Customer Review

17 of 40 people found the following review helpful
1.0 out of 5 stars Hit and Miss, 21 Nov 2012
This review is from: Nikon D7000 Digital SLR Camera Body Only (16.2MP) 3 inch LCD (Camera)
I bought this as a second camera body to my D300s. First impressions were that it was definitely no D300, and felt lightly built and plastic in comparison. However, I was prepared to accept this, its light weight could also be an advantage, but after initial test the focussing was so poor with some of my lenses (even with back focus adjusted) that I returned it for a refund. During the time I had to use it it was evident that although it produced better quality images than the D300 it was only a marginal difference (in raw) and most people would never have noticed it in real world situations. Most people, however, would have noticed the images that were out of focus, demonstrating that in my opinion reliability is more important than quality, especially when the gain is only marginal.

My conclusion of this experience is that if you are going to pay this much for a camera perhaps it's better to pay the extra for a professional build quality model, or go for cheaper models like the D3100 that, despite being less than half the price can take excellent photos. I am sure there are some excellent versions of this model out there, but there are obviously quite a few bad ones as well. I am sure there are also people out there who think they have a good one, but may not (yet) have used it with a lens that miss-focuses (people have indicated fast wide angles as being the most likely to cause problems). I accept cameras can break down or stop working, it happens, but cameras that have intermittent faults are really of no use to anyone. I can correct exposure or colour in Photoshop, I can retouch dust, but I cannot refocus an image that is badly focussed. There are plenty of people who have reported this problem and it has now been in production long enough for Nikon to have eradicated it. AF in modern day cameras should now be consistent and accurate considering how long the technology has been in use.

Ultimately I have decided to pass on this model. Even if I find one that appears to be working fine I will always be wondering if the AF problem will resurface at some time. I have given this model only one star because I believe although it can be a great camera but the possibility of having this sort of problem with a camera in this price band is unacceptable. I find Amazon reviews an excellent gauge for camera quality, and you will definitely see different trends for different camera models.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No

[Add comment]
Post a comment
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Amazon will display this name with all your submissions, including reviews and discussion posts. (Learn more)
Name:
Badge:
This badge will be assigned to you and will appear along with your name.
There was an error. Please try again.
Please see the full guidelines ">here.

Official Comment

As a representative of this product you can post one Official Comment on this review. It will appear immediately below the review wherever it is displayed.   Learn more
The following name and badge will be shown with this comment:
 (edit name)
After clicking on the Post button you will be asked to create your public name, which will be shown with all your contributions.

Is this your product?

If you are the author, artist, manufacturer or an official representative of this product, you can post an Official Comment on this review. It will appear immediately below the review wherever it is displayed.  Learn more
Otherwise, you can still post a regular comment on this review.

Is this your product?

If you are the author, artist, manufacturer or an official representative of this product, you can post an Official Comment on this review. It will appear immediately below the review wherever it is displayed.   Learn more
 
System timed out

We were unable to verify whether you represent the product. Please try again later, or retry now. Otherwise you can post a regular comment.

Since you previously posted an Official Comment, this comment will appear in the comment section below. You also have the option to edit your Official Comment.   Learn more
The maximum number of Official Comments have been posted. This comment will appear in the comment section below.   Learn more
Prompts for sign-in
 

Comments

Tracked by 1 customer

Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-6 of 6 posts in this discussion
Initial post: 24 Feb 2013 01:39:32 GMT
with respect to the author of this post, I am a professional photographer that uses a Nikon D7000 as part of thier kit... If you are using Auto Focus on a camera like this then you should not be buying a DSLR, They are never really built for auto focus and you should think about learning how to manual focus instead.

In reply to an earlier post on 11 Mar 2013 14:45:11 GMT
Fargon says:
I imagine there are a lot of Pros who use auto-focus on this and even pro-level DSLRs. For portrait, wedding, landscapes, macro etc., manual may well be a valid choice (but not the only one), but I'm sure that sport or wildlife Pros would struggle to continually focus manually, eg as a bird of prey flies toward them. By the time they have focused correctly the subject is out of focus - that's what continual autofocus etc is for and why Nikon, Canon etc have it on their cameras. I do agree that auto-focus can sometimes let you down, but I have a lot of good shots that I (or even a Pro) would simply not have captured if I had been manually focusing. Ps..I did use SLRs before auto-focus was an option, but it's nice to have the choice.

In reply to an earlier post on 12 Apr 2013 14:26:50 BDT
Last edited by the author on 12 Apr 2013 14:35:04 BDT
CC says:
I agree with Fargon. Autofocus is essential for much of modern professional wildlife photography.

In reply to an earlier post on 4 May 2013 18:11:57 BDT
S. Smith says:
Frankly, I'm amazed a pro photographer would say this. I agree manual focus is preferable for still life, landscape etc, but for sports, children etc auto focus is essential. After all this is what Canon have built their SLR/DLSR reputation on. In the end this is merely yet another 'we know what we are doing, you are all just amateurs' comment from a 'Pro'.

In reply to an earlier post on 16 Nov 2013 16:30:34 GMT
DB100 says:
Images taken on this camera can appear to be in focus in the viewfinder but out of focus on the final image. The problem is probably due to erratic/poor mirror alignment. I doubt it would make any difference if you were using AF or manual.

Irrespective of whether you want to focus manually or by AF, this is an AF camera. The AF is a large part of the camera, and my main gripe is that it should not leave the factory without being tested and working 100%. I have used Nikon (professionally) since the days of the F2, long before AF became an option. I never used had any reservations about using a Nikon untested straight out of the box. Recently there seems to have been a catalogue of problems reported with new models, and getting a good unit has become a bit of a lucky dip.

In reply to an earlier post on 19 Apr 2014 22:50:52 BDT
No disrespect, but you seem to be a fool!

Take a look at the new Nikon D4s and ask why it has such a good auto focus system... because Pros use auto focus!!
‹ Previous 1 Next ›

Review Details

Item

Reviewer


Location: UK

Top Reviewer Ranking: 7,729