Nikon D7000 AF factory defects

[steve_bingham]

<p>I bought my Nikon D7000 <strong>on the first day available</strong>. I use, or have used on it the Nikon 12-24. 10-24, 14-24, 16-85 (VR), 70-300 (VR), f4 300, 105 (VR), 17-35, 16-35, and most recently, the 85 f1.4G. Not one produced any sort of back focus or front focus that wasn't my fault. This camera, unfortunately, was marketed as both a novice and advanced camera. There are literally more ways to screw up focusing than I can mention, much less explain how to avoid them. I believe this duality accounts for a huge percentage of complaints. The few that are legit can be fixed by Nikon at no cost. If running out of warranty bothers you, purchase an extended warranty.<br>

If this is not a solution, buy another brand! (and see where THAT gets you)<br>

Please re-read. <a href="http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2010/03/this-lens-is-soft-and-other-facts">http://www.lensrentals.com/blog/2010/03/this-lens-is-soft-and-other-facts</a><br>

I hate these type of posts!</p>

[eric_charpentier2]

<p>John,<br>

I dont believe that calibration would have change much, I think there is a desing flaw in the D7000 it is only an opinion, I may be wrong, but this is how I feel about it. The D300s older design is much stronger in buil quality, plus more resistant to elements. Of course I went from, 16Mp to 13Mp, but I find the D300s to be flawless, the auto focus is faster than the D7000, picture quality is very close to the D7000 up to iso 3200, but, the most important factor for me is trust. I was not trusting the D7000 enought to keep it. As for the price, the D300s is only 200$ more. I was also frustrated to have to send back a dslr that I just purchase and have to wait for 3 weeks for it to return. </p>

[niko_korhonen]

<p>I'm new here and decided to read this thread to better understand the sorts of questions and answers are posted.<br>

My own personal experience in photography goes back to 1960 and in primary school. Its only been since when I bought an F4 that I experienced auto focus. So I was used to fine manual focus adjustments and manually opening up a stop for more dof. In the film days you had to do it like that because you often had to wait weeks to see your results. At least in Finland where I live.<br>

The first DSLR I bought was a D300 which I use for wildlife and a D700 for landscapes, portraits etc. I have friends who have D7000's and neither I not they seem to have a problem with any of our cameras. They also spent half their years like me in the manual film era. Maybe all this is unrealistic expectations?<br>

I will make one comment though, and that is this: I have used my friends D7000 quite a bit and apart from perhaps a later generation sensor, it does not AF quite as well for me as the D300. Its just a subjective observation. I was always thrilled with the speed of the D300. I see it as a D700 with a smaller sensor, which it in fact is. To me both cameras are jewels. The D7000 is good, but to me the D7000's position in the DSLR hierarchy is below the D300 in build quality and its reflected in the price.<br>

My suggestion to those with AF difficulty is to pass on what works best for me. And anyone who had the pleasure in their past of feeling the strong torque effect of the internal AF motor in an F4, was to learn to use the center focus point really well, because thats all you had. Either that or go to the big white rectangle and let the camera do its best. Surprisingly for me, this latter method is remarkably effective. I always have difficulty in between these extremes....how many sensors?...Dynamic or not?...AF lock on?... Thats all too complicated. My absolutely favorite lens is manual anyway: the 80-200 F4 Ais. You need good manual fine tuning for portraits and landscapes anyway. AF is only needed for wildlife or sports, and sports is really hard with any camera.<br>

So again: technique or unrealistic expectations in a lot of cases.<br>

If anyone is coming to Finland, I will take them into the lakes and they can practice shooting ducks with an FM2n and a 3.5 manual telephoto so they can learn how to do it properly.</p>

<p> </p>

[eric_charpentier2]

<p>Niko,<br>

I totaly agree with you. The D7000 is a prosumer product. The sensor and functions of the camera, are realy impressive, but it does not perform, in genera,l as well as a D300, D300s.<br>

This is the conclusion I came to after 10 days of testing and frustration. Taking a simple portrait, in good light, should be a very simple thing for a camera with the specification of a D7000, It wasnt the case with my copy.<br>

So, I decided to go another path, I bought a D300s, not for it's high technical specification, witch are almost obsolete by today standard, but, for it's general quality , in built, images sharpness and color, handling, auto focus speed and reliability. In the end, it's not the megapixels or picture controls or 39 focus point or, or, or... that make a difference, it's the final result, when everything is said and done, how does the picture look like.<br>

I have been in photography for a very long time and the D300 have a prouven track record as a solid performer and this is what I expect for the amount of money that Nikon ask for the privilege of being a Nikon owner. :-)</p>

 

[ShunCheung]

<blockquote>

<p>I have been in photography for a very long time and the D300 have a prouven track record as a solid performer and this is what I expect for the amount of money that Nikon ask for the privilege of being a Nikon owner. :-)</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Eric, if you do a little search, you'll find plenty of threads concerning various "problems" for the D300, equivalent to this one on the D7000; people frequently cite various "urgan legend" they read on the web. If anything, there are more such D300 threads than D7000 due to the simple fact that the D300 has been around for a lot longer:</p>

<ul>

<li>The one I mentioned earlier is a good example: <a rel="nofollow" href="00SCGt">http://www.photo.net/nikon-camera-forum/00SCGt</a> Interestingly, the OP for that thread immediately followed up here.</li>

<li>The following title is self explanatory: <a dir="ltr" href="00PPbf" target="_top">Any Major <strong>Nikon D300</strong> Defects? (When will Nikon fix the d300 <strong>...</strong></a></li>

<li>The "false battery low" problem that affected a small number of early D300 bodies, especially with big lenses attached. Nikon eventually fixed it via updated firmware: <a dir="ltr" href="00OT2O" target="_top"><strong>Nikon D300 Issues</strong></a></li>

</ul>

<p>And the list goes on and on. If you believe in those, you'll wonder about the D300's proven track record.</p>

<p>I bought my D300 in November 2007 and my D7000 in November 2010. In both cases I got them almost as soon as they were available. I compared their AF capability last year and found only a small difference between the two. The main issue is that I miss the extra 6 cross-type AF point on the D300 (15 vs. 9). Since I shoot a fair amont of sports and wildlife, the slower memory write speed on the D7000 is very noticable and can be an issue if you a lot of successive frames.</p>

<p>Eventually I decided on the D7000 as my primary DX body due to its improved high-ISO capability. With the D7000, I am comfortable at ISO 800 and sometimes 1600, which is a big plus for wildlife photography. The D300/D300S can get quite noisy at ISO 800 if the lighting is not good, which is typically the case when I need ISO 800 or higher. The 1080p video capability from the D7000 is merely an extra bonus.</p>

<p>A few months ago I posted this owl image I captured at the Galapagos. I was glad that I had the D7000 with me; @ ISO 3200, the noise is not great but acceptable. The noise would have been ugly had I used the D300. The owl is a nocturnal animal; therefore, you typically photograph them under dim light. Notice that AF is spot on when I needed to use ISO 3200.</p>

<p>I still own my D300, but it is now my backup DX camera.<br />

<CENTER>

<img src="http://static.photo.net/attachments/bboard/00Y/00YuUX-370673584.jpg" alt="" /> <br />

<P>

Nikon D7000 with 200-400mm/f4 @ 400mm, f4, 1/160 sec and ISO 3200.</p>

</P>

</CENTER>

[daniel_bliss]

<p>From my own experience -- and backed up by very good authority -- there is clearly a problem with the way in which D7000 autofocus works under warm color temperatures and in particular incandescent light. Under 2500K to 3000K light, you're looking at a consistent -12 adjustment with f2.8 lenses and about a -8 with f3.5. Under daylight, there is no problem that I can see, but the D7000's response to incandescent with autofocus is a serious problem that should have been attended to by Nikon a long time ago.</p>

[dirk_steyn]

 

<p>I'm not sure how people can so confidently state that D7000 A/F issues as reported by some are due to user error. If your D7000 focuses correctly I totally believe you and I'm happy for you. Using A/F is not complicated. I bought a D7000 two weeks ago, and eventually returned it today after struggling with back-focusing issues. I had to adjust the A/F fine tuning endlessly to get acceptable results in various light conditions. All my lenses are acceptably sharp on other Nikon bodies, but all 4 needed "fine tuning" on this camera. Even with fine tuning, the A/F doesn't consistently focus correctly. I ended up using manual focus for most shots. Very disappointed in Nikon - I've been a Nikon D-SLR enthusiast for many years. Back to my D90.</p>

 

[bartlomiej_gierczak]

<p>Didn't I tell You? The problem is real</p>

[Mike D]

<p>I'm beginning to feel repetitive in posts like this one. Both of my F7000s had auto focus problems and one had an exposure problem. I don't believe in micro adjustment unless a lens is the problem and my lenses have already proven their focus accuracy on other Nikon bodies. I took both bodies to Nikon Torrance for repair. Both came back operating properly. I did provide Nikon with images taken with the D7000s illustrating the problems. Nikon really appreciates that.</p>

[eric_charpentier2]

<p>I got a D300s and could not be happier.</p>

<p>Case close as far as I am concern.</p>

<p>Happy hollyday to all !</p>

[johnw63]

<p>Bartlomieg,</p>

<p>Your original questions were:</p>

<p>"Do You know the matter ?<br /> What do You think about that ? Have You replaced mirror mechanism by service ?"</p>

<p>For the most part, we did not know about it, because it just didn't show up much, and because it wasn't a problem , we didn't make Nikon replace our mirror mechanism. </p>

<p>The point that most have made is, if Nikon fixes the issue, when it is sent in, then they are doing their part. I don't know if this issue is more prevalent than any other issue that camera makers have. If it WAS a big issue, then we wouldn't need a single poster to let us know about it. The professionals would be posting about it and there would be a recall.</p>

[ShunCheung]

<p>When people say using AF is not complicated, there is where the problem is. The Multi-CAM 3500 AF system (on the D300, D300S, D700, and all D3s) and Multi-CAM 4800 AF system on the D7000 are complicated. I have been using AF almost from the beginning, starting with my N8008 in 1989. And yet, back in 2007, I found the AF system on the D3/D300 very different from the D2X I was accustomed to at the time. It took a lot of trial and error with different settings to figure out what work for me.</p>

<p>Back then, besides my own D300, Nikon also sent us a separate D300 body and then a D3 body. So I had three cameras all using the Multi-CAM 3500 to work with. For example, 51-point with 3D tracking is pretty much useless to me. Face-detect AF was primitive back in 2007 even on the high-end D3. Today, face-detect AF is excellent on the much cheaper J1 as long as the face is facing the camera from the front; from the side, it is not so good.</p>

<p>If you look around there have been all sorts of complaints about the D300's AF also. If you want a camera with very few complaints, try the D3X, not because it is any better (I tested one for photo.net), but since it is a $8000 camera, very few people own one so that internet discussion on that model is quite limited compared to the affordable ones.</p>

[robert_k1]

<blockquote>

<p>When people say using AF is not complicated, there is where the problem is. The Multi-CAM 3500 AF system (on the D300, D300S, D700, and all D3s) and Multi-CAM 4800 AF system on the D7000 are complicated.<br>

...<br>

It took a lot of trial and error with different settings to figure out what work for me.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>And for even the most experienced owners of many Nikon gear who can tell the failure of AF in their images. Some (many?) never figure the settings out, because the many permutations of the settings make it nearly impossible for trial and error. The less experienced, the first time owners, and the less critical probably never realize that AF is not working as supposed to.</p>

<p>Nikon could have done all these owners a great favor by:</p>

<p>- Explain in detail how the Multi-CAM system work, and how they differ in each body.</p>

<p>- Provide recipe like suggestions for AF settings for some common shooting situations, such as centered vs off center focus point, decoupling exposure metering from focusing, static vs moving subjects, subject moving across vs back and front, etc. Explain WHY each element in the settings matter. These will lay the foundation for the shooters to experiment with.</p>

<p>In the much simpler film days, Nikon provided excellent brochures (yes, in PRINT) such as the Challenge and New Creative Techniques series. Now with the much more complex digital, this kind of information is non-existent from Nikon, in print or online. It makes no sense. Well, perhaps there is a good reason - Nikon may think that detailed explanation of these complex AF systems may scare the less experienced potential customers away.</p>

<p>This leaves room for someone like Thom to bridge the gap. But not everyone reads Thom, nor can we rely upon him to be right all the time.</p>

<p>http://luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/nikon-focus.shtml</p>

<p>http://bythom.com/autofocus.htm</p>

[johne37179]

What firmware are those who experience the problem using? There have been two updates since the released of the

camera. I have not had similar problems that I can attribute to the camera. However, there are times that my D7000 will

focus somewhere other than I want it to. In those cases I just reframe, refocus and move on. The camera has such a wide

range of capabilities that it does increase the opportunity for user error. I've pushed about 10,000 images through the

camera and consider myself about 80% of where I'd like to be interns of using the camera without till haing to think about

each step. Ad cameras become moe sophisticated and complex the learning curve becomes steeper and the process

takes longer.

[ShunCheung]

<p>As I said, I bought my D7000 almost as soon as it came out last year. (I did the same with the D300 4 years ago.) I had the original version 1.00 firmward for about a year. Only recently I upgraded to A 1.02 and B 1.03. Firmware is definitely not the issue. Age of the camera shouldn't be either; my D7000 has over 20K actuations now.</p>

<p>The fact of the matter is that moden electronics are complicated. I have two graduate degrees in computer science, but when I bought my first DSLR the D100 back in 2002, it looks me months to learn digital and post processing. Even today, I only a small fraction of the features in PhotoShop; I know enough to print good images, but there is lot more out there that I don't know.</p>

<p>Therefore, if one doesn't have the time to spend on learning complex digital cameras, they are better off getting a point and shoot. Even the J1 is pretty complex once you go inside the menus.</p>

 

[johne37179]

<p>Shun: You are right on the mark about the complexity of the system -- it isn't any single component either -- it is a system from lens through camera to media to processor and software. I'm reminded of moving up to high performance aircraft after flying for several years. The flying was the same, but the systems management and time frame to do it in were much more demanding. The same is true with each new generation of camera. The D7000 seems to me to be a generational jump from my D70 and thinking back to my D1, it looks like a fossil now. Moving to CS5 at about the same time and having 16GB of RAM and seemingly endless memory opens doors that I never thought of before. It is all that learning and working with the new capabilities (and failing time and again along the way) that is exciting.</p>

[studio460]

<p>I bought a USA Nikon D7000 at a Los Angeles-area Best Buy immediately after its release, SN: 30029XX. A couple months ago, I bought an AF-S Nikkor 17-55mm f/2.8G and found that the lens appeared to unpredictably back-focus. Test after test, shooting wide-open, using a high-contrast target (a lock-off shot of an Apple keyboard) and the center focus-point, definitely showed something was amiss (e.g., focus on the 'T' key, but the 'V' key was the only letter sharp). I also thought that the D7000 "AF problem" was mere internet lore, until I had the problem myself. AF-tune didn't help, since the behavior was inconsistent. Often, the lens wouldn't auto-focus at all until a re-mount/re-boot. I returned that lens and bought another 17-55mm Nikkor from Samy's Camera in LA. There's no focus problem, but every once in a while, the AF is dead, requiring a re-mount/re-boot. This problem only occured with these two lenses. Up until I bought the 17-55mm, AF was spot-on with this body when using the AF 35mm f/2.0D, AF 50mm f/1.4D/G, AF 105mm f/2.0D, AF 180mm f/2.8D, AF-S 70-200mm f/2.8 VR I, etc.</p>

[studio460]

<p>Settings for above:</p>

<p>Firmware v1.02<br>

Focus mode: single-point<br>

Focus point: center, cross-type<br>

Number of focus points: AF39<br>

Focus-tracking: off</p>

 

[studio460]

<p>My point was both to contribute an additional report to the mix, as well as to field others' hypotheses on the matter. Could the D7000's "AF problem" be caused by particular body-lens combinations? Some odd quirk between the D7000's, and lens CPU's firmware and/or electrical tolerances for example,?</p>

[david_amiel]

<p>There is no issue regarding AF system. I own a Nikon D7000 for more than a year, and after thousands of pics I realized that AF systems are mainly human errors. Seriously!</p>

[aurele_monfils]

<p>I have used the D90 for a couple of years then I decided to get the D7000. I had no problems with the AF on the D90. If my shots were out of focus with the D90, yes it was my fault and I was able to make in field corrections. I have taken well over 60,000 shots with the D90 with the vast majority of the shots were tack sharp. The D7000 now thats a different beast, I have had nothing but AF problems right from the start. Those persons who own a D7000 and report no problems, thats great I am happy for you, but please do not attempt to boost your ego by telling yourself and others that all of the D7000 owners who have AF problems do not know what they are doing. Seriously! </p>

[eric_charpentier2]

<p>I am so amused by this tread Lol ! Lol ! and re Lol!</p>

<p>The toyota owners that crash their cars a couple of years ago , probably did not know how to drive and it was probably their fault....</p>

<p>Again, Lol !</p>

[steve_zavodny]

<p>i've done exhaustive testing and still been burned by randomness on this issue. I'll send mine in <br>

if they really take them.</p>

[robert_k1]

<blockquote>

<p>The toyota owners that crash their cars a couple of years ago , probably did not know how to drive and it was probably their fault....</p>

</blockquote>

<p>That's what the Nikon cheerleaders (who have no first hand experience of the D7000 problems reported here) want everyone to believe.</p>

[Matt Laur]

<blockquote>

<p>The toyota owners that crash their cars a couple of years ago , probably did not know how to drive and it was probably their fault....</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Did you ever actually follow up on that story? <strong><a href="http://www.caranddriver.com/features/its-all-your-fault-dot-renders-verdict-on-toyotas-unintended-acceleration-scare-feature">I didn't think so.</a></strong></p>