RomanP: I don't get what the big deal is here, for the price:- same body as 610 (except tilt screen)- same toy-like 4way selector...really inferior to the 810's and 5D's.- same sensor- same 6fps. Wait, that's now 6.5fps. - same buffer! Really, they couldn't double the RAM?
Is it worth an $800 difference between the two models? Yes, better autofocus system, but IQ will be very close, and you won't get more shots at an event than with a D610. It's like Nikon is crippling this model only to queue up a truly high speed 760s next year.
Just see the D750's buffer in glorious action here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L1wXGdaNvko
And if you weren't being sarcastic, you'd be taken as retracting in good faith.
Suggestion: Handle the bodies if you can--that's with lenses and installed charged batteries. Lots of things weigh nearly the same.
So in ViewNX I opened the D610 and D750 ISO 12,800 DPR studio raws (daylight) and the noise levels aren't even close. The D610's raw is much noisier, a point backed up by extraction ACR 8.7.
I'll go ahead and try CaptureOne V8 too, for now I'll skip DXO since they are a pain about running trialware.
First read Josh,
Then I'm still guessing you've handled neither.
Just the fact of two card slots in the D750 versus one in the D610 is a significant body difference.
I'll be really clear, even if the bodies were exactly the same, which they aren't: The D750 has much much faster and more accurate AF system than that in the D610.
nizar ghosn: how could you justify the better iso performance in the d610 in your comparison line on this page, despite the comparison chart shows that the d750 is better .. and why you have the handling of the d610 is better than the d750 in this page ??? is it ???
Go higher, I don't consider ISO 6400 particularly high for a full framed sensor in 2014.
It's real easy to see if you download the raws.
I think you have point that at ISO 6400 noise isn't a significant problem with the D610--it's that one full stop further is about the limit, whereas the D750 can go higher.
shutterbud: I have a soft spot for Leica, but I really hope the T is a one-off
The X-Vario has much slower lens.
I think the point of comparison could be the new X with the 1.7 lens. (Which, yes is cheaper than the T.)
Ron A 19: Seems like the D750 seems to have a sharper image at full resolution, but could this be partly because the Canons are using a lens that is 22 years older? The 85mm USM cannot outresolve the 85mm G (compare them on thedigitalpicture.com). If DPReview wants to compare these two cameras on a resolution basis, why don't they use the same lens on different bodies? A third party reference lens like the Sigma Art or Zeiss otus would be the perfect way to show limitations of a sensor rather than a cheapo circa '92 lens.
sharper than what?
I'm guessing some Canon.
I did check Wikipedia, finding/downloading the original PDF took longer.
You can see Mr Physics below for a repeat of the 1/8000 of sec flash sync preposterousness.
You were free to check the point about 1/8000 sec sync speed in these comments and you clearly didn't.
You really do read all my comments then.
HowaboutRAW: Mr Physics+Frank C:
According to Wikipedia the flash sync speed of the D70 is 1/300 sec.
With a smaller (APSC) focal plane shutter it is easier to build higher sync speeds.
The top shutter speed of the camera is indeed 1/8000 sec.
The problem remains after I posted this in response to your link:
"Right I found the PDF thanks to Google too. And downloaded it with a faster interweb connection. If memory serves page 95."
"However if you make the statement without sourcing it, statements like the D70 has sync speed of 1/8000 sec also get posted."
You then decided you just had to post:
"Probably makes sense to fact check things first before posting too. Especially since DPR has had the specs posted for years."
As for 1/8000 sec and nonTTL flashes, there remain big problems, what maybe one could hope for is the flash staying on at a constant level the entire time both shutters are open--thereby acting like a spotlight. All seems to invite big exposure troubles.
tiberiousgracchus: Fuj where are you ?
Well unlike Sony, Fuji is concentrating on one lens mount for a very well regarded APSC mirrorless system.
WACONimages: Max shutter speed of 1/4000s, Limited buffer capacity affects continuous shooting, Slow AF in live view, no 4K. For a camera this price...
No doubt the sensor and handeling will be top. We live in 2014 at the edge of 2015. The above cons are easy to overcome by Nikon, but for some reason the don't want to..
Careful--pay attention, I'm not the first mention of Samsung in this thread.
Also you've read all my comments?
There are big reasons to use Nikon bodies for pro work, I don't dispute that.
NB: Bodies are NOT lenses, you've confused the two. Though the use of one body type usually means one lens mount.
And a good enough lens, Nikon, on a more capable body, Nikon, can be more useful than an amazing lens on a less capable body.
Unfortunately for you, I stand by my comments about the best Samsung lenses, and it's pretty easy to see this better optical quality.
For my purposes, I'd pick a D750 over an NX1, but I'd then have to use Zeiss lenses to get the good Samsunglike optical performance.
You can make any claim you want, the better Samsung lenses do what I say.
En Trance: Also, if I rest my camera on a good tripod at the beach, 1/4000 does not cut it due to the wind alone. (Especially with a tele lens) After that, I begin to think of exposure. Why is Nikon limiting their shutter speed so severely?
Okay, higher price and likely more weight for the faster shutter.
Solely for reasons of sand in my gear I'd avoid using the D750 on a beach with the wind blowing. Nikon has a body for such environments.
And again, if you find the yourself with the D750 in that environment and the wind it is problem, figure out how to stabilize the camera, tripod weights, bean bags, bags full of sand.
Have you downloaded the DPR studio raws from the D750 and D610? The D750's have significantly less noise at high ISOs than the D610's. It's easiest to see in shadows, but not only in shadows.
Extracted in ACR 8.7 and the latest Nikon ViewNX, they're not even close.
You do realize that NowHearThis is a screen name?
It's the repeat posting of "focus".
I get the idea behind reducing vibration and/or increasing the shutter speed.
As you say, use a heavier tripod. (As you know:There are weights.)
As I said, use a D4S. (Or use a large bean bag on a solid object like car.)
The fact remains that the D750 is a highly capable camera, and the OP is going on about a minor factor.
Careful, the Samsung NX1 is not the high ISO equal of the D750, but the best Samsung lenses are optically superior to the best from Nikon (and Nikon is starting to improve).
It's in an odd codec, but the video from the Samsung is much more serious as is the AF during video.
Both the NX1 and the D750 have extraordinarily appealing characteristics.
At say ISO 1000 and below, using the best Samsung lenses on the NX1, the Nikon will only beat the Samsung for image quality if you use a Zeiss lens on the Nikon body--and the Zeiss would need to be an Otus, not one of the regular very good lenses, since those are already equaled by Samsung.
And still Sony can't equal the image quality Nikon gets out of Sony sensors.
Right the Df and the D610 don't have the latest-greatest Nikon AF, however the D750 sure is close.
Right I found the PDF thanks to Google too. And downloaded it with a faster interweb connection. If memory serves page 95.
However if you make the statement without sourcing it, statements like the D70 has sync speed of 1/8000 sec also get posted.
And Wikipedia says CCD. Is that something you just edited today?