Updated (February 2013): Compare the Nikon D7100 vs Nikon D3

Nikon D3 vs Nikon D7100

Winner
Nikon D3

101

Nikon D7100

86

Runner-up

Reasons to buy the Nikon D3

Low noise at high ISO
Low light performance
2,290 ISO
Large viewfinder
Viewfinder size
0.70x
Rapid fire
Continuous shooting
9 fps
Barely any delay taking photos
Shutter lag
88 ms shutter lag
 

Reasons to buy the Nikon D7100

Screen size
Large screen
3.2"
HDR
In-camera HDR
Combines multiple exposures
Movie continuous focus
Movie continuous focus
Makes it easy to get in-focus movies
Sensor cleaning
Self cleaning sensor
Avoids dust in your photos

galleries

Explore our gallery of 50 sample photos taken by the Nikon D7100.
Explore our gallery of 50 sample photos taken by the Nikon D3.

competitors

Nikon D3 Competitors

Nikon D750

Nikon D750

Pro DSLR

$1,399 - $1,797 body only

$2,297 with 24-120mm lens

HDR Has in-camera HDR
Overall image quality Significantly better image quality
Battery life Much shorter battery life
Nikon D700

Nikon D700

Pro DSLR

$3,681 body only

Sensor cleaning Has a self cleaning sensor
Size Much smaller
Battery life Much shorter battery life
Nikon D3S

Nikon D3S

Pro DSLR

$1,067 body only

Low light performance Lower noise at high ISO
Movie format Shoots movies
Shutter lag Much more shutter lag

Nikon D7100 Competitors

Nikon D7200

Nikon D7200

Entry-level DSLR

$789 - $997 body only

$1,076 - $1,297 with 18-140mm lens

Shutter lag Much less shutter lag
Overall image quality Better image quality
Movie continuous focus Doesn't focus continuously recording movies
Nikon D5500

Nikon D5500

Entry-level DSLR

$597 body only

$697 with 18-55mm lens

Touch screen Has a touch screen
Screen flips out Has a flip-out screen
Weather sealed No weather sealing
Canon EOS 70D

Canon EOS 70D

Pro DSLR

$779 - $899 body only

$891 - $999 with 18-55mm lens

Shutter lag Much less shutter lag
Autofocus Faster video autofocus
Dynamic range Less dynamic range

discussion

Nikon D3
D3
Nikon

Report a correction
Nikon D7100
D7100
Nikon

Report a correction

Showing 0 comments