The design really isn't that radical. There were some film cameras in the 90's with similar shapes, but they "scared" people and camera makers went back to the flattish designs we see today.
Remember, long ago when Osborne Computer released the Executive when they had 700,000 original Osbornes still in the warehouse? They were bankrupt in short order. Not saying this is likely, but who will buy the D610 now the 750 is here?
It does bring up an interesting point. The jury-rigged stuff out there from companies like Hoodman and the professional video companies do not serve the camera owner who wants to magnify their LCD. Their devices are bulky and clumsy, mostly badly designed because there is no easy way to affix them to generic cameras. A simple L-hinge, attached to the tripod socket where the viewer could flip under the camera when not in use would be good.
DSLR upon DSLR....an no serious mirrorless.
Gesture: These are all very mice cameras and I would love to have full frame and if some legacy lenses can do well on the digital sensor, so much the better.
But I wish Nikon ( or someone else) could rethink the digital SLR. Make it more compact, simpler to operate, without giving up robustness. Time to get away from the space shuttle console.
They did. The retro. And all everyone did was complain.
stromaroma: yawn. Total waste of effort. Where's the D300 replacement?
The D300 replacement, a body that good with a new APS sensor would cost...as much as the D750.
marc petzold: I'd like to see a decent EVF built-in to the Quattro, say 2.88 MP.
These high resolution EVF's look nice (provided they update fast enough) but they are not needed. Zoom focusing is available on all cameras so manual focusing is easy, even with a 1 meg or less resolution. That leaves composition and you simply don't need high resolution for that. I'd rather have a fast-updating 1M display than a slow and smeary 2.88.
JDThomas: This is pretty much what the D610 should have been in the first place. It's got a lot of great specs and will be a great camera for a lot of people.
However, this is not a D700 replacement. I think Nikon is trying to bury the D600 stigma by using a name that people equate with one of the best cameras Nikon ever produced.
It's relatively cheap at only $2300, but I would have paid $3000 for these guts in a D810 body.
Camera companies are in trouble. Cost-cutting is in the cards for all of them.
bobcat3610: With every new announcement from Nikon it's becoming more and more apparent that DX is dead ! As a sports and wildlife shooter FX holds no appeal for me.
Only because they killed it with a second-rate D300 replacement.
pgphoto_ca: 3000$ in Canada !!! oupsss
Well, the dollar has dropped 10% against the U.S. since the D800 was out, but it's still a bit high.
abhijitsarkar: Now that used 800E prices are about the same, why'd I not buy that but 750 instead?
Maybe this won't have the problems that every 800 has had?
Body looks like Olympus's "Tough" P&S cameras.
Ozyxy: this camera looks perfect for manually changing iso, f, shutter and exposure compensation! I wish all cameras were like this rather than require using the menus...
Oddly enough, menus can result in even faster changes of ISO, etc, since they are all on one flat surface. This can be even faster if the touchscreen is there. Not saying I like it though.
You'll notice a lot of up-market offerings coming from the camera companies because the middle-buyer class has diminished considerably. It's like that in a lot of companies now.
I'm glad they criticized the use of plastics. We see camera lenses working, dating back to the 1800's still, yet none of these plastic bodied lenses will likely survive anywhere near that long, even if the electronics do.
The extra-fine haptics and the precision of the focusing mechanism can only be achieved with a metal design. The robust all-metal barrel is also well equipped to deal with the rough daily work of a professional photographer, ensuring a long product life. In contrast to lenses containing a lot of plastic, which can become unbalanced over time, the metal ZEISS Otus lenses remain stable for many years. This ensures that the image quality remains consistently high.
Using a phone as a primary photographic instruments is just being lazy. If you are a DSLR/mirrorless user and someone suggested to go use a little P&S, if you value the images you take, you'd ignore the suggestion. So why go and take images with a phone, other than the convenience?
Honestly, only about double Nikon's 85mm f/1.4 price for the very best optics isn't that bad. Course, maybe it means Nikon's price is too high? Rationale was stated best by a new E-810 owner who bought the other OTUS. He said he wanted to see what 36mp was really like.
It's going to be a dead, dead, dead show if you into cameras. However, if you want phones, TVs, etc, it should be good.
I carry cameras with a strap off my right shoulder. No plate required. However, all decent, modern tripods should have a quick release plate system.
mpgxsvcd: You had me until "Manual Focus". Manual Focus would be great for the interior architecture shots that this lens was intended for. However, I need it for low light action shots which really require good AFF.
How many cine lenses do you know that offer AF? How many video shooters use AF?