Am I crazy? D750

[lizardofwoz]

I am always amused by the size and weight arguments against DSLR cameras. What a bunch of wimps!

Try working for an eight-hour day with a Mamiya RB67 with Metz CT60 flash attached, together with the Metz separate dryfit battery pack. Two or three interchangeable film backs - clients often wanted B&W, colour neg and transparencies, all at the same time. A separate bag carrying rolls of 120 film and a spare battery for the Metz. A DSLR would have seemed like an impossible dream of lightness and convenience back in those days.

Too heavy? Too bulky? Get real

(I forgot to mention the damn Lunasix swinging around the neck getting in the way...)

I am getting forgetful. I didn't include the mandatory parts resumé:

Apple stuff. Nikon stuff. Mamiya stuff. Sinar stuff. Elinchrom stuff etc., etc., etc.

 

[JDDavis]

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.

C.S. Lewis said something to the effect of...The past is gone. The future hasn't happened yet. The present is the only thing we experience that might approximate eternity. So, don't forget to live in the present and enjoy it. Steven Hawking would tell you that nothing is forever that exists in space time except that time itself can literally "take forever" at a certain distance from a massively dense object such as a black hole. Either way, that's deep, and I agree. There are no forever purchases.

BTW, don't discount the "lightness" of the D750. With the right lens it's no burden at all to hike with all day. Maybe not with a 70-200 or a 200-500 but it's lug-ability is one of the reasons I chose it over the D810 (or D61).

 

[kenoh]

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?

Probably because their white pro zoom is the most expensive lens they own and they want people to see they spend a fortune on their camera ergo they must be a good photographer.

Whoever thought it was a good idea to paint big pro zooms white needs to have a chat with someone about the concept of less is more, stealth and discretion!
[doublepost=1456987364][/doublepost]

I am always amused by the size and weight arguments against DSLR cameras. What a bunch of wimps!

Try working for an eight-hour day with a Mamiya RB67 with Metz CT60 flash attached, together with the Metz separate dryfit battery pack. Two or three interchangeable film backs - clients often wanted B&W, colour neg and transparencies, all at the same time. A separate bag carrying rolls of 120 film and a spare battery for the Metz. A DSLR would have seemed like an impossible dream of lightness and convenience back in those days.

Too heavy? Too bulky? Get real

Here we go... Not a wimp thing, just a no need for it thing.

 

[The Bad Guy]

Probably because their white pro zoom is the most expensive lens they own and they want people to see they spend a fortune on their camera ergo they must be a good photographer

My short(ish) 85mm cost and weighs a lot more than my expensive white zoom...

 

[kenoh]

My short(ish) 85mm cost and weighs a lot more than my expensive white zoom...

Yep. My Summiluxes cost more than double my 70-200 white sony pap lens..

So they are misinformed too...

 

[The Bad Guy]

Yep. My Summiluxes cost more than double my 70-200 white sony pap lens..

So they are misinformed too...

What have you got against white zooms, Ken?

 

[Freida]

My short(ish) 85mm cost and weighs a lot more than my expensive white zoom...

What does white zoom mean?
Am I gonna look like a fool with 24-70 2.8?

 

[Cheese&Apple]

What does white zoom mean?
Am I gonna look like a fool with 24-70 2.8?

No, you'll be just fine Freida. "White zoom" is a reference to that horrid colour manufacturers like Canon like to apply to their long lenses.

Nikon shooters don't have to worry about people pointing at their lenses and giggling.

~ Peter

 

[kenoh]

What have you got against white zooms, Ken?

Too much bling, too much attention grabbing
[doublepost=1457019077][/doublepost]

What does white zoom mean?
Am I gonna look like a fool with 24-70 2.8?

No you are fine.

Top end Canon super-teles are painted white as are some selected Sony G lenses... Just trying to provoke the Canonistas on here...

 

[Cheese&Apple]

Top end Canon super-teles are painted white as are some selected Sony G lenses... Just trying to provoke the Canonistas on here...

You have to be very careful with that Ken...they are, for good reason, an insecure bunch.

 

[Freida]

I see
Hehe

 

[The Bad Guy]

Too much bling, too much attention grabbing
[doublepost=1457019077][/doublepost]
No you are fine.

Top end Canon super-teles are painted white as are some selected Sony G lenses... Just trying to provoke the Canonistas on here...

Hahahaha...too much bling. Um, don't you own a Leica? I'd be quiet if I were you.

 

[phrehdd]

Freida, perhaps make a list for yourself of your photo gear expectations. It may start with how well it fits in your hands, ease of control and access to menus all the way to how large a print you might expect to make and of course if low light is important and/or ability to shot fast moving subjects.

There is that old cliche that it really is the photographer who makes the shots not the camera but reality suggests it is both. The question is, will these Nikon offerings and lenses really take you to that "level" that you expect and is it worth the price of admission. Remember, things change very quickly in photo gear because of photo sensor advancement. To me, the lenses are equally important if not more. In my case, I don't need a full frame camera and find that I can make exceptional images and prints with some of the lesser cameras (smaller than FF sensor cameras) because of my experience, type of sensor exploited and good lenses. Some of the latter can be had at quite a bit less than the Nikon cameras and lenses discussed and produce images that are truly outstanding.

If it came down to 700 series vs the 800 series for travel, I have zero problems with either. As another stated, you should handle the cameras to see what works best for you. Chances are both are a touch of overkill. As for lenses, I would be far more interested in VR for the longer lenses and zooms and only consider VR on shorter lenses or zooms if I hand hold at very slow shutter speeds.

 

[lizardofwoz]

Hi Freida. It is too easy to become hung up on the equipment. If you buy the 750 and you are happy with its performance, that fact is not going to change a few years down the track when the 750 has morphed into the gold-plated supersized sensor 750000. Phredd was correct in that it is really all about the photographer's skills and his/her ability to see a picture. Without that basic ability no amount of fancy lenses from exotic manufacturers is going to improve your pictures. Even learning the elements of good composition will not produce fantastic art if you cannot imagine a picture. Learning the compositional 'rules' are only guidelines that will lift your work out of the holiday snap category but will not necessarily make it memorable.

I have been in camera clubs where the main topic of conversation has been all about the latest cameras and 'glass', and not about the excellence of their photography. The consequence is that their work becomes dreary and repetitive, and they are surprised when some newcomer with very modest gear wins their club competitions with outstanding pictures.

You can see that principle at work in here too. Notice that the really outstanding work - and some of it in this forum is absolutely stunning and comparable to the best professional work - is mostly coming from the photographers not busily describing their latest super-lens.

There is only one way for you to find out... and it is the hard way. Buy your heart's desire and take lots of pictures. You will know fairly quickly if you are in that rare percentage who could use a Box Brownie and make art

Good luck

Apple, Nikon, Mamiya, Sinar etc., etc., etc.

 

[kenoh]

Hahahaha...too much bling. Um, don't you own a Leica? I'd be quiet if I were you.

Good point, well made...

 

[Freida]

So, I think I'm not going to buy the setup this weekend as originally planned as I received a suggestion to wait few weeks as things might change. I didn't get more so I wonder if that means that there will be a new camera from Nikon or there will be new rebate? Anyone heard anything, please?

 

[Apple fanboy]

So, I think I'm not going to buy the setup this weekend as originally planned as I received a suggestion to wait few weeks as things might change. I didn't get more so I wonder if that means that there will be a new camera from Nikon or there will be new rebate? Anyone heard anything, please?

No new cameras unless you are looking at a D500 or D5 in the next little while. No idea on rebates, but they usually run something in spring, but usually on the cheaper lenses and body combos, not that sweet setup you are looking at!

 

[jerwin]

I've check my usage and this range should cover around 80% of what I shoot.

Remember the crop factor! A 24-70 lens on a D750 is equivalent to a 16--45mm lens on a D90

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.

The D3300 is an entry level body. There's a lot that's missing besides focus points.

 

[mofunk]

So, I think I'm not going to buy the setup this weekend as originally planned as I received a suggestion to wait few weeks as things might change. I didn't get more so I wonder if that means that there will be a new camera from Nikon or there will be new rebate? Anyone heard anything, please?

The current price is cheaper than what I paid a few months ago. I'm not mad because its a great camera. Its super fast when it comes to focusing vs my D90. The wifi feature is nice. I used it over the holidays to take family photos.

 

[Freida]

Remember the crop factor! A 24-70 lens on a D750 is equivalent to a 16--45mm lens on a D90

Yeah, I've checked in Aperture the real zoom as I wanted to check how much I will be limited when i go from crop to normal. And it turned out that I really don't use that much above 70mm. Yeah, there were cases in zoo and stuff when I wanted to zoom in but those were specific case. the 24-70 should cover the most of my usage and eventually I might buy 70-200 (or different) when I actually need it to justify the cost.

 

[Apple fanboy]

Yeah, I've checked in Aperture the real zoom as I wanted to check how much I will be limited when i go from crop to normal. And it turned out that I really don't use that much above 70mm. Yeah, there were cases in zoo and stuff when I wanted to zoom in but those were specific case. the 24-70 should cover the most of my usage and eventually I might buy 70-200 (or different) when I actually need it to justify the cost.

The 70-300 is not a bad shout for a fraction of the price. I have both, but find the 70-300 gets more outings due to the light weight and the extra 100mm comes in handy. The difference in IQ isn't that much.

 

[Freida]

The current price is cheaper than what I paid a few months ago. I'm not mad because its a great camera. Its super fast when it comes to focusing vs my D90. The wifi feature is nice. I used it over the holidays to take family photos.

Can I ask you please, how noisy it is compared to D90? I read reviews that D810 is super quiet compared to D750 but I just wanna know if its the same noise level as D90 or if its worse
Thanks

 

[Apple fanboy]

Can I ask you please, how noisy it is compared to D90? I read reviews that D810 is super quiet compared to D750 but I just wanna know if its the same noise level as D90 or if its worse
Thanks

D750 is awesome on noise. I'm sure the D810 is good to, but trust me you will notice a huge difference from your D90. Especially with good software. DXO optics 10 is awesome for noise reduction.

 

[kenoh]

D750 is awesome on noise. I'm sure the D810 is good to, but trust me you will notice a huge difference from your D90. Especially with good software. DXO optics 10 is awesome for noise reduction.

Lol was the question meant around audible noise no? How loud is it?
[doublepost=1457186963][/doublepost]

Lol was the question meant around audible noise no? How loud is it?

Sony is silent when you need it BTW Just in case you were wondering. You can use it on a library without getting told off

 

[Apple fanboy]

Lol was the question meant around audible noise no? How loud is it?
[doublepost=1457186963][/doublepost]

Sony is silent when you need it BTW Just in case you were wondering. You can use it on a library without getting told off

What an idiot! So it's certinly quieter than my old D300 used to be. Comparable to my D7100. In quiet mode it seems quiet enough to me. I've photographed squirrels without any issues.