Railfan Technology > Nikon body names/numbers

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

Here's one list of past and present:

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

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

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

KG

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

 

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.

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.

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

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

---

A few months ago I purchased a factory refurbed D7100 from Adorama to replace my aging D90 and so far I like it.  Attached is a sample photo.

JBWX



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/28/17 17:09 by jbwest.

---

The D7x00 series has the old fashioned manual aperature coupling, making it possible to use the 1970's manual cameras with a new digital camera. More info somewhere in the Rockwell site.

Has anybody tried using a manual focusing Nikon lens on the D7x00?

I realize you asked about bodies, but I'll offer this for lenses.

http://www.mir.com.my/rb/photography/photography.htm

 



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 03/30/17 10:10 by SOUCF25.

One great thing I've noticed about Nikon is generally speaking, image quality remains pretty consistant from the lowest priced models all the way up to the top of the line. And it's excellent - superiror, I believe, than any Canon you could get your hand on.

What you get for the extra money is better build, less noise at higher ISO, more buttons and dials (less menues and scrolling) and in some cases, more focus points (though with a DX camera, you will always have a wider spread) and last - more frames per second. Perhaps video.

The D750 is a "steal" if you can swing it - seems like the D810, there are plans for newer versions of each - the D810, likely first.

As for image quality and features - same goes for Canon, though image quality is a notch below though the new-ish 80D and 5D Mark IV have closed the spread a bit.

I'd say the biggest difference between the D7100 and the D750 would be less noise at higher ISO's and ease of use (buttons vs scrolling) - both worthy of consideration!


/Mitch

Posted from Android

Expanding a bit on what Mitch said, I still have and continue to use my first digital camera, a D40.  The D40's image quality remains excellent for most purposes, and I continue to use it regularly as a small "family" travel camera.  While in challenging situations where you need a high ISO or need to heavily crop an image, the extra pixels and other more advanced features of the D7100 are nice to have (and a D7200 or full frame camera would be even better), I would argue that for the majority of railfans something like the D40 is more than adequate.  A lot of money gets "wasted" on quality and features that most of us will rarely or never use.  Because of today's rapid technological change cameras tend to become obsolete before they wear out.  On the other hand if you have the money, why not spend it.  Good equipment does feel nice in the hand, and a few of the new features are actually useful.  I do like all the focus points on the D7100.  

JBWX