Nikon D7100 review – Still one of the best SLR’s around

Image quality

Our in-depth SLR photo quality tests didn’t really throw up any big surprises, but we were interested to see the effect of the D7100 not using an optical low-pass filter (OLPF). In pretty much all other digital cameras, the OLPF softens details very slightly to avoid moiré interference – the rippling patterns that are caused by two regularly repeating textures that are overlaid on top of each other, including two layers of translucent fabric. It also happens between the regular pattern of pixels on a camera’s sensor and repeating textures such as fabric and bricks too. Obviously in theory, omitting the OLPF on the D7100 should improve image sharpness, but there is an increased risk of moiré.

Our test shots only outlined a little evidence of either effect. While we did do our level best to create some moiré interference, it took a lot of effort to generate just some mild examples. We didn’t really spot it once in the rest of our test shots.

This is the worst example of moiré interference we could muster (the faint horizontal stripes on the roof)

Photos were incredibly sharp, and the fidelity of subtle details in bright conditions was far beyond reproach. However, direct comparisons with the D5200, which shares the same 24-megapixel resolution but uses an OLPF, weren’t quite as dramatic as we initially expected. We noted in our review of the D5200 that we often struggled to achieve sharp focus, which appeared to be mostly down to problems with its kit lens’ optical stabilisation (a problem we were thankfully unable to replicate on the D7100 and its kit lens).

With optical stabilisation switched off on both cameras, there wasn’t a huge amount to choose between them for detail. The differences became smaller when we used the same lens on both cameras, and disappeared completely when using the same lens and processing their raw output in Lightroom.

Comparing the D5200 and D7100, the D7100 shows a small but decisive advantage for detail here. However, the D7100’s superior autofocus and kit lens could well have played just as much a roll as the D5200’s OLPF (Click to enlarge)

Under controlled studio conditions using the same 18-105mm lens on both the D5200 and D7100, the D7100’s detail advantage is very slight. The 18-megapixel Canon EOS 100D compares well to the 24-megapixel Nikons (Click to enlarge)

Switching from JPEGs to raw (processed to maximise detail in Lightroom 5), the differences between the D5200 and D7100 all but disappear. The EOS 100D still looks pretty good in comparison (Click to enlarge)

Noise levels at fast ISO speeds were also impressively low, especially when you consider the high resolution. Comparing the  raw output in Lightroom with noise reduction switched off, noise was significantly lower than from Canon’s latest-generation 18-megapixel sensor (we tested the EOS 100D) at ISO 6400 and above. Comparing their JPEG output narrowed the gap – it seems that Canon’s noise reduction is superior to Nikon’s – but the D7100 still came out on top at ISO 12800 and 25600. It also even nipped at the heels of the full-frame D610, especially when comparing their JPEG output. As a result, it seems very safe to say that this is the best APS-C sensor we’ve seen.

ISO 6400 produces print-worthy results, particularly after processing raw files in Lightroom

Comparing JPEG output at ISO 12800, these three cameras are surprisingly close in terms of noise and detail levels. The Nikon D7100 should by rights come last considering it has a much higher pixel density than the 18-megapixel EOS 100D and the full-frame 24-megapixel D600

The three cameras’ raw output (without noise reduction) reveals D600’s finer, subtler noise texture, but the D7100 squarely beats the EOS 100D here

Here are the same three raw files again, this time with noise reduction applied in Lightroom 5

Conclusion

With the D7100 now costs around £550 for the body only, it’s one of the best budget SLR’s around. These prices, coupled with its specifications, mean there isn’t exactly a direct equivalent model in other manufacturers’ SLR ranges. This can make it a little tricky to work out if it’s the right model for you. We’ll take you through all of the options to help, though.

If you’re after a well-priced enthusiast camera, the Nikon D7100’s weather-proof body and great handling make it the perfect choice. Before you part with your cash, the main competition comes in when you start to look at the current crop of lower-price full-frame DSLRs, such as the Nikon D610

Initially available for £1,499, the D610 has the same resolution (24.2 megapixels), but in a full-frame sensor. This means there’s a lot less noise in shots and some better ISO performance to boot. We also found that depth-of-field looked better on the D610 too. Full-frame cameras really are a step in image quality and it’s generally the point that all amateur photographers want to get to in the long-run.

Of course, the choice boils down largely to compromises. With the D610 you have to pay more and you’ll need full-frame FX lenses, which are much more expensive, as there’s more glass in them. While telephoto lenses are easy for cropped-sensor cameras, such as the D7100 (a 70-300mm zoom acts like a 105-450mm lens), on a full frame camera you get the focal lengths written on the side. Admittedly, it’s significantly easier to get good wide-angle lenses for full frame, but if you’re going to do a lot of wildlife photography on the D610, it means bigger and more expensive lenses.

If you decide to opt for the Nikon D7100, you’re given marginally better auto-focus, and cheaper DX lenses to choose from. However, you can buy full-frame lenses as an investment now, so that if you do upgrade to a full frame camera, you can maintain the same lenses. However, the downsides you get are much worse low-light performance, and a poorer depth-of-field too.

A bigger concern is definitely going to be price, with the D610 now considerably more expensive, if you can find it anywhere. There’s quite a chunk of money difference and it could force your hand. If you are going to opt for the D7100 now, it may be worth buying full-frame lenses for it, so you’re ready for an upgrade to a full-frame model down the line.

If you do choose the D7100, you’re getting a great camera. It’s not as much of a stand-out, groundbreaking camera as the D7000 was when it first appeared. Being spoiled for choice doesn’t exactly diminish the D7100’s appeal, though. The short-lived continuous raw speed is our only serious disappointment, especially as this could have been the perfect camera for wildlife enthusiasts with its large viewfinder, seasoned autofocus and weather-proofing. Otherwise, it’s very hard to fault, with class-leading image quality, fantastic ergonomics and sophisticated autofocus that keen photographers will definitely appreciate. The D7200 successor is undoubtedly a great Best Buy award-winning camera but it’s not a drastic improvement, so you might well find the now much cheaper D7100 more than sufficient for your needs with the savings put towards lenses.