, and the 5D Mark III is apparently outselling it by a wide margin. Now the D7100 is the best thing since sliced bread, and while is does seem like a well-spec'd camera, I suggest we wait and see how well it sells, compared to a camera Canon may or may not release, before we declare victory for Nikon and claim Canon 'had their ass handed to them'.

 

[unfocused]

Agree to disagree.

I'm not sure we disagree. I have no problem with anyone buying any particular brand of any product. And, I certainly understand the need for someone who is earning a living in any profession to buy the tools that may give them an edge.

In fact, I think it is probably those of us who don't do this for a living that are more trapped than those who do earn a living at it, as we don't have any means of recovering our investment.

My point was never that no one should ever change brands or select a product that better fits their needs. My complaint is about those who cannot see past their own narrow obsessions and react hysterically on the internet to each new product introduction by competitors as though it's somehow going to drive Canon into bankruptcy.

As I said, I am thrilled by Nikon's efforts to aggressively compete on both price and features. As consumers, whether professional or amateur, we can only benefit.