back to article Nikon points D7000 camera at high-end enthusiasts

Nikon hauled in London's camera and tech press corps yesterday to show off its latest DSLR, the Nikon D7000. We shall post a review soon enough, but for now, here's a run down of the spec. Positioned between the Nikon D90 and the D300s, this 16.2mp camera is aimed at enthusiasts who are willing to pay £1100 for a body only or …


This topic is closed for new posts.
  1. Ian Michael Gumby

    What? No sample photo's?

    I'd have figured El Reg would have gotten their hands on one to really take it for a test drive.

    The flame because the article was too short and a full review needs to happen. :-(

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: What? No sample photo's?

      All in good time, all in good time.

      The specialist camera sites get first dibs, not always, but mostly. Of course,they have been in the camera review game much longer than us - we have to earn some more stripes before we get kit on pre-release.

    2. Anonymous Coward

      Go here :)

    3. Giddy Kipper


      "We shall post a review soon enough, but for now, here's a run down of the spec."


  2. James Hughes 1


    You could have least have read the first paragraph.

    "We shall post a review soon enough, but for now, here's a run down of the spec."

  3. Anonymous Coward

    DX - WTF?

    I've been waiting for ages for Nikon to come out with an FX format camera that is actually affordable. This is just the right price point, but it is DX. Why put a 16 MP sensor on a DX format camera. I don't understand them at all. Canon have an affordable full frame sensor - why not Nikon.

    1. Anonymous Coward

      Try the D700

      Not as expensive as the D3 but one very , very nice package

    2. Mark 65

      Not sure

      But would it be the Nikon equivalent of the Canon 7D or is that taken by another model.

      Agree with the poster who commented on the naming scheme.

    3. Sorry that handle is already taken. Silver badge

      Why not?

      Because it would cost twice as much. Full frame sensors aren't cheap.

      And before someone trots out Moore's Law to "prove" that they will quickly become orders of magnitude cheaper than they are today, no matter what you do to the size of a transistor, a full frame sensor is still 36mm x 24mm.

  4. D@v3

    Enquiring minds...

    are curious about the mega pixel count.

    I know that with cameras of a high enough grade, it doesn't really matter, but I'd still like to know....

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Thumb Up

      It does matter

      A top-end DSLR camera with a 5Mp sensor will produce far better pictures than a 10Mp compact almost across the board.

      However, whether or not a 16Mp sensor is better quality is just one factor. All other things being equal, including lens quality, noise level and sensor size/quality then the more pixels the sharper the picture.

      It's like looking at hi-fi amps. You get a low-end one with lots of knobs and gauges and compare it with a high-end one with just a volume control. The low-end one might look cool and have an impressive spec, the high-end amp will just blow the socks off the competition in terms of sound quality.

  5. AceyMan

    incorrect position in the lineup

    It's not between the D90 and D300s -- it's the D90 replacement. Look at the photo blogs and you can confirm this. The D90 has been dropped and is no longer in the channel.

  6. John 62

    numbering scheme?

    I don't understand Nikon's numbering scheme now. It used to be that fewer digits was better, now the D7000 is supposed to be better than the D90.

    1. Sorry that handle is already taken. Silver badge

      No, it wasn't.

      It was D# (professional level), D### (mid level), D## (entry level). Now they've rolled entry and mid into D####.

      1. Sorry that handle is already taken. Silver badge


        That's probably a bit of an oversimplification, since the D### series are more than just mid level.

        Also, they haven't rolled the D### in to the new D#### series. I don't know what I was thinking...

  7. Alan Firminger


    There's one thing I bang on about, and that's shutter lag.

    Nikon quote it, may this set a trend.

    And it is 0.052 seconds, which is good ( that's why they quote it ).

  8. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward


    I would imagine that all the existing Nikon compatible lenses would fit this digital back.

    However: this doesn't really seem to be a camera that targets professional photographers (D3X is more than 6 times the price), so I don't know how many lenses the potential buyers would already have.

  9. mordac

    Exchange Rate??

    $1200 in US

    €1200 in Europe

  10. Charles King

    Canon still losing the race

    Given this model is clearly designed to occupy the ~£800 point on the street, this is a rather more impressive introduction than Canon's lacklustre 60D. (Spoken as a Canon user :( )

    1. Sorry that handle is already taken. Silver badge

      Ain't Competition Grand?

      Also speaking as a Canon user, this should give them a kick up the arse. This does look likely to occupy a price point above the 60D however. I have a feeling the 60D will in time dispell some of the initial, and I believe irrational, disappointment, but I'd be seriously looking at the D7000 if I weren't wedded to Canon.

      Now pardon me while I go out and buy that 7D I've been eyeing off for so long.

  11. James Ashton
    Thumb Down

    "Full HD Video" Deceptive

    Sure it can do 1920x1080 progressive video ... at 24 frames per second only. Great if you're making a movie for projection in cinemas but not so good for display on a TV screen. To get 25fps or 30fps matching TV standards you have to switch down to 1280x720 resolution. Given the tiny difference between 24 and 25 this has to be a limitation driven by marketing and not by technology. In due course Nikon will presumably have something that can to 1080p25 and 1080p30 but at a higher price.

    1. Rob Davis

      24p is Blu-ray compatible, not aware of any films at a higher rate

      I would have thought that, at 24p, being compatible with the professional film industry that uses this frame rate with higher end equipment can only be a bonus.

      This provides enthusiasts and indie-film makers an easier path (not having to convert framerates, with potentially dubious results) to publishing and airing their content. For once this decision appears to be driven by standards rather than technology or marketing.

      1080p30 and 1080p25 and higher obviously have benefits with higher frame rates but 24p appears to be the most common standard of Blu-rays and films, even though other rates are defined.

      Don't 24p Blu-ray films look good on a TV then?

      Of course, I could be completely wrong if distributing films is over the internet - where frame rate support might be more flexible and variations supported. YouTube has a 1080p but also a mode called 4K - for content made by high end Red cameras.

      Read a debate about 24p vs other frame rates here:

      "HD Camcorders: all not 24p capable for archive direct to Blu-ray: thoughts?"

      1. Sorry that handle is already taken. Silver badge

        Lack of 25p and 30p is a "bonus"?

        Must be some strange definition of bonus with which I'm unfamiliar.

  12. Rob Davis

    Time limit on length of video?

    Hopefully they've not capped the duration limit, it just fills up the capacity of the memory card.

    Earlier cameras had a deliberate time limit to avoid EU Duty on camcorder classification.

    FAT32 card limit, if used, can be overcome by auto-splitting the continous growing recording into separate files with a playlist metafile to link and order them, as PVRs might do.

    'Clip' in the official spec seems ominous though :(

This topic is closed for new posts.

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021