Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
The D6XX was superior to the D700 in every regard except supposedly AF. The D750 is supposed to focus better in low light than any Nikon dslr so far. What would replace the D700 for you?

The D700 was "professional" level camera while Nikon themselves say on their website that the D750 is an "enthusiast" level camera. Now I definitely do not want to get into a huge debate as to what qualifies a person or a piece of gear as "pro", but I will say this: when you are using the camera all day, every day there are little things that matter. Things like build quality, the amount of detail shown on the top-panel LCD, sync speed (albeit just 1/3 of a stop), and having specific switches / buttons for each camera function.

I have not handled the D750 (or even the D610 for that matter), but I own two D700s and have used the D7000 extensively & D7100 a little. The feel of these cameras is completely different. When you put a heavy lens like the 70-200 on the front of a pro-level body, the magnesium alloy front panel makes a solid connection that you feel you can really trust. Personally, I never felt 100% confident putting such a heavy lens on a lower level camera - it always felt just a little fragile to me. That's not to say Nikon's lower level cameras are not well built - they are, but the pro bodies are just at a different level. We're obviously looking at different needs for different users here.

Similarly, I prefer having a button for each function, not having one button which does many different things depending on which mode or menu you're in. For most people this won't be a deal breaker, but for those whose camera rarely leaves their hands it can make all the difference. Again, little things.

I will not be selling my D700s to buy D750s because I do not feel like it's an upgrade. It's more of a side-step. I'd get some features that I know I'll like, but will lose many others that I use every single time I pick up the camera.

To answer your question about what a real D700 update would look like - I think most of us hoped for the D610 sensor in a D810 body.

I'm really not trying to talk down Nikon's enthusiast level cameras. They're fantastic, and for most people the D750 will be a massive upgrade. I'm just trying to explain what (I think) a lot of people are looking for in a "true D700 successor" camera and why the D750 is not it. (apologies for the long response)

Best regards.

----------

The current high end Nikons can do high speed shutter syncing.

High speed sync can be a handy option from time to time, but it's not the same thing.

High speed sync strobes the flash so multiple pulses of light paint in strips of the frame as the shutter moves. But each time you increase your shutter speed by a stop, the maximum flash power drops by a stop. Also, it only works with the very latest flashes which support iTTL (not cheap).

On the other hand, with my D70 and an old SB24 I could shoot at f/2.8 and still overpower the midday sun because it happily synced at 1/2000 of a second with full-power flash.

Cheers!
 
Hali

The D700 was "professional" level camera while Nikon themselves say on their website that the D750 is an "enthusiast" level camera. Now I definitely do not want to get into a huge debate as to what qualifies a person or a piece of gear as "pro", but I will say this: when you are using the camera all day, every day there are little things that matter. Things like build quality, the amount of detail shown on the top-panel LCD, sync speed (albeit just 1/3 of a stop), and having specific switches / buttons for each camera function.

I have not handled the D750 (or even the D610 for that matter), but I own two D700s and have used the D7000 extensively & D7100 a little. The feel of these cameras is completely different. When you put a heavy lens like the 70-200 on the front of a pro-level body, the magnesium alloy front panel makes a solid connection that you feel you can really trust. Personally, I never felt 100% confident putting such a heavy lens on a lower level camera - it always felt just a little fragile to me. That's not to say Nikon's lower level cameras are not well built - they are, but the pro bodies are just at a different level. We're obviously looking at different needs for different users here.

Similarly, I prefer having a button for each function, not having one button which does many different things depending on which mode or menu you're in. For most people this won't be a deal breaker, but for those whose camera rarely leaves their hands it can make all the difference. Again, little things.

I will not be selling my D700s to buy D750s because I do not feel like it's an upgrade. It's more of a side-step. I'd get some features that I know I'll like, but will lose many others that I use every single time I pick up the camera.

To answer your question about what a real D700 update would look like - I think most of us hoped for the D610 sensor in a D810 body.

I'm really not trying to talk down Nikon's enthusiast level cameras. They're fantastic, and for most people the D750 will be a massive upgrade. I'm just trying to explain what (I think) a lot of people are looking for in a "true D700 successor" camera and why the D750 is not it. (apologies for the long response)

Best regards.

----------



High speed sync can be a handy option from time to time, but it's not the same thing.

High speed sync strobes the flash so multiple pulses of light paint in strips of the frame as the shutter moves. But each time you increase your shutter speed by a stop, the maximum flash power drops by a stop. Also, it only works with the very latest flashes which support iTTL (not cheap).

On the other hand, with my D70 and an old SB24 I could shoot at f/2.8 and still overpower the midday sun because it happily synced at 1/2000 of a second with full-power flash.

Cheers!
You gave a lot of good info here and I agree, but I have to add one thing.
Except for the different button layout, the "body quality" of the D700 and D800 is the same as the D750/D610. The lens mount is not integrated into the magnesium body. This is a popular misconception, because product pictures suggest otherwise. Read up on it. The fear of it not supporting lenses properly has no basis in reality.
 
You gave a lot of good info here and I agree, but I have to add one thing.
Except for the different button layout, the "body quality" of the D700 and D800 is the same as the D750/D610. The lens mount is not integrated into the magnesium body. This is a popular misconception, because product pictures suggest otherwise. Read up on it. The fear of it not supporting lenses properly has no basis in reality.

I don't think that's correct.

The pro level cameras have an all magnesium frame. There is a polycarbonate overlay to give shape to the front of the camera, but the metal lens mount is attached directly to the magnesium frame.

The enthusiast level cameras have a magnesium back and top, but there is no metal frame to the front of the camera. Therefore the metal lens mount is attached to the polycarbonate (carbon fibre in the case off the D750) faceplate. See what happened to this guy's D600 when it went over on a tripod: http://forum.nikonrumors.com/discussion/250/d600-cracked-body/p1

I'm not sure what gear you have, but if you get the opportunity, try mounting a 70-200 on the D610, then immediately after on the D810/D4. You'll feel that it's completely different. The pro bodies honestly feel much stronger - it's not just in my mind.

That's my understanding anyway, but as you suggest I'll go and read up on it as I could be mistaken.

Best regards.
 
The enthusiast level cameras have a magnesium back and top, but there is no metal frame to the front of the camera. Therefore the metal lens mount is attached to the polycarbonate (carbon fibre in the case off the D750) faceplate. See what happened to this guy's D600 when it went over on a tripod: http://forum.nikonrumors.com/discussion/250/d600-cracked-body/p1.
I've read this exact same thread before :)
I also know of the exact same case with a D800 + lens falling of the tripod and it also cracked.
The guy sent his D800 to Nikon for repair and Nikon said broken magnesium alloy bodies can not be repaired. Now if you send in a broken D600 body it can actually be repaired quite cheaply.

Like I said the commercial images of the D800 and even D4 are deceptive. To my knowledge the lense mount is just screwed onto the body. Same as any other Nikon DSLR. I have never seen any test that would suggest that the all magnesium alloy bodies are any more rugged than plastic. They are harder to repair and heavier though!

Photography is a lot about the experience, so if the D700 feels so much better to you, then go for it.
Future dslrs will be more like the D7xxx, d6xxx and now d750.
 
I've read this exact same thread before :)
I also know of the exact same case with a D800 + lens falling of the tripod and it also cracked.
The guy sent his D800 to Nikon for repair and Nikon said broken magnesium alloy bodies can not be repaired. Now if you send in a broken D600 body it can actually be repaired quite cheaply.

Like I said the commercial images of the D800 and even D4 are deceptive. To my knowledge the lense mount is just screwed onto the body. Same as any other Nikon DSLR. I have never seen any test that would suggest that the all magnesium alloy bodies are any more rugged than plastic. They are harder to repair and heavier though!

Photography is a lot about the experience, so if the D700 feels so much better to you, then go for it.
Future dslrs will be more like the D7xxx, d6xxx and now d750.


Yes, it could be that the lens mount is designed to break on event of impact. I was told by a Nikon repair person that the speedlight flash mount is designed to be a weak point, and is thus the bracket breaks if the camera is dropped with the flash attached. The mount/bracket point is an easily repaired (and relatively cheap) part.

Also, with a camera + lens drop, something has to absorb the impact so a weak point (which is easily and cheaply repaired) seems like good design to me. I guess forums like this force Nikon to produce their 'pro' bodies with all metal bodies due to the perception that metal is 'better'.

I prefer lighter bodies. And I would prefer a cheap and easily repaired lens mount to break rather than my lens taking all the force.

Just my opinion.
 
Also, with a camera + lens drop, something has to absorb the impact so a weak point (which is easily and cheaply repaired) seems like good design to me. I guess forums like this force Nikon to produce their 'pro' bodies with all metal bodies due to the perception that metal is 'better'.
These are exactly my thoughts. But photography is art and not 100% rational.
(Just look at the Df ;)) If the metal feels better, then it's more enjoyable.
In the long run dslrs will get lighter and smaller and bricks like the D700 or D800 will become rare.
 
If I may... Nikon is DOOOOMED! :p
Seriously, they need to get off their asses and back to the brainstorming step.
 
If I may... Nikon is DOOOOMED! :p
Seriously, they need to get off their asses and back to the brainstorming step.
They still make the dslrs that produce the best image quality.
The low-cost camera market (P&S) is dying, but the high end market is well and alive.
The dslrs are now the best so far.
Nikon is doing the right thing. They are moving the customers to Full Frame.
The smaller sensor market will eventually be taken over by cell phones.

We will also see medium format dslrs for Pros.
 
We will also see medium format dslrs for Pros.

I don't see anything that supports this:

1) MF manufacturers are losing sales.
2) Sensor size is the biggest cost and larger sensors are low-margin items.
3) Even APS-C sensors can produce images for any usage.
4) Even "professional" DSLRs aren't selling as well to pros as the "prosumer" ones.
5) Larger lenses cost more.

Without a significant visual advantage, I can't see the low volume sales of professional bodies supporting this. Now if you include the prosumer bodies like the D8nn and 5Dmk_foo series, then I maybe, but it still doesn't make economic sense- especially when you factor in a new lens mount and lens series for high-resolution digital sensors.

Paul
 
I'm guessing if the D600 didn't have those issues the D610 wouldn't have seen the light of day and the D750 would have been next up. My local camera shop has the D750 and it feels better in the hands than the D600/D610. From the looks of it, its a good win for those who don't want to spend the extra $$ for a D810.

D750 looks pretty solid. The flip screen I can see using. Nice move Nikon
 
Can I ask why? I like the solid shutter mechanism you get on a Nikon.

In addition to Swordio's comments, I will also add that an electronic shutter does not impose a mechanical lifetime to the camera, electronic viewfinder, arbitrary fps, global shutter would be great, and of course, no oil spots ;-).
 
Having had a D800, a D700 a D3s a d7000 and a d7100 I have to say after receiving the D750... The only 2 cameras that are valid to raise above are the 3s and the D800.. The d3s because o matter what, it is built like a tank and works like a machine gun... the D800 because its a bit heftier and has a bit more in terms of buttons and resolution...
Anything else, the D750 stands supreme. D700? yea it was a great cam and yes back then it was "classified" by Nikon as a Pro cam but back then they only had the D700, the D3X and the D3s and the D3 where the last three were a single body and just a few changes. The D750 falls smack in the middle and acutally exceeds some of the points of the D800 and D810. I have to say I like this camera a lot. The 70-200 lens makes a re-asuring CLICK when connected and feels like with the D800, properly mounted and solid. With the 35mm f1.4 on the D750 the focus at night, outside it spot on .. wow.. After the weekend I will post some images but so far.. WOW. this cam just ROCKS!
 
Having had a D800, a D700 a D3s a d7000 and a d7100 I have to say after receiving the D750...

Which one of these smilie things is for gear envy? :confused: Enjoy the new camera. Would love to hear more about it as you get to know it.
 
Damn, the D610 is a steal now!
Refurbished with 30 months full warranty, 30 day return period €910/£720.
It has never been so cheap to enter FX. For a price difference of €1200 I would always recommend the D610.
 
Although I don't shoot as much commercial work as I once did since moving to mostly black and white medium and large format film for fine art, I still do upgrade my digital cameras once they hit 100k cycles. So I currently have the D810, D750 & X100S. I think the 750 is an enormous upgrade over the D700 which I sold two of years ago to get a pair of D800's.

The 750 is almost perfect, the reason I say almost is that it has a loud shutter / mirror action, even louder than the D800 that was the loudest SLR I had used minus my Hasselblad 501/CM's. This is not a deal breaker by any means since the D810 is conversely the quietest SLR I have used. The other thing that took getting used to on the 750 is that when you go to change the image quality, white balance or ISO settings it prompts the rear panel to light up, not always welcome in situations of the political journalism I do.

Other than that, all things considered the new 750 is really a fantastic camera and much better paired with the D810 than the D610 was because I found both the metering and auto white balance on the 610 kind of lousy compared to the 810 so it made post a bit tougher to deal with. The 750 pairs perfectly with the 810 in this regard.
 
Damn, the D610 is a steal now!
Refurbished with 30 months full warranty, 30 day return period €910/£720.
It has never been so cheap to enter FX. For a price difference of €1200 I would always recommend the D610.

That's tempting. Going to wait until The Photography Show in March, and see what deals are around. A D300, 18-55mm and 70-300mm to trade in should get me some discount.
 
Interesting, I look forward to seeing some more.
On a side note, both of your images offend me as you don't have a lens cover on the back of your lens. :(
I thought about making you cringe.
More inapproriate lens pictures on their way. :D
 
Lens used: Nikkor 85mm 1.8g at f2.8, iso6400

ScreenShot2014-10-12at95148AM_zps1f852af7.png


I shot the D750 at 1/1600 (on the left), but was able to shoot the D610 at 1/2000 (on the right) to achieve equal brightness.

Since higher shutter speeds influence IQ at higher ISOs this isn't a fair comparison.
I still think the D750 preserves the colors better even at 6400.
The noise performance seems to be equal up to 25600. With the D610 preserving more details and the D750 more color.
I was able to fix up the D610 in Lr by simply defringing.
 
Lens used: Nikkor 85mm 1.8g at f2.8, iso6400

Image

I shot the D750 at 1/1600 (on the left), but was able to shoot the D610 at 1/2000 (on the right) to achieve equal brightness.

Since higher shutter speeds influence IQ at higher ISOs this isn't a fair comparison.
I still think the D750 preserves the colors better even at 6400.
The noise performance seems to be equal up to 25600. With the D610 preserving more details and the D750 more color.
I was able to fix up the D610 in Lr by simply defringing.
In normal photography, what's the highest ISO you use? With the type of photography I do, I hardly ever go above 800.
 
In normal photography, what's the highest ISO you use? With the type of photography I do, I hardly ever go above 800.
I don't try to go past 200 if possible. But since Germany is not a sunny place at dawn, in the forest or at night on the street much higher comes in handy.
 
Although I don't shoot as much commercial work as I once did since moving to mostly black and white medium and large format film for fine art, I still do upgrade my digital cameras once they hit 100k cycles. So I currently have the D810, D750 & X100S. I think the 750 is an enormous upgrade over the D700 which I sold two of years ago to get a pair of D800's.

The 750 is almost perfect, the reason I say almost is that it has a loud shutter / mirror action, even louder than the D800 that was the loudest SLR I had used minus my Hasselblad 501/CM's. This is not a deal breaker by any means since the D810 is conversely the quietest SLR I have used. The other thing that took getting used to on the 750 is that when you go to change the image quality, white balance or ISO settings it prompts the rear panel to light up, not always welcome in situations of the political journalism I do.

Other than that, all things considered the new 750 is really a fantastic camera and much better paired with the D810 than the D610 was because I found both the metering and auto white balance on the 610 kind of lousy compared to the 810 so it made post a bit tougher to deal with. The 750 pairs perfectly with the 810 in this regard.
What do you mean when you say "it prompts the rear panel to light up"?
 
What do you mean when you say "it prompts the rear panel to light up"?

The back panel lights and shows toggleable options for those settings. This is in addition to the top LCD. It's not a big deal, but should be optional as it's unnecessary in most cases.

Meister- nice comparisons! I agree regarding handling of blacks-- much better than my D600 was at that. I find the high ISO to actually be a little better in most cases though (on the 750).

If anyone wants any test shots I've got my 750 and new 20mm 1.8G sitting next to me at work today and would be more than happy to upload any particular test shots! :D
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.