j._steven_ueckert

<p>"So Nikon -> Canon -> Nikon -> Canon? "</p> <p>For 33 years I supported my family and myself as a photographer for the two largest newspapers in Texas, both among the half dozen largest in the USA. When I embarked on that career I decided to use the best tools available to get the job done. During the film era that was Nikon for SLRs and RF Leicas. When my paper went digital, the Nikon shooters were issued first the D1 and then the D2 series, Canon shooters got the current Canon 1D cameras. Due to staffing changes and budget options, after a year with the D2H & D2X bodies, I had the opportunity to change to Canon 1D Mk IIn bodies. For me that was a huge improvement, and a no brainer. Knowing I was going to retire at the end of 2008 I weighed my options, the Nikon D3 was again a no brainer for me, even though I was an early adopter of the original 5D. After using a 5D and D40 from early 2007 to mid-2008 for most assignments and the aging Mk IIn bodies for sports, it was obvious in mid-2008 when I contemplated freelance work after retirement, that the D3 was best for me. Then the D700 and battery packs (with D3 batteries) became even better. The D700 bodies carried me through mid-2013. When it was obvious that Nikon was not going to update the D700 with another actual prosumer camera, and the 5D3 was the real deal, not like the 1D Mk III that badly hurt Canon's reputation, begrudgingly I invested in a pair of 5D3 bodies.<br> Given Nikon's most recent offerings of a potential prosumer camera: D600, D610, Df and D750, my opinion is Nikon does not want to threaten flagship sales be it the D3S, D4 or D4 successor, with a true successor to the D700. Fortunately for me and a plethora of students, wedding shooters and those who can't or won't justify the 1DX, Canon updated the 5D2 with the 5D3 and now there are rumors of a 5D4.<br> I still love my old Nikkors and have yet to dispose of my D700s (haven't touched them in more than a year now). It pains me to consider them and a D700 knowing how much better is the 5D3 for what I shoot. I've looked at the Df and thought if only it could do 8 fps, or even 7 fps. I have absolutely no use for either a D600 or D610 and don't consider the D750 as any rival to the 5D3. I've actually used my long Nikkors with Rayqual adapters on my 5D3 bodies. While the images are excellent, losing their AF, auto aperture and EXIF data with the 5D3 is one step forward and two or more steps backwards.<br> A long answer to a short question.</p>

<p>My disappointment with Nikon is calling the new body "D750" as if it were a successor to the D700. More appropriately it should be called a D650 as it seems more in line with the D600 & D610.<br> In 2008 Nikon brought forth the D3, then they took the sensor from the D3 and put it in a smaller form factor body delivering the same IQ as the D3, albeit at a mere 5 fps. BUT, Nikon offered the provision of 8 fps with an accessory battery grip using the same battery as the D3. I sold a pair of D3 bodies replacing them with a pair of D700 bodies and battery grips (and D3 batteries) in the spring of 2009. I loved the smaller form factor of the D700 and added the battery grips for sports and other occasions necessitating a higher cycling rate.<br> Then Nikon brought out the D3S but didn't offer that sensor in a D700 class body. Then Nikon brought out the D4 but didn't offer that sensor in a D700 class body. True, the Df shares the D4 sensor. I hope no one considers the Df as a successor to the D700, not a chance.<br> Now Nikon brings out the D750, a very worthy competitor to the 5D3, even offering 1/2 fps more than the Canon. How many years already has the 5D3 been available, how much longer until a 5D4 comes to market no doubt with at least a 7 fps cycling rate? The D750 is not a sports or action camera in the year 2014, it might have been in 2010. Had Nikon simply put the D4 sensor in a body the size of the D750 (or even D700) with a native cycling rate of 5 or 6 fps and an option of adding a battery pack providing only a cycling rate of 8 fps, I think they would sell as many as they could make. And with the high IQ (ISO 6400 and up) perhaps not even as good as a 5D3, I'm afraid Nikon has again misjudged the market they once dominated with the D700. Neither the D610, Df or D750 will draw Canon shooters away from the 5D3 like the impact of the D3 & D700 in 2008-2009.<br> Good luck Nikon, I think you are going to need it.<br> For the record, I switched from Nikon to Canon when the EOS 1D Mk IIn was overwhelmingly better than both the D2H or D2X I used. When the D3 came out I was glad I had kept most of my Nikon glass which I've always preferred to the comparable offerings from Canon. Sadly, I didn't hold on to my Canon glass and when the 5D3 obviously offered so much more than the D700, I had to reacquire Canon lenses when I moved to the 5D3 from the D700.<br> I've been watching Nikon wondering if they would ever seriously compete with the 5D3. I don't think they want to as the D750 just isn't that much more especially with the expectation of a 5D4. Canon hasn't always gotten it right though, remembering the AF issues of the 1D Mk III and that many believe the 5D3 is what the 5D2 should have been. But it does seem that Canon realized the market share they lost when the D3 (and subsequently the D700) appeared and they (Canon) seem determined not to let that happen again. Nikon, on the other hand, doesn't seem to understand that there is a market segment that cannot justify or otherwise afford either a D4 or 1DX and depend on a prosumer camera such as a D700 or 5D3.</p>