Review on Nikon D7100 DX-Format CMOS Digital 📷 SLR (Body Only) with 24.1 Megapixel Sensor by Athit Za ᠌

Name: Nikon D7100 DX-Format CMOS Digital 📷 SLR (Body Only) with 24.1 Megapixel Sensor
Item: Nikon D7100 DX-Format CMOS Digital 📷 SLR (Body Only) with 24.1 Megapixel Sensor
Rating: 1

March 29, 2023

The worst product for your money, I do not recommend it to anyone.

If you are a photographer who takes their work seriously and cares about the quality of their portfolio, you should avoid using this equipment at all costs because it will render even the most beautiful photos unusable. The absolute worst Nikon camera ever made! I will never get over the want to reshoot my whole library, starting in 2022 and going all the way up to 2022 in full frame. Oh, sadly, the elbow is right there, but you won't bite! Give me the Nikon D600 and D800 and transport me back to those years. Alternatively give D7000
After shooting for four years with the D800 and on a variety of Sony E crops, I came to the realization that I had been using the D7100 for an inexplicably long time. - Now that I'm going back over the images and looking at the older RAVs, I can't help but feel sickened by what I see. And while it's true that the camera is useful and versatile in its settings, the image quality that it produces for a top crop is absolutely monster in terms of noise, color, and parasitic hues. Most of all, irritating noise is a source of annoyance at all times and in all places. Because of the way the camera works, complicated, dim, or otherwise mixed light is instantly eliminated. I feel it's important to call attention to how the colors green and red have been rendered, which is eerie and in no way photographic. Just a blackened acid without any shading or variances. Even a significant reduction in contrast and saturation does not much improve the image. After waiting for so many years, I finally decided to buy a Nikon D7000. Despite the fact that the colors are dull, they are adequate in terms of the variability of shades, with normal white that is free of parasitic dirt. All of this is accomplished with a noticeably lower noise level and higher detail. And after using the cameras D800, D600, Sony a3500, A5000, and even the NEX 3N and D7000, I can't look at any images taken with the D7100 without getting bleeding tears in my eyes! A low-cost Sony a3500 that has been updated to improve the quality and quantity of its parts, for instance, can tear apart this Nikon d7100 like a heating pad while it is still in position. The hues are in no way proportional to one another; a3500 is a holy number
There is no money for full-frame; if you don't want to get off Nikon, take a Sony or a D7000.

Pros

Review rewritten after a wait of six years! 1) Prior to the debut of the D7200, the Nikon crop with the sharpest matrix of any and all SLR models offered by Nikon. This edge, on the other hand, is awfully harsh, cheap, and tough! 2) With high sharpness even with low ISO settings (100-200), good optics. About just agricultural products! Who, though, has need for snotty sharpness that lacks detail? NO on the part quality 3) Ergonomics: an appropriate weight and a grip that is just somewhat uncomfortable. Reliability They had the brilliant idea of adopting this convenient standard to the 600s. 4) Overall construction quality and the customary high Nikon plastic standard 5) An auto WB that is relatively correct. 6) A long lifespan for the battery

Cons

1) Monstrous, unclean, loud, grainy matrix. When compared to the D5200, which can work at an ISO setting of up to 1600 without any issues, this model is noticeably noisier and grainier. When set to 7100 with an ISO of 400 and taken outside on an overcast day, the picture is completely ruined. When the scene is underexposed, there is a revolting, unclean noise in the shadows. Even at ISO 100, there is a lot of background noise. As you zoom in, you can make out the grain, but on a full-frame camera, this is not the case at all; the images are perfectly clear. Even with the default sharping setting of +5, the picture that comes out of the camera is grainy, very harsh, and excessively sharp, but the fine detail is lacking. Even though ISO 100 produces the least amount of noise when shooting at 24 megapixels, cropped images still look awful when there is no noise reduction applied. 2) The visual quality of any optic, even at 1080i, is noticeably lower than that of the competition, including even the oldest and most affordable Sony UPCs. There is no way to control the hole that has appeared in the video. 3) Dangerous traces of shutter oil begin to emerge on the matrix almost immediately (in the SC, the matrix was slightly scratched since the technicians were so foolish that they couldn't wipe off a couple of traces!). The illumination of the viewfinder is unreliable, and it rapidly becomes obstructed with dust coming from the interior. 4) The color is a reckless felt-tip pen; it's scorched; it's acid; it tears out the eye. The colors green and red are conveyed in an indescribably terrible way (vyryglaznaya acid). The transmission of each and every color on this camera is flawed, resulting in the appearance of a plethora of muddy, wayward tones that have never really existed and do not currently exist. 5) With those old screwdriver glasses, your focus is off. 80-200mm, which, when used on the D800, achieves a perfect hit of 2.8 on target; when used on the D7100, it focuses as it should each and every time. 6) Very vulnerable to exposure and handshake problems; this is a problem for any 24 pm crops with a small pixel size. When shooting in RAB and JPEG L, there is always a chance that your hands will produce micro-blur in the final image. Even something as simple as the mirror fluttering in S can trigger microshifting.