Now I did like the Sigma DP Merrills, the resolution was spectacular, but they were so restrictive to use and basically dictated to me what kind of pictures I could take. While I was prepared to put up with a certain amount of that, I was of course missing pictures, not being able to shoot what I wanted and I eventually decided that the constraints those cameras put on me were not worth me going 'Wow' every time I looked at the screen. Because that 'Wow' wasn't pleasure that I had got a great image but just me admiring the image quality, and I'd rather be happy with the image itself than how it looks.
So while I appreciate the removal of the AA filter on the D7100, because of the obvious improvement in CMOS sensors in general, it doesn't seem particularly necessary for the achievement of sharp images. There are however still cameras that have far too strong AA filters, the Nikon D3200 being an obvious example. Why that camera is like that I have no idea, presumably its a different sensor to the one in the D7100 and needs more filtering to keep the noise down. As I wrote before I also found the output from the Nikon D600 I had somewhat soft also, though to be honest the files would sharpen up nicely in post-processing.
So in conclusion, more positive noises about the D7100. I certainly like it better than either the D600 or D3200 I tried and it will be a nice companion camera to the D800E. I like it as it will be particularly useful for landscape work when I'm looking for that extra depth-of-field. Much as I love the D800E I do sometimes struggle to get enough in focus and tend to push the VR in my lenses and my hand-holding steadiness to the limit. When I had it a while ago I always thought and wrote that the D7000 was a great camera and I think the D7100 is a worthy follow-up and an even better camera. And thats no small complement as far as I'm concerned.
To comment join the Soundimageplus Blog Readers Group at Google+
For discussion - join me over at Google+