Nikon Introduces D750 FX Body, $2299.95 and 20mm/f1.8 AF-S

[Two23]

<p>D7000 series is too profitable for Nikon to let it go. Unlike the D3300 buyer, the D7100 buyer does tend to buy more lenses. Most likely it too will get the new AF cam.</p>

<p>Kent in SD</p>

[Landrum Kelly]

<p>Kent, I wonder how well Nikon will tend its crop sensor/DX garden--a very lucrative one that could be even more lucrative. I just looked at the new Canon announcement of the 7D II. It is not raising much noise on the Canon forum just yet, but it is a marketing <em>tour de force</em>, I believe. After all, how many top-end buyers are out there, and what is the profit margin for each item? I personally prefer the full-frame cameras, but there are a lot of people out there who want something smaller--but still bigger than cell phone cameras or MFT.</p>

<p>I think that the D750 was designed for a well-targeted marketing niche, but I simply wonder how big that niche is compared to crop sensor bodies and DX/EF-S lenses.</p>

<p>--Lannie</p>

[Mike_R1664876643]

<p>I'm really on the fence now over which FX DSLR to upgrade to from my D300s, between the D810 and D750. I had purchased the 16-35VR lens earlier this year because of the rebates, with a plan to go FX by the end of the year. I do mainly landscape photography, which would favor the D810. However, the D750 seems like the better "all-around" DSLR being smaller and lighter, more sensible file sizes (yet a still impressive 24mp), and best of all a full $1,000 less. I could see myself wanting to do more people photography if I had the D750. The articulating screen also seems extremely useful for low angle landscape or architectural shots. The only feature I might miss from my D300s is the 10-pin connector, since I have the MC-30 cable which I use a lot. Nikon has a lineup of FX cameras now that are clearly distinguished from one another, which may be good for their profits, but bad for people like me who have to make a decision on which to go with.<br>

Personally, I don't get all hung up on what number Nikon wants to assign to their cameras. As far as I'm concerned they could have named it the D81 and I could care less if it's a well thought out camera, which the D750 seems to be. </p>

[mike_halliwell]

<blockquote>

<p>How is Nikon supposed to "respond" to a camera that doesn't exist? Canon 7Dii phantom rumors have been around as long as Nikon D400 DX rumors but neither of those is a real product.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Well, one of them is. So let's see what, or if, Nikon are going to do about the other?</p>

[ShunCheung]

<p>Mike, what makes you feel that Nikon needs to respond to the 7D Mark II?</p>

<p>Has Canon responded to every Nikon DSLR introduced? See my post on the other thread on this topic you started: http://www.photo.net/nikon-camera-forum/00cpRP</p>

[ShunCheung]

<blockquote>

<p>Nikon has a lineup of FX cameras now that are clearly distinguished from one another, which may be good for their profits, but bad for people like me who have to make a decision on which to go with.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Having more choices is good for the consumer, but not necessarily good for Nikon since they have more manufacturing, distribution, and repair/parts issues.</p>

<p>If you have been using the D300, I think 24MP is plenty and a lighter body is a plus. I am very impressed by the D810's shutter; it is very quiet. Obviously I haven't used the D750 yet.</p>

<p>Personally, I don't use the MC-30. New Nikon DSLRs have the shutter delay mode and you can choose among 1, 2, and 3-second delays. I think that is more than good enough and I would rather not have another cable handing around that can get caught on branches, etc.</p>

<P>

P.S. If you mainly shoot landscape, IMO the D610 should already do a fine job. You may appreciate the D750's superior AF for people photography and indoor parties, etc. Presumably the D750 also has superior low-light capability, which is not important for landscape.

</P>

[mike_halliwell]

<blockquote>

<p>Mike, what makes you feel that Nikon needs to respond to the 7D Mark II?</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Well, there <strong><em>appear</em></strong> to be enough 'unsatisfied-with-Nikon' users that have spawned a myriad of threads bemoaning the lack of speed and excess of pixels on the Nikon forum. Canon have, or appear to have, made something that many Nikon users have been wanting and given up waiting for.</p>

<p>Now we all know forums such as this, in common with the internet as a whole, produce a skewed image of reality, often exaggerating small things out of proportion.... BUT, if Canon have made a 7DMKII, they think there's big enough market. Why do Nikon think there's no need to make, ie think there's NO demand for, a similar camera?</p>

<p>It's not as if we're comparing Ferrari with Fiat. Nikon and Canon are in direct competition and it's usual market practice not to allow the other side to get too far ahead.</p>

<p>Now, in a few days time people will put the D7100 head to head with the 7D MKII.... old tech v new. Game Over for the Flagship DX/APS-C awards.</p>

[Mike_R1664876643]

<p>Thanks Shun. I'm interested how smooth & quiet the D750 shutter is, because I've heard the D810 is very nice. I agree that 24mp is probably more than enough resolution for me, or anyone for that matter. Just looking at the DXOMark lens scores, the D610 more than doubles the resolution I get with any of my lenses on my D300s and I expect the D750 will as well. The D800e nearly triples it.</p>

[ShunCheung]

<p>Mike, nobody says there is no market for a successor to the D300. However, Nikon's focus is high and low-end FX, and Nikon has made that strategy very clear. Do you think Canon has still not moved into the 36MP category because there is no market for cameras with that many pixels?</p>

<p>No every brand competes in every category. Canon and Nikon are clearly lagging in the mirrorless area, whether mirrorless is making money or not is another issue.</p>

<p>The D7100 competes against the 70D as they are in the same price category. Interestingly enough, the 7D Mark II's competition will be the Canon 6D and various Nikon D750/D610. For those who want a higher-end 10 fps APS-C DSLR with top-of-the-line AF, I am afraid that Canon is the only way to go now. If you are not happy with what Nikon offers, by all means move to Canon. Likewise, for those who want mirrorless, I am not sure Nikon 1 is the right move either.</p>

[mike_halliwell]

<blockquote>

<p>Do you think Canon has still not moved into the 36MP category because there is no market for cameras with that many pixels?<br>

</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Err, Yes I do actually....or rather there's a very, very small market who NEED 36MP. It's real easy to make a 36 or 40MP Studio camera, and that's about the only place to take advantage of all that resolution. There's no bomb-proof shutter needed due to high speed usage, no complex mirror shock-absorbing tech, there's no processor intensive work, there's no High Speed AF. Sure the D810 <strong><em>can</em></strong> be used outside to great effect, but to gain the benefit from those <strong><em>extra</em> </strong>pixels is almost impossible on a windy day, never mind a moving subject. Remember all those D800 v D800E v D600 comparisons?<br>

<br>

There are more 'Who needs 36MP?' comments on p.net than there are 'who needs 9fps?'*</p>

<p>I guess Canon think there are more people who want 10fps, than want 36MP.</p>

<p>I, and I don't think I'm alone, think they're absolutely right.</p>

<p>However, the lens cost issue to 'Jump Ship' is indeed a real problem!</p>

<p>* A calculated guess combined with the plethora of 'how will my computer cope anyway?' and then there's 'the nightmare storage' issues.... blah blah blah...</p>

[ilkka_nissila]

<p>It is easy enough to take advantage of the 36MP sensor in outdoor environments as well as the studio. E.g. when photographing children playing together, sometimes you have framed for a landscape composition with 2-3 subjects, and decide afterwards that you want to do a vertical of one subject because that person has a great expression and the others do not. Piece of cake with 36MP; image quality remains great and you can still make a large print. You can track and shoot approaching subjects at a greater range of distances and retain high image quality. To take advantage of the high resolution without flash, use a fast shutter speed (i.e. 1/1000s, sometimes even faster may be needed if the subject is moving quickly) or a tripod with EFCS to get the best detail. The very high dynamic range at low ISO (which is made possible by the high pixel count, and is not available on other sensors) is great in contrasty light, both in people photography as well as landscape, and the resolution of the images provide a multitude of options for how the images can be used.</p>

 

[ant_nio_gomes]

<blockquote>

<p>Personally, <strong>I don't use the MC-30</strong>. New Nikon DSLRs have the shutter delay mode and you can choose among 1, 2, and 3-second delays. I think that is more than good enough and<strong> I would rather not have another cable handing around that can get caught on branches</strong>, etc.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>You're right about the cable inconveniences but shutter delay doesn't substitute it for long exposures (night and or some ND filters to eliminate people from public places) and adding to it I also have a radio trigger since my D200 days that uses the 10 pin to do remote the importance of this connection is even bigger for me.<br>

The lack of this contact added to AF-On button and viewfinder ocular without blind are important details to me, not mentioning the convenience of some buttons to provide direct access to some functions. <br>

But Nikon made a decision on targeted consumers and it's up to interested people to evaluate pros and cons and not to keep claiming the camera should be like this or that.</p>

[chip_chipowski]

<blockquote>

<p>Well, there <strong><em>appear</em></strong> to be enough 'unsatisfied-with-Nikon' users that have spawned a myriad of threads bemoaning the lack of speed and excess of pixels on the Nikon forum.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>LOL. By <em>that</em> standard, we could reach all sorts of conclusions ;)</p>

[mike_halliwell]

<blockquote>

<p>To take advantage of the high resolution without flash, use a fast shutter speed (i.e. 1/1000s, sometimes even faster may be needed if the subject is moving quickly) or a tripod with EFCS to get the best detail. </p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>One tiny iota of movement <em><strong>anywhere</strong> </em>and the difference between 24 and 36 MP is utterly pointless.</p>

<p>If, and it's a very big<strong><em> if</em></strong>, you can go over 1/focal length in shutter speed (or 1/1.5 x focal for DX) , you are surely using wide apertures in very good light (without flash). That's pretty rare where I shoot.</p>

[mike_halliwell]

<blockquote>

<p>LOL. By <em>that</em> standard, we could reach all sorts of conclusions ;)</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Chip, do enlighten us with the <strong><em>WE </em></strong>and whomsoever you speak for.</p>

[Peter_in_PA]

<blockquote>

<p>One tiny iota of movement <em><strong>anywhere</strong> </em>and the difference between 24 and 36 MP is utterly pointless.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Unless you are writing marketing copy to sell cameras.</p>

<p>Beyond 12MP (I now am at 16) is meaningless to me.</p>

[Mike D]

<p>The new 10 FPS, Canon D7 II will also help sell a bunch of very expensive Canon telephoto lenses. Most persons I know who own a D800 are also using some interaction of a Nikon 18-300 zoom lens. Seriously!</p>

[chip_chipowski]

<blockquote>

<blockquote>

<p>LOL. By <em>that</em> standard, we could reach all sorts of conclusions ;)</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Chip, do enlighten us with the <strong><em>WE </em></strong>and whomsoever you speak for.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Mike - the "we" refers to this community, discussing Nikon. When Shun asked you about the market for a Nikon equivalent to the 7Dii, you cited a "myriad of threads bemoaning..." I really enjoy this forum, but I just don't think the common complaints around here are necessarily reflective of the market. When I wrote that comment, I was thinking about what Nikon marketing would conclude from reading the 10,000+ posts on the DF ;)</p>

[mike_halliwell]

<p>Chip, interestingly, no-one I know here speaks for the community....everyone is an individual. There is no BORG here.</p>

<p>....is there?</p>

<p>The Nikon Df, well, can you see a Dg in the offing....really?</p>

[chip_chipowski]

<blockquote>

<p>Chip, do enlighten us</p>

</blockquote>

 

<blockquote>

<p>Chip, interestingly, no-one I know here speaks for the community....everyone is an individual.</p>

</blockquote>

 

[ilkka_nissila]

<p><em>If, and it's a very big<strong> if</strong>, you can go over 1/focal length in shutter speed (or 1/1.5 x focal for DX) , you are surely using wide apertures in very good light (without flash). </em><br>

<em> </em><br>

I typically shoot indoor sports (e.g. figure skating) with the 200/2 at around 1/1000s to 1/2000s, ISO 1000-2000. That's 1/(5*FL) to 1/(10*FL). For outdoor portraiture and children playing I checked that in daylight my shutter speed is typically around 1/800s or faster, focal length 24mm to 70mm. I will try to stay faster than 1/(3*FL) when photographing people. I like shallow depth of field and prefer to avoid movement blur. If I am forced to go near 1/FL I will shoot 10 frames of the situation if that's what it takes to get one that is acceptably sharp. This is, however, quite rare. It happened a few times when I was photographing people watching a presentation on a video projector and the faces of the audience were lit by only the reflected light, so I was at 1/25s, ISO 6400, f/1.4 and underexposing at that. Certainly in such circumstances 36MP is not going to help. However, it is not that common that I have to go slower than 1/(3*FL) for photographs of people. For landscape, it is another matter, and there the shutter speeds can be from another world (8s to 1/30s are common in the winter, on very bright days it might be 1/200s). </p>

[rick_m.]

<p>Canon's release of the 7D MKII today illustrates my point very well. Nikon has absolutely nothing to compete with it. Nikon has one sports camera. It costs $6000.00. Or you go used. Canon has a 10 FPS dual processor crop sensor camera for less than a third of the price. And oh by the way with nicely greater resolution.</p>

<p>The Canon users spoke and Canon listened. We have been crying for the exact same competitor from Nikon for 6 years and they ignored us. But since there is no way for Nikon users to contact a Nikon rep this is not surprise.</p>

<p>I grant that a few event photographers who do not wish to use the D7100 for half of the price might like the D750. Good for them. But really folks. The D750 is boring. I want just one gee-whiz thing from a new release. Canon got my attention big-time with a 10 FPS sports thoroughbred. 65 autofocus points all over the shooting area not bunched up and with the center linked points at -3EV. Shutter rated at 200K actuations. Do not make me explain the joy of flicker-timing for those of us who shoot indoor sports events. It is a HUGE feature. If you don't know what it is look it up and then think about it very carefully. Buffer holds 35 RAW and over 1000 JPEG fine. </p>

<p>In other words Canon just released what we have been asking for. Now a Canon shooter can have an outstanding DX sports camera AND a pretty super full frame camera (5DMKIII) for less than the price of the only Nikon serious sports camera. So if you were a new pro what would you do?</p>

<p>I have shot Nikon since the early 70's. I have several of them including a D4, D3, 2- D2Xs D300 and a D7100. (F5, F2As and F100 too not to put to fine a point on it.) I don't have to prove my commitment to Nikon. They however are not proving their commitment to me. They have let their service slide and the last innovative camera they have produced for the professional market is arguably the D800/810. The new Canon is not just a super nice camera. It is a thoughtful, precisely placed, game changer. They are going to cash in it big-time. Canon doubled down on DX (APSc) today. But more importantly they made a camera that professionals and advanced amateurs can be really excited about. And Nikon gave us the D750. Whoopee. </p>

[johne37179]

<p>It does appear that the D750 is likely to be it for new bodies at Photokina -- that is disappointing. I was hoping for the rumored D9300.</p>

[joseph_smith3]

<p>Rick M's post immediately above saved me from writing the same thing. If Canon can release a 10 fps "DX" body, why can't Nikon? There sure is a market for it. I would buy one or two of them. And I already own a D 800E. </p>

<p>Joe Smith</p>

[ShunCheung]

<blockquote>

<p>If Canon can release a 10 fps "DX" body, why can't Nikon?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Because Nikon already has a D750 @ $2300 and a D610 @ $1900. Nikon offerings are already very crowded for DSLRs around $2000. Canon only has a 6D in that price range. Officially it is $1900, but I have friends who bought a new 6D in the middle of last year for $1500, and that was less than a year since its introduction.</p>

<p>Canon and Nikon introduced the 6D and D600 within a few days two years ago, both @ $2100 initially. Since then, Nikon has introduced five FX-format DSLRs and none from Canon. Whether introducing so many new FX DSLRs in a row is "good" or not is debatable. But Nikon has already updated every FX-format DSLR they introduced in 2012 while every current Canon FX-format DSLR model is over 2 years old.</p>

<p>You can also ask the question why Nikon has already updated everything, why Canon cannot even update one. The fact of the matter is that the two companies are in different situations and seem to have different business strategies now for $2000 DSLRs.</p>

<p>To me, it is silly to ask if Canon can do this, why can't Nikon. And then you can turn around and ask Fuji has those APS-C mirrorless camreas, why can't Nikon, and then Sony has those FX mirrorless cameras, why can't Nikon .... If Nikon needs to match everything Canon, Sony, Fuji, Pentax, Olympus ... provides, there is not a viable business model.</p>

<p>That topic is discussed further on this parallel thread: http://www.photo.net/nikon-camera-forum/00cpRP</p>