Am I crazy? D750

[Freida]

Hello guys,

I need some opinions please before I make my mind up. I still can't decide so I come here to know opinions.

As discussed in other thread, I have decided that I am going to upgrade (most likely) my D90 kit.
D90 was great for me except few things - in low lights it was very very noisy, the video is crap (my iphone 6 shoots amazing one compared to D90) and sometimes the focus would fail me a bit even when light conditions are good (wedding event) as it looked good on the small display but then when up on big screen it would be slightly blurred so I would be fixing it in post.

So, I'm going to india in 8 days and after extensive research I came up with this (thanks to some people from here who helped).

Nikon D750 + 24-70 2.8 VR lens.

Nikon has some rebate now so I'll get £250 for my old D90 kit (which was £700 I think at the time of purchase).
And the lens is something I thought that I will need eventually and it will last a lifetime so I don't wanna buy something worse and then lose value and buy this later anyway. I've check my usage and this range should cover around 80% of what I shoot.

I'm recreational photograph so there are times when the camera is not used for weeks/moths as I use it mainly for events, holidays or weddings when I want to take nice pictures. In my 6 years of usage I have used it for few trips and weddings and I never regretted getting it even when it was not used often. It was always the "pro" gear that would do amazing job when needed. (except those drawback I described earlier)

What am I looking for? I guess the answer is a single purchase that would sort me out for pretty much my whole life or until the camera breaks as I'm under the impression that the lens will last me my whole life (right?). I have the money aside and I'm only here because I'm feeling little guilty with such an expensive purchase. I don't want second hand units as I never trust those.

So, what do you guys think? Am I crazy for getting something that I may not 'need' and I'm just making a luxury purchase that I will regret later or is it one of those moments when one is feeling guilty when buying something expensive but then it proves it be worth it in a long run?

 

[Cheese&Apple]

So, what do you guys think? Am I crazy for getting something that I may not 'need' and I'm just making a luxury purchase that I will regret later or is it one of those moments when one is feeling guilty when buying something expensive but then it proves it be worth it in a long run?

It's a question that only you can answer Freida - based on need/want and budget.

I will say that I think you've made an excellent choice in both body and lens. Both are top performers that are capable of producing outstanding images and lasting for many years to come.

I don't regret for a second making the leap to a full frame DSLR years ago and I don't regret the small fortune I've spent since…but that's me.

~ Peter

 

[Apple fanboy]

Hello guys,

I need some opinions please before I make my mind up. I still can't decide so I come here to know opinions.

As discussed in other thread, I have decided that I am going to upgrade (most likely) my D90 kit.
D90 was great for me except few things - in low lights it was very very noisy, the video is crap (my iphone 6 shoots amazing one compared to D90) and sometimes the focus would fail me a bit even when light conditions are good (wedding event) as it looked good on the small display but then when up on big screen it would be slightly blurred so I would be fixing it in post.

So, I'm going to india in 8 days and after extensive research I came up with this (thanks to some people from here who helped).

Nikon D750 + 24-70 2.8 VR lens.

Nikon has some rebate now so I'll get £250 for my old D90 kit (which was £700 I think at the time of purchase).
And the lens is something I thought that I will need eventually and it will last a lifetime so I don't wanna buy something worse and then lose value and buy this later anyway. I've check my usage and this range should cover around 80% of what I shoot.

I'm recreational photograph so there are times when the camera is not used for weeks/moths as I use it mainly for events, holidays or weddings when I want to take nice pictures. In my 6 years of usage I have used it for few trips and weddings and I never regretted getting it even when it was not used often. It was always the "pro" gear that would do amazing job when needed. (except those drawback I described earlier)

What am I looking for? I guess the answer is a single purchase that would sort me out for pretty much my whole life or until the camera breaks as I'm under the impression that the lens will last me my whole life (right?). I have the money aside and I'm only here because I'm feeling little guilty with such an expensive purchase. I don't want second hand units as I never trust those.

So, what do you guys think? Am I crazy for getting something that I may not 'need' and I'm just making a luxury purchase that I will regret later or is it one of those moments when one is feeling guilty when buying something expensive but then it proves it be worth it in a long run?

Check my signature. I'm just a hobbiest, not a pro.
You purchased that D90 forever ago and have had a lot of use and enjoyment out of it over the years. In that time you have saved a fortune by not upgrading every year or so.
IMO you are going to get a lot more years out of that D750. But only you can answer the question you ask.

 

[ApfelKuchen]

How much time is left to your life? I've seen far too much technology change/become obsolete in my lifetime. I still have my Nikon F-mount lenses from the pre auto-exposure/auto-focus days (all purchased prior to 1973). According to what I read, they're still usable (with some modification, and without either auto-exposure or auto-focus) on new Nikon bodies... but I gave up on Nikon a long time ago, for a variety of reasons.

Which is to say, you don't know what the future may bring, both in the evolution of your own needs, and the evolution of the technology. "Future-proofing," whether in cameras or computers, operates on a horizon far shorter than "lifetime." Buy what will serve you well now, and for, perhaps, the next five years. Anything more than that is gravy.

I'm convinced that, within 5 years or so, sensor quality will advance to the point where it'll be very hard for any but the most demanding pros to justify the weight or expense of a full-frame sensor (and the glass that goes with it). Effectively, a FF sensor might become the equivalent of a Hasselblad - hard for even most pros to justify. (Yeah, I know there are DOF differences that can't be avoided, but let's keep this in perspective - there were DOF issues when photographers moved from 8"x10" to 4"x5", from that to 2.25" square, and from there to 35mm. It's a trade-off, pure and simple - the format always affects the aesthetic.)

If you buy a big, heavy bit of glass now (with the intention of using it yourself for a lifetime), you're committing yourself to a lifetime of big, heavy cameras - as a 36-105 equivalent zoom (presuming you move back to APS-C) it's not likely to be nearly as useful - you're going to miss the wide end of the zoom range. It just may be that you'll end up selling that big hunk of glass when it's time to get your next body. Treat it well!

It seems camera shake is a serious concern for you. Consider that weight contributes to shake. A lighter camera body and lighter lens may do better for you as you age...

 

[Freida]

How much time is left to your life? I've seen far too much technology change/become obsolete in my lifetime. I still have my Nikon F-mount lenses from the pre auto-exposure/auto-focus days (all purchased prior to 1973). According to what I read, they're still usable (with some modification, and without either auto-exposure or auto-focus) on new Nikon bodies... but I gave up on Nikon a long time ago, for a variety of reasons.

Which is to say, you don't know what the future may bring, both in the evolution of your own needs, and the evolution of the technology. "Future-proofing," whether in cameras or computers, operates on a horizon far shorter than "lifetime." Buy what will serve you well now, and for, perhaps, the next five years. Anything more than that is gravy.

I'm convinced that, within 5 years or so, sensor quality will advance to the point where it'll be very hard for any but the most demanding pros to justify the weight or expense of a full-frame sensor (and the glass that goes with it). Effectively, a FF sensor might become the equivalent of a Hasselblad - hard for even most pros to justify. (Yeah, I know there are DOF differences that can't be avoided, but let's keep this in perspective - there were DOF issues when photographers moved from 8"x10" to 4"x5", from that to 2.25" square, and from there to 35mm. It's a trade-off, pure and simple - the format always affects the aesthetic.)

If you buy a big, heavy bit of glass now (with the intention of using it yourself for a lifetime), you're committing yourself to a lifetime of big, heavy cameras - as a 36-105 equivalent zoom (presuming you move back to APS-C) it's not likely to be nearly as useful - you're going to miss the wide end of the zoom range. It just may be that you'll end up selling that big hunk of glass when it's time to get your next body. Treat it well!

It seems camera shake is a serious concern for you. Consider that weight contributes to shake. A lighter camera body and lighter lens may do better for you as you age...

Would you say that the lens will no longer be as useful as now? I was under the impression that the law of optics don't allow the lens to be much smaller or even light (except use of different materials but it won't be radical) and that is also the reason why lens technology hasn't changed that extremely unlike the cameras. So the body I might upgrade in 6-8 years and I think I'm ok with that if the need arises but the glass I would hope I will never upgrade nor will the technology change that extremely in that area. Was I under a wrong impression?
[doublepost=1456870096][/doublepost]

Check my signature. I'm just a hobbiest, not a pro.
You purchased that D90 forever ago and have had a lot of use and enjoyment out of it over the years. In that time you have saved a fortune by not upgrading every year or so.
IMO you are going to get a lot more years out of that D750. But only you can answer the question you ask.

Thank you, I guess that makes sense. I'm no pro but I do enjoy taking nice pics when I get the time or opportunity
[doublepost=1456870166][/doublepost]

It's a question that only you can answer Freida - based on need/want and budget.

I will say that I think you've made an excellent choice in both body and lens. Both are top performers that are capable of producing outstanding images and lasting for many years to come.

I don't regret for a second making the leap to a full frame DSLR years ago and I don't regret the small fortune I've spent since…but that's me.

~ Peter

Thank you. Thats what I've learnt in the past few weeks and thats why I thought it would be a good choice. Especially the lens

 

[monokakata]

I shoot with the D810 and have 2/3 of the Holy Trinity Lens Set (I'm lacking the 24-70) and they are great, great glass. I'm sure the 24-70 is also.

However -- you're going to be traveling and thus in unpredictable settings (photographically speaking), and you might need to go longer than 70mm.

The 28-300 doesn't get a lot of love because, for sure, it's not up to the Holy Trinity's standards. I know this, because I have one. It's slower and it's not as sharp. But it's a very versatile lens and it's certainly, absolutely not a bad lens. It can also get respectibly close to a subject. Somewhere on MR there's a thread about it, in which I participated.

Here's something from a really fine photographer's website:

http://blog.mingthein.com/?s=28-300

If I were traveling, and could take only one lens, that would be it.

 

[Cheese&Apple]

Would you say that the lens will no longer be as useful as now? I was under the impression that the law of optics don't allow the lens to be much smaller or even light (except use of different materials but it won't be radical) and that is also the reason why lens technology hasn't changed that extremely unlike the cameras. So the body I might upgrade in 6-8 years and I think I'm ok with that if the need arises but the glass I would hope I will never upgrade nor will the technology change that extremely in that area. Was I under a wrong impression?
[doublepost=1456870096][/doublepost]

Freida, If you like shooting with a full frame DSLR camera and have weighed the pros and cons, I say don't worry about what may or may not happen in camera technology somewhere down the road. Go with what you know now, enjoy your trip and don't worry about that lens…it's awesome, has staying power and will last a long time indeed.

~ Peter

 

[v3rlon]

I think "5 years or so" is an extremely optimistic estimate for the end of FF cameras. Many things have changed since we went from 8*10 glass to 4*5.

While snapshot shooters will most certainly fall into this (if they haven't already), people prepared to drop $3000 USD on a body/glass are not really in the same category. If Freida were shopping for a D3300, you MIGHIT have a case. Not anywhere close for a D750.

I work in semiconductor manufacturing. We don't bend physics that fast, though it isn't for lack of effort.

Back in the early 90's I attended a seminar "Is Film Dead" by leaf systems. It was a $20,000 camera attached to a $20,000 computer. It had to take 3 exposures (R, G, and B separately), at 1/30th second shutter speed each for a 2MP picture.

No, Film wasn't dead. It wasn't dead in 5 years. It isn't dead in 25 years. I could see it coming, then though. Still, I have taken a LOT of pictures since then. So, no, by all means, consider what you like and enjoy the camera.

I shoot a D750, and leave a 24-70 F2.8 as the default lens most of the time. It is a great choice that takes great pictures. Even if that dire prediction does come true, will you get back to India in 5 years to retake those photos?

 

[ApfelKuchen]

Would you say that the lens will no longer be as useful as now? I was under the impression that the law of optics don't allow the lens to be much smaller or even light (except use of different materials but it won't be radical) and that is also the reason why lens technology hasn't changed that extremely unlike the cameras. So the body I might upgrade in 6-8 years and I think I'm ok with that if the need arises but the glass I would hope I will never upgrade nor will the technology change that extremely in that area. Was I under a wrong impression?

The laws of optics don't change - if your next camera body is also a full-frame (FF) format, then that lens will serve you very well for many years.

However, a lens for a FF camera is significantly larger and heavier than a lens for a smaller format like APS-C or Micro Four Thirds. The smaller the sensor/film, the smaller the camera and lens can be. The point I was trying to make is that you're locking yourself into a large, heavy format and the trend is likely to be away from the FF format as image quality in sensors continues to improve.

How much of a size and weight difference?

Lenses (chosen for rough equivalence):
FF: Nikon 24-70mm f2.8 - 2.36 lbs/1070 grams - 6.1"/155m long
APS-C: 16-47mm (equivalent to a 24-70mm on a FF camera) closest Nikon equivalent Nikon 17-55mm f2.8 1.66 lbs./755 grams - 4.35"/111mm long
Micro four thirds: 12-35mm (equivalent to 24-70mm on a FF camera) Olympus 12-40mm f2.8 0.84 lbs./382 grams 3.31"/84mm

Camera bodies:
Nikon D750 (FF) 750 g (1.65 lb) 141 x 113 x 78 mm (5.55 x 4.45 x 3.07″) (1.82 kg/4.05 lbs. with above lens)
Nikon D90 (APS-C) 703 g (1.55 lb) 132 x 103 x 77 mm (5.2 x 4.06 x 3.03″) (1.458 kg/3.21 lbs. with above lens)
Olympus OM-D E-M10 II (Micro Four Thirds) 390 g (0.86 lb) 120 x 83 x 47 mm (4.72 x 3.27 x 1.85″) (772 g /1.7 lbs. with above lens)

 

[v3rlon]

The laws of optics don't change - if your next camera body is also a full-frame (FF) format, then that lens will serve you very well for many years.

However, a lens for a FF camera is significantly larger and heavier than a lens for a smaller format like APS-C or Micro Four Thirds. The smaller the sensor/film, the smaller the camera and lens can be. The point I was trying to make is that you're locking yourself into a large, heavy format and the trend is likely to be away from the FF format as image quality in sensors continues to improve.

How much of a size and weight difference?

Lenses (chosen for rough equivalence):
FF: Nikon 24-70mm f2.8 - 2.36 lbs/1070 grams - 6.1"/155m long
APS-C: 16-47mm (equivalent to a 24-70mm on a FF camera) closest Nikon equivalent Nikon 17-55mm f2.8 1.66 lbs./755 grams - 4.35"/111mm long
Micro four thirds: 12-35mm (equivalent to 24-70mm on a FF camera) Olympus 12-40mm f2.8 0.84 lbs./382 grams 3.31"/84mm

Camera bodies:
Nikon D750 (FF) 750 g (1.65 lb) 141 x 113 x 78 mm (5.55 x 4.45 x 3.07″) (1.82 kg/4.05 lbs. with above lens)
Nikon D90 (APS-C) 703 g (1.55 lb) 132 x 103 x 77 mm (5.2 x 4.06 x 3.03″) (1.458 kg/3.21 lbs. with above lens)
Olympus OM-D E-M10 II (Micro Four Thirds) 390 g (0.86 lb) 120 x 83 x 47 mm (4.72 x 3.27 x 1.85″) (772 g /1.7 lbs. with above lens)

[doublepost=1456891695][/doublepost]

The laws of optics don't change - if your next camera body is also a full-frame (FF) format, then that lens will serve you very well for many years.

However, a lens for a FF camera is significantly larger and heavier than a lens for a smaller format like APS-C or Micro Four Thirds. The smaller the sensor/film, the smaller the camera and lens can be. The point I was trying to make is that you're locking yourself into a large, heavy format and the trend is likely to be away from the FF format as image quality in sensors continues to improve.

How much of a size and weight difference?

Lenses (chosen for rough equivalence):
FF: Nikon 24-70mm f2.8 - 2.36 lbs/1070 grams - 6.1"/155m long
APS-C: 16-47mm (equivalent to a 24-70mm on a FF camera) closest Nikon equivalent Nikon 17-55mm f2.8 1.66 lbs./755 grams - 4.35"/111mm long
Micro four thirds: 12-35mm (equivalent to 24-70mm on a FF camera) Olympus 12-40mm f2.8 0.84 lbs./382 grams 3.31"/84mm

Camera bodies:
Nikon D750 (FF) 750 g (1.65 lb) 141 x 113 x 78 mm (5.55 x 4.45 x 3.07″) (1.82 kg/4.05 lbs. with above lens)
Nikon D90 (APS-C) 703 g (1.55 lb) 132 x 103 x 77 mm (5.2 x 4.06 x 3.03″) (1.458 kg/3.21 lbs. with above lens)
Olympus OM-D E-M10 II (Micro Four Thirds) 390 g (0.86 lb) 120 x 83 x 47 mm (4.72 x 3.27 x 1.85″) (772 g /1.7 lbs. with above lens)

It doesn't matter what the trend is, only what is the correct camera for her wants/needs.

The trend is front wheel drive, but not in my cars.
Trend is auto-tuned angsty singers, but not in my playlist. See?

 

[Moakesy]

The D750 + 24-70 2.8 VR lens sounds like a great choice. You may want to consider the 70-200 2.8 as an alternative, but it depends on what range suits your needs the best.

I started off wanting the 24-70, but am very pleased I went for the 70-200 instead, as it better suited to the pictures I mainly take (more sports & people than landscapes). I do have a wider lens though for the occasional landscape. I only mention it as an potential alternative, you know your own needs.

One other point to note, I think it was you who said in your original thread about going to Grays of Westminster. If that was you, you might find you get more than Nikon's £250 in part exchange. I was very surprised that I got £30 more than expected.....and if I'd taken the battery charger with me I'd have got more.

I left it at home to sell on eBay, which turned out to be a mistake! Greys said if I'd brought the charger with me, they'd have stuck on an extra £35. It wasn't worth the train fair to take it back in, so in the end I sold it on eBay for £10.

It's worth taking in the boxes and all the bits if you have them.

 

[Freida]

Thank you guys for your input. I think after reading all these + some more reviews and impressions from real people I think I come to the conclusion that I am going to bite the bullet and treat myself. Its expensive to fork out so much money in one go but I think it will be worth it. And if not and I hate myself for doing it then I can always sell it on ebay and account the money loss in the difference as a price of a rental.
So on saturday I will go to Graysofwestminster and will treat myself.
As its my first experience with FX format and I'm not good at setting things up, is there something I should check or be careful when purchasing? Is there a checklist one should follow or will they do it for me in the shop.
Graysofwestminster are trustworthy, right? I think they have great reputation so there is no risk of being 'cheated', correct?

 

[kenoh]

Thank you guys for your input. I think after reading all these + some more reviews and impressions from real people I think I come to the conclusion that I am going to bite the bullet and treat myself. Its expensive to fork out so much money in one go but I think it will be worth it. And if not and I hate myself for doing it then I can always sell it on ebay and account the money loss in the difference as a price of a rental.
So on saturday I will go to Graysofwestminster and will treat myself.
As its my first experience with FX format and I'm not good at setting things up, is there something I should check or be careful when purchasing? Is there a checklist one should follow or will they do it for me in the shop.
Graysofwestminster are trustworthy, right? I think they have great reputation so there is no risk of being 'cheated', correct?

I will make it simple for you... everyone has an opinion but I will reduce it to the basics.

The D750 is an incredible body. Look at the shots that the guys on here produce with it.
The lens is a cracker! one of the holy trinity.

You are a Nikon shooter so are used to the format. Nothing you say suggests you need to go small and light as an immediate priority.

Yes, over time it will depreciate in value but think of all the time you will have enjoying it in the meantime.

It is not a lemon of a setup, it is about as good as you can get and will be a massive upgrade from where you are today.

Do it, enjoy it, and love it. Shoot with it everyday! it fits your needs now, it will fit your needs in the future you are not wasting money you are spending a lot, but not throwing it away. Nikon DSLR is not going anywhere anytime soon and good glass is good glass.

Don't over analyse, hit purchase and channel the energy into enjoying it and making pictures.

and post here with your images so we can enjoy them too!

 

[Freida]

EDITED (its non VR - my bad) Here is one question I've just noticed.
With the rebate the D750 + 24-70 2.8 VR = £2784
however, D810 kit with 24-70 2.8 = £2850

Now, D810 is a bit heavier and the file size is bigger.

But wouldn't it be better to get the D810? How is the video on D810 compared to D750?

Argh...... now I'm confused.

 

[Freida]

Its almost tempting to buy the D810 kit and sell the D810 body and get D750 + make small profit.

 

[kenoh]

Here is one question I've just noticed.
With the rebate the D750 + 24-70 2.8 VR = £2784
however, D810 kit with 24-70 2.8 VR = £2850

Now, D810 is a bit heavier and the file size is bigger.

But wouldn't it be better to get the D810? How is the video on D810 compared to D750?

Argh...... now I'm confused.

I am not a Nikon guy but I thought the D750 was a newer generation? doesnt it have some things that the D8

Its almost tempting to buy the D810 kit and sell the D810 body and get D750 + make small profit.

OK, you need to explain the profit bit... and have you got a buyer lined up? if not. go with the D750 and be happy you have a great kit would be my idea.

The 810 is great, the 750 is great. Either is an option. I suppose if your priority is still images, then the 810 has the cracking Sony sensor in it. It is incredible... I honestly doubt that unless there is nothing on the specs that jumps out as an issue then they will be equally good for you.

 

[Moakesy]

So on saturday I will go to Graysofwestminster and will treat myself.
As its my first experience with FX format and I'm not good at setting things up, is there something I should check or be careful when purchasing? Is there a checklist one should follow or will they do it for me in the shop.
Graysofwestminster are trustworthy, right? I think they have great reputation so there is no risk of being 'cheated', correct?

Greys are fantastic, tell them what your thoughts are and they listen and advise accordingly. They deserve every bit of their reputation. No pressure, no upselling, just expert advice by great people. Allow for a minimum of one hour in there, more like two hours (time will fly by).

Here is one question I've just noticed.
With the rebate the D750 + 24-70 2.8 VR = £2784
however, D810 kit with 24-70 2.8 VR = £2850

Now, D810 is a bit heavier and the file size is bigger.

But wouldn't it be better to get the D810? How is the video on D810 compared to D750?

Argh...... now I'm confused.

Wow, that is quite incredible...less that £100 between the two? Again.....be honest with your thoughts with the guys in the shop, they won't mind and will advise you on the differences. You will also be able to hold both in your hand and compare.
[doublepost=1456923196][/doublepost]One other thing to note, and a slight correction....

Whilst they won't upsell to try and get you to purchase a model you don't need, they will offer their 'Nikon Owner' scheme. This gives an extra years worth of warranty on any kit you buy from them (so 2yrs vs 1yr), a quarterly magazine and discounts on their training sessions.

I paid for the basic membership, as £60 seemed quite cheap for an extra years warranty on five different bits of kit. I now get regular emails to join their courses, such as 'D750 Masterclass', 'Night time shoots in London' or 'Demystifying Adobe Photoshop Lightroom'. They may or may not be of interest for you....I find them quite expensive, even with the discounted rates.....but I may still give one a go if I see one that I'm particularly tempted by.

I thought it worth mentioning.....as it might be something of interest.

 

[JDDavis]

Money is actually kind of worthless unless you use it for something. Only you can decide the things / services that you need and want that is worth trading your money for. Photography can be an experience that enriches your life and I would imagine just about everyone on this forum would agree that it's something worth trading some of our hard earned money for. That money I spent on my D750 was in no way making my life any better sitting in my bank account. I'm thankful that I am in a position that I could spend it. Moving to the D750 allowed me to expand my "artistic" vision because it opened up new scenarios in which I could still get quality images. That sounds pretty cheesy but that's where I felt the value was. If I was simply upgrading to own a "pro" camera that spit out big files then I'd have to question why I really wanted it.

No camera body or lens is really a "lifetime" kit. You may actually hold on to it for your lifetime but you can't go into the decision justifying the purchase by telling yourself it's ok because it's a lifetime purchase. Crap happens. You may get the "bug" and be the first in line for the next D750. You may drop your 24-70 off a bridge. Tech may and will change to something that's un-ignorable. Committing yourself to the "lifetime" justification is just too much pressure to operate under. If you have the funds, are willing to spend them, and you're not sacrificing something of greater value to you then just go for it and don't look back.

Best of luck and my .02 is the D810 is an amazing camera but I think the D750 is pretty close to the sweet spot in the FF world for physical size, performance, and file size (24mp).

 

[Apple fanboy]

EDITED (its non VR - my bad) Here is one question I've just noticed.
With the rebate the D750 + 24-70 2.8 VR = £2784
however, D810 kit with 24-70 2.8 = £2850

Now, D810 is a bit heavier and the file size is bigger.

But wouldn't it be better to get the D810? How is the video on D810 compared to D750?

Argh...... now I'm confused.

D750 is newer but both are great cameras. The body of the D810 is a little bigger. Try them both in your hands and see which you prefer. You won't make a bad choice. I was trying to decide the same thing and decided on the D750 for the movable screen. Really good for low shots when you don't want to lie on the floor like this one.
_DSC0082 by apple fanboy1, on Flickr

A good price site to following the UK is this one.
http://www.camerapricebuster.co.uk/Nikon/Nikon-Digital-SLRs/Nikon-D750-Camera-Body

Also from here http://www.dpreview.com/products/compare/side-by-side?products=nikon_d750&products=nikon_d810
you can see that both cameras are very similar! Just relax, make your decision and go for it. You'll enjoy it!
[doublepost=1456941602][/doublepost]

I am not a Nikon guy

We all have our cross to bare!

 

[kenoh]

D750 is newer but both are great cameras. The body of the D810 is a little bigger. Try them both in your hands and see which you prefer. You won't make a bad choice. I was trying to decide the same thing and decided on the D750 for the movable screen. Really good for low shots when you don't want to lie on the floor like this one.
_DSC0082 by apple fanboy1, on Flickr

A good price site to following the UK is this one.
http://www.camerapricebuster.co.uk/Nikon/Nikon-Digital-SLRs/Nikon-D750-Camera-Body

Also from here http://www.dpreview.com/products/compare/side-by-side?products=nikon_d750&products=nikon_d810
you can see that both cameras are very similar! Just relax, make your decision and go for it. You'll enjoy it!
[doublepost=1456941602][/doublepost]

We all have our cross to bare!

I know mate, and I feel for you, I am so glad to be one of the lucky ones who went Sony...

 

[Apple fanboy]

I know mate, and I feel for you, I am so glad to be one of the amateur ones who went Sony...

Fixed that for you

 

[kenoh]

Fixed that for you

Ha ha ha ha.... that's it, I am coming to the show to poke you in the eye.... your viewfinder eye!

 

[Apple fanboy]

Ha ha ha ha.... that's it, I am coming to the show to poke you in the eye.... your viewfinder eye!

I'll see you there. I'll be the one NOT wearing his camera round his neck with the biggest lens attached! Why do people do that at a show?

 

[ApfelKuchen]

[doublepost=1456891695][/doublepost]

It doesn't matter what the trend is, only what is the correct camera for her wants/needs.

The trend is front wheel drive, but not in my cars.
Trend is auto-tuned angsty singers, but not in my playlist. See?

Tech trends are most definitely pertinent to a question of "lifetime." Whether one follows those trends is, as you point out, still a personal decision. Some people must immediately follow the latest trend, others refuse to budge until whatever it may be is pried from their cold, dead hands. Most people fall somewhere in the middle.

Choosing the "correct" equipment (or spouse) can be a complex decision, especially when "lifetime" is one of those specified wants/needs. "Will this be good for a lifetime," is the question that was asked. It's often asked by people contemplating the purchase of high-end gear. Future-proofing, as anyone who spends time at a computing forum should know, is a risk sport.

I didn't comment on whether it was a great choice today. It certainly could be a fabulous choice for today. (I'm not sure I'd want to carry that kit around while hiking, hence my particular bias in favor of "lighter" - especially as I'd have to carry a heavier tripod as well.) But stuff changes, and not everyone is immune to the winds of change. For me, I would never consider either a computer or a camera as a "forever" decision.

 

[ProjectManager101]

I would go for a D330. It is cheaper and it is awesome, 24 MP.
I have a D50 I wanted to use as you said and I basically never used it, still collecting dust. I got the D330 and is awesome, still haven't used it that much, just in December.

So, if you are going to leave something collecting dust... the D750 is way too much technology, get a Samsung smart phone instead, it takes awesome pictures, light years better than the iPhone and is cheaper and is a phone.