Nikon D7100 vs Pentax K-30

Winner
Nikon D7100

91

Pentax K-30

87

Runner-up

Reasons to buy the Nikon D7100

Full HD
Movie format
1080p @ 60fps
Large screen
Screen size
3.2"
High true resolution
True resolution
24 MP
Almost no delay when powering up
Startup delay
300 ms startup delay
 

Reasons to buy the Pentax K-30

Image stabilization
Image stabilization
  1. Sensor shift
Shutter lag
Barely any delay taking photos
162 ms shutter lag
Size
Really small
Prosumer size (130×97×71 mm)
Thickness
Thin
2.8"

galleries

Explore our gallery of 50 sample photos taken by the Nikon D7100.
Explore our gallery of 50 sample photos taken by the Pentax K-30.

competitors

Nikon D7100 Competitors

Nikon D7200

Nikon D7200

Entry-level DSLR

$849 - $1,047 body only

$1,347 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

$539 - $697 body only

$590 - $797 with 18-55mm lens

Low light performance Lower noise at high ISO
Touch screen Has a touch screen
Viewfinder size Significantly smaller viewfinder
Nikon D5300

Nikon D5300

Entry-level DSLR

$409 - $497 body only

$525 - $597 with 18-55mm lens

Screen flips out Has a flip-out screen
Low light performance Lower noise at high ISO
Viewfinder size Significantly smaller viewfinder

Pentax K-30 Competitors

Pentax K-50

Pentax K-50

Entry-level DSLR

$295 body only

$408 - $470 with 18-55mm lens

Light sensitivity Better maximum light sensitivity
Size Slightly smaller
Pentax K-5

Pentax K-5

Entry-level DSLR

$639 body only

$1,250 with 18-55mm lens

External mic jack Has an external mic jack
Startup delay Significantly less startup delay
Supports 24p No 24p support
Pentax K-3

Pentax K-3

Entry-level DSLR

$699 - $739 body only

$989 with 18-135mm lens

Screen size Significantly larger screen
True resolution Much higher true resolution
Size Larger

discussion

Nikon D7100
D7100
Nikon

Report a correction
Pentax K-30
K-30
Pentax

Report a correction

Showing 0 comments