Nikon D750 & D780
- Thread starter Joeturner11
- Start date
- Messages
- 1,106
- Name
- Paul
- Edit My Images
- No
A couple of months ago I bought a slightly used one. It's been great, no issues other than user error in getting to know it. I also have a Tamron 24-70VC which is a great lens. I'd highly recommend it over a Nikon. I think it's just as good and way less expensive.
- Messages
- 2,398
- Name
- Dan
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Cheers for the reply. Def an option for me
How does the Tamron perform straight out of the box? Any MF adjustments? Did you buy grey or UK?
I just have a half a mind on and future problems and it helping that Nikon would be working on their own products.
- Messages
- 23,547
- Name
- Toby
- Edit My Images
- No
Value wise no-one in their right mind would buy the VR version. IQ wise it's supposedly not as good as the non VR version either, at least in terms of sharpness. For me if you need AF speed then go for the Nikon, if not then the Tamron is certainly worth considering. For me the best overall compromise is a used non VR Nikon, which is why I ended up buying one
I bought EU (Amazon Germany I think) as you get a 5 year EU warranty with Tamron vs 1-3 years buying Far East Grey.
I think it was pretty perfect out the box, may have done micro adj with the 750 but I guess that will be variable depending on the body you get matched to the lens anyway?
- Messages
- 1,106
- Name
- Paul
- Edit My Images
- No
I'm in Canada, I bought it from a dealer. I haven't done any adjustments, it works fine as is. When I got it Nikon hadn't come out with a VR version so the Tamron VC was a definite plus. I didn't notice any difference in focus speed (it's been over a year, so, really, I can't remember) but I definitely liked the sooc colour tones of the Tamron over the Nikon. Currently, the Nikon VR version is C $3000 and the Tamron VC version is C $1500. It's a no-brainer for me.
- Messages
- 2,398
- Name
- Dan
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Yep appreciate each lens/camera combination is different. I have first hand experience of the sigma art lenses however which usually need a decent amount of MF adjustment , albeit are stunning once you've got it nailed.
- Messages
- 23,547
- Name
- Toby
- Edit My Images
- No
From my experience Sigma lenses always need a fair bit of AF tuning with Nikon bodies so I won't consider one that's not compatible with the dock anymore.
- Messages
- 23,547
- Name
- Toby
- Edit My Images
- No
This is why it's so important to try these things for yourself as I prefer the rendering of the Nikon, yet you prefer the Tamron. These things are always so individual which is why it's so hard to recommend which is better
I don't like how 'fat' the Tamron feels either tbh.
- Messages
- 1,106
- Name
- Paul
- Edit My Images
- No
This is why it's so important to try these things for yourself as I prefer the rendering of the Nikon, yet you prefer the Tamron. These things are always so individual which is why it's so hard to recommend which is better
Completely agree!
- Messages
- 6,948
- Name
- Rob
- Edit My Images
- Yes
The problem with trying to provide an inherent fault is having a big sample without any bias to that sample make up. That's difficult to do as with Internet forums you are probably more likely to hear from users who have had problems than users that haven't (or owners that either very happy or very happy with no middle ground). The best ones to do this sampling are owners of a large number of same or similar products (and that's rare for cameras/lenses). I've seen threads from Stuart at lens for hire before that compared his actual repairs for similar faults and manufacturers against number of products owned.Great post and I dont disagree with any of the points you have made! I would also comment that Panamoz have reimbursed me for the costs from Nikon and my comments/observations are solely based on the variability with fixing the 'issues' at cost or no cost, as you rightly say however proving a camera has an inherent fault is a far different case than suggesting it may be
The 150,000 shutter value is in someways misleading as it doesn't mean all cameras would reach this value or even get near it. If you read this link it sounds like the 150,000 value isn't a mean time between failures figure either.
http://www.dslrbodies.com/cameras/nikon-and-dslr-camera-faq/what-does-tested-to-150000.html
I do wonder how it's calculated as it's quite likely the majority of cameras would ever reach this value before they are upgraded to the next model. I wonder if this is taken into account in the calculation? Without true MTBF testing it's difficult to say what a true shutter expectation would be. The sad fact is there would always be some that are expected to fail at low actuations, some will reach actuation beyond the rated value and many that will never fail as they never reach their failure actuation value.
The flare and shutter shading issue don't help expectations as we can't be sure if a failure is related to them or not. Without knowing how many shutters failed early on previous models it's difficult to compare the D750. I do feel for everyone that has experienced shutter failures. One of the reasons I haven't sent my D750 for the shutter shading recall is due to the issues several have experienced with repairs.
It's not just the d750 that experienced problems, one of my friends has a D800 with a failed remote connector port. It seems that many have failed in this way but it's difficult to provide it's an inherent fault. The worse of it is the repair is over £450. Whilst it's still possible to use the camera it limits his use as a landscape photographer to s maximum of 30 second exposures and effectively cuts his cameras worth to half it's used value.
- Messages
- 1,353
- Name
- Chris
- Edit My Images
- Yes
+1
Have no fear with Panamoz (despite this morning's scary BBC programme!). I did however have to go to digitalrev for the Tamron 24-70 as Panamoz couldn't tell me when they would have stock. The Tamron will obviously save you some cash which you can put towards a screen protector [emoji28]
My d750 checks out on Nikon site as not being subject to recall, came with latest firmware so I didn't have to update it. That's not to say it won't develop I problem of course, but everything good so far
- Messages
- 23,547
- Name
- Toby
- Edit My Images
- No
What scary BBC program was that?
- Messages
- 23,547
- Name
- Toby
- Edit My Images
- No
The shutter count isn't set in stone which is why I said it's about what's deemed reasonable. I'm sure if a camera has a suggested shutter expectancy (or however they word it) of 150,000 and a camera fails after 5,000 most people and solicitors would deem this as unreasonable. Of course you can then get into the grey area of how a camera's been treated etc etc, but if I had a failure under 50k I'd not be happy and would certainly push it further. My previous D750 had circa 65,000 IIRC with no hint of an error.
- Messages
- 6,948
- Name
- Rob
- Edit My Images
- Yes
At 2k to 3k would be expecting more from it too. Is it UK or grey, how old is it and is it still within the warranty? Have you push it further with Nikon saying it should it's so low you would expect more life expectancy considering that's only just over 1% of Nikon estimated shutter actuation rating? 1% is on the very low side. I would expect there would be a few that would fail at low shutter activations like this but would expect a company to replace as a faulty product.
It's not the same by any means but I've recently had a problem with a canvass print, straight on it looked good but 4 weeks after hanging it I noticed marks visible when looking from the left with brighter daylight from the right. I contacted the printers, sent them photos of the marks, at first they were going to send me a new one and take away the faulty print. A few days later they contacted me to say as it's outside of their 14 day return period they now won't be sending a replacement but will give me a £15 voucher as goodwill. I've yet to reply as I'm still thinking how I should be word the reply. Suffice to say I won't be using their goodwill voucher as I won't be ordering from them again, not due to the likelihood of another poor print but poor customer service when something has gone wrong. To me it's a faulty print (which I've shown by pictures looking from left, straight on and right- marks is only visible from one side with a light source on the opposite) and wasn't something I've done to damage the print.
- Messages
- 6,948
- Name
- Rob
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I agree, I've never like the shutter ratings as without test data to back it up it's a meaningless number. I think you are right it's deemed what is reasonable and this is where it gets complicated due to expected life, type of use it's had and its general condition. If the shutter actuation are only 1% of Nikons shutter rating then clearly something is not right. I sometime think the issue isn't that a product has failed but it's how a company deals with it that really matters. From what's been said so far at 2k-3k it's a poor response, 70k-80k would be different.
I'm no lawyer... but I wonder if you had a case that under Uk Consumer Rights legislation. You might have a fight though. Could be worth contacting your local trading standards and Which, etc.
Remember though that any claim you have is between you and your retailer not between you and Nikon, so if Panamoz have paid up then that's satisfaction according to legislation.
As I commented above, assuming you are wanting to argue under legislation, then it's between you and your retailer not between you and Nikon.
People are probably aware, but there is a Shutter Life Database, though be suspect of any outlier figures...
http://www.olegkikin.com/shutterlife/nikon_d750.htm
http://www.olegkikin.com/shutterlife/nikon_d750.htm
- Messages
- 7,325
- Name
- Graham
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Something like "Ripoff Britain" I managed to watch some, silly that they called a "Grey" a "counterfeit" when they are in fact made by Nikon.
- Messages
- 6,948
- Name
- Rob
- Edit My Images
- Yes
That's an interesting site that I wasn't aware of. The results are the bell shape I would expect but there are more failure at the low end than I would expect. Looking at other cameras apart from the early failures there seems to be a similar bell shape appearance. Being a small sample and it being a voluntary data collect there is the possiblilty the data could potentially capture disgruntled users with earlier failures than a true overall sample. It would be interesting to see a poll of D750 users in this thread but it's unlikely to get a bigger sample than that link. We would need a sample size in the thousands across a varied user base and failures/non failures muddy the results as potentially a non failure could carry on for many thousands more actuation.the survival estimate results is closer to what I was expecting, although 5% failed by 1000 actuation does seem high.
It was bought from Panamoz who have without question been great paying up the invoice value from Nikon without delay so as mentioned it's not about cost to me but quality and service from Nikon (which having been told yesterday the camera would be back with me today seems not to be the case as the repair still shows as 'under repair' and I have had no notification from UPS last night as promised!)
It was under a year old when the first ERR message came up and the camera 'locked up' and because it had the 3 year warranty I didn't worry too much but then it started occurring every day of use so at 13 months I sent it off to Nikon.
The camera, like all my equipment, is treated with kid gloves and has never been dropped/bumped and would have no 'external' cause to potentially have a bearing on the failure and as already stated I would doubt it had been used beyond a couple of thousand shots.
I have never had a shutter failure on any previous Nikon D40/7000/7100/300 etc. that I have owned in the past and this being by far the most expensive body I have purchased it just worries me that the 'talk' on the internet suggests this is far worse than other bodies for the failure rate - I agree that only the problems/negative gets talked about online but that is still a relative number i.e. other cameras with a lot of potentially inherent faults would surely also be highly publicised online but I am not aware/haven't read about it beyond possible the D600 example oil issues?
- Messages
- 23,547
- Name
- Toby
- Edit My Images
- No
Having now seen the full story I do feel that some of your frustrations have been a little unfounded tbh. OK, not great that the camera developed a fault which I know is frustrating. However it is a camera that is out of 'traditional' warranty, Nikon have no obligation to fix it as it is unlikely that it is related to the shutter recall. Panamoz are the ones responsible for the repair and they've done their duty as you'd expect and paid for the repair, I'm not sure what there is to complain about tbh. OK so Nikon communication hasn't been great and you've been waiting a bit longer than you thought. However, there has been a bank holiday and they could have been waiting for parts to come in. Yes you might expect them to have contacted you if there was going to be a delay, but unless they specifically stipulated how long it would take then why would they if they deem it to be within a reasonable amount of time, even if that's not reasonable to you. I know when the flare issue was first reported Nikon told me (because I asked) that turnaround would be 4-6wks IIRC so I waited until turnaround times came down. In that situation Nikon deemed 4-6 weeks a reasonable amount of time.
I know you're frustrated, and its not nice shelling out that kind of money for it to break and then be without it for several weeks, but we also have to put things into perspective, which I know isn't easy when you're the one going through it
I am in agreement with the comment on Panamoz being responsible and they have taking that responsibility, my primary gripe is that Nikon have a product that seems, whether anyone agrees or not, to have a higher than average failure rate for one component. Of course this is my opinion based on 'internet information' rather than fact but nonetheless this is then compounded by irritation on the lack of information and, in my opinion, delays in repairing and advising me of when it would be completed, as stated above even now it seems that despite being told I would receive it back today this is not happening.
The crux of my issue is whether Nikon were aware of a greater propensity of failing shutters than they acknowledged publicly and indeed whether the variety of faults with the shutter are different but related to a lower quality production line on the 750 than other cameras (let's be honest did Nikon ever really acknowledge he D600 oil issue or in fact just bring out the 610 to 'deal with it'?
As you say in the grand scheme of things and life this is no big deal whatsoever and at some point soon I will, I hope, have it back fully repaired [emoji106]
The crux of my issue is whether Nikon were aware of a greater propensity of failing shutters than they acknowledged publicly and indeed whether the variety of faults with the shutter are different but related to a lower quality production line on the 750 than other cameras (let's be honest did Nikon ever really acknowledge he D600 oil issue or in fact just bring out the 610 to 'deal with it'?
As you say in the grand scheme of things and life this is no big deal whatsoever and at some point soon I will, I hope, have it back fully repaired [emoji106]
Just to comment on / backup what @snerkler is saying here but to also expand on (what I believe are) your consumer rights (with the usual caveat that I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice)...
Its annoying when you have a problem ... and as an individual if you have a problem more than once (even just once) with the same company's products you will become cautious. But these are outlier problems. As commented you hear much more about the people who have issues than the ones who don't. How many D750 have been sold? How many have had premature (lets be generous and say 50,000 activations) shutter failures?
If others people have issues with failing shutters at low count then you should be going to your RETAILER / SUPPLIER and not direct to Nikon. Nikon will repair your camera yes, but outside their 1 year warranty (which as the paperwork says does not affect your statutory rights) they will charge you. However you still have recourse to consumer rights legislation but that is a contract between you and the retailer not you and Nikon (or Canon or Olympus or Sony etc) - but you may have to be prepared to fight (contact your local trading standards, Which and Consumer Advice units).
http://www.nikonusa.com/en/service-...ers-of-the-Nikon-D600-Digital-SLR-Camera.html pretty much accepts there is a problem ... and the fact that if you continue to need cleaning they will (afaik) replace the D600 with a D610 indicates they accept there is more than just a mild problem with some D600 cameras. But companies don't make explicit acknowledgements more than they have to ... they are afraid because of over zealous class action type suits.
Its annoying when you have a problem ... and as an individual if you have a problem more than once (even just once) with the same company's products you will become cautious. But these are outlier problems. As commented you hear much more about the people who have issues than the ones who don't. How many D750 have been sold? How many have had premature (lets be generous and say 50,000 activations) shutter failures?
Last edited:
- Messages
- 23,547
- Name
- Toby
- Edit My Images
- No
Yeah, I can understand if they have advised you on a return date and not fulfilled it you have a right to be frustrated/annoyed.
Unfortunately this is just speculation, whether or not it's true I guess we'll never know for sure. Their handling of the D600 fiasco wasn't great and unfortunately it's made 'us' more skeptical of Nikon.
Fingers crossed it won't be long. I do understand your pain though
Last edited:
- Messages
- 1,353
- Name
- Chris
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Just watched it, talk about interchangeable words to make a great story, who needs facts when you have Matt Alwright telling you (and two sad faced Togs) that your grey import DSLR is in fact a fake!
- Messages
- 7,325
- Name
- Graham
- Edit My Images
- Yes
[emoji106] this
- Messages
- 23,547
- Name
- Toby
- Edit My Images
- No
Is that what they actually say? Knowing myself how in this day and age you have to be careful how you advertise, what you say etc etc I'm surprised they've been allowed to get away with such false information. I'll try and watch the program at some point.
A number of times in fact, using the word fake and counterfeit as a substitute for 'grey import' and then throwing in a genuine (ha ha) example of an actual fake P&S Canon camera at the end to legitimise the previous DSLR grey import discussions!
If you skip to the camera story on the link above it's only about 3-4 minutes of the whole programme
Last edited:
- Messages
- 1,353
- Name
- Chris
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I was somewhat bemused by the programme.
First of all that they tried to say canon and Nikon considered grey market cameras fake and wouldn't fix them.....but then they rather mixed that up by suggesting serial numbers where being replaced by the sellers to dupe people. I'm not saying that doesn't happen, but it the businesses selling grey that we are familiar with (rather than some random eBay person) certainly aren't doing this.
The other thing is I just can't believe those two togs were real or that they raise their heads above the parapet in a forum like this. I had no sympathy for them, and can't understand how they couldn't be totally aware of the situation if they had only googled for 10 mins. Who buys from random websites they've never heard of anyway? And to save only a reported £100 on such a high ticket item? They should be greatful they got any product at all IMHO.
So the whole thing felt like scare tactics, didn't feel like a BBC piece at all. Felt like the manufacturers or the HMRC or both had put them up to it.
First of all that they tried to say canon and Nikon considered grey market cameras fake and wouldn't fix them.....but then they rather mixed that up by suggesting serial numbers where being replaced by the sellers to dupe people. I'm not saying that doesn't happen, but it the businesses selling grey that we are familiar with (rather than some random eBay person) certainly aren't doing this.
The other thing is I just can't believe those two togs were real or that they raise their heads above the parapet in a forum like this. I had no sympathy for them, and can't understand how they couldn't be totally aware of the situation if they had only googled for 10 mins. Who buys from random websites they've never heard of anyway? And to save only a reported £100 on such a high ticket item? They should be greatful they got any product at all IMHO.
So the whole thing felt like scare tactics, didn't feel like a BBC piece at all. Felt like the manufacturers or the HMRC or both had put them up to it.
Last edited:
- Messages
- 23,547
- Name
- Toby
- Edit My Images
- No
Which we all know is totally untrue
Agreed
Also the TOG with the D7000 who was a 'pro' wedding photographer, really?!?!?!?!?
- Messages
- 4,605
- Name
- Kris
- Edit My Images
- No
Finally found some bluebells. Didn't get the expressions I wanted and a little rushed so found another place for tomorrow morning hopefully..
- Messages
- 23,547
- Name
- Toby
- Edit My Images
- No
What makes you think he wasn't a pro tog?
No back up body would signal that to me from the start of the piece/interview
- Messages
- 23,547
- Name
- Toby
- Edit My Images
- No
Had my first issue with ex-pro batteries today. One of my fully charged D750 ones is actually only showing 84% and registering 329 shots when viewed in the battery info in camera So either it's miscommunicating with the camera, won't hold full charge anymore, or miscommunicating with the charger and saying it's full when it's not.
So either it's miscommunicating with the camera, won't hold full charge anymore, or miscommunicating with the charger and saying it's full when it's not.
- Messages
- 5,006
- Name
- Tim
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Finally found some bluebells. Didn't get the expressions I wanted and a little rushed so found another place for tomorrow morning hopefully..
Smashed it, lovely shot!
- Messages
- 4,605
- Name
- Kris
- Edit My Images
- No
Thanks Tim. I'm not totally happy with them, I didn't recce the place and just went with a small patch of bluebells but into the sun was a bonus (was told there was a better showing than there was). A few of the better expressions weren't that sharp for some reason. I had the OCF gear with me as was expecting a dark woodland scene but the light was lovely for a backlit shot. Just quick edits, I'll have another faff at some point and clean up the stray hairs. The rest are on my Flickr.