Select Models wrote:
Twice the megapixels... articulating screen... lighter in weight... built in WiFi... better low light performance... improved Expeed 4 image processor... Clarity option in menu... longer battery life... Flat menu setting for maximum dynamic range... burst rate of 6.5 frames per second... improved auto-focusing with 'group area' AF... 2 SD card slots... U1 and U2 programmable exposure modes... full HD video with 1080p... yeah it's been replaced...

I mentioned 2 simple features that separate out the 'consumer' and 'professional' models and that the D750 either does not have or appears to not have.

photoimager wrote:
Control style as per D600/610/7000 etc so probably no option to lock the aperture / shutter speed and no dedicated AF-On button.

Lower pixel count would aid the buffer emptying and get closer to the D700; WiFi - if you want it then put an EyeFi card into one of the slots; articulating screen - easier to damage / not a rugged feature ...........

The D700 was a D3 without a vertical grip. To be a D700 replacement it would be a D4 without a vertical grip and without the retro styling of the Df. Yes, given sensor technology developments, the image quality might well be better than the D700. However, it is a camera with the emphasis on toys rather than functionality in demanding conditions.

rickspix_uk wrote:
And of course , Ken has a review of it already ! 

http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d750.htm

As if you need to read a Ken Rockwell review. Lemme guess...he LOVES it!

photoimager wrote:
However, it is a camera with the emphasis on toys rather than functionality in demanding conditions.

Exactly.

I shoot a lot in low light, as do a lot of us. What I NEEDED was something at least as good as a D3s under those conditions.

Looks like what they're selling is a D610 with some video improvements. I'm pretty sick of still cameras that have an emphasis on video.

Left-handed Photography wrote:
So what will I do? Most likely sell my D800 and buy the D750. Why? Because although I love the pro feel and features of the D800, I hate the 36MP and want a camera that can focus in near darkness while giving my extended ISO range.

I hear that a lot but I have never understood it.  Why not just shoot in a lower resolution mode?  The camera doesn't force you to shoot 36mp if you don't want to.

I happen to agree.   For everything that I do, 24mp is more than adequate.

Fred Greissing wrote:
As far as market goes Nikon has nailed it IMO.

It's the prefect camera for weddings. Small, light, fast and with state of the art AF.

Perfect enthusiasts sports camera.

Great size for a FF landscape camera.... with the added benefit of weather sealing.

Price point is really good.

It is interesting, they are marketing it as both a pro and enthusiast camera.   I think they see the features you re suggesting as appealing to some pros.  Certainly in terms of image quality it will be fine.

I am anxious to buy one.

Sharing and transferring your favorite D750 photos is fast, easy and fun. Wirelessly connect to the D750 with a compatible smartphone or tablet, browse the camera's memory card, download your favorite shots and then email them, text them or upload them to your favorite website. You can also use your smart device as a remote monitor and control for the D750—see what the camera sees and fire the shutter. For faster wireless transfers, transmit images over FTP using the WT-5A Wireless Transmitter + UT-1 Communication Unit. (Advanced shooters can use a web browser on a smartphone or tablet in HTTP mode to operate camera controls and begin Live View shooting.)

The in camera Wi-Fi is like other cameras.  The only thing you can connect to is a tablet.  The reason is that the table connects to the camera, so there is no FTP support.

What is interesting though is that it supports the UT-1 and WT-5A combination.  That is an expensive solution for Wi-Fi but it is incredibly capable.  It is interesting that they built support for that into the camera.

Fred Greissing wrote:
As far as market goes Nikon has nailed it IMO.

It's the prefect camera for weddings. Small, light, fast and with state of the art AF.

Perfect enthusiasts sports camera.

Great size for a FF landscape camera.... with the added benefit of weather sealing.

Price point is really good.

Exactly.  Now to see what Canon comes up with in response (give the 6D improvement).

GPS Studio Services wrote:

I hear that a lot but I have never understood it.  Why not just shoot in a lower resolution mode?  The camera doesn't force you to shoot 36mp if you don't want to.

I happen to agree.   For everything that I do, 24mp is more than adequate.

I used to ask that as well, but if you like shooting RAW, you're stuck with the max format.

Viator Defessus Photos wrote:
I think Nikon just did a really good job of killing market demand for the D610. I love my D600 and my D610 but I can't see many new buyers choosing a D6x0 over this for $400.

I had plans to pick up the D610 until I heard the D750 news. The D610 was a perfect fit for what I shoot, but the D750 is better. So yes, you're probably right. Nikon kept out some features you'll find in the D810, no true with the D610.

Fred Greissing wrote:
As far as market goes Nikon has nailed it IMO.

It's the prefect camera for weddings. Small, light, fast and with state of the art AF.

Perfect enthusiasts sports camera.

Great size for a FF landscape camera.... with the added benefit of weather sealing.

Price point is really good.

Not until they jack the flash sync speed back up to 1/500sec. The only reason that I'm still using my D70s a lot is that hi speed flash sync.

Christopher Hartman wrote:

I used to ask that as well, but if you like shooting RAW, you're stuck with the max format.

I you shoot RAW in crop mode you don't get 36mp. You get something less.

Chuckarelei wrote:
Not until they jack the flash sync speed back up to 1/500sec. The only reason that I'm still using my D70s a lot is that hi speed flash sync.

That isn't going to happen.  The only way it can be done is with a CCD sensor.  CMOS takes a little time to ramp up whereas CCD is instantaneous.  When they went from the D70 to the D200, they didn't make it work either even though the D200 was CCD.

Zack Zoll wrote:
This camera - and the reception it's getting here - proves that it's not always best to give the customer what they say they want.

Let's look at Nikon's recent track record. They responded to complaints that the 1 series lacks fast primes by releasing 50mm 1.8 and 85mm 1.2 equivalents. Nobody buys them. They respond to(correct) complaints about  the D600 by making the D610, and servicing the cameras for free. The Internet decides the D6x0 series is poison. They finally make a D700 replacement with all the features common on everyone's 'must have' list, and nobody is happy because it omits things that they personally wanted.

And let's be honest ... most people weren't going to be happy anyway, unless they got a D4s without the vertical grip for $2000.

And after all this pandering, people still gripe that Nikon isn't listening.

Don't get me wrong, I'm no Nikon fanboy. Aside from a camera I've had since the 80s, I don't own any Nikon gear. But the fact is that no camera company in recent memory has responded as well to consumer feedback as Nikon, and all they get for it is complaints, and a product line that's stretched too thin.

There are many things I like about the camera, but it just is not enough to get me to want to replace either my D700 nor D800.

I don't know what other people want most, I only know what I want and need most. (Which I have said many things in the past.)

For me personally, I mostly want U1/U2 being controllable by a AF-On/AE-L type right-thumb button, and a new professional DX body.  Either of those features, and I would likely pre-order the camera.

Otherwise, i don't care, there are plenty of options in the FX lineup, and it is the DX lineup that is currently weak on the high end.

As for the primes and stuff, am I the only one who thinks that maybe all this gear is increasingly being priced out of what customers are willing to pay for them?   I can understand the Holy Trinity being so expensive (I guess) but with everything else being so spendy, I don't think people are going to buy as much as Nikon seems to think they are.

Zack Zoll wrote:
They respond to(correct) complaints about  the D600 by making the D610, and servicing the cameras for free. The Internet decides the D6x0 series is poison.

Timing is crucial though.

Using wiki : D600 was released Sept 2012. February 2013 Nikon's first response to dust is to clean your sensor. October 2013 Nikon releases the D610 which looks an like D600 except adding .5 fps and changing WB ( changing WB could be a firmware update right ? ). Which had to be like putting hot sauce into the eye of customers that had affected D600s and weren't getting the resolution they wanted. Then finally in February 2014 they accept all D600s for shutter repair. September 2012 - February 2014 is a long time to not really consider it a problem, and the D610 release didn't help because it looks like a silent acknowledgement of a mistake but they want you to buy the new one.

It would've been rough but I could've jumped up to the D600 at any time but kept firm to wait until it was $1500 or less (new/refurb/or trusted used source would be fine) but the dust and response kept me from buying one. Since the February 2014 announcement it is a viable option again.

DougBPhoto wrote:
As for the primes and stuff, am I the only one who thinks that maybe all this gear is increasingly being priced out of what customers are willing to pay for them?   I can understand the Holy Trinity being so expensive (I guess) but with everything else being so spendy, I don't think people are going to buy as much as Nikon seems to think they are.

Nope. I remember looking at prices in ~March 2009 and being almost ready to buy things like the D700 (refurb ~ $1999, 105 DC ~$800 new , 85 1.4 D ~$900 new ), and then the recession paired with price increases seemed like a double whammy. Those that bought that refurb D700 in 2009 (or used) could've gotten an astounding percentage of their money back YEARS after the purchase because of various factors (flooding, recession, late replacement or cost of replacement, etc ).

Fred Greissing wrote:
Nikon has a winner here IMO.

It is a really nice quite compact full frame DSLR with state of the art AF 24 MP sensor with state of the art dynamic range.

This will be my new "personal" camera.

Sold the Fuji X-T1 and lenses when I saw how small and compact the D750 is.

Behind my old bellows lens hoods the d750 hides very nicely. I also prefer the extra weight of a D750.... but I'm 6'4" with size 14 shoes and large hands.

I will also upgrade my wives D7100 to a D750.

My thoughts exactly...even down to the big man with large hands! I'm still not sure if I want to replace one of my D700's with this or a D810 but they've put together a very solid camera here.

Robb Mann wrote:
I get how the D750 fits in.

Nikon is going after white space in the market, not upgrade customers.

The Df was 'pure photography' - a camera designed around still photos.

The D750 is 'pure videography' - Nikons first serious attempt to woo videographers.

BINGO!... pretty observant... I'm gettin that same message...

Select Models wrote:
Twice the megapixels... articulating screen... lighter in weight... built in WiFi... better low light performance... improved Expeed 4 image processor... Clarity option in menu... longer battery life... Flat menu setting for maximum dynamic range... burst rate of 6.5 frames per second... improved auto-focusing with 'group area' AF... 2 SD card slots... U1 and U2 programmable exposure modes... full HD video with 1080p... yeah it's been replaced...

Nope, it hasn't from all I can see the D750 is more of a toy than a tool.
I'm going to check it out, but I have my doubts about getting one.

It's PACKED with crap I don't need or want. Things I consider consumer features... Like the tilting screen... ??? or the use of crap @$$ SD cards? WTF?


J.