virtualkyr: From a stills perspective - the D7200 is an awesome camera, and a likely good upgrade from my D90.
However, I believe Nikon has really missed a great opportunity to attract video shooters by not incorporating some 4K into this one. They really would have done something Canon hasn't done yet and provide a larger sensor alternative with better low light performance and DR than the Panasonic GH4.
I can count on my two hands how many videos I've shot with my DSLRs in the last four years. Why? Because until the auto-focusing in video mode is improved and until every lens I own has VR to counter the subtle or major shaking while hand-holding during video, I see no point in it. All I'm doing is creating shaky video that would act as torture on the viewer. Unless the camera is strapped to a tripod and unless my manual focusing during video is flawless, I'll probably end up creating un-watchable crap.
Wedding photographers can either deal with what's available on the pro gear market, or they can buy something far more suitable to get the job done. I think 4K (from my perspective) is a waste until the AF and VR issue is worked out.
Aur: Nikon HQ
Nikon engineer: "We can increase video to 4k, add in USB 3.0 chip, give the screen tilt, make a lighter carbon frame, add.."
CEO: "no no no, that will require actual work, just add 18 shots to the buffer size and call it a day, our customers are stupid, they'll think it's all new hardware"
Nikon engineer: "But our DSLR sales have dropped by 30% in the l.."
CEO: "la la la, I can't hear you"
Wait another few months for the next release, or wait another year for a better featured DSLR. I'm sure the D7300 or a higher end model with more improvements on a D7100 is just around the corner.
Upgrading every year or every few months as something new comes out is just too much IMO. If you're concerned about 4K video, why not pick up a system capable of that and keep the Nikon DSLR for stills, which is where it excels?
Here's the crazy part. Nobody is forcing anyone to buy anything. Vote with your money by buying or not buying the produces you like or dislike. Not every model is gong to be right for you, but it will be right for millions of others.
You do realize you don't have to upgrade your camera every time a new model emerges, right? The improved AF, improved buffer and improved image quality seem minor to someone with a D7100, but to new buyers or to those upgrading from much older models, these new features are exactly what those people have been missing in the D7100 and what held them back from buying one. It costs $1,200.00. Name me any other camera with the same image quality/DR/High ISO performance, AF speed/accuracy and price point that would match the D7200. You'll have trouble doing so.
sagar parmar: is there new body of d750 in coming in market without any defect , i want to buyit, but i can't because of flare issue .
I have shot thousands of photos with mine and not a single photo so far has been ruined by this "problem". I'm pretty sure that unless every photo you shoot is at a specific angle toward the sun where the sun isn't in the frame, you'll be just fine. As suggested, if you like shooting flares, wait a couple of months and you should be safe from any flare problem since Nikon is taking care of it now.
Known Member: 90% should be downed to 80% due to the flare issue! How come DP did not see this flare??
Because it is difficult to reproduce and doesn't happen with every D750 body. Even the affected bodies don't show the problem unless they face a very specific angle toward a light source with a specific lens. People need to stop freaking out over something so incredibly minor, especially since Nikon has taken the appropriate steps to fix the problem on every affected D750 free of charge.
Xenon1: Hello guys,Has anyone noticed the top control panel in d750 has shrunken in size and information. D610, D700 and D810 have much larger panels. To take full benefit of information and settings one needs to view in the 3.2" LCD panel! just like the small cameras like D5300 etc. Any comments...?
Got used to it very quickly. Not a big deal. Easy ISO setting eliminates the need to see ISO displayed on the back screen. You can change it without having to look. I almost never use the back screen to change any of my settings. Everything I need is displayed on the top LCD as soon as I press the appropriate button.
Great composition of an incredible scene.
Pixel Pooper: "It also boasts a faster frame rate than any non-professional full-frame Nikon DSLR since the D700."
This is a very diplomatic way to say that the frame rate hasn't improved in the 4 years since the D700 was released.
Yes, but keep in mind that the D750 has a 24 megapixel sensor vs. the D700 12 megapixel sensor. Processing file sizes double that of the D700 at the same rate as the D700 IS an improvement. No?
Samuel Dilworth: The very enthusiastic reception for this camera surprises me.
To me it seems like just another fractional iteration of Nikon’s FX platform, largely put together from existing or tweaked technology modules. It does little or nothing to solve the big problems causing SLR sales to fall. (It doesn’t even have a built-in GPS receiver for geotagging.) Unless I’m missing something, it has nothing that might attract a new type of customer either. Even the design is a nondescript, black blob indistinguishable from any other Nikon SLR to a causal observer. It practically defines banality.
What is there to get excited about? The main innovation seems to be a novel, cost-cutting construction technique – not that you’d notice as a buyer, since a D750 sells for $800 more than the functionally similar D610 (itself overpriced).
Obviously it’s not for me, but I can appreciate many cameras that aren’t. This one defeats me. Maybe my expectations are out of whack.
What's not to love? Cameras haven't changed drastically in the last 10 years, even image quality is incremental.
I was VERY happy with the image quality of the D600/D610. All that could have made it better for me was the professional and improved 51 point AF that works wonders in low light. It's easier to hold, lighter, slightly smaller, better video capabilities, tilting screen, better weather sealing, slightly faster FPS and so on. Good luck finding that combination in any other make.
Some may have faster FPS, some may have slightly better low light performance (with a downsized 12 megapixel full frame sensor), some may be smaller, but none of them are all in one. The D750 comes closest to a complete package for most people at an affordable price.
Until Sony can put such a complete package of image quality, AF and FPS performance, lens selection and affordability into one of their "revolutionary" cameras, DSLRs like the Nikon D750 will outsell it. Just my $0.02.
Frank C.: Perfecting that rectangle ever more, almost a square by now! Hey Nikon, how about working on a circle for a change, things progress forwards no?
A circle? Am I understanding correctly that you want the body to be circular? I can see that being a problem when trying to read the top and back display. The reflections alone would make it difficult to see the information. There's nothing wrong with the D750 body design. It's one of the most comfortable-to-hold DSLRs currently available.
www_zeeshan_de: Missing the innovative A7S review, missing the innovative A7 II review, but what we got here is the nothing new Nikon D750 review...
Give it time. The D750 review didn't come out right away either. The camera was released in September last year. It took three months to get a review, longer than it took to get a Canon 7D Mark II review. The D810 hasn't had one yet, either. Patience. I'm sure there are plenty of other thorough reviews online for each of these cameras.
Skulls: The buffer is not bad at all. I'm looking at your niece pictures and they perfectly fit into 1.2 DX crop mode, combine that with quality at 12bit, and the buffer would give you 70 shots max and around 60 average, without ANY loss of quality! :)
I know, I wasn't criticizing you, just adding to your comment. :)
Yes, exactly, except you don't need 60 shots in a row, 20 to 30 would suffice. More than enough.Shoot at full resolution in 12 bit RAW and you increase your buffer space without sacrificing much image quality.
Dyun27: As amazing as this camera sounds, the 28 megapixel crop sensor would worry me. It's already challenging not to introduce motion blur to the 16 megapixel D7000 sensor with longer lenses, it's definitely challenging with the 36 megapixel full frame sensor of the D800 and the D7100 24 megapixel sensor.
At 28 megapixels with a crop sensor it means having to use higher ISO settings, faster shutter speeds and using VR whenever possible. At that point I'd have to start taking a monopod or tripod wherever I go. Only the shorter lenses would be easy to use.
Definitely not imagining things. :)
@Kawika - I generally shoot at 420mm, 1/2000s, ISO 400, f/6.3. I shoot a lot of birds in flight where I sometimes have to follow the bird as it travels past me. My lens doesn't have VR, but even if it did, it would actually hurt more than help in those situations.
Well, when I did get the shot nice and sharp, it looked great even at pixel level. Why get a 36 megapixel sensor and then downsize to 24 megapixels to make it look better? Know what I mean? At that point why not just get the 24 megapixel sensor instead and spare yourself all the downsizing? Sometimes I need to crop down to 100% to get closer to a subject that didn't quite fill the frame because I didn't have a longer lens. In those situations the motion blur can be a problem. With a D600/D610 I get many sharp shots even at pixel level that I can crop. If I'm downsizing the D800/D800E/D810 file to 24 megapixels because at 100% the image is too blurry, might as well just shoot with the D600/D610.
I'm speaking from experience. After having used the D7000 for a couple of years I upgraded to the D600. The D600 was much easier to hand-hold at slow shutter speeds even though it had more megapixels, because the pixel density wasn't as high. When I later rented a D800 and tried shooting with it at the same ISO and shutter speed as with the D600, I was getting a lot of motion blur. Hand-holding a telephoto, I had to be VERY steady to not capture movement at pixel level due to the pixel density of the D800 sensor. This 28 megapixel sensor seems like it will be even more dense, hence having to use higher shutter speeds to offset the possibility of capturing movement. Some will be OK with that I'm sure, might even be OK for me, but I'm definitely feeling concerned about cramming that many megapixels into a crop sensor. Maybe Samsung has a way to counter that.
As amazing as this camera sounds, the 28 megapixel crop sensor would worry me. It's already challenging not to introduce motion blur to the 16 megapixel D7000 sensor with longer lenses, it's definitely challenging with the 36 megapixel full frame sensor of the D800 and the D7100 24 megapixel sensor.
nerd2: Samsung just announced its true monster flagship NX1 today - it has 28MP BSI APS-C sensor (should easily equal 24MP FF without BSI), 205 point PDAF + 15.6fps continuous shooting with focus tracking, 4K/UHD video support and direct hdmi out. Oh it has tilting screen and wifi too. And matching 16-50 2.0-2.8 IS lens too.
I call this true innovation. What are you doing nikon?
Yes, but how GOOD is that sensor? Is it better than what Nikon is offering in any of their bodies? How fast and accurate is that AF in real life situations? Specs are great on paper but real use is what I would be interested in. I imagine that motion blur with a 28 megapixel crop sensor would be a problem, especially on the telephoto end. I'd need to carry a tripod everywhere or shoot at high ISO just to keep the shutter speed up to prevent motion blur from being captured.
Dyun27: I am amazed at the amount of criticism on the net regarding the D750. This is the cheapest, most well-featured full frame body currently on the market. For the money it just doesn't get better than this. It's got;
- A kick-ass sensor that will give you a ton of dynamic range and resolution, plus incredible high ISO performance.
- Kick-ass AF system that will track and capture your subject better than any other Nikon body, including the pro models even in the dark.
- Built in Wi-Fi, something many of you have been whining about for a couple of years now.
- It's lighter, but also weather sealed to the same extent as the D810 (from what I've heard)
- It has great video features and you can change the aperture in live view now.
- It has 6.5 FPS without a grip at full resolution while the D700 has 5 FPS even with the grip, unless you use AA batteries.
I can't even begin to imagine how someone might have trouble making incredible photos or videos with this camera.
I don't need to own stock in Nikon to see what's right in front of me.
@ nerd2 - This is a redesigned sensor with improved high ISO range and bigger pixels, which means more light-gathering ability so it isn't the same as the one in the D600/D610 or a7.
Right now the D810 sits on top of the DxO Mark sensor rating chart (if you trust their ratings). The A7R is the only non-Nikon sensor sandwiched between the D810 and the D800/D610/D600. The dynamic range and high ISO performance is rated higher in all these Nikon models vs. A7R. The D750 with its' improved pixel pitch may end up doing even better in the dynamic range and high ISO department.
While all features beneficial to wildlife and low light shooting are important to me, I'm willing to sacrifice a couple of FPS for better image quality. As for 4K video, for now people may have to look elsewhere, but I'm sure it's coming, especially with more competition rising up from the likes of Samsung.