Nikon D750 & D780

Just seen, it WILL, and DOES have scene modes.... so suck it up people :)
 
Pookeyhead said:
It will kick the sh1t out of the ancient, outclassed long in the tooth, past it's sell by date, crusty old D700.
Click to expand...

All my photos from now on will be crap. And there I was thinking that it's not the camera, but the photographer... :(
 
Pookeyhead said:
Just sick of hearing people moan about every new camera released lately, and I'm sick of hearing people bang no about a "proper" D700 replacement, or a "proper" D300 replacement. The D750 will VASTLY outperform a D700 in every conceivable way... scene modes or not.
Click to expand...

Part of the problem I'd say is that the D700/5D2 fanboy war went on for so many years that some people became totally entrenched in pushing the specs of their camera as the perfect imaging tool, anything less than those specs updated isnt going to met with approval by them.
 
Ed Sutton said:
All my photos from now on will be crap. And there I was thinking that it's not the camera, but the photographer... :(
Click to expand...

My bird shots are going to be spectacular once I pick up the Nikon 600mm f4 that I bought a few weeks ago ….. it's with my son at the moment in the UK, but he reckons that I won't be able to carry it ……. must get an assistant, (as many of the greats had), and I'll just direct the shots whilst eating my sandwiches.
 
Ed Sutton said:
All my photos from now on will be crap. And there I was thinking that it's not the camera, but the photographer... :(
Click to expand...

You know me better than that... but nice try at the cheap shot. No new camera will make you a better photographer, no, but clearly this will utterly outclass the D700 in every way.. TECHNICALLY.... it will do nothing for your ability as a photographer, no.
 
DPReview certainly rate the Auto Fucus capability....
"The D750 inherits a version of the 51-point Multi-CAM 3500FX AF system that we've seen used in the D800/E and D810 but its 'II' version is actually more sensitive - rated down to -3EV. We haven't been able to really get a feel for how much difference this makes in normal use but in theory, the D750 should offer superior AF reliability in poor light compared to the D810 and D4S, which is quite something (and which might prompt more than a few D800 owners to 'upgrade' to the D750)."
 
Joeturner11 said:
Yes the D700 is a old camera now but doesn't mean it still can't take good images
Click to expand...

I never said it couldn't. I just said it's old.. and outclassed by a large number of other cameras these days. A decent photographer can make a decent image with anything. However... if the D700 is all that... why are so many D700 owners moaning about every new camera because it's not a "D700 replacement"? They did so when the D800 was launched, the D610 and now with the D750. If the D700 is so great, why don't they just shut the **** up if it's so great?
 
Pookeyhead said:
You know me better than that... but nice try at the cheap shot. No new camera will make you a better photographer, no, but clearly this will utterly outclass the D700 in every way.. TECHNICALLY.... it will do nothing for your ability as a photographer, no.
Click to expand...
:D

The sensor's undoubtedly better tech. But the shell around it, not so much. Ergonomics matter as much/more to some people than the pursuit of IQ perfection. Which is where some of the dissatisfaction clearly lies.
 
sk66 said:
VASTLY? In every conceivable way?
I seriously doubt it...
Click to expand...

(Shrug)... AF will be better. Noise handling will be better. Resolution is obviously better, dynamic range will be better, sharpness by default will be better, data handling will be better... features will be better... What else matters? "pro" build quality? Like you all need that for some reason?


At the end of the day it's just a camera any way... why do people leap to the defence of the D700 like I've just called their wife a minger or something? It's old... it's tired, and it's not that great any more. Get over it... move on. There are much better cameras around.

Ed Sutton said:
:D

The sensor's undoubtedly better tech. But the shell around it, not so much. Ergonomics matter as much/more to some people than the pursuit of IQ perfection. Which is where some of the dissatisfaction clearly lies.
Click to expand...

Then buy a D810. Oh forgot.... files are too big.....

Just no pleasing some people.
 
Last edited:
Pookeyhead said:
I never said it couldn't. I just said it's old.. and outclassed by a large number of other cameras these days. A decent photographer can make a decent image with anything. However... if the D700 is all that... why are so many D700 owners moaning about every new camera because it's not a "D700 replacement"? They did so when the D800 was launched, the D610 and now with the D750. If the D700 is so great, why don't they just shut the **** up if it's so great?
Click to expand...

I think that you have to accept David that gear is important to some of us, whether we are good or bad photographers……. just as i accept that my Leica M3 or even M8 or my LTM has taken some wonderful images both in the hands of the skilled but also the hands of the unskilled ……. I regard a lot of my "good" images as being partly a question of luck and right time/right place

But lets not get onto that …….. as I said I'm waiting for the New D650 before I make my mind up ……. whilst still drooling over images of the D4S
 
BillN_33 said:
I think that you have to accept David that gear is important to some of us
Click to expand...

Only because you "drool" over cameras instead of treating them like tools.. which they are.
 
I think the lightness of the body, combined with the articulated LCD screen. Is going to be a dream to use. Having grown up with SLRs in the 80s I never thought I needed one until I tried it. Just think of the possibilities with the wifi. Put the camera up in a tree with a wide angle lens looking into a birds nest. Use the app to
Monitor what's going on, take a photo. Time lapse photography etc. there are lots of creative potentials to be exploited. However, the camera is as only creative as your imagination and your knowledge on how to use it.
 
Last edited:
Pookeyhead said:
Only because you "drool" over cameras instead of treating them like tools.. which they are.
Click to expand...

I "drool" over many things - we will eat moules-frites in about 30 mins

I do treat my cameras as "tools" always have, but I can also "drool" over them especially if I have not got them ........ as I have said to you on a number of occasions and in the end tried to explain in a number of ways ....... my cameras are part of the processing of my nature watching and I record images of what I have seen for record purposes ...... they are a tool just as my "bins" are a tool ....... I could bird watch with my eyes only, but at my age especially, x 7's, x 8's and maybe x 10's are really useful and enable my bird watching to be far more enjoyable ....... plus I can just listen to birds, but recording of their calls does help me to expand my interest ....... so therefore a camera, long, (expensive) lens, good binoculars, (I have 4 pairs), and a small tape recorder really help me to enjoy what I love......... and that's before we get onto camo clothing etc., etc.

I don't take my expensive kit out to "show off" - most of the time there is no one around - and I certainly would not carry all the needed stuff around with me ...... if it was not needed.

It is a pity that you cannot share other people's views
 
Last edited:
All this because I called the D700 old and past it's prime... LOL... seriously.
 
gadgeteer said:
Christ there's some whinging going on in this thread. All the usual fluff about "oh it's not a pro body". Just what do you do with your camera gear? Do you hammer nails with them or something? I've dropped my D600, taken it to the beach, got it wet in a rainstorm in Thailand and it still hasn't missed a beat.
Click to expand...


People can say whatever they want, wouldn't be much point to a discussion forum otherwise. Moaning about the moaning only contributes to it, ironically.

Pookeyhead said:
Just seen, it WILL, and DOES have scene modes.... so suck it up people :)
Click to expand...


I personally couldn't give a rat's that it has scene modes. The dial looks to be just cheap and tacky to use, like the one on the D600 - feels horrible towards the one on say the D800. Otherwise, it does the job I guess.
 
Last edited:
Simplythebeast said:
DPReview certainly rate the Auto Fucus capability....
"The D750 inherits a version of the 51-point Multi-CAM 3500FX AF system that we've seen used in the D800/E and D810 but its 'II' version is actually more sensitive - rated down to -3EV. We haven't been able to really get a feel for how much difference this makes in normal use but in theory, the D750 should offer superior AF reliability in poor light compared to the D810 and D4S, which is quite something (and which might prompt more than a few D800 owners to 'upgrade' to the D750)."
Click to expand...
How on earth can they rate the AF when theyre only quoting the Nikon distro crap
 
Last edited:
Pookeyhead said:
I never said it couldn't. I just said it's old.. and outclassed by a large number of other cameras these days. A decent photographer can make a decent image with anything. However... if the D700 is all that... why are so many D700 owners moaning about every new camera because it's not a "D700 replacement"? They did so when the D800 was launched, the D610 and now with the D750. If the D700 is so great, why don't they just shut the **** up if it's so great?
Click to expand...
FFS David really.
 
Pookeyhead said:
I never said it couldn't. I just said it's old.. and outclassed by a large number of other cameras these days. A decent photographer can make a decent image with anything. However... if the D700 is all that... why are so many D700 owners moaning about every new camera because it's not a "D700 replacement"? They did so when the D800 was launched, the D610 and now with the D750. If the D700 is so great, why don't they just shut the **** up if it's so great?
Click to expand...
nowt wrong with my d700 just sent it to nikon for a nice shiney service :):)
 
Pookeyhead said:
(Shrug)... AF will be better. Noise handling will be better. Resolution is obviously better, dynamic range will be better, sharpness by default will be better, data handling will be better... features will be better... What else matters? "pro" build quality? Like you all need that for some reason?
Click to expand...
Unless they've made some kind of leap in sensor technology the "better" will be fairly marginal and will be "better" for the same reasons the D6xx/D8xx is better than the D700... larger file sizes recorded with more pixels.
But the AF could be more significant. I'm not too sold on that as my D810 isn't noticeably better than my D4 (the contrary actually) and I'm not too sure my D4 is noticeably better than my D3 was.
And I have no idea about other features that may be an improvement. Interestingly they've left the AA filter so there will be less benefit of the high MP's than with the D810 (but it will still be a resolution increase if you make use of it).

Some "negatives" of the D750 vs D700
slower max shutter
slower x-sync
slower max fps / expensive grip w/ no fps boost
no AF-on
fewer "direct access" buttons/switches
larger files for minor gains (DR/ISO/etc)

How much does any of this matter? That's up to you. I might buy the D750 as my only camera if I had to make that choice; I think it's nicely positioned... or I might buy a used D3s instead (they've started to sell for comparable prices).

Edit: I'm not sure I would say that the D750 doesn't have pro build quality... maybe not "pro styling." It's supposed to be weather sealed same as the D700/8xx's... the flippy screen might be a weak point there though. CF and magnesium...should be plenty durable.
 
Last edited:
Pookeyhead said:
Then buy a D810. Oh forgot.... files are too big.....

Just no pleasing some people.
Click to expand...

For most people the files are too big. Print journalism doesn't need 36mp. No web uses require that size file. Nobody printing to A3 (or even a bit more) needs them. 12mp is enough for most purposes, and 24mp is more than plenty. So who does need all those tiny dots on 35mm sensor? IQ obsessives? People who would really should be using medium format but can't afford it? :confused:

As you have said the D700 is getting long in the tooth, which is why some people would like to replace their with something similar in build and performance, not one or the other. Kind of like the way a lot of people buy a new car which is essentially the same as their old one - just not so worn out.
 
When I had a D700 people on forums used to moan and wish it had as many megapixels as the 5D MK II. I like the Nikon range of cameras and they seem to be differentiating them enough to appeal to different users.
 
dinorock said:
nowt wrong with my d700 just sent it to nikon for a nice shiney service :):)
Click to expand...


I never said there was anything WRONG with it.

Gary Coyle said:
No David, its because yet again you diss EVERYONE elses opiion, wants and needs like only yours counts and you rant and rave like a spanked and abused public schoolboy.

Opinions count, but to you, just not anyone elses.
Click to expand...

The only thing I'm "dissing" is the way everyone slags off every new camera these days because it's doesn't have every single feature they want, or doesn't EXACTLY replace the camera they have. Given the stupid amount of camera releases from Nikon lately, it's clear they are doing their best to please everyone, but it's clear that some people just can't be satisfied. There's a perfectly good D700 replacement in the D810.. but no... files too big... so they want the D810, but a 24MP version.... etc etc... and when the D750 isn't it.. EXACTLY.... moan, moan, moan.. it's pathetic. If you can't find something to fit your needs in the Nikon range.. just give up... you'll never be happy.

Ed Sutton said:
For most people the files are too big. Print journalism doesn't need 36mp. No web uses require that size file.
Click to expand...

Then resize it. If you don't have the time because you have to upload images on the fly.. press for example, then you'll be shooting in JPEG anyway... just select 3680 x 2456 and get on with it.


Ed Sutton said:
Nobody printing to A3 (or even a bit more) needs them. 12mp is enough for most purposes, and 24mp is more than plenty.
Click to expand...

What's wrong with having more than you need? Just resize it. Hardly a reason to suggest it's not a D700 replacement.


Ed Sutton said:
As you have said the D700 is getting long in the tooth, which is why some people would like to replace their with something similar in build and performance, not one or the other
Click to expand...


So.. the D810 then. Similar in performance and build. Just bigger files.... which is not exactly a problem is it.

Ed Sutton said:
. Kind of like the way a lot of people buy a new car which is essentially the same as their old one - just not so worn out.
Click to expand...

I doubt they'd be happy with the D700 "replacement" was 12mp, or didn't offer better noise performance, or dynamic range... so no, they don't want the same but not worn out at all.

Laudrup said:
When I had a D700 people on forums used to moan and wish it had as many megapixels as the 5D MK II.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Just no pleasing some people.
 
Last edited:
Don't play the politician, David. :rolleyes: Who DOES need 36mp files from a 35mm sensor? Who is it aimed at? It can't really be the majority of DSLR users.
 
David, you obviously know much about photography and you have a lot to offer and contribute, and, many of us sense this even if we do not know it as a fact. You probably produce good, great or whatever images, I have no idea, and I am sure that you can demonstrate that, but do not judge everyone by your own preferences as many other people could be equally knowledgeable, skilled or experienced and are quite happy to share and discuss other peoples preferences without necessarily accepting that these would be their preferences.

Come on David, just think about it …… try to give advice and help in a way that is more acceptable than it is condenscending - some threads are more about the "banter" than the technicalities or whatever …… from a lot of your other posts that I have read you do get near to doing this.
 
Gary Coyle said:
How on earth can they rate the AF when theyre only quoting the Nikon distro crap
Click to expand...
It would seem they are making an assumption that because it is a mark two version and because it is rated down to -3EV it should be a superior AF system in low light. We will have to wait and see if that is the case.
 
Its going to be a good camera - just not the one I'm looking for...

Seems like it will be an D810 or whatever its called next year..
 
Well I have ordered one so I hope the NHS can make me hand smaller before it arrives.
 
sk66 said:
Isn't -3EV "stub your toe" dark? I mean, that's just this side of black. Not so sure how useful that really will be, but maybe it will be able to focus thru ND filters.
Click to expand...
Yep, basically the edge of what the human eye can see in, but I prefer your description :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top