Kenrockwell 對現役Nikon DSLR分析(含D7000)

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/00-new-today.htm
D7000 versus D700

D700: Extraordinary for work in low-light. Retains subject textures and sharpness better than D7000 at high ISOs. Much bigger finder and uses same lenses as 35mm cameras.

D7000: Extraordinarily clean images at stupid-high ISOs, but loses some texture and not as sharp as D700 at very high ISOs. Higher resolution at low ISOs than anything except the D3X. (Noise reduction drops the effective sharpness at high ISOs.) Smaller finder, with much smaller size, weight and price.

D300, D300s and every other DX camera: Wasted by the D7000. I doubt 1 or 2 extra frames-per-second for sports makes up for the cleaner images at higher ISOs and faster AF of the D7000.

D3/D3s/D3X: The pro's camera for news and sports. Better texture retention and sharpness at stupid-high ISOs, and faster frame rate (9 solid FPS) for action. Too big for civilian use, but pros love it and its huge finder, and in-camera 5:4 cropping.

總結(D7000與D700主要差異):
Overall, no one really uses stupid-high ISOs unless you're stupid enough to shoot action in low light with a zoom, or especially with a consumer f/4 or f/5.6 zoom. ISO 25,600 is meaningless; in dim light with action, ISO 3,200 to 6,400 is more than enough with the right lenses.

Overall, there isn't much real difference between the D700's and the D7000's high-ISO performance. I prefer the high-ISO performance of the D700 over the D7000 because I prefer to see the subject's texture with a tiny bit more noise, instead of having it slightly cleaner, but softer, around ISO 6,400, which is the highest ISO at which I shoot.

The D7000 completely replaces all the other DX cameras, but the D700 or any of the FX cameras aren't replaced at all by the D7000. As always, it all depends on what you've trying to do, and what lenses you intend to field with either camera.