Updated (September 2010): Compare the Nikon D3000 vs Nikon D7000

Nikon D7000 vs Nikon D3000

Winner
Nikon D7000

83

Nikon D3000

36

Runner-up

Reasons to buy the Nikon D7000

Full HD
Movie format
1080p @ 24fps
Large viewfinder
Viewfinder size
0.62x
Has live view
Live view
Preview your photos
Weather sealed
Weather sealed
Shoot in extreme weather
 

Reasons to buy the Nikon D3000

Size
Really small
Prosumer size (126×97×64 mm)
Thickness
Thin
2.5"
Weight
Light-weight
485 g

galleries

Explore our gallery of 50 sample photos taken by the Nikon D3000.
Explore our gallery of 50 sample photos taken by the Nikon D7000.

competitors

Nikon D7000 Competitors

Nikon D7200

Nikon D7200

Entry-level DSLR

$829 - $1,097 body only

$1,389 - $1,397 with 18-140mm lens

Movie format Lower frame rate movies
Screen size Significantly larger screen
Movie continuous focus Doesn't focus continuously recording movies
Nikon D7100

Nikon D7100

Entry-level DSLR

$595 - $797 body only

$800 - $1,097 with 18-105mm lens

Movie format Lower frame rate movies
Screen size Significantly larger screen
Battery life Shorter battery life
Nikon D5500

Nikon D5500

Entry-level DSLR

$525 - $747 body only

$590 - $847 with 18-55mm lens

Movie format Lower frame rate movies
Low light performance Lower noise at high ISO
Viewfinder size Significantly smaller viewfinder

Nikon D3000 Competitors

Nikon D3100

Nikon D3100

Entry-level DSLR

$364 body only

$555 with 18-55mm lens

Movie format Shoots movies
Low light performance Significantly lower noise at high ISO
Thickness Much thicker
Nikon D3200

Nikon D3200

Entry-level DSLR

$249 body only

$309 - $447 with 18-55mm lens

Movie format Shoots movies
Low light performance Much lower noise at high ISO
Thickness Much thicker
Nikon D3300

Nikon D3300

Entry-level DSLR

$279 body only

$349 - $447 with 18-55mm lens

Movie format Shoots movies
Low light performance Much lower noise at high ISO
Thickness Much thicker

discussion

Nikon D7000
D7000
Nikon

Report a correction
Nikon D3000
D3000
Nikon

Report a correction

Showing 0 comments