Discussion in 'Nikon' started by tholte, Aug 23, 2014.
Does Nikon finally get it right with the D750?
It looks like it to me.
Not aware that Nikon has released anything about a D750. Where is the information that leads you to the conclusion that Nikon finally got it right?
I can't find anything either. If Nikon has come out with a small camera about the size of the Fuji XT1 with better AF and ISO can go to 1600 with no problem, I'd say maybe they got it right. If the supposed new camera is M43 I'm especially interested.
Kent in SD
Nikon Rumors has the D750 having a 70% chance of being introduced at Photokina. It is a 24 MP, full frame body positioned between the D610 and the D810. Nikon has teased us with an add about an upcoming sports camera. This part is not rumor.
Nikon has teased us with an add about an upcoming sports camera. This part is not rumor.Please provide a link to that teaser - the one on the well-known nikon rumor site (from August 11) certainly is not from Nikon (it says to right below it).
Please provide a link to that teaserMM Nice one from Nikon Rumours, putting up a picture, subscribted : "This is not a nikon teaser", loads of ppl who read to quickly miss the word "not"...
Does Nikon finally get it rightIf they structurally got it wrong, how come so many people use Nikon cameras? Are both D610 and D810 so backwards and foolish that we really need another FX camera, or wouldn't we be served better if Nikon put that R&D budget somewhere else?
If someone doesn't have the budget for a D4s what are his other choices? Surely not D610 or D810 nor the old D300s. So a "small" D4s might do the trick for some sports and action photographers (among others). This product can find a market especially if Canon introduces something similar as rumoured. Nikon wouldn't want to be out of the game.
The thing I like so much about Photo.net is that it does not condone rumors. Please let's stick with that and leave rumors to the other forums. As behind the times as is professed about the D300s, mine sure does a good job. The most I will say is it would be nice to see a replacement for that; Dx, 24mp, ISO 25,000, 10fps, NOT smaller.
Considering there's been no information from Nikon about a D750, and as far as anybody knows there is no such camera,
I don't see how anybody can make a judgment about whether Nikon got it right.
Yup. C.P.M is correct. I went back and read the ad. It's a fake.
Ye of little faith in rumors! We will know for sure in a few weeks, why not hope?
Nikon got it right with D300 and D700. Should have continued that way.
Of course I have no faith with rumor sites. Their purpose is to generate web traffic at all cost in order to sell advertisements and make money; they are not there to provide accurate information to readers. They typically provide half truths and sometimes even deliberately insert wrong information to give themselves further opportunities to provide "corrections" so that they get two additional round of "news/rumor cycles" out of nothing. Another tactic is that they drip a bit of information at a time so that the announcement of one product becomes headline news half a dozen times.
Just like most other people, I read rumor sites once in a while, but I take them with a large grain of salt. Sometimes I am under Nikon NDA myself and their tactic becomes very obvious since I know what the facts are. For example, four years ago, I was under NDA and knew that Nikon was announcing four lenses. The rumor site was tipped off with info for all four. However, they suddenly changed the 28-300mm/f3.5-5.6 AF-S VR for FX to 18-200mm for FX: : http://www.photo.net/casual-conversations-forum/00WtzV
There was no way that they would have gotten correct info for the other three lenses but a technologically impossible 18-200 FX, so I pointed that out on the thread above. Of course, after milking the wrong info for a while, the rumor site turned around and "corrected" themselves. The actual Nikon announcement came a month later: http://www.photo.net/nikon-camera-forum/00X6PA
If you treat rumors as facts, when your wishes are shattered, the disappointment and frustration will be serious. It is unwise to let those rumor sites drag you on an emotional roller coaster ride.
Shun, the Nikon Rumor site I visit places probabilities, some of them pretty low, on all their statements about rumored equipment. They seldom say 100% probable except for some Sony models which they absolutely nailed. Even in the auto industry, accurate information about highly anticipated models is leaked, officially, to the public sometimes a year in advance. BTW, the auto industry is having a record year while DSLRs are slowly losing market share to mirrorless.
Shun, the Nikon Rumor site I visit places probabilities, some of them pretty low, on all their statements about rumored equipment. They seldom say 100% probableSo that is their cover to post a bunch of wrong information, sometimes deliberately? Those probabilities are merely random numbers to cover their back side, not scientifically significant statistics. It doesn't change the fact that they generate false hopes and expectations to benefit themselves, only to get lots of people disappointed. Again, you only have yourself to blame when you fall for those rumors.
Sometimes they are right and sometimes they are wrong. In this particular case, I hope they are right because it looks like the camera I have been looking for to replace my duct-taped D300 that has been in too many blizzards and taken to many falls.
Their purpose is to generate web traffic at all cost in order to sell advertisements and make moneyYup, totally agree to that,!!
But i think both the truthfull sites and rumour sites have their place.. the former for geting / sharing iusefull information, the latter ones for amusement.. Both try to make an income from what they do best, be it information or amusement... and if they do their job well, and they do, i like to visit them both..
It is just the art to use them both to your advantage and know which one to believe....
It's amazing this thread is still running....bizarre to say the least.
I mentioned the rumoured 'D9300' once in a posting and got stomped on...I was told it triggered the photo.net 'bozo' filter. Guess it's been reset now??
"Finally" implies that Nikon has never gotten anything right before. Given that people have been creating amazing photos with Nikon gear
for nearly sixty years, I would say that the company does plenty of things right.
I have been looking for to replace my duct-taped D300 that has been in too many blizzards and taken to many falls.Tim, I don't know exactly what kind of camera you are looking to replace that old D300, and more importantly, what you expect from any future Nikon DSLR. My gut feeling is that the rumor sites will let you down, again.
Personally, I replaced my D300 with the D7000 way back in late 2010. That D7000 has in turn been replaced by a D7100.
My gut feeling is that the rumor sites will let you down, again.Indeed, the Rumour Site in question has absolutely nothing on anything to replace your poor taped-up D300.
Sad, but true....it's a funny old World.
This thread is a heck of a lot more entertaining than your standard "should I use a protective filter" thread.
As long as they don't stick it in one of their prosumer bodies and slap a "flip-up" LCD panel on it, I'd be intrigued.
As long as they don't stick it in one of their prosumer bodies and slap a "flip-up" LCD panel on it, I'd be intrigued.One of the rumours is exactly this.
"Finally" implies that Nikon has never gotten anything right before. Given that people have been creating amazing photos with Nikon gear for nearly sixty years, I would say that the company does plenty of things right.They've certainly got a lot right, but perhaps they should never have 'spoiled' us with the F100, D300 and D700, creating expectations that have rarely been met since. Nikon only really seems to pull out all the stops when under significant pressure from Canon - then they stop worrying less about cannibalising sales from the single digit bodies, and more about losing market share. So here's to a strong, aggressively priced '5D mk IV'...
I have a hard time thinking that my D800's did not get it right. IMHO..lol...
But I am intrigued with the Sony 7 series which offers a camera specific to the needs of low light functionality, something in the middle and then something at high resolution (needing a bit more light). The only thing that really baffles me is why they did not offer an electronic front shutter for the 7R.
Maybe there is not a perfect camera except the one you have in your hand when you want to take a picture.
It is amusing that the D700 is now described as some huge success for Nikon that they have not repeated. Back then, having "only" 12MP was considered to be a major disadvantage behind Canon, who introduced the 21MP 5D Mark II merely a few months after the D700.
Nikon introduced the D700 on July 1, 2008 @ $3000. There was absolutely no shortage at introduction and the price dropped very quickly. By October, Nikon USA offered a $300 rebate and a lot of stores were selling it at $2450 to $2500.
In comparison, the D800 was the hottest thing at launch. Adorama, Amazon, B&H, etc. had huge waiting lists with all sorts of complaints about shortage. I waited two months before my local store was able to fulfill my D800E order in June, 2012.
Most contemporary reviews of the D700 were very positive, recognising the tradeoff between high ISO performance and pixel count, e.g.:
As for the pricing and availability of the D800, that sounds like more of a problem with Nikon USA's supply chain than anything else. I don't think there were huge shortages here in the UK, and the street price had dropped £600 by Christmas:
(to be fair the UK price wasn't exactly a bargain, and there was a pre-launch price hike, sorry correction of an 'internal systems error', giving them plenty of room for discounts).
Nothing wring with the D800 (or D810) and its huge pixel count - it clearly fills a very successful niche, just not quite the same niche as the D700 (hence the interest in a 'D750').
Hey, if you want a current model action camera at less than D4 prices, it's not like Nikon doesn't offer anything - you can
get a Nikon 1 V3
As for the pricing and availability of the D800, that sounds like more of a problem with Nikon USA's supply chain than anything else. I don't think there were huge shortages here in the UK, and the street price had dropped £600 by ChristmasRichard Williams, I am afraid that your memory is not serving you well.
Nikon started shipping the D800 in March, 2012 and the D800 shortage was world wide. See this thread from back then: http://www.photo.net/nikon-camera-forum/00a822
The initial price for the D800 in the UK was high to begin with (at least compared to US prices), but it actually went further up after introduction before it finally went down months later after the shortage was over. The following news article from DPReview in March, 2012 should remind you what happened: http://www.dpreview.com/articles/5314529035/nikon-uk-d4-d800-price-rise
By July 2012, the D800 shortage in the US was pretty much over; at least the D800 was in and out of stock by then so that if there was any wait, it would be no more than a few days. However, according to Rodeo Joe, who posts from the UK, the shortage was still serious over there: http://www.photo.net/nikon-camera-forum/00acIY
Nikon is in the business of making money. Should they create a successor to a camera that they needed to provide a major rebate almost immediately after launch and cannibalize the sale of their flagship camera or one that was initially flying off the shelf for months? I think the choice is very obvious.
^Which is why they won't make a Medium Format Film camera.
I think the ..."Who needs a 9fps FX camera (and can't/won't afford a D4s)?
..........is a very similar question to........
"Who actually needs 36MP?"
The answer, from a business point-of-view, is 'Who cares, as long as we sell them at the price we want'.
...and the D800/D810 is apparently selling nicely.
From a business sense it's either No Sale of a D4s or Sale from a D700 replacement. Which makes more sense. money or no money? There's a balance, sure, but you need two things to make it balance!
If Nikon can't make a D4S and a lesser D4S, called a D750 or whatever, aimed at more-or-less the same market, but slightly lower spec and cheaper, what were they thinking with the D3 & D700? Now, you can say they won't make the same mistake twice, but you gotta say what were they thinking would happen in the first place?
Maybe, the D4S is over priced?
Is comparison of D700 and D800 right? I feel like D600 was D700's replacement. Then question would be: how success of these 2 cameras measure up? Also if D300 successor was D7000 series: how successful was it? Any numbers on cameras sold? There is a huge pressure on nikon (and canon) from smartphone use and (fast improving) mirrorless offers from other makers. Can both companies survive catering only to top end pro photographers who will buy D4, D810? If portrait, school, wedding, product and serious amateur photographers go mirror-less (nikon is not leading in that department) then what?
Is comparison of D700 and D800 right? I feel like D600 was D700's replacement.Sorry, not even close, or we wouldn't have all these complaints about the lack of any upgrade to the D700 (and D300).
As I pointed out earlier, the D700 was initially $3000, the D600 was initially $2100 (and $2000 for the D610). Just that major price difference ~50% should immediately tell you that the D600/D610 is a lower-class camera.
For all practical purposes, the D700 was a "D3 junior" with the same electronics and AF system. Back in 2008, I was all set to buy a D3 until I saw the D700 in person and immediately decided to save some money. I bought a D700 on the spot. At least in my case, the D700 literally took sales away from the D3. Meanwhile, the D600 has Nikon's 2nd-tier AF system and the consumer-style controls similar to the D90, D7000, and D7100. The D600/D610 clearly posts no threats to any D4/D4S sales.
Hindsight is 20/20. Looking back, in 2008 Nikon lacked a $2500 FX body to counter Canon's 5D, which had been introduced 3 years earlier in 2005, and the subsequent 5D Mark II. Borrowing the existing design and electronics from the D3 was a quick, stop-gap solution, even though it lacked pixel count and hurt D3 sales. Now that they have numerous FX options, I don't see Nikon selling an equivalent "D4 junior" at a 50% discount from the flagship model again.
The landscape is indeed very different today. Smartphone cameras have pretty much wiped out most digicam (i.e. Coolpix) sales. Mirrorless cameras sell well in Japan but not necessarily elsewhere. As far as I know most companies that specialize in mirrorless cameras are still losing money (at least in that line of business). I can see why Canon and Nikon are not eager to jump in all the way. Meanwhile, DSLR is mature technology. The days that most DSLR users upgrade their bodies every year or two are gone.
Nikon started shipping the D800 in March, 2012 and the D800 shortage was world wide. See this thread from back then: http://www.photo.net/nikon-camera-forum/00a822But does this mean that the D800 was 'flying off the shelves', or that Nikon had simply announced a shipping date that was much earlier than they were actually geared up to fulfill in quantity? (I would guess that the actual global sales figures aren't something that's widely known outside Nikon).
The following news article from DPReview in March, 2012 should remind you what happenedCareful reading of my post might suggest I didn't need reminding! ('to be fair the UK price wasn't exactly a bargain, and there was a pre-launch price hike, sorry correction of an 'internal systems error', giving them plenty of room for discounts'). We can give Nikon the benefit of the doubt about the 'systems error' and assume that the launch price was always meant to be £2600 not £2400. In practice, there were retailers advertising it at £2400-£2500 even after the price hike:
By August, street prices were dropping, hitting £2000 in October and dropping to around £1900 by the end of November, 8 months after the official availability date (and perhaps 4 months after it became more readily available, if Rodeo Joe was still having trouble finding one in July). That's a drop of 20-27%, depending on which launch price we believe, pretty much in line with what happened to the D700 over here (which I think went down from £2000 to somewhere in the £1500-1600 range before prices began to go back up due to currency changes, or whatever). There seem to be similar proportional drops in the sale prices of most Nikon models in the first 3-9 months - I'm not sure that we should read too much into the exact timing, which could depend on several factors. Low demand can lead to an early price drop, but so can over-supply. High demand can keep the price up, but so can production difficulties, leading to under-supply.
Would anyone like to open a book on the future price of the D810? Availability doesn't seem to be a problem at the moment. I'd probably bet on some reasonable deals by the January sales.
Richard, do you now remember that there was serious D800 shortage world wide in the first half of 2012, including the UK? As far as I could tell, the D800 was selling very well in early 2012 because quite a few owners were already discussing the so called left AF issue on various forums by late March.
Unlike the D700, which was selling @ some 18% discount after merely three months in the US, US prices for the D800 held steady till the end. Nikon provided some $200 rebate briefly in 2013 but the price went back up afterwards, until the D810 was announced. Needless to say, Nikon is much happier to sell a DSLR at $3000 than $2450.
Currently on Amazon.com, the D810 is #3 along all DSLR sales. The other 4 among the top 5 are all bottom-of-the-line Canon Rebel and Nikon D3300 models that sell for $500 or so. Since the D810 is a fairly new model, the initial demand should be higher, but for a $3300 DSLR that is at best a modest upgrade from the earlier D800 (rather than a totally new, breakthrough design) to have sales volumes on par with $500 consumer models, it is obviously doing very well: http://www.amazon.com/Best-Sellers-Camera-Photo-DSLR-Cameras/zgbs/photo/3017941/ref=zg_bs_nav_p_1_p
Incidentally, 18 among the top 20 on Amazon's list are either Canon or Nikon DSLRs. Somehow Amazon puts mirrorless cameras into the same category as DSLRs. Among the top 20, there is exactly one mirrorless camera. Therefore, I don't think mirrorless is exactly taking over any time soon.
BTW, Amazon is showing some real-time data. While I was reading this, the D810 was jumping between #3 and #4. Therefore, the stats could be slightly different by the time you read that link.
"Availability doesn't seem to be a problem at the moment." Richard, you are correct, but I don't know if it was from better inventory management or less demand or both. However, I and many others sold their D800s to help pay for the D810. Check out eBay, it is glutted with used D800s. I question whether the demand for a high MP DSLR has increased or we are just seeing a rotation out of the D800 into the D810. This is a real opportunity for a photo newbie looking to buy a high MP used body.
<<Currently on Amazon.com, the D810 is #3 along all DSLR sales. The other 4 among the top 5 are all bottom-of-the-line Canon Rebel and Nikon D3300 models that sell for $500 or so. Since the D810 is a fairly new model, the initial demand should be higher, but for a $3300 DSLR that is at best a modest upgrade from the earlier D800 (rather than a totally new, breakthrough design) to have sales volumes on par with $500 consumer models, it is obviously doing very well:>>
At the moment. I have to wonder how long that will hold up since it is a new camera. The population of potential buyers can't be big, all in all. I am suprised none of the mirrorless cameras are showing up. That might be because there are so many of them they are diluting the impact of any single model. Or, it might be that cameras are more & more becomming a niche product. People are either just using their cell phones or the 5% (or whatever) that are really into photography skip mirrorless and go to DSLR. It would be interesting to research.
Kent in SD
If the D750 is to the D4s as the D700 was to the D3, then I would expect 16 mp and thus better low-light performance than if it were to come in with 24 mp. In other words, I am hoping for a poor man's D4s: 16 mp and good low light performance in an affordable package.
Some intermediate number of pixels could also be a possibility--if Nikon could get a 20-mp sensor, but I don't expect that. The Canon 6D has done well in low light with 20 mp, and the new Sony FF has only 12--shades of the D3 and D3s!
I'm not saying that Nikon couldn't make a really good low-light camera with 24 mp, but so far no one has really done that to my satisfaction.
I am emphasizing low-light performance in an affordable package because that is what I am looking for. I am not sure what the market is for a poor man's D4s where low light is concerned.
I do suspect that the D750 at least exists, regardless of what its specs turn out to be. We will know soon.
I didn't care for the D700. The output wasn't sharp enough for my taste. Some people have suggested that the anti
aliasing filter on that body was a bit too strong. I don't know if that's actually the case, but it wouldn't surprise me.
The live view implementation on the D700 was horrible - the mirror jumps up and down pointlessly - but other Nikon
bodies of that era shared the same problem.
The D800/800E are amazing cameras that got nearly everything "right" with the possible exception of sluggish auto focus
in dim light.
If, with the emphasis on IF, the leaked specs emerging are true and the price point is right (!), I can see Nikon selling lots of these.
Twin SD slot, both UHS II compatable.
...and if Nikon want to try and get the jump on Canon, possibly 4k as-well.
Why are we even discussing a camera based on a rumour? Five pages (and counting) of pure speculation, wishful thinking and "what I'd like to see Nikon do is....". I know it's been a slow couple of weeks on this forum, but let's keep a sense of proportion guys.
"Why are we even discussing a camera based on a rumour?" Because it's fun Joe! Listen to the rumors about new cars, new Iphones etc., etc. The rumor I really like about the new D750 is that it may have a bokeh enhancer built into the body so I won't have to rely on my existing cheap lenses to get some decent bokeh. Could be a real game changer!
I have to agree with Tim that even if it is mostly BS, it satiates the NAS in us, for a while at least.
But where's the D7200? The expected camera at Photokina...
I don't think they have ever co-released an FX and DX camera together...have they?
Mind you, if it is the D700's true successor and the D7200 has all the 'flaws' that made it NOT the next D300S fixed, it's a mighty interesting pairing they've made!!!
NAS? what's that..
The rumor I really like about the new D750 is that it may have a bokeh enhancer built into the body so I won't have to rely on my existing cheap lenses to get some decent bokeh. Could be a real game changer!Tim, you started this thread by stating that Nikon "finally get it right" with this so called D750. Of course that suggests Nikon has not been getting it right, at least for some time; that in itself is very questionable.
And by stating that Nikon is getting it right this time, you apparently know, or at least you think you know, some specific details about some future cameras. I wonder exactly which features make it right this time. Are you talking about this bokeh enhancer? Hopefully not.
I don't think they have ever co-released an FX and DX camera together...have they?Have you heard of the simultaneous D3 and D300 announcement on 23rd August, 2007? Nikon spent a lot of money to fly plenty of people around the world to Tokyo for the introduction, including Bjorn Rorslett and Ellis Vener .... Who knows how much money Nikon spent for that occasion? Unfortunately, the great recession hit the following year and we haven't seen that kind of spending again: http://www.photo.net/nikon-camera-forum/00MKgI
As I said before, those rumor sites have little creditability. They would hesitate to make things up; a little typo on some web site in some corner is major news for them .... It can be fun if you consider them "entertainment." If you believe in the rumors and are hoping that your dream camera to replace your whatever aging camera is just around the corner, the eventual disappointment will be frustrating.
Doh, I knew there was something nagging the back of my mind!.
So, a FX D750 and DX D7200 'Action Camera' double release in presidented!
.........and they only just missed the 7 year anniversary!
What I like about the rumored specs are: Fully articulated screen and a lighter body. These are enough for me to say "Finally, …"
If any of you have not been able to easily get a quality photo with any of the existing digital SLRs on the market today, this camera is not going to do anything for you except take more money from your wallet.
Marc M, I'm very happy for you.
But, you're obviously not pushing the imaging envelope....
Hello, everyone. I go away for a couple of weeks, and everything goes to hell...
People have been wanting a "D750" for ages. The D800 is actually a lot closer to a D700 successor than many scared off by "I don't want 36MP" would think; the D810 even more so, though I maintain that a "small raw" which was actually useful (enlarged the buffer size rather than reducing it, was significantly smaller than a compressed full resolution file, was editable in-camera, increased the frame rate, was lossless...) would have made a bigger difference. The D600/D610 was obviously a small step back from the D700 in some ways (and a step up in a significant number of others). The gap around the D700 specs is still there, though - like the D300 - the D700 is quite aged technology now. Whether the latest round of rumours are actually based on Nikon's plans or on the dreams of those still wanting a D700 update remains to be seen.
It doesn't make much sense to me to launch a D750 into what, to me, is quite a small gap between the D610 and D810, especially with the Df kicking about. However, the Df didn't make much sense to me either. Nikon hurt the D3 sales significantly with the D700 (like Shun, I might have bought a D3, but bought a D700, so that's at least two data points), but they had the D3s "get out of jail" update. Given the relatively recent D4s, I'd be surprised if they can do the same trick again, but maybe the D4s sales are dropping. It's true that 8fps and 24MP is quite different from 11fps and 16MP, so maybe there's really enough of a market difference to justify both.
Nikon have a problem shifting their DX cameras - the shelves are apparently over-stocked with old models. I could kind of see that if Nikon want to introduce new models, they'd do so in the FX space (and this is more a "D800 replacement" if the D810 is the "D800e replacement") - but they'd still have five FX models active (assuming the D3x is RIP), which is a lot.
Why would Nikon do this? Well, the D700 was a frantic response to the 5D2; the D600 was a response to the 6D. The D800 differed from the 5D3 in roughly the ways the 5D2 differed from the D700 (slower, worse autofocus, higher resolution). Canon haven't responded (yet) to the D800, and Nikon don't really have a 5D3 competitor. An 8fps multicam-3500-based 24MP D750 would be a strong 5D3 competitor, and I guess might take on whatever Canon may be planning with a 6D replacement. Also, if they've got a shutter mechanism that can keep up (and the D810 just got a new shutter mechanism, so maybe it can...) then building a D810 with a D610 sensor(-ish) may not be so challenging. The data rates roughly line up, too. And it would plug the gap for those wanting a faster D810 without the D610 downgrade route, though I'm sure they'd lose some D810 sales in the process.
But there's very little information even rumoured. Photokina starts in three weeks. It seems extremely unlikely that Nikon would launch such a camera just after Photokina, so I suggest patience, grasshopper. We'll know whether there's any fact to this very soon. The rumour sites often are very accurate - normally around the point that they start saying "tomorrow, Nikon will launch..."
As for "did Nikon finally get it right..." Well, I own an F5, a D700 and a D800e. At their respective times, they were all very "right", thank you, for what I wanted from them. If you really want a D700 replacement (especially if you'd been using the D700 with a grip) and don't mind the delicacy of a flip-out screen or the likely price, maybe the rumoured D750 is "finally right" for you. Though I think there's been some "not half bad" going on in the meantime. But there really aren't many stinkers out there from any manufacturer, camera wise - I even give grudging respect to the Df and the V-series for some of what they can do. That said, I admit that Nikon have had a few manufacturing issues on a lot of recent cameras - mostly minor. Just as the D700 was mostly a tried-and-tested D700 body with a tried-and-tested D3 sensor, something like the alleged D750 does have a chance of falling in the "nothing new to go wrong" category of reliability. We can hope.
delicacy of a flip-out screenD5xxx has had it for many many years, and SONY, Olympus, and now Canon also use these. I have not read a single complain on line that these screens are delicate. If any thing, you can flip them in ward to protect the "delicate" screen itself. I would rather suspect that Nikon does not put them in higher end cameras b/c its live view sucks so few will "bother" to discover how useful they are. Or Nikon just wants to sell us the $200 wast level finder from the film days.
Marc, I for one have never "easily" got a good quality photo with my existing DSLR but I bet I might with a new D750 if it pops into reality next month at Photinka.
"If any thing, you can flip them in ward to protect the "delicate" screen itself. I would rather suspect that Nikon does not put them in higher end cameras b/c its live view sucks so few will "bother" to discover how useful they are. Or Nikon just wants to sell us the $200 wast level finder from the film days. "
I don't think Canon or Nikon put flip-up screens on the higher end bodies because it introduces a significant point of failure (structurally and weatherproofing wise) in cameras that have some to be known as bullet-proof tools that a photojournalist can take anywhere. I guess it depends on your shooting style as to whether you find them useful or not. I do understand why some people like them. I'm certainly no war photographer, but I would just assume Nikon leave flip screens off of the pro bodies. Then again, routine $200 repair bills to repair screens that snapped off the body might be enticing for them too!
To be fair, I'm just repeating the claims of why the D7000 and above don't have the D5x00 series' flip-out screen. Canon don't seem to have felt a problem in putting a flip screen on the 70D, though the full-frame models notably lack one. (I'm always a little confused about the market positions of the various models; I tend to think of 1200D (Rebel T5) < D3300 < 700D (Rebel T5i) < D5300 < 70D < D7100, but it's not really a solid opinion.)
The D700 is officially a "professional camera" by at least one of Nikon's measures. The D610 isn't. If a D750 - if one exists - is marketed in the same position as the D700, I'd have thought a flip-out screen was unlikely. But Nikon are allowed to change their minds.
Would I use a flip-out screen? Probably. I'd certainly like the side effect of the buttons being put where my right hand can reach them. But I have caught myself thinking that, were I to get an RX100 as a pocket camera, I might prefer the mk1 to the mk2 just because it's less likely that I'd get the screen caught on something and mangle the ribbon cable. Probably less an issue with a DSLR, unless my pockets get much bigger.
A lot of discussion on very little information. I'm happy to speculate based on announcements, and I'm happy to discuss the kind of features that people would like the next camera to have, but I really hope anyone reading this thread realises that there's a massive disclaimer on it that we know nothing (Jon Snow).
Given that we're getting close to the show, I'm looking forward to seeing what else Nikon may or may not produce - and, for that matter, Canon, who've been very quiet so far. (Not that it seems to hurt their sales.)
There are two things I find myself defending in these on-line forums. One of them is the flip out screen, which I love after using it for the first time on a m4/3 camera, and which Nikon cameras mostly lack. Interestingly this one feature is popular with mirror less camera and its lacking often creates an outcry among mirrorless users. dSLR users, in contrast, do not care about this because they cannot find it to be useful and many think the screen must be flimsy — they are not. Another one is auto-ISO in "manual" mode completed with EC. Here the situation is the reverse as this is found in Nikon's higher end dSLRs, but often lacking in earlier mirrorless cameras. When mostly Nikon and Pentax users requested this, people reacted in amazement because this destroys the purity of the "manual" mode.
The flip out screen is not flimsy, unless someone has statistics in its repair frequencies to prove me wrong. I have not found any complain on line about the screen breaking off. How do you take pictures of toddlers at their eye levels to be more engaging? If you often take pictures of children by shooting down, you need a flip out screen. Not to mention how useful it is for macros, street, and to shoot at any angle you like. Try it guys, especially those old guys like me who cannot bend! You will love it.
Well, it depends how you define "flimsy". The flip-out screen on the back of the Sony RX100-II is attached to a reasonably solid, but flat, bit of metal - but for a camera I'd be putting in a pocket, it's perfectly possible for it to get caught on something and bent, or for something to wedge behind it and damage the ribbon cable. That risk may be outweighed by the utility, but the size of the mechanism simply prevents it form being as robust as most of the rest of the camera.
Most DSLRs with flip-out screens have the screen more inset into the rear of the camera, reducing the chance of anything getting behind it, and the wiring often goes through a solid pivot (but doesn't always). If the screen is extended, it absolutely is exposed to damage more so than most of the rest of the camera; stowed, probably not so much, and the ability to invert the screen for protection is arguably valuable. My plastic LCD cover does have some scratches, mostly I think from when I've had something like a security badge on and the camera has rubbed against it - an inverting screen may or may not help here. I certainly think flip-out screens are useful. They're robust in storage, at least with DSLR designs. How well I'd expect one to hold together if it was open and fell off a tripod is another matter, but then supposedly the D800 frame is a little prone to cracking under those circumstances anyway. (I'm curious whether the D810 is better.)
If the flip-out screen isn't a red-herring, it's a very good way to turn away 'real pros' who feel it's a weakness and need to buy an armoured D4S...
...whereas the prosumer is gentler on their kit and can't afford a D4S.
I've never had a moment's concern for the screens on my D5100 and D5300 and I'll admit to using them both at an airshow, one long lens and one short zoom and dropping them into and getting them out of the camera bag rapidly. They never got caught-up or snagged on anything.
Plus you can use the flip-out screen to support the camera for some extra reach for overhead shots! (Wait, aren't we supposed to do that?)
" it's perfectly possible for it to get caught on something and bent, or for something to wedge behind it and damage the ribbon cable."The screen is stiff to pull out and has good resistance when being turned around in use. Furthermore, "normal" people will fold it in before putting it in a bag. It is one simple snap, the same way you would fold your wallet before putting it back into your pocket. For what you said to happen it would be like saying what if people get into the car with an open umbrella. As I said, where is the proof that the screen is prone to breaking in actual use? The mighty D800 is known to have an issue with the lens mount that it breaks when dropped with a lens on it. Just being big and heavy and all metal does not guaranteed anything. You just like to argue, don't you?
The more probable reasons why Nikon has not put more flip out screen in their cameras:
1. To save a few bucks.
2. Many will not use it often b/c Nikon's live view is not so robust to use.
3. Too much trouble to rearrange buttons that are now on the left side of the screen. This is Nikon's favorite side by the way as they seem to like to put new button there. D7100 and on has a new "i" button at the bottom making it even harder to find the ISO button.
Not only I hope it is true that D750 has a flip out screen, I wish it is state of the art. It should be touch sensitive to make it easy to change settings, zoom in and out, select and change AF points, etc, features that are long available on Canon and Panasonic with a touch screen cameras. Given the current limitation of live view in Nikon's cameras, the lack of a flip out screen is not a deal breaker. However if they put a state of the art screen that makes live view more enjoyable to use, that will be a feature worth bragging about.
CC - I can vouch only for a brief shop experience where I tested whether an RX100-II would fit in my pocket - and yes, it was closed - and removed it to find a piece of card firmly wedged between the screen and camera body. I don't think I'd damage the hinge (of the RX100-II - I've seen flimsier hinges) that way, but there's an unprotected ribbon cable back there that could easily have been pressed hard against the edge of some cardboard - or worse if I'd had, say, a hotel room card in there. It wouldn't stop me buying an RX100 (if the lens on the -III is as good as rumoured, the price is the thing stopping me), but it would make me more careful with the camera. Is it enough to make the camera fall apart easily? Obviously not. Is it a source of potential weakness not found on cameras without flip-out screens? Yes. It's very hard to argue against the engineering of that statement, but I'm not trying to argue the extent of that weakness.
The design on most DSLR screens - and of course we have no idea what Nikon may or may not choose to use on a camera that they may or may not be going to make and may or may not call the D750 - includes a sideways twist, unlike the Sony's screen, and manages to protect the edge of the screen somewhat so that it's harder for something to get wedged behind it. You're also less likely to slide a DSLR into a pocket already containing vertically-oriented bits of card and plastic, and I've not seen a DSLR hinge with exposed wiring. So the particular concern I had with the RX100-II isn't likely to be relevant to the D750. What is more likely to be a problem is that there's a relatively small joint with a limited range of movement that may be exposed if the camera takes a tumble, especially with the screen folded out. The joints are necessarily a little hard to weatherproof, too.
Will it snap if you look at it? No, but the F5 didn't need a titanium prism casing for most use - Nikon high-end cameras are generally engineered to survive careless abuse. (Actually, I thought it was the D800's frame that could crack, but I'm only reporting Thom Hogan, and may have mis-remembered.) And, argumentativeness aside, I agree about weight - I reckon I could drop my plastic 28-80 on the floor and have a reasonable chance of it working; I'd be much less confident with my 200 f/2. While away in Canada, a colleague of mine was trying to put my bag (containing two laptops, a D800E, a 14-24 and a 70-200 f/2.8) on the floor for me so it would be out of the way while we ate, and dropped it from a couple of feet up. I was gibbering for a long time. (Everything seems okay - even though a Think Tank Shape-Shifter isn't all that padded!) If he'd dropped my GF2 in its mini-bag, I'd not have batted an eyelid. Maybe the argument is that a D5300 isn't heavy enough, with the likely lenses attached to it, to break its hinge, but a D7100 might be.
I wouldn't mind seeing a flip-out screen (though it would probably be more useful on the D810 than a "sports camera"), but Canon and Nikon really don't seem to think pros would like to risk one. Same reason that there's no flash on the 5D3, 1Dx or D4. I don't think they'd worry about the cost on the high-end cameras if there weren't a down side. Not that this has stopped Pentax with their medium format cameras, but I'm not sure I'd ever thought of those as "robust" anyway (even having been hit on the head by my original 645).
For live view, I haven't really been aware of a problem with the D5x00s - and not really with anything but the D800, whose problems are mostly centred around the sensor read out. (Cameras without separate aperture control do have some issues if you change aperture, but the D8x0 doesn't.) The D810 seems to have solved the line skipping, so I don't see why there should be an issue; I don't think any of the 24MP cameras have had the problem, unless I'm wrong. You seem to be concerned, though - I'd like to know what's still worrying you.
Redesigning the interface? Well, yes, people would no doubt complain - especially D700 owners. (I'm annoyed enough at the +/- button switch, which you can't reverse in software.) But I've been begging for the controls under my right thumb for years, so I'd like it! The D5x00 has that style of interface.
Touch screens are a mixed blessing. It would be interesting to see Nikon try this, but they're unlikely to get it perfect on the first attempt. I quite like my GF2's touch screen, but it's nothing like phone quality, On the other hand, a modern capacitive multi-touch screen stops working if you have gloves on or when it gets wet, which are situations in which a high-end camera has to work; they also don't work so well with your eye to the finder, and tend to get a bit smeary. I'd probably sooner see Nikon try this on the "D5400" first.
As ever, no one-size-fits-all. An FX DSLR with a flip-out screen would be an interesting differentiator, but if Nikon are really after the D700 crowd who weren't tempted by either the D600/D610 or the D800/D810, and who haven't already picked up a D3s or D4, I'd be worried that the picky few would be put off by a screen like this. It's a pretty specific market - and I have to point out that the D810 is a perfectly capable 6fps 25MP camera (trading a reduced sensor area in 1.2x crop for bigger AF coverage), so you'd really need that partial stop of sensitivity and 33% frame rate jump to justify getting rid of the extra 12MP. Which may argue against its existence, or may argue that the camera would have to be differentiated in another way - by flip-out screen or otherwise.
It's not going to stop the complaints that each higher-end Nikon model isn't a true superset of the functionality of the one below (D3300 aside), though - paying more doesn't get you a universal improvement. Stick a flip-out screen on a D750 and at least some D810 owners are going to be annoyed.
As ever, no one-size-fits-all. An FX DSLR with a flip-out screen would be an interesting differentiator, but if Nikon are really after the D700 crowd who weren't tempted by either the D600/D610 or the D800/D810, and who haven't already picked up a D3s or D4, I'd be worried that the picky few would be put off by a screen like this.You'd have to be very picky to be put off by a rotating screen, though there are several other ways that you might imagine the bean counters could still mess with the D700 hold-outs. An undersized buffer would do it, or a smaller body with poorer handling, or (my favourite) leaving out the screwdriver AF motor...
Latest rumours are 51 point AF (hardly surprising) and 8fps without a grip (hmm...). Since everyone is saying Photokina, we will at least know if there's any substance to this in a couple of weeks.
or (my favourite) leaving out the screwdriver AF motor...For an action camera, you'll be needing to use AF-S lenses or the equivalent names from independent makers...so having a body motor is useless. And do away with that stupid aperture follower tab slot...it's a big gash right past the weatherproof lens mount right into the gizzards of the thing........and just waiting for water and dust ingress.
If you're into AF-D lenses, this camera isn't meant for you....and you'd be far better off with another FX body, with more resolution blah, blah.....
If you're into AF-D lenses, this camera isn't meant for you....and you'd be far better off with another FX body, with more resolution blah, blah.....Of course according to the other thread ( http://www.photo.net/nikon-camera-forum/00cmkF ) we aren't supposed to use them on the higher res cameras either, as they won't be taking full advantage of the sensor. I guess we should return all our AF-D lenses to Nikon for re-cycling, or dispose of them sensibly in the nearest landfill.
The rumor has it that the D750 is 'only' 24MP....
Putting your fav. old D lens on a 36MP sensor doesn't make it a worse picture.....just not as good as it could be with a more modern lens.
However, it's not a case of ALL modern ones, there's new lemons just as well as old gems.
However, it's not a case of ALL modern ones, there's new lemons just as well as old gems.Sarcasm aside, I completely agree. I hope the older lenses aren't orphaned by the new range of cameras, though I suppose 'AFS only' will eventually creep up the range. If there is a 'D750' next month, whether or not it has an AF motor might be seen as a statement of intent by Nikon (they've been pretty busy lately knocking out, e.g., f/1.8 primes to replace older pre-AFS designs). I suspect lenses like the 105 DC might never get the AFS treatment, and it would be a shame if you had to buy at least a D810-level camera to make them work (for now). You can argue that a 'sports' camera is best served by AFS lenses, but many of use don't buy a body for only one type of photography, and some of the AF/AF-D lenses actually focus very quickly (they just sound slower).
You'd have to be very picky to be put off by a rotating screen, though there are several other ways that you might imagine the bean counters could still mess with the D700 hold-outs.Well, you have to be pretty picky to be put off by having a camera that can do 12MP and 5fps and not want a camera that offers 36MP at 4fps and 25MP at 5fps with a small crop. Not so much if you want to use a grip at 8fps, but there's the used D3s and D4 market to consider if that's of interest. But I speak as a D700 owner who's happy with my D800e (though I may still defect to a D810) so I may be guilty of not understanding those with a different opinion.
For an action camera, you'll be needing to use AF-S lenses or the equivalent names from independent makers...so having a body motor is useless.I'll race my AF-D 28-80 f/3.3-5.6G against your 50mm f/1.4 AF-S if you like... but I admit it's the exception rather than the rule. I do think that Nikon might eventually make a motor-less FX body, but I'd expect it more to be a low-cost, low-weight option ("D500"?) than a sports camera. Bonus marks for using a pentamirror.
And do away with that stupid aperture follower tab slot...it's a big gash right past the weatherproof lens mount right into the gizzards of the thing........and just waiting for water and dust ingress.Agreed to an extent. Nikon could probably consider doing without it, especially if they allowed you to indicate an AI-S lens was not just AI (or restored the detector post) so the camera could control the aperture. It wouldn't be rocket science to enable stop-down metering if people wanted to use the aperture ring anyway. I kind of like having proper AI compatibility, but since I don't own any lenses with a nonlinear aperture lever it really wouldn't hurt me, and having stop-down metering would give you proper pre-AI compatibility that's not much more clunky than the Df's two-stage system.
However, it's not a case of ALL modern ones, there's new lemons just as well as old gems.Quite. I'll take on an AF-S 24-120 f/3.5-5.6G IF-ED with an AF Micro 200mm f/4D ED-IF any day.
Well, you have to be pretty picky to be put off by having a camera that can do 12MP and 5fps and not want a camera that offers 36MP at 4fps and 25MP at 5fps with a small crop. Not so much if you want to use a grip at 8fps, but there's the used D3s and D4 market to consider if that's of interest. But I speak as a D700 owner who's happy with my D800e (though I may still defect to a D810) so I may be guilty of not understanding those with a different opinion.Depends entirely on what you shoot, really. If you used a grip with the D700 to shoot sports at 8fps, the D800 is going to disappoint. If you never bothered with the grip the D800 is not quite there, but the D810 has finally equalled the D700, and added its spectacular own pixel count and other advantages. Of course, the faster single digit bodies would be much better for fast action, though heavier and more cumbersome for all-day general use. What the D700 and D300 really nailed was the concept of the gerneral purpose camera that tackled everything reasonably well. Technology has moved on since then, but Nikon has also moved away from this sort of camera. The D750 may, or may not, change that (if it actually exists!).
For scenics, its definitely the D810. For sports, my D700 with grip does OK in the evening. Always disappointed at the lack of micro detail of the D700 for scenics. Dragged out my old D2H a couple of months ago. All it needs is a modern sensor, and I would be happy for the rest of my life. At 4MP, it's a dinosaur, but just listen to the rapid fire of the shutter. It's music to my ears. And the form fit is wonderful.
Mike Halliwell wrote:
Marc M, I'm very happy for you.
But, you're obviously not pushing the imaging envelope....
As soon as you can, please post a pic that's a result of "pushing the imaging envelope." A bet a million pros out there would love to see what they've been missing.
Rumor or not, I concur with Thomas K @ 1:46. Yes there was some questions about the 12MP of the D700, but then people started using it and along with the D200 and D300/s has been one Nikon's most successful digital cameras.
Richard Williams: "What the D700 and D300 really nailed was the concept of the gerneral purpose camera that tackled everything reasonably well. Technology has moved on since then, but Nikon has also moved away from this sort of camera. The D750 may, or may not, change that (if it actually exists!)."
So true, and since Canon has a camera like this, the 5D Mark III, I don't see the reason why Nikon shouldn't have one...
Lol, most pp at this ws often have comments on rumours, but now the most extensive thread is about a rumour ocer a camera that was not announced or even hinted at by Nikon themselves,...
This thread even spend a lot more attention to this then any other site i could find....
Human nature leads us to always want more, faster, better. This applies to cars, boats, airplanes, bicycles, and just about everything else in life. If your aren't trying to get ahead, your're following behind. The same applies to cameras and lenses. Nikon and Canon do not appear to be providing the gear that their photo enthusiast customers think they should be so they imagine about what is needed and this is how rumors spread. Just give me a fast, modern, accurate cropped frame sports body that can upload images directly to my web site with little effort and I'm a happy camper. My kid's iPhone's can do this, why can't my D7100. I really don't want to spend $6,200 on a D4S. (PS, I now use a Sony A77 II (24 MP, 12 FPS, 52 image buffer) but it doesn't upload to the internet either.)
My kid's iPhone's can do this, why can't my D7100.
Well the integration of mobile phone technology into a camera would necessarily make it somewhat larger and heavier and most people probably don't use a DSLR that way. I for example may post images online but they go through a rigorous editing procedure and the resulting images are very small compared to the information captured by the camera. So it's like using huge freight ship for the task of a small boat. To me a great part of the creative process in photography is in the post-processing and image selection so I wouldn't normally be posting anything online without going through a critical analysis. There is also a technical issue: high end DSLRs have a metal chassis that gives them some strength which is necessary for the precise relative alignment of the mirror, viewfinder, mount, AF sensor and main imaging sensor. If you want good wireless functionality the circuits relative to that would have to be outside of this chassis. In practice reports suggest that wifi functionality integrated into DSLRs (such as the D5x00) functions less well than that in mobile phones or point and shoots which do not require a metal chassis. The metal chassis attenuates or even blocks transmission of radio waves. Thus Nikon's more common solution is add-on wifi devices which you can use together with a mobile phone or tablet to post pictures online, if you must do this without a computer. Personally there is no situation where I would want to post images online without having gone through a proper computer. I understand that newspaper photographers would need to do that sometimes though, or at least send images to the office.
As for the relative popularity of the D800 family vs. D700, I agree with Shun; in my circle of photography-interested friends the D800 family has been much more popular than the D700 which most people saw as very low resolution for a full frame camera. It basically captures only a fraction of the detail that our lenses that we have paid for can render. The D800(E)/D810 are big improvements in that respect and the resolution is very useful for many practical situations. Of course high fps rates are also another feature of interest, though I never found much use for it since I normally photograph people at large apertures where the depth of field is so shallow that no AF can keep up with at 9fps. 5fps is much more realistic to use at f/2 or f/1.4. For stopped down photography, and some action-oriented lenses such as 70-200/2.8 II or 300/2.8 I suppose high fps and wide open usage can still be compatible but it never was my cup of tea.
That said, I fully support the idea of a versatile FX camera with 24MP and 8fps, I believe it would be a perfect balance of detail and speed for many users. I purchased the D810 and so I am not going to get a D750 (if realized along these specifications), however that is not because I don't like the rumoured specifications but simply because I need to work with a camera that exists today instead of something that may or may not exist in the future.
While I prefer the shallow depth of field and robust AF and detail of FX combined with fast lenses, I have applications where I use the D7100 in combination with a 200mm lens to record extra detail and perhaps better wide open image quality than a 1.4X TC could give with an FX camera. It works nicely for those situations (mainly photography of stage music and dance outdoors) but I wouldn't want to purchase a DX camera that is more expensive than the D7100 for these situations since it can not be my main camera for the shorter focal length work (due to absence of wide aperture DX wide angles mainly, but also for other reasons). So I appreciate that this camera, which I use for tele shots, is light weight and affordable. I do recognize the limitations of the D7100's buffer, but I think this will be remedied soon with an update, it is such an obvious feature to improve upon to beef up further sales. Otherwise I think it is close to being a perfect camera for the task, when combined with a high quality fast telephoto lens. If I were a high fps shooter I would work with the D4s (or D4, or D3s) and get the new TC-14E III, or a longer lens to get access to long focal lengths with the 9-11fps functionality of those cameras. However as I explained high fps is not a priority for me, and so I can work with the 5-6fps cameras that I already own, without experiencing much limitations. I am not interested in using DX for short focal length work at this point in development of the DSLRs, though if a nice lens to cover this need existed 5-10 years ago, I might have found it to work well enough to my needs. As things are I like the fact that Nikon is emphasizing the development of FX products since they are compatible with the kind of aesthetics that I like to strive for in my photos, and I like the big optical viewfinder image that FX DSLRs provide. However I absolutely think DX DSLRs are a great choice for photographers on a budget who do not have specific preference for shallow depth of field in conjunction with wide angle of view. The D7100 is light weight and feels very comfortable in my hands and I have used it more than other cameras this past summer. However, the detail from the D8x0(E) family and the tonal quality are in another class in my experience. And even if you don't make huge prints you can use it in action photography by framing with safety margins around the subject while shooting and then finishing up the composition in post processing. This I find to be a highly effective method for capturing action. I appreciate that for other types of work such as bird photography a DX DSLR can be preferred (especially since birds tend to be small and often there is need of more, not less depth of field) and I think the solution will be in the form of upgrades to the D7100 rather than to the D300s.
Depends entirely on what you shoot, really. If you used a grip with the D700 to shoot sports at 8fps, the D800 is going to disappoint. If you never bothered with the grip the D800 is not quite there, but the D810 has finally equalled the D700, and added its spectacular own pixel count and other advantages. Of course, the faster single digit bodies would be much better for fast action, though heavier and more cumbersome for all-day general use. What the D700 and D300 really nailed was the concept of the gerneral purpose camera that tackled everything reasonably well. Technology has moved on since then, but Nikon has also moved away from this sort of camera. The D750 may, or may not, change that (if it actually exists!).After the weekend... Firstly, a reminder that a D3 (1240g no battery) or D4s (1350g with battery) is slightly lighter than a D700 with a grip (1286g, no batteries). It's also smaller. If Nikon have an 8fps FX body without needing a grip, that's a significant new thing. Canon have had 8fps in the 7D without a grip for some time, but at full frame, the 5D3 can only get to 6fps.
Given the D800's better low-light performance than the D700, the 1.2x crop mode that hit 5fps on that camera only really left it behind the gripless D700 in depth of field control.
The D700 was a great low-light and consumer-grade sports camera - unsurprisingly for something with so much D3 in its lineage - but it's a bit questionable how general it was. I've used it for weddings (including mine!) and landscapes, but it really has too little resolution, too strong an AA filter, and insufficient dynamic range at low ISOs for those subjects (not that the 5D2 is better for dynamic range, but the D800 is); it's also a bit on the heavy side. It's a great camera, and by no means bad at these, but I really think for these situations, the 5D2 was somewhat better - while being comparatively hopeless for sports. The D800 reverses this - it's an amazing camera for slower, low ISO work. It's rarely much worse than the D700, but essentially it didn't improve on the D700's strengths, only its weaknesses. Canon made the 5D3 much much better as an action camera, and very slightly better for slower work - I've always said that it seems to be a better generalist than the D800. The D810 improves the responsiveness of the D800 to make it a better general-use camera, but the Canon probably still has the edge on autofocus and un-cropped speed.
If there's an 8fps D750 (or whatever), it'll be a more direct competitor for the 5D3. But the multicam 3500 is getting quite long in the tooth despite software updates. I'd be a little surprised to see Nikon make a major change here since they didn't for the D4s, though. But Nikon often surprises me, and sometimes it's even in a good way!
As for fast interweb uploads, may I recommend an Eye-Fi and tethering? I'm sure it's not perfect, but I believe it works. But I agree that this forum
I've little doubt that the noise on this forum indicates there's more demand for a D7100 replacement, especially if it's closer to a D300s replacement, than yet another FX camera - even if it's a less niche one than the Df. We've spent so long talking about the other possible things Nikon could launch, it's interesting to divert to this area. But I hope we've been clear that it's no more than rumour - those sites which insist on discussing only the "facts" of the rumour itself may well run out of steam far sooner, and have less of interest to say. We've talked far less about what a D750 might be than the limitations and abilities of existing cameras and people's needs, which are reassuringly close to facts.
But the multicam 3500 is getting quite long in the tooth despite software updates.
Obviously the changes are not just software. The D810's developers stated in an interview published in Japanese and kindly translated by a native speaker at fotozones.com that state that the sensitivity of AF to the colour of the light was corrected in the D810 including hardware changes. Quoting Akira's translation
"7. The AF is improved both on the hardware and the algorithm levels. Further details are classified.
8. The AF inaccuracy problem under incandescent/tungsten lightings is mitigated on the hardware level. Further details are classified."
"3500" in the module name to my understanding refers to the number of sensels (or that's the way it was in the early days) and it is not a part number; there are several different Multi-CAM 3500's units with different behaviour.
Thanks, Ilkka - and that may have been unfair of me, since even the D700 to D800 generation gained f/8 support while still claiming a Multicam-3500. Well spotted that there are hardware changes here too. Still, and while I'm glad to hear reports that the D4s and D810 have improved autofocus performance over the D800, there's no doubt that some key features of the 3500 - the total number of points, the number of cross-sensors, the areal coverage - have remained unchanged since the D3/D300 launch. Canon's autofocus in the 5D2 was truly archaic (the 1Ds-III had approximately the AF system of the Eos 1V, which was way more respectable), but the 5D3's system really does seem to have improved coverage. It's better still in the 1Dx because of the colour tracking from the meter (if I'm not confusing reviews I read a while back) - I'll be interested to see how the 5D3 compares to the D810 here - but it's still a little disappointing that Nikon haven't yet responded to the 1Dx/5D3 AF system more spectacularly.
But if the D810 AF system is the improvement I hear, maybe I wouldn't be disappointed to see it in a "D750" after all.
If the true spec is indeed 6.5fps in burst mode, Nikon have really messed up big-time....
....unless it's 8 or 9 with a grip..(just like the D700 it's replacing???)
6.5 just doesn't cut it. Sorry that's a big fat FAIL.
The D610 does 6fps...what's the point of 6.5 for 'Action'?
Mike and others, please keep in mind that rumours are not facts. Reading, and believing, rumors so that you are misled by them is going to bring you a lot of frustration.
I have read some stories that certain people sold their Canon 7D a year or two ago because they had read rumors that the 7D Mark II release was "imminent" such that they wanted to dump their old model before used prices were affected by the latest and greatest. They got burned quite badly as no 7D Mark II was actually introduced.
We'll resume the discussion when the dust settles.
Separate names with a comma.