Home Open Account Help 163 users online

Railfan Technology > Nikon body names/numbers


Date: 03/13/17 17:52
Nikon body names/numbers
Author: howeld

Is there a handy rule for Nikon body numbers? I'm kind of keeping an eye on the used market for a new camera. But the numbers are all over the place.

Think that the D3100 is entry level and the higher the number up to the D7100 has better features but still fairly affordable.

Then you have the lower number: D40/50/60/90. I have a D50 and it isn't anything special. Where do those fit in?

The D5, D810, D500 etc are super expensive.
How do you keep everything straight?

Posted from iPhone



Date: 03/13/17 17:55
Re: Nikon body names/numbers
Author: TCnR

Here's one list of past and present:

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/dslr.htm



Date: 03/13/17 19:43
Re: Nikon body names/numbers
Author: tinytrains

Use Ken's giude above. There is little logic in Nikon's numbers.

In general:
Odd number of digits tend to be profesional grade (full frame). D0 D000
Even number of digits thed to be hobbiest models (croped sensor, DX). D00 D0000
Of course the D500 is a cropped sensor (DX) which blows the whole scheme.
 

Scott Schifer
Torrance, CA
TinyTrains Website



Date: 03/14/17 02:44
Re: Nikon body names/numbers
Author: kgmontreal

Look for a D7000 rather than a D7100.  I have both and prefer the former.

KG



Date: 03/14/17 09:14
Re: Nikon body names/numbers
Author: howeld

Thanks for the information.  I have been leaning towards a 7100 if I can find one for the right price.

 



Date: 03/14/17 10:39
Re: Nikon body names/numbers
Author: atsf616

Factory-refurbished D7100s were a genuine bargain about 18 months ago. Several reputable dealers (Adorama, B&H, Roberts) all had them for around $499 --  mine came from Adorama with less than 480 clicks on the shutter, and was cosmetically new in all respects.  Prices have since trended back up a bit, but good ones can still be found if you look around.



Date: 03/14/17 13:10
Re: Nikon body names/numbers
Author: Frisco1522

I bought a D70 outfit new and a Nikon flash.  Still have it and use it infrequently.  Very heavy, but works nice.   I would probably have to get the book out to remember what every thing does.
I carry around a Canon SX1 IS (I think) point n shoot.  Uses AA batteries, shoots HD video and has Image Stabilization.   Right now its sufficient for me.  I don't do much any more.  Today's trains bore me to tears.  Did shoot some video of 844 here last Oct.
When I was younger and more was happening, I always had to have the latest Canon 35.  Then I traded my beloved FT for an AE1 and that ended that.  What a POS that thing was.   Mirror bearing noise.  Also bought a Canon A1 Hi8 video.  Worked great for a while then spent the rest of its life in and out of the shop.  Another POS.  Electronics kept going bad.  I finally sold it for parts on ebay for $20.  How sad.
I'm at the age where if I have something that works, that's fine.  No more being on the cutting edge.



Date: 03/16/17 21:38
Re: Nikon body names/numbers
Author: tinytrains

kgmontreal Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Look for a D7000 rather than a D7100.  I have
> both and prefer the former.
>
> KG

I have never owened a D7000, but I love my D7100. Especially the extra resolution.

Scott Schifer
Torrance, CA
TinyTrains Website



Date: 03/17/17 18:17
Re: Nikon body names/numbers
Author: austin

If your looking at Nikons, I am currently testing out a D7200 from my D300. I can happily say there is a major noticable difference in the resolution from the cameras. If your a Costco member they currently have them in a Kit format with a 18-55mm lens and a 55-300mm lens. Benifit here is they have a 90 day return policy no questions asked. So you can easily test out the camera for a bit to make sure your comfortable with the item before dropping the money into it.. Just a thought.... Heres a example from the D7200 shot yesterday.

Enjoy, 
Jeff




[ Share Thread on Facebook ] [ Search ] [ Start a New Thread ] [ Back to Thread List ] [ <Newer ] [ Older> ] 
Page created in 0.0539 seconds