[dylansalt]

The D7100 runs with a toshiba sensor - I wonder how it compares to the Sony equivalent?

[RyanW]

The D7100 runs with a toshiba sensor - I wonder how it compares to the Sony equivalent?

I think some are disappointed that you can't raise exposure by quite the same level you can on some of the Sony sensors as cleanly, and it's not quite as clean at high iso as the 16mpx Sony was in the 7000, but there are 24mpx here, so that is no doubt part of the difference in noise.

To me the color rendering looks a little "gentler" (very subjective, I know) than the other Nikons. I like that. I think I would prefer this sensor over the others just based on that.

[oeriies]

I've been shooting Pentax for quite a while, and still do, but I was able to pick up a Nikon 500mm f/4G for a good price and bought a Nikon D7100 to go with it. I've been using it for a few weeks. I continue to use the K-5 with shorter glass. Here is a quick comparison:

Handling, build, and ergonomics: The K-5 is the clear winner. The all magnesium body and smaller denser feel is superior to the Nikon (which is bigger, lighter, and plastic on the front side); the buttons are better placed on the K-5; the grip is easier to grip; and the menu is easier to navigate.

Low light capability: K-5 is the winner. The D7100 isn't a slouch but I can recover more detail from shadows with less noise with the K-5 than with the D7100.

Lens versatility: K-5 is the winner because of in-body shake reduction. Vibration reduction (VR) isn't available on a lot of Nikon glass, so while they offer an extensive lens system it isn't really that extensive if you focus on high quality glass with VR. The availability of SR for all Pentax lenses is a big plus. Nikon excels with zooms with VR, but these are very expensive, e.g., $2,700 for the new 80-400mm VR.

fps and burst rate: K-5 wins again. The D7100 has a significant problem with its buffer size. Shooting RAW you get about 5 shots in the first second, and then the camera stops for a while and resumes at 1 shot per second. The K-5 can fire off 25-30 shots at high speed before it slows down to two shots per second.

Continuous autofocus: D7100 wins by miles. The autofocus system is very, very good. It grabs onto birds in flight tenaciously and doesn't let go. The continuous autofocus system on the K-5 is worse than useless, in my experience.

Resolution: The extra pixels in the D7100 sensor allow for much more aggressive cropping.

Long glass: Nikon wins big. The Nikon 400 f/2.8, 500mm f/4, and 600mm f/4 are superb. There's nothing like them available from Pentax. Sigma makes a good 500mm for K-mount but it isn't as sharp as the Nikon 500mm and it isn't stabilized and it isn't weather sealed.

This and that: The Pentax TAv mode is better than the manual auto ISO implementation on the Nikon. With TAv you still can switch to manual mode and set things manually. On Nikon you can make manual mode work like TAv by setting it through the menu system to use auto-iso, but then you don't have a manual mode anymore. When using the D7100 I miss the green button. Video functions are better on the Nikon and it doesn't overheat in video mode as the K-5 does. Everything you turn clockwise on the K-5, e.g., to mount a lens, turns counter clockwise on the Nikon. Maybe it is just that I'm used to the Pentax way, but I think it is more natural to turn to the right than to the left. Nothing like the PentaxForums in Nikon world where there are a bunch of user sites, none of which have the wealth of info and involved members that are found here.

Bottomline: They are both great cameras. If you want access to the best long glass, great continuous autofocus, and the highest resolution in a cropped sensor at a very reasonable price then Nikon is the obvious choice. If you mainly shoot in the wide to short telephoto range, prefer primes to zooms, and want a camera with great ergonomics and no obvious corner-cutting, then the K-5 and its sucessor is the way to go, in my opinion.

Russ

[JinDesu]

Thanks for that very comprehensive and very useful update, Russ

[tuco]

...
Low light capability: K-5 is the winner. The D7100 isn't a slouch but I can recover more detail from shadows with less noise with the K-5 than with the D7100.

A friend has the D7100. The files look really good to me. And DxO mark has the sports ISO higher than the K-5. So why better low light with the K-5 (but really they are the same if you round off)?

And if you believe Nikon, their in lens VR is good for more stops than in body stabilization (which I have no idea). And if you get a lens like the new 70-200/f4G VRIII, it performs way better on APS-C than FF.

[Arpe]

Everything you turn clockwise on the K-5, e.g., to mount a lens, turns counter clockwise on the Nikon. Maybe it is just that I'm used to the Pentax way, but I think it is more natural to turn to the right than to the left.

Try going throught the Nikon menu and selecting the "reverse dials" or something like that. The direction of the dials can be reversed, as can the direction of the exposure meter. Of course, you can't do that to the lens mounting!

[Sol Invictus]

Try going throught the Nikon menu and selecting the "reverse dials" or something like that. The direction of the dials can be reversed, as can the direction of the exposure meter. Of course, you can't do that to the lens mounting!

That was the first thing I did on the D600.

[bossa]

A friend has the D7100. The files look really good to me. And DxO mark has the sports ISO higher than the K-5. So why better low light with the K-5 (but really they are the same if you round off)?

And if you believe Nikon, their in lens VR is good for more stops than in body stabilization (which I have no idea). And if you get a lens like the new 70-200/f4G VRIII, it performs way better on APS-C than FF.

Dx0 places the new Tamron 70-200 F2.8 higher than that new Nikon F4 zoom. Then of course there's the new 80-400 variable F-stop zoom. Whilst slow it is very nice optically but expensive.

[Arpe]

Rugby league (as opposed to rugby union)
Nikon D7100.
ISO 3200-4000. 1/640s. f2.8
exif in files.

1.


2.


3.


4.


5.
This guy just ran at them all night and made good ground.


6.


7.


8.
Collision.


9.

[rawr]

Nice shots. IS0 4000 on the D7100 looks pretty good (under bright lights).

But there is something not very nice about the background blur - eg some of the people's faces in the background break up into watercolour, rather than fine grain or soft blur. Not sure whether that is a ISO thing or a lens thing or a JPG thing.

[bossa]

Insane game.. give me a decent game of AFL anytime. Nice shots though and I agree that there's something weird in the bokeh.. what lens was that?

[tuco]

...
But there is something not very nice about the background blur

I believe it's the responsibility of the lens on how it renders out of focus (bokeh), not the sensor.

[Arpe]

Nikon 70-200/f2.8 VRII. Not known for its wonky bokeh!

Looking at the originals I'd say it's a combo of high ISO, noise reduction and resizing. But I don't these guys would worry too much about it!

[tuco]

Nikon 70-200/f2.8 VRII. Not known for its wonky bokeh!

Looking at the originals I'd say it's a combo of high ISO, noise reduction and resizing. But I don't these guys would worry too much about it!

In picture #1, the orange shirt in the background. I've seen that before even on my film shots from post processing. I think its applying too much clarity in editing - smears it, perhaps.

[joe.penn]

The D7100 is turning out to be a great camera and for me a very fine addition to my equipment arsenal. When comparing the D7100 to the K5, the D7100 IMHO is just overall quite a bit better - I am really hoping that the new K3 will be up to par with the D7100, although that will be a real challenge for Pentax and really can't see them coming out with anything soon that can compete with this thing unless they pull a miracle out of their a$$. The features packed in the D7100 is incredibly impressive, here is a quick take on what I have seen thus far:

[[ FER: I have well over 110K snaps between 2 K5 bodies and I am about 12K snaps into the D7100 ]]


/********************************************

MY D7100 Pro's VS K5

- First and Foremost, Features!
The features packed into the D7100 are without a doubt extremely impressive and is lightyears ahead of the K5. I won't really go into the features in detail, but to be able to customise the rotational direction of the dials is just one of the many features found in this thing and should give a hint of how flexible and detailed the options are in this body, you can TRULY make this thing yours [customized to your liking].

- Sensor
Obviously, the sensor is a plus. One of the biggest pluses is the post cropping flexibility with these larger mp sensors - I can crop big and still retain large print sizes in excess of 300dpi, this has really helped in my gallery work. Also, one huge area where this sensor trumps the K5's sensor is in detail, especially when using NR - I can see practically no loss in detail when using LR's noise reduction with shots in excess of 4000iso (this is also noted on DPReview's review of this body/sensor). Sharpening is another plus, it seems that this sensor also allows for finer and cleaner sharpening, K5 outputs easily show sharpening artifacts when pushing sharpening to it's max, the D7100 outputs seem to show near zero sharpening artifacts even after pushing sharpening to it's limits with much cleaner edges and contrast transitions.

- AF
Well, really not much to explain here, the AF system is a pro system from the flagship D4, that says enough.

- Size
For me, the larger size is a plus, when using the K5 without a grip, my pinky does not rest on the lower part of the body grip, this is not the case with the D7100. With the K5 I need a battery grip attached for my average size [glove size medium] hand in order for my pinky to rest comfortably, with the D7100 I do not need the battery grip for this.

- Flash Features
Well, again, really don't need to explain much here, there are nearly as many different flash specific features on here as there are total features on the K5 (maybe not that many, but a whole hell-uv-a lot of features that are flash specific). Also, the availability of premium flashguns and flash accessories is just mind boggling.

- Premium Glass Selection
No comparison, from primes to telephotos, oem to third party glass, there is quality premium glass everywhere for Nikon mount.

- Tethering
Need no explanation here.

- Dual Card Slots
Great feature, and programmable also - you can choose to make one card to hold your raws and the other to hold jpegs, or you can use one as a backup.

- Metering
Metering is extremely impressive, I have yet to clip highlights and my curves seem to be really consistent - the D7100's metering system is definately a big step up from the K5.

- AF Adjustments
You can set values at [+/-]20, you can also set different values for a lens and TC combo, another really nice feature.

- LCD
The LCD on the D7100 is bigger and brighter.

- VF Display
The VF display in the D7100 is twice as bright (if not more) than the display in the K5.


MY K5 Pro's VS D7100

- Construction
The K5 feels a little more solid and more dense, this is probably due to the smaller size and more magnesium alloy being used in the K5's construction.

- Memory Buffer Size
The buffer size is quite a bit better.

- TAV Mode
Not available on the D7100, however it can be somewhat mimicked on the D7100 but it is kind of a pain.


********************************************/


I only touched on a few of the features/options that I make use of on the D7100 (and the other references pertaining to glass and accessories), IMHO, the couple of things/features that I noted for the K5 are really the only things that can compete against the D7100. Don't get me wrong, I love the K5, but again for my usage it really can't match the D7100.