New nikon FF action camera

decigallen said:
I imagine it's because of how sRAW works - it seems to average 4mp into 1mp so it was always going to be 9mp. 9mp wouldn't bother me so much but I'd have liked it to have been 14bit.
Click to expand...

I was thinking more of how Canon do it, with small and medium RAWs. It still baffles me why Nikon didn't do that in the D800, it would have made a much more versatile camera. Or as you suggested they could have split the line off into 24 and 36 mp models. Either way I think they would have sold many more cameras that way.
 
I thought the same until reading a justification for it somewhere. Apparently Canon's mRAW isn't really RAW at all and that the images lose a lot of DR.

I agree that they'd have sold more cameras with a split mp lineup. Can you imagine they released a fast 16/24mp D800 beside a slower 36mp D800e? So many bases would've been covered and the 5Dmkiii would've gotten a bit of a kicking. It would've been pretty forward thinking (Sony have gone on to do it since) and covered pretty much most digital photography disciplines.
 
Joeturner11 said:
Looks like it will finally be the D700 replacement, Do you reckon there price it in the middle of the D610 and D810 price at around 2k?
Click to expand...

Seems likely. Can't see how else they could price it. Nikon are really flooding the FF market at the moment!
 
viewfromthenorth said:
I'm not in the market for a new camera, but a direct replacement for the D700 would be the only thing to tempt me away from my D700.
Click to expand...

Why would they try to upgrade the best camera they have produced in it's class?
 
medwaygreen said:
Why would they try to upgrade the best camera they have produced in it's class?
Click to expand...

Because it's 5 year old technology and therefore by today's standards Neolithic, and therefore in the minds of many (not me) no longer capable of capturing a decent image?
 
medwaygreen said:
Why would they try to upgrade the best camera they have produced in it's class?
Click to expand...

Because it lags behind in MP count and high ISO performance now. Unfortunately, it doesn't sound like it'll be for me if the body is smaller. I hate those piddly little bodies because I'm left eye dominant and a BBF shooter. Smaller bodies mean my thumb pocks me in the eye.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BBR
medwaygreen said:
Why would they try to upgrade the best camera they have produced in it's class?
Click to expand...


Because its 6 year old technology. Which doesn't make it any less capable but does male it a bit of a dinosaur in tech terms. Its not been sold for a couple of years and does now lag in areas like DR and ISO.
 
Im not really seeing what this offers over the d610 at this price or over the d810.
Over D610 you will get a better body ,AF system and fps probably… cons -knowing nikon the sensor will be exactly the same,price increase.
Over D810 you will get fps and lower MP if thats what you want, lower price … cons less MP, I'm sure DR is lower and Iso is no better

Knowing what nikon has done recently there will be something crippling this to allow its lower price point, whether they take away a function or just use the now 2 year old d600 sensor in a third camera but with the new processor and like the d810 say it does so much more when in fact by the look of it doesn't.

I was hoping for what i would have called a real d700 replacement.. D4 mini 16mp, high fps and better hi iso.

This is going to get flack what ever way they go i guess.
 
I have seen some absolutely stunning photographs taken with D700 and D3, I am sure we all have. Now that 'technology has moved on' are those photographs now not as good?

I think you would need to be a very very good photographer indeed to have 'outgrown' either of the aforementioned cameras.

A good analogy perhaps is cars, where you have a sports car that can do 180 mph but you nvere do more than 100 mph but you still feel the need to change it for the new one that can do 200 mph. It seems to me that this sort of GAS has very little to do with photography.
 
BBR said:
I have seen some absolutely stunning photographs taken with D700 and D3, I am sure we all have. Now that 'technology has moved on' are those photographs now not as good?

I think you would need to be a very very good photographer indeed to have 'outgrown' either of the aforementioned cameras.

A good analogy perhaps is cars, where you have a sports car that can do 180 mph but you nvere do more than 100 mph but you still feel the need to change it for the new one that can do 200 mph. It seems to me that this sort of GAS has very little to do with photography.
Click to expand...
I haven't outgrown my D700, I certainly don't do it justice.

But I have noticed times where a better camera may have helped (primarily AF related). ISO performance isn't just about noise either, the colours at higher ISO look to have improved from what I have seen, not a deep investigation but something I've noticed. Seeing as I often shoot north of ISO 2000 that's a nice thing to have rather than wang up vibrance in post. Throw in new shiny things like group AF, video, better liveview, better megapixels, probably increased DR through the whole ISO range, etc and the would be nice list grows long.

Also my D700 is god knows how old now, I got it used. The shutter count is not rocketship numbers but it's growing. The rubber is showing it's age and starting to come away in places. Batteries were all used and some aren't that fantastic either. One of my EN-EL4a only managed 400 shots for 85% usage over a week on holiday which is pants for that battery.

The newer bodies improved this area, do I need a Dwhatever? not really. Will I get one anyway, yup.
 
pmac said:
Im not really seeing what this offers over the d610 at this price or over the d810.
Over D610 you will get a better body ,AF system and fps probably… cons -knowing nikon the sensor will be exactly the same,price increase.
Over D810 you will get fps and lower MP if thats what you want, lower price … cons less MP, I'm sure DR is lower and Iso is no better

Knowing what nikon has done recently there will be something crippling this to allow its lower price point, whether they take away a function or just use the now 2 year old d600 sensor in a third camera but with the new processor and like the d810 say it does so much more when in fact by the look of it doesn't.

I was hoping for what i would have called a real d700 replacement.. D4 mini 16mp, high fps and better hi iso.

This is going to get flack what ever way they go i guess.
Click to expand...

The full specification hasent even been anounced yet or the name confimed by Nikon so it's impossible to discern the advantages (if any).

It does look like Nikon is finally listening to what their customers want and giving some serious attention to the FF market.
 
The23rdman said:
Because it lags behind in MP count and high ISO performance now. Unfortunately, it doesn't sound like it'll be for me if the body is smaller. I hate those piddly little bodies because I'm left eye dominant and a BBF shooter. Smaller bodies mean my thumb pocks me in the eye.
Click to expand...

Exactly the same here. If it's like the d600 then it's a non starter.
 
BBR said:
I have seen some absolutely stunning photographs taken with D700 and D3, I am sure we all have. Now that 'technology has moved on' are those photographs now not as good?

I think you would need to be a very very good photographer indeed to have 'outgrown' either of the aforementioned cameras.

A good analogy perhaps is cars, where you have a sports car that can do 180 mph but you nvere do more than 100 mph but you still feel the need to change it for the new one that can do 200 mph. It seems to me that this sort of GAS has very little to do with photography.
Click to expand...
There are great photos shot with a Nikon fe but doubt many still use on a professional basis.

There are times I would like more mp and better ISO.
 
Good price if thats right?
Nikons Pro bodies have a different feel to anything I've ever used, you feel like you could knock nails in with em!
I would think if that price is to believed, we will be looking at something a little below that level but still solid, I have owned two D3's/D800's which were tough as old boots and a D600/610, which were not but still adequate. Nikon's policy is very hierarchical, it will be interesting to see how it "does not tread on other models toes", so to speak, may this be a dual D300/D700 replacement, tempting D300 users to Dark (Large) side???
 
medwaygreen said:
Why would they try to upgrade the best camera they have produced in it's class?
Click to expand...

Because it's nearly 7 years old, 12MP and essentially outclassed by almost everything? 7 years is a long time for a digital camera to remain relevant. Pro Nikon bodies were superseded by better models evry 7 to 10 years when they were film based. The D700 is just very long in the tooth now.
 
Being all modern and everything do you think we'll get built in wifi and GPS? Maybe 4K video and a flappy screen too? USB 3 would be nice too...
Being branded an action Camera I see the chance of a D400 withering by the minute but what do I know? It'd be just like em to bring that out a Photokina too!
 
BBR said:
I have seen some absolutely stunning photographs taken with D700 and D3, I am sure we all have. Now that 'technology has moved on' are those photographs now not as good?
Click to expand...

The D700 and D3 are still fantastic cameras, I personally think anything D700 + Above all you need is good glass, I have seen lots of images taken with a D700 and 600mm f/4 that are 10x better than guys with D4's, People need to stop chasing after the latest tech body and throw the money towards more glass
 
Blank_Canvas said:
$ 2,500 according to one website. About £1,504
Click to expand...
Nah, dollar prices never translate exactly, if nothing else because of tax differences, plus the usual UK mark up. More likely to be somewhere north of £2000.
 
I'm a back button focuser and use the D610 as a backup body with no problems. You just configure the AE lock to AF-ON only. Easy. I've absolutely no problem with the size of the body at all and my main body is a behemoth of a D4. The only issue is certain functionality lacking and this could be rectified with firmware tweaks.

With regards to the D700, it's still a very capable camera but when put side by side against a modern Nikon it falls away. It's resolution, DR and image quality pale in comparison to even the D610. And only one card slot makes it a nervy camera to use for pro shoots. Nikon really should've replaced it 3 or 4 years ago alongside the D3s.

If the D750 is essentially a D610 with pro-AF, better buffer and better controls it will be great.
 
I saw a post on the FM forums regarding this camera and different sensor's sony has released, included a 24mp dx sensor with on sensor PDAF…. Could this FF part be a big mistake?
7dmk2 being announced soon so a DX would make more sense. maybe a 24mp DX camera with d810 type body using AF from a nikon 1 camera… would be fast action anyway.
 
I think the name of it (if accurate) gives a pretty strong indication that it'll be FX. If nikon was going pro-DX they'd likely place it as a D310/D350 - the D300 was as much loved and revered as the D700 and it would make more sense to use that name.

Can see the Sony sensor from the D610 being in the D750 but with improved AF and processor.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ST4
Pookeyhead said:
I still don't get why having more resolution than you need is a problem. What problems do you think a 36MP image will give you that a 24MP image won't?
Click to expand...
Sorry for late response, been away at Edinburgh festival.

I don't think a 36mp image would give me any image problems, but I often shoot between 2-3k shots in one w/end and I'm not much of a cropper, so 24mp is more than enough for me. I already use a D7100 and 24mp imo is way too much for a crop sensor but would be more suitable with a FF sensor. If I was doing studio portraits, landscapes or anything tripod based (where I took several mins to set up for the shot) then a 36mp would probably be more to my liking. Apart from the odd long exposure, the other 98% of my shooting is handheld of moving subjects. A D750 would be better suited to my style/subject shooting.
 
decigallen said:
With regards to the D700, it's still a very capable camera but when put side by side against a modern Nikon it falls away. It's resolution, DR and image quality pale in comparison to even the D610. And only one card slot makes it a nervy camera to use for pro shoots. Nikon really should've replaced it 3 or 4 years ago alongside the D3s.

If the D750 is essentially a D610 with pro-AF, better buffer and better controls it will be great.
Click to expand...

If the D600/610 had been given the 51pt AF system and 1/8000 shutter sync I would likely have purchased one instead of a D7100.

I was using my D700 heavily at the w/end and even my DX D7100 comfortably beats it for DR at it's native/lower ISO levels. The darks and contrasts on the D700 are looking flat these days in comparison. The D700 still produces the more keepers though as the AF on D700 is still the better.

Even if D750 is in a D610 style body (but with similar D810 button layout and no scene dial) I'd still be quite happy as I get sick of lugging around a heavy gripped D700 all day with 70-200mm attached. I don't go hiking up mountains or drop my cameras so don't necessarily need the pro build throughout, but would still take it if it's there.
 
I dont miss the 1/8000 shutter speed as it goes down to 100 ISO, so in practical terms its no different in that respect. If you're a centre point focuser the af keeps up with the d700 but isn't a patch on the d4. The array of points is a problem though.

Since switching from d700/d3s to d610/d4 I've altered my shooting style to take advantage of the amazing dr. You can get so much detail from the shadows. Ill try and find a few examples where I've pushed it to the limit.
 
Joeturner11 said:
Most likely, Don't think there will ever be a D400 and I think the D600 killed the hopes of there being a D300, as the consumer DSLR went full frame, I personally don't think your see a Pro Nikon body with a DX sensor anytime soon...
Click to expand...

Me neither and that will not please the birders who will have to buy a D750 and a teleconvertor for their fast long lenses if they don't already have one, (Birders can't have enough focal length!), those that use the long sigma zooms and that new Tamron will be effectively stuffed, unless Nikon do something with the buffer on any D7100 update, Nikon's hierarchical system (Deliberate crippling!) would argue against there, gently forcing you to FF and an £8000 lens...

viewfromthenorth said:
Nah, dollar prices never translate exactly, if nothing else because of tax differences, plus the usual UK mark up. More likely to be somewhere north of £2000.
Click to expand...

Agreed the £1500 "Entry" level FF is covered by the D610, the Df is a one off and got rid of all the parts left over from the D600 production fiasco, and raided the spares out of the D4 parts bin. (I really do believe that!) Which leaves a thousand or so quid hole in the range between the D610 and the D810, so £2000 is about right for the UK, or £1999.95 street to you and me...:)

It will still be a very interesting offering and I'm sure it will be a humdinger of a camera but Nikon want to empty your wallet after all...
 
Last edited:
decigallen said:
I'm a back button focuser and use the D610 as a backup body with no problems. You just configure the AE lock to AF-ON only. Easy. I've absolutely no problem with the size of the body at all and my main body is a behemoth of a D4. The only issue is certain functionality lacking and this could be rectified with firmware tweaks.
Click to expand...
You're right eye dominant aren't you? Left eye dominant means your face is in the way of BBF properly on consumer style bodies. I used to be fine with it until I got a pro style body now I just can't get used to the old way.
 
maninsuitcase said:
You're right eye dominant aren't you? Left eye dominant means your face is in the way of BBF properly on consumer style bodies. I used to be fine with it until I got a pro style body now I just can't get used to the old way.
Click to expand...
Lefty here too, and always found the back focus button method awkward, due to my hooter and ugly mug being pressed against the back of the body, though I do see it's value. I wish I could train myself to use the other eye but it's never worked for me, left handed and left eyed, I'm just a freak! ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top