Nikon D750 & D780
- Thread starter Joeturner11
- Start date
- Messages
- 6,408
- Edit My Images
- No
Look at the Nikon holy trinity for starters. I don't like the name by the way. Compare the price with Wex and you'll save £££s with Panamoz.
Three Year UK warranty included, as with the cameras.
- Messages
- 439
- Name
- Darren
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Ahh ok, I didn't look as I already have the last 2.
Even on the 85mm 1.8 there is no difference. Weird.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 4,605
- Name
- Kris
- Edit My Images
- No
What are the trinity Nick?
I bought an 85G secondhand from here so have also ordered the 35G and 16-35 VR for now which will cover 80% of what I need. Hopefully next year I will add the 50G and maybe the 70-200. It was the 70-200 that I've lost in making the move over. I would like a 24G too in time...
I haven't used 50s in the past too much but at the price they are they are useful at times without having the flexibility of a 24-70. Was never convinced with canon mid zooms but the Nikon 24-70 does look a different animal and would be handy at times. Need a lottery win now I reckon to fund that lot.
I bought an 85G secondhand from here so have also ordered the 35G and 16-35 VR for now which will cover 80% of what I need. Hopefully next year I will add the 50G and maybe the 70-200. It was the 70-200 that I've lost in making the move over. I would like a 24G too in time...
I haven't used 50s in the past too much but at the price they are they are useful at times without having the flexibility of a 24-70. Was never convinced with canon mid zooms but the Nikon 24-70 does look a different animal and would be handy at times. Need a lottery win now I reckon to fund that lot.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 4,605
- Name
- Kris
- Edit My Images
- No
Trinity of zooms maybe, much prefer primes but the Nikon zooms are better than the canon equivalents my a country mile, except maybe the 70-200. I so wanted the 14-24 but the flexibility of being able to use my filters edged it for the 16-35.
It's funny moving over from canon because the holy trinity people refer to are the their 3 primes, 35L, 85L & 135L.
It's funny moving over from canon because the holy trinity people refer to are the their 3 primes, 35L, 85L & 135L.
- Messages
- 4,345
- Name
- Martin
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I have had many cameras over the years and every one has been THE camera, the one I would take to my grave; in each case it hasn't been THE one. This D750 however probably is as I am now getting on a bit so I am unconcerned about the reduction in resale value especially as even those purchased from Panamoz will be next to worthless when the next but one version comes out (as I have found with the D3000 that my wife has), I expect my D7000 to go the same way when the D7200(?) comes out. Many people have experienced no problems with cut-price websites as I did when I bought my 180mm IF ED but perhaps we have all been lucky. It is only when things go wrong that the proof of the pudding is in the eating and I prefer to hedge my bets. I am glad however that cut-price establishments exist as I would it does serve to limit prices from other companies but they are not for me.
I shall order one of those, I presume it doesn't interfere with the articulation of the screen? I am surprised that Nikon haven't included one as they did with the D7000 (plus others I presume).
- Messages
- 1,157
- Edit My Images
- No
When I see loads of good reports from a company I would put it down more to good service than luck.
The working life of my cameras is generally 2-3 years tops so resale is a consideration for me. The UK d750 will probably sell for 700quid second hand in 2 years time. The grey imports won't be selling for £500 less than that.
The working life of my cameras is generally 2-3 years tops so resale is a consideration for me. The UK d750 will probably sell for 700quid second hand in 2 years time. The grey imports won't be selling for £500 less than that.
- Messages
- 4,345
- Name
- Martin
- Edit My Images
- Yes
But you also said that Amazon hadn't been good to you but they have many, many thousands of good reports so there is an element of luck involved in a transaction with any company.
Gary Coyle
In Memoriam
- Messages
- 12,654
- Name
- Gary
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Theyll be selling for exactly the same. there is no warranty and no one will care where a 3 year old camera came from, no one even questions where it came from and no one (not many) asks for original receipts for a 3 year old camera, look at all the D700's sold on here recently, no one has asked where they were originally sourced, no one cares, the used value between UK and grey sourced cameras is exactly the same in a private sale once the original warranty has expired.
- Messages
- 1,157
- Edit My Images
- No
Yeah I agree, but you can't simply put down the myriad of positive accounts of Panamoz as people 'getting lucky.' They are providing what appears to be not only a great price but exceptional service.
Also, they're not just matching but bettering the warranty of the UK model and any report I've read of them dealing with faults has filled me with confidence. Nikon warranties aren't transferable either are they? That surely makes the 'key' advantage of buying in the uk kinda null.
- Messages
- 890
- Name
- Dilip
- Edit My Images
- No
The main screen protector fits and feels good - GGS or something I had on the 5D3 felt smoother but this should do the trick until proper screen protector is available.
- Messages
- 2,225
- Name
- Will
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Having the D750 is making me question whether I'm actually going to get much use from my Fuji X-T1 any more.
Maybe I'll just get rid of the 56mm... As nice as it is, it kinda detracts from the whole compact camera system aspect.
Maybe I'll just get rid of the 56mm... As nice as it is, it kinda detracts from the whole compact camera system aspect.
- Messages
- 2,469
- Name
- Adam
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Having the D750 is making me question whether I'm actually going to get much use from my Fuji X-T1 any more.
Maybe I'll just get rid of the 56mm... As nice as it is, it kinda detracts from the whole compact camera system aspect.
I had exactly the same dilemma Will. I had the XT1 with 14,23 and 56mm lenses but once I picked up the D750 and started taking photography more serious, I had little use for the XT1.
It's a great little camera but like you say, stick a hand grip on, a 56mm or even worse, one of the new MASSIVE zooms, and it all feels a little pointless.
I sold up yesterday and decided to get the 35 and 85mm 1.8G's for the D750, and a X100T as my fun/travel camera.
Don't regret it at all.
- Messages
- 2,225
- Name
- Will
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Up until the D750, I was just using my D700 and D800 for weddings. My X-T1 and X100S were for pretty much everything else because they offered a more portable set-up, but at the cost of overall image quality.
Now, I can see myself wanting to use my D750 and a few primes (35/50/85) more which will all comfortably fit in the space my Fuji kit took up.
With the X-T1 still the current flagship model, it's not depreciated too much yet so I'm considering selling the lot before it does. Or do I just keep the X-T1 and 35mm for those occasions when I want a really compact set up?
First world problems!
- Messages
- 2,469
- Name
- Adam
- Edit My Images
- Yes
The D750 is relatively light, as are the 1.8G fx primes I've picked up. So they fit in the same bag as the XT1 and weigh about the same.
Personally I wouldn't keep an XT1 just to have the 35mm. I'd just stick with the X100S or upgrade to the X100T.
Arghhh decisions decisions
- Messages
- 1,157
- Edit My Images
- No
First wedding using 2xD750 bodies, and incidentally the first gay wedding i've shot.
It's kinda the Holy grail for me with regards to a wedding camera. The D8** series has slightly better image quality and shadow recovery. The D4 is a better workhorse and a good deal quicker. But, the D750 is the perfect marriage of all the features you want in a wedding body. File size isn't ludicrously big, the buffer and shooting speed is more than acceptable, the AF is truly fantastic in any given lighting condition. The metering is so good that I found myself shooting in A mode way more than I used to. And finally (and most importantly), my back isn't aching as much as it usually does after a 12 hour shoot!
Here's the shadow recovery put to use in place of OCF, to create the scene as it was in my memory.
It's kinda the Holy grail for me with regards to a wedding camera. The D8** series has slightly better image quality and shadow recovery. The D4 is a better workhorse and a good deal quicker. But, the D750 is the perfect marriage of all the features you want in a wedding body. File size isn't ludicrously big, the buffer and shooting speed is more than acceptable, the AF is truly fantastic in any given lighting condition. The metering is so good that I found myself shooting in A mode way more than I used to. And finally (and most importantly), my back isn't aching as much as it usually does after a 12 hour shoot!
Here's the shadow recovery put to use in place of OCF, to create the scene as it was in my memory.
- Messages
- 394
- Name
- Adam
- Edit My Images
- Yes
First post so please be gentle.
I have moved from a D5000 to a D7000 and have just taken the plunge and order the D750 (from panamoz). First order with them so fingers crossed it goes ok.
I've got the donut of full frames lenses at present so having to completely upgrade my kit. I shoot everything, depending on where I am and my mood i.e. landscape, city scapes, street, sports, wildlife. Basically I have no loyalty to a genre yet. With that in mind I would really appreciate your wise views the following set up for the D750. Unfortunately I don't have a money tree so this may take a while to build up. I also like lighish gear but a little flexible there. My current idea is as follows
First purchase 50mm f1.8G
Second purchase 18-35 f3.5-4.5 G
Final purchase 70-200 f4
What do people think? I want something that will last and produce sharp result (I'm a massive fan boy when it comes to sharp detail). One of my concerns is coverage between 35 and 70. Do you think the 50 will adequately cover it?
Thanks in advance for any input.
I have moved from a D5000 to a D7000 and have just taken the plunge and order the D750 (from panamoz). First order with them so fingers crossed it goes ok.
I've got the donut of full frames lenses at present so having to completely upgrade my kit. I shoot everything, depending on where I am and my mood i.e. landscape, city scapes, street, sports, wildlife. Basically I have no loyalty to a genre yet. With that in mind I would really appreciate your wise views the following set up for the D750. Unfortunately I don't have a money tree so this may take a while to build up. I also like lighish gear but a little flexible there. My current idea is as follows
First purchase 50mm f1.8G
Second purchase 18-35 f3.5-4.5 G
Final purchase 70-200 f4
What do people think? I want something that will last and produce sharp result (I'm a massive fan boy when it comes to sharp detail). One of my concerns is coverage between 35 and 70. Do you think the 50 will adequately cover it?
Thanks in advance for any input.
First wedding using 2xD750 bodies, and incidentally the first gay wedding i've shot.
It's kinda the Holy grail for me with regards to a wedding camera. The D8** series has slightly better image quality and shadow recovery. The D4 is a better workhorse and a good deal quicker. But, the D750 is the perfect marriage of all the features you want in a wedding body. File size isn't ludicrously big, the buffer and shooting speed is more than acceptable, the AF is truly fantastic in any given lighting condition. The metering is so good that I found myself shooting in A mode way more than I used to. And finally (and most importantly), my back isn't aching as much as it usually does after a 12 hour shoot!
Here's the shadow recovery put to use in place of OCF, to create the scene as it was in my memory.
thats good!!
Aparty from a great image, the recoevry is exactly why im interested in this camera.
- Messages
- 41,925
- Name
- 'Gramps'
- Edit My Images
- No
@Adam Wortman - Check out the 24-120 f4 VR, it's a great walkabout lens and from your wide scope of interests would be a good option depending on available budget.
- Messages
- 2,038
- Name
- Phil
- Edit My Images
- No
thats for posting, the shadow recovery is very impressive. Would you mind sharing the what ISO that was at?
- Messages
- 1,157
- Edit My Images
- No
Yeah the recovery is great, but it's weird that it's only gotten mainstream attention with this camera. The D800 (out nearly 3 years ago) is even better in terms of recovery. The D4 and D610 are at least equally good as the D750 in that respect as well.
If you're shooting landscapes and portaits I'd say get a D800 or D810 as they have superior image quality. If you're mostly shooting in daylight, save some money and get a D610. If you need a workhorse camera and can't afford a D4 or don't fancy the weight, get a D750. With the D750, Nikon now has a truly fantastic full-frame lineup.
If you're shooting landscapes and portaits I'd say get a D800 or D810 as they have superior image quality. If you're mostly shooting in daylight, save some money and get a D610. If you need a workhorse camera and can't afford a D4 or don't fancy the weight, get a D750. With the D750, Nikon now has a truly fantastic full-frame lineup.
- Messages
- 1,157
- Edit My Images
- No
ISO 100, f2.8, 1/160 35mm 1.4G
If exposing for highlights to recover later, as in this pic, I'll ALWAYS keep the ISO at 100.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 2,038
- Name
- Phil
- Edit My Images
- No
I currently shoot 2 x D810's and very happy, but the lighter the better so may well hand one off to swmbo and pick up a D750. 810 for wider stuff, 750 for longer focal lengths where I need the shutter speed, best of both worlds.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 1,157
- Edit My Images
- No
Here's a more extreme one done with the D800 earlier this year.
Once you get used to the limits of the sensor you can do an awful lot with it. I pushed my D800 more than any other Nikon camera and it never disappointed.
Once you get used to the limits of the sensor you can do an awful lot with it. I pushed my D800 more than any other Nikon camera and it never disappointed.
- Messages
- 2,038
- Name
- Phil
- Edit My Images
- No
you won't be disappointed with the switch to FF that's for sure, but I'd spend some time shooting the 50mm before you think about your next purchase, you may decide that you love primes on FF and don't want zooms or vice-versa.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 1,157
- Edit My Images
- No
I think the D810 alongside a D750 could be the best wedding combo there is. Just sold my D800 but would consider getting a D810 in future.
- Messages
- 2,038
- Name
- Phil
- Edit My Images
- No
- Messages
- 2,469
- Name
- Adam
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I understand the first one as you wanted to retain detail in the sky, but wouldnt it have just been easier for this one if you boosted the ISO?
- Messages
- 1,157
- Edit My Images
- No
Yeah, I agree totally. I always attempt to reproduce the scene as I remember it without pushing it too far. To that end, I do a fair bit of brush work.
There's no substitute for classic, proper exposure 95% of the time!
- Messages
- 1,157
- Edit My Images
- No
Increasing ISO (or reducing shutter speed, opening aperture as there was headroom) would only serve to blow out the background (as in the image below). It was 2pm on a summer day and we were in the shade. I wanted one photograph that retained a bit of the sky and background giving a really even image - the scene more as the human eye sees it.
In the same scene I also exposed for skin for a very different 'feel' that I love just as much. The other 'shadow recovery' image was the bride's favourite picture, though.
- Messages
- 2,469
- Name
- Adam
- Edit My Images
- Yes
It is all down to personal taste. I actually prefer the blown out pic, but I like that look in general.
All lovely shots mind.
- Messages
- 394
- Name
- Adam
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I've had a look at this lens and it has some seriously mixed reviews. It's kind of similar in that respect of the 16-85 DX lenses reviews (mixed). I originally had that lens but didn't enjoy it at all and ended up replacing it with the 17-55 2.8 which I loved - save for the weight. I assume you're a fan of the 24-120. Have you used the 16-85 dx? If so is it comparable?
- Messages
- 394
- Name
- Adam
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Thanks for your response. Yeah, I got the 50mm on order from Amazon so will start with that. I had the 35mm 1.8 DX lens which I liked so I'm guessing the experience will be comparable. Re the prime v zoom debate. I'm less concerned with zoom in the, what I would call street shooting focal lengths i.e. 50mm, but I do think its handy (probably preferable) when shooting landscapes and distant objects. From my research the 18-35 and 70-200 (f4 version) have pretty great optical quality with the benefit of being able to zoom. Do you have any thoughts on that point?
- Messages
- 1,157
- Edit My Images
- No
Thanks! Totally get where you're coming from. I love going into shade and exposing for skin (especially on grey days, and almost always with the bride's portraits) as it gives a kinda soft, ethereal look. I also love recovery shots too but only when I find something worth recovering.
- Messages
- 2,038
- Name
- Phil
- Edit My Images
- No
I've not had either of those so can't really comment. I prefer primes so am biased, though I do love my 14-24. From the wider end have a look at the 20mm 1.8/g and the Sigma 35mm 1.4 as an alternative, if you love pixel peeping the Sigma especially is insanely sharp.
- Messages
- 1,157
- Edit My Images
- No
Have you considered the Sigma 24-70mm f2.8 HSM? It's a great lens for the price and you always see them popping up on ebay.
- Messages
- 41,925
- Name
- 'Gramps'
- Edit My Images
- No
I'm only using FX so haven't used the 16-85 ... some people get confused between the poor old 24-120 and the new f4 VR, there is no comparison between the two.