These other pictures are three people from my running group. Another great group of people! #1511658

I generally refrain from critiquing challenge postings, but in this case I'd ask the question about the white balance. The skin tones seem a little too warm to me. Could the reds be reduced just a little? #10543385

I did adjust the color a bit to take away some of the red-I definitely see what you mean. Is this any better?

By the way, I compared my pictures to my friend's, and I can definitely see the difference in the sensor's ability-the shadows and graininess aren't as bad. He has a brand new Sony (not sure which one). I decided to wait for the next Nikon D7000 to come out. I am sure there will be an upgrade this year with the new sensor, so I am just waiting it out.

As for the setup-I used my telephoto lens at 85mm, ISO 1600 (ugh!!!), shutter priority at 1/320s, and f 5.6. EV -1 and cloudy WB. It was SO gloomy that day. #10543729

I really like my Nikon D7000 I just got it in Sept, so far I haven't been disappointed at all. #10544814

That leg thing that Dale pointed out is pretty funny...what are the chances the lines on his sock would line up perfectly with the other leg like that?? #10545139

#10545148

As for shooting in RAW/JPEG, I actually chose to shoot in JPEG (yes, I know) because I knew I was going to take around 500 pictures. It was more of a space issue... #10545731

However, in this shooting situation, I would think JPG was more than adequate. We aren't talking portraits here, we're talking casual candids suitable for webpage display, maybe a 5x7 sRGB print, or small inserts in newsletters. Nor are we talking Dale's rodeo shooting where he is going to want to emphasize things like clouds of dust in post-processing. "Pixel peeping" might reveal differences in image quality, but in real-life viewing situations, Pat's 24 MP camera or a your NEF image, probably won't produce anything visibly better than the JPG from your [18 MP?] D5100.

Elaine, be careful to understand what you may actually have been comparing between Pat's pictures and yours. Unless you were comparing raw files on a high quality monitor, you were more likely comparing the quality of Pat's more current, state-of-the-art, in-camera JPG processing, LCD capabilities, or even the quality of your lenses rather than the capabilities of the sensor. I'm not sure high megapixel counts give you much more than larger print and tighter cropping capabilities. They often actually increase noise problems that require higher-powered in-camera JPG processing to overcome. I've had both the Sony NEX-5N (18 MP?) and the NEX-7 (24 MP) on the same size APS-C sensor. While the NEX-7's JPG processing is pretty good, I'm not convinced that its sensor outperforms the NEX-5N in "gloomy" conditions.

Here is one reviewers comment that happens to include references to both the D5100 and D7000:

"If you just want fantastic pictures, get a D5100. If you're a seasoned photographer who also wants more knobs and blinking lights, go for the D7000."

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d5100.htm. I'm not a big fan of Ken Rockwell, but others are. He does often make a point that many camera models share the same sensor, the D5100 and D7000 in this case. So just be sure you understand where advantages of higher-priced cameras come from. It often isn't the sensor.

Don't let us or other's intimidate you. Understand what you are after in any given situation and don't make things harder (or more expensive) than they really need to be. #10545964

So I understand what you are saying about the sensor and being able to enlarge to print. I assumed that the newer sensors were better in low light situations. Not true?

And yes, the D5100 and 7000 have the same sensor. I think the D7000 is due for an upgrade this year with a new (better and more sensitive) sensor. Not sure. If it comes out, I'll definitely read the reviews before I buy to make sure I am buying for the right reason.

And I appreciate the time you took to write your comments Stephen!

#10546541

I've owned and used both 1) the Canon 5D (12 MP on a full-frame sensor and the Canon 5D Mark II (21 MP on a full-frame sensor and 2) the Sony NEX-5N (18 MP? on and APS-C size sensor) and the NEX-7 (24 MP on the same size sensor.

There are still those that hold that the original 5D outperforms the 5D Mark II in noise characteristics and while I didn't use my 5D very long, there are times when I've been out shooting with my 5D Mark II that I wonder if I wouldn't have done better with the original 5D, which I still own but never use. And I'm certain that the noise characteristics of the NEX-5N outperforms the NEX-7. Sensor performance does improve as we progress from one generation of sensor technology to another, but when you are comparing similar generation implementations where they've just crammed smaller photo sensor sites onto essentially the same size sensor, the larger pixel size ought to outperform the smaller. But I want to emphasize that becomes noticeable to us only when we are working with RAW files. When we are working with the in-camera JPG files, the camera software will have dealt with the noise and then what you're seeing is the sophistication of the noise reduction software. #10547001

My friend and I decided to only shoot where there were no photographers. We didn't want to compete and take away from someone else. I decided a few years ago that I do not want to do this for money. I think for me it would take the fun out of it, and if someone appreciates my pictures, that is enough for me. It is a fun hobby and I want to keep it that way:). I am lucky to have a decent day job :)

I give you guys credit for doing this as a paying job! #10553023