Nikon acknowledges 'issue' with flare in some D750 bodies

I assume you are sarcastic, right :-)

"Is the left AF point something you have to use?" - buahahahaha. If you're on that - ask him if he needs pixels under the oil splits on D600.

@HowaboutRAW

It wasn't just the farthest left one, it was several of the left sided ones. It's not only single zone AF that uses it. It also means that 3D tracking and 51 point AF don't work properly. I got it fixed by Nikon (eventually, after they claimed that they had not received any bodies with a similar problem) so I don't have to worry about it anymore.

@ HowaboutRAW

There were a lot of people on this forum who were trolling D800 users who reported this issue. I think that he presumed that you were one of those guys trying to say that there it was not a serious issue and that I should have just lived with it. He was comparing it to denying the problem with the D600.

MF just doesn't work on a adequately on a D800 (unless you are using a small aperture and have a while to set up). If you miss the focus plane by 1cm on a fast lens it is immediately obvious. I also think that people are far less accepting of slightly out of focus images now than they used to be. Even the cheapest cameras can focus so well that people expect perfect focus.

@ HowaboutRAW
I can and did get by for a while. You can do things like focus and recompose, but you may have missed the thing you were trying to capture by the time you have done that. The advanced focus system on a $3000 camera should work on all focus points from the start, and it is something that is each body is supposedly tested for. Working around the problem is not an acceptable solution.

The problem was with a misaligned AF module. That is not because it was a new technology, it was a manufacturing defect. Phase detect AF was very well established by 2012 and more advanced systems worked perfectly on the D4. I don't really know what you are arguing. Nikon claimed that all the bodies they sell were within certain tolerance levels - they clearly weren't, or their tolerance levels were a joke. You might like to MF your cameras, but I don't. It takes longer and is less accurate. Deliberately using obsolete technology is for hipsters and nostalgics.

I just don't understand what you are arguing about. The order of my focusing preference are usually PDAF > Live view > MF. If I can't get a good focus with PDAF, or I need super accurate focus, I use live view and manual focus (by zooming in to the live view). Pretty much the only time I would use MF exclusively is for astrophotography or when it is very dark, when the AF can't keep up.

I absolutely stand by my hipsters comment. MF is slower and less accurate. Only a Hipster, or someone who is unwilling to embrace newer and better technology, would chose MF over AF.

Seriously, stop talking about the 80s. It was probably the worst decade in the 20th century. We have just had the equivalent of the computer revolution in photography and you are still stubbornly using an abacus.

Why did you reply to my comment in the first place?

This would obviously be your next step - to imply that I don't know what I'm talking about.

OK.

I do use manual focus where it is useful.

I don't shoot movies. If I did I would hire a guy to specifically be in charge of focus on a big monitor, not a tiny viewfinder.

CDs can capture all sound perceptible to the human ear. Please see the work of Harry Nyquist. The bad sound of CDs in the 80s was the result of sound engineers who were unfamiliar with the technology. Humans are unable to distinguish well mastered CDs from studio masters in double blind tests. But I could have guessed that you are into vinyl...

Can your abacus do advanced spreadsheets and solve differential equations?

I am just about to upload a few pictures I took in 2014. Why don't you do the same. That will help you decide if my apparent lack of knowledge of camera tech has had a negative impact on my ability.

Yes, it is :/ but that's the sad nature of quality control issues. They're very much unpredictable.

There's been an investigation going on by Polish Nikon community and their findings are as follows:
1. On 99% all bodies have this defect
2. There are better and worse cameras - in some issue appears in all lenses, in other it's just with some lenses.
3. There are users that don't mind the problem and those that do
4. In some cameras defect comes out without trying, for others it's either that they don't shoot much against the light or they have light sources in a frame, or they got lucky, better camera and problem does not occur with their body-lens combination.
5. Light shade or stopping down the aperture are not a solutions
6. Not to complain... it's still a great body and it does take pictures ;)

source: http://forum.nikoniarze.pl/showpost.php?p=3495377&postcount=706

Do you read the vitriolic drivel you read? Or are you just a sheep incapable of reading comprehension? This MINOR issue only happens at a very precise incident of light angle, and usually only when one is trying to make it happen. In two huge reviews, IR and DPR, did not It have it happen even once. But, have fun getting your jollies attacking Nikon, who has already said they would take care of the issue.

sandy b;

From what I can see, you have zero ideal for what is the REAL problem. As well as some Review sites when they tried to explain the problem.

You just did not get it. That's for SURE.

You need to try to use your OWN brain just for ONCE. If you still do not know what's the problem after you used (up) your brain. Call Nikon, and they may help you to understand what's the problem.

Try it.

Uhmm, Nikon has never had a camera "recall".

What about the D600?

It took them 2 years but at the end the did replace the whole camera including mine.

what do you call that?

RichRMA:

Is the D750 not reliable?

Does the shutter fail?

The battery?

The AF?

The exposure computer?

The mirrorbox?

Do more than 0.01 percent of photos have this stepped flare?

Try to drive a 2014 Toyota backward at 40 miles per hour and you may get odd results, though it will likely still be reliable.

I've had many low-end Sony products break over the years, I guess they're made elsewhere in Asia. (I've never had problems with high end Sony gear.)

"I've had many low-end Sony products break over the years, I guess they're made elsewhere in Asia. (I've never had problems with high end Sony gear.)"

Unlike Sony products breaking after some years, I bought some new Nikon products that were sold with design defects. One of this products was so bad that sprinkled oil into my pictures but the worst of all was Nikon DENYING the problem for almost 2
years.

At the end Nikon was mandated (by customer reaction) to repair and/or replace all these cameras.

Thanks God I learned no to buy low quality products like Nikon.

lacikuss:

I didn't say the low-end Sony products broke after years of use. Try not changing the meaning of what I wrote. That kind of thing is really annoying. I said low-end Sony products have frequently broken for me (quickly implied), so much so that I won't buy them anymore and now pick Panasonic.

All you can point to is oil on the sensor of the D600? Have you ever had to fix photos with dust and scratches in the prints?

Even scanned negatives can be a pain to fix with Photoshop, that's with an infra-red channel getting rid of most dust and scratches--not so much chemical burns.

If you can't clone stamp over an oil spot, you don't know much about working with digital photo files.

Was Nikon wrong to deny the problem? Yes.

Was Nikon wrong to have not discovered the problem during development? Yes.

It is way simplistic to think of all Nikon products as low quality.
And the D600 isn't a low quality product, it's an outlier with a defect; a defect many thought not real serious.

Pretty much a minor issue, not a major one, one has to try to get it to happen, and it has been shown in other cameras, see the IR report, and photography life.

A good friend has one and shot a number of photos on vacation. He didn't "Try" to make this happen but it did and now he has photos, with a band, that he can't retake. There are many once in a lifetime photos that can't be recreated and Nikon has blown their quality.

This is a serious defect and one that should give you pause about buying. I really liked the way his camera feels and was considering. I've been a Digital Nikon user since the CP990 and am looking to replace my rock solid D300. I hate the thought of relearning a system, but now I'm looking at Sony because I don't want to risk shabby quality.

Wow! Once in a lifetime photo? in the DLSR world, who would take photos and not review it instantly? That's what the 3.2" LCD is for! If your friend was serious, he would have immediately caught the flare on the LCD and would have recomposed the shot. Be practical and do not troll. This D750 is much better than the competition!!!!!!

pwberndt:

Okay, but various Canons have this problem too. So then if your friend had been using a Canon somehow that's different?

It's pretty clear how to avoid this, if you know to look for it.

I'll bet you can get your D300 to do it too.

Don't know about Sony SLT systems. Less likely to be a problem with various mirrorless systems I'd posit.

The difference netween the 750 and the Canon's (as well as the d810/610) is that it is barely notacible whilst quite glaring in the 750 - just look at the samples comparisons between the different cameras on IR...
Nikon is normally VERY reluctant to admit any problem and if this is a non-issue like some here say, why would they have spoken up?

HowaboutRAW: you've been patrolling all D750 threads trying to counter any criticism and spreading false information as though you were on Nikon's payroll.

No other cameras released in previous years show this flare problem to the same extent. If they do, it has been minor enough to go UNNOTICED FOR YEARS.
The difference with the D750 is that the problem is serious enough to have been noticed WITHIN WEEKS of the camera being released.

How about you stop spreading misinformation? No chance, I suppose.

Thys:

Um, you'd have to be pretty blind not to note the step in the 6D flare.

So you're saying that less ruined is acceptable?

locke_fc:

I don't work for Nikon.

Don't pretend that some how the problem isn't significant for a D610 or 6D, if the step is the the photo is ruined.

And don't lie about me spreading false information, this kind of lying on your part doesn't do you any credit as a thinker.

If you'd accept the step in the flare of the 6D, you don't care to much 'bout image production quality.

This site covers the step in the 6D and the D750:

http://www.imaging-resource.com/news/2014/12/24/nikon-d750-flare-problems-heres-why-and-what-to-do-about-them-its-not-lens

It's not even comparable. The 6D's is barely noticeable even in a test designed to highlight it as much as possible. The issue is totally insignificant in the 6D, and even more important, it occurs only from light sources below the camera. The D750 has it from sources above the camera, which happens to coincide with where the sun will be at all times in your pictures.

Why do people like yourself let brand loyalty take over from logic?

I've got a 6D. I'd trade it for a D750 in a heartbeat even with the flare issue. And if some other company made an FF that was even better in the same price range, I'd just ship again to that one.

The point is accept when products have issues, and don't try to convince yourself that somehow other products have the same issues when they don't.

Criticism of Nikon is warranted here.

Not sure you get irony

Irony is I just read the IR article everyone is refering to - yes, Canons have a similar problem, sort of, but way lesser degree in the images - so no excuse for Nikon.....

So the other images are only partly ruined? That makes sense.

The other images are less affected, so not ruined.

I think Nikon seems will not put new major issues into D760's body (or some of the D760 body) after introducing issues like "Oil leaking", "Internal reflection", etc.

Golden standard.

Most Nikon cameras are made in Thailand.
http://www.businessinsurance.com/article/99999999/NEWS060101/399999816
It all came to surface when the floods hit in 2011

Since this is probably a design issue, it believe it really doesn't matter where the camera is made or assembled. All Nikons are designed in Japan and then made in Japan and Thailand or some other cheap labor country.

to me Nikon is spitting out too many models too quick. Chances of overlooked issues increase that way

Nikon did it this way so they could fool people into thinking they have a better camera. But they forgot to tell the world that the production of the 'old' 36MP sensor was replaced by an upgraded version that is also used in the A7r. This way its cheaper for Sony to produce a 36MP sensor while not needing 2 production lines.

D800 was flawed and I know because I have one.
And as you guess it will not be replaced but phased out in my business.

Well Nikon did try to fix it, and it was/is better now.
But I never like using the left part of the AF focus points as it still is a hit or miss. Might be psychological as well.

In short I've lost a lot of faith in Nikon over the past years.

there are many who order the pre- launch models - go figure

well, most of them !

well, hopefully it'll fix the flare issue for everyone buying that new body. I wouldn't expect much more than that... perhaps some more memory for continuous shooting, or something equally cosmetic, but that'd be about it.

@Everlast66 - not true.

As for the flare issue, we didn't encounter it in our testing. Dave at Imaging Resource dug into it in some depth, and his conclusion is that the problem is only an issue in a very narrow band of circumstances, and the D750 isn't the only camera that exhibits it. No disrespect to Dave but we spent our time (a lot of it) testing things that (I think) matter much more - sensor performance, and AF performance.

@Barney
During the entire December we could only read First impressions, Second impressions, Reviews and then Review Updates of Canon, Nikon and Samsung gear. While we couldn't see reviews of say Sony's A6000, A77II, A7II, A7s which seem to be generating a lot of interest which was confirmed in the gear of the year vote.

Then there was this strangely positive new category 'Real world tests' that also included, surprisingly, Canon, Nikon and Samsung.

Everlast66:

Here's the May 2014 review of the Sony A6000:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/sony-alpha-a6000

The A7S is a rather specialized subtype.

I won't defend DPR and the A77II, but I don't read reviews.

However the A7II only released in early Dec. So no review makes sense.

And the Samsung NX1 was announced in Sept and out in Nov.

Thys:

Since you asked, most current full framed DSLRs have this problem to a certain extent,

Here's the IR article you will need to read:

http://www.imaging-resource.com/news/2014/12/24/nikon-d750-flare-problems-heres-why-and-what-to-do-about-them-its-not-lens

I guess they didn't have a Df and D4s around to test. (And no APSC DSLRs appear to have been tested.)

Note above where BB clearly refers to work Dave at Imaging Resource did.

HowaboutRaw: I Read the article - quite good with good examples from a range of cameras. Though it is quite obvious that the d750 is way worse than most of the others tested - best camera for this kind of flare seems to be the cheapo 6d :-)

Thy,

The stepped flare, if there in any photo, means that the photo is ruined unless you can crop the step out.

So the stronger contrast of the D750 example is really immaterial. If it occurs, it's big problem with any and all of those examples.

The irony is that the extra contrast of the Nikon D750 example probably did Canon (and Nikon) a favor--now Canon can work to fix it and pretend it's only a Nikon thing.

No, it's not "all or nothing". World isn't black and white. Clearly flare is non-issue with pretty much all of the cameras in the Imaging Resource test but D750 and 1Dx, from which D750 easily got most pronounced stepped flare.

Flare in most of the cameras tested is something majority of people won't even notice, one in 1Dx photos is something you might consider fixing in post-production - one from D750 is nearly unfixable and that's the one that ruins the photographs. You see the difference now?

lol @ clone stamping.

Whatever it's acceptable or not depends very much on a photograph and the camera we're talking about. Harsh steps D750 produces are very visible under pretty much every circumstances when they occur. On the other hand gentle flare from 6D looks perfectly fine on a background of blue sky.

As said: It's not a black and white situation. Yes, arrangement of photographs which is causing this type of issue isn't very common, but when it happens - D750 owners are truly screwed, by far more than any other.

Howaboutraw do you work for Nikon? You seem obligated to find excuses for them all the time. Just go look at the samples you yourself pointed out - the Canons you so insistently imply is nowhere NEAR as bad as the d750 - in fact the lowly 6d is the best of the whole bunch. You seem to know better than your own beloved company because Nikon themselves have admitted an issue. Obviously when they offer a fix you should not send in your camera 'because Canons does it too'

HowaboutRAW - wow, you really seem to have a problem with that Canon 6D. If you want to complain about something - at least be smart enough to complain about the model where it is at least somewhat visible - 1Dx. On 6D it's barely there even with a solid gray background - therefore it's invisible in real-world scenarios. It's nothing like the problem with D750 where step is very sharp and clearly pronounced no matter the photo.

And again: photos are NOT "ruined" if flare is slighter. Strength plays a major role in visibility and whatever you can consider photo ruined or not. Shame that you can't see that, but don't be surprised that people think you are paid Nikon supporter - cause blind, stupid posts like the one above are exactly what paid Nikon PR team does.

Because Nikon acknowledged the problem, it warrants a revision to 104% Platinum award. Happy?

KS:

Then what award (downward) does the Canon 5DIII get, since Canon has never acknowledged this problem?

Find a problem that will affect 10% + of the pictures from he D750 and then steelhead3 has a point.

Yes @HowAboutRAW you are right, your example demonstrate it well
http://www.dpreview.com/members/763697725/galleries

iAPX:

Still confused by the definition of the word "any" I see.

The fact remains that Canon DSLRs also have this problem.

I'd not be so quick to link my gallery given the ...

The problem with the statement you changed is that you've now misused the word "it"--since none of my gallery photos demonstrate DSLR flare. Or even lens flare in general.

You keep digging yourself in deeper and deeper.

iAPX,

Every one is free to look at my gallery.

I'd not go calling attention to your gallery or that commercial work. Both have big weaknesses that are pretty obvious, even if one has paid you.

And no my gallery does NOT demonstrate the lack of a problem on a D750, since you seem confused on this point, I didn't shoot the photos with a DSLR.

So your gallery is available at:
http://www.dpreview.com/members/5255636843/galleries

And won't mention mine, because we are not in a commercial website, but on a website for digital photographer, not digital trolls :)

Let's see how it goes when you say D750 has less noise than D610, D750 have no flare (even when Nikon recognize it publicly). And let's see your photos!

iAPX,

I never said there is no flare with the D750, nor have I said there is no stepped flare, which is the subject. Has this point also befuddled you?

That's not a link to my gallery.

So you've contradicted yourself by claiming you wouldn't mention your gallery. Another problem in your "logic".

You've seen, and linked, some of my photos. I wasn't planning on sharing D750 examples for reasons I've already listed, and one of those previously listed reasons was your attitude.

iAPX;

Why would my gallery photos shot in the early 2000s have anything to do with the D750?

Do you not understand that this is new camera?

You said that the problem is workse on Canon and you didn't encoutnered it when you taste-bed the Nikon D750, the best is to look at your gallery no?
http://www.dpreview.com/members/763697725/galleries

You seems to know more than Nikon itself about this problem, and I am happy to have your expert explanation about this!

iAPX,

That is known as a LIE, I most certainly said no such thing about the stepped flare being worse with Canon, I said the step had greater contrast with the D750 (which is a Nikon since you've been so very confused through now).

Again, there are NO images in my gallery from FF bodies and if there were any, they'd not likely be full sized files.

I don't claim to know what exactly causes this problem, however I've read the IR article in some detail. I suggest you do the same before further posting.

Again, why would you think I'd share my D750 files in my gallery?

Your gallery is there for people to check out:
http://www.dpreview.com/members/763697725/galleries

I think that actual 24MP Sony sensor is really incredible, wether in D600 D610 or D750, in low light. And I show it at 6400 ISO in black and white and in color too :)

Oh and with well-established international top-model (if we excuse my cat picture! lol)

Ryan is just monkey see monkey dp-ing

Seems Nikon can't much right over the past few years. It is not like it is an industry problem over all camera bodies no matter the manufacture. If it was all Canon, Nikon, and name the camera would have the same defective issues.

@HowAboutRAW

Same sensor, even if you pretend it's not.
Your full-frame examples on your galleries inglighted me:
http://www.dpreview.com/members/763697725/galleries

So DPReview is *NOW* the standard after you pretended they are not worthwhile to compare sensors and lenses?!?

Your galleries demonstrates how worthwhile you are:
http://www.dpreview.com/members/763697725/galleries

Well,
Nikon used to acknowledge nothing and release a D610 or that updated not self detonating flash(please help me with the model i forgot)

They now acknowledged the problem before making a tweaked model that doesn't have the same issue.

So even though their QA still needs some work. The customer service and communication is improved after the last incidents.

Let's just give them a chance to sort it out since they seem to be trying.

I actually liked my D610, but the snickers and snide comments I received from passers-by were just too much. Now, all I get are compliments, no one dares insult my Canon.

Great bit of smart sarcasm there, Karl!

KS:

Do they ask about your Canon's stepped flare problems?

My Canon is perfect, my shots are beautiful. Shut up.

No Karl, I'm not going to shut up, the fact of stepped flare with Canon full framed bodies has been well demonstrated.

The D750 also produces beautiful pictures, sans stepped flare, just like a Canon can.

Pretending that the problem doesn't apply to you (and who knows perhaps you have an APSC Canon without this problem) isn't going to make the problem for Canon disappear.

KS:

Gee Karl, are you signing because I wouldn't follow your directions (not sarcastic ones either) to "shut up".

Listening to "advice" spouting such attitudes aint going to be my path.

And you crossed a line.

iAPX:

Pray tell, what do my galleries demonstrate about a Canon 5DIII and stepped flare? In case you really think my gallery includes 5DIII shots, that DSLR wasn't out back then.

You're really obsessed with my galleries, I'm just not clear why. Do decent 1MB nature shots really make you that excited, or is insecure, or both?

Compare what to what?

What does my gallery have to do with the 5DIII?

Did you eat ground beef in Scotland circa 1997?

fine Karl, enjoy your Canon, there are fine Camera's but their sensors are just not up to scratch... DR, shadow detail etc. are poor. Next range of FX cameras from Canon better have new (not revised for the umpteenth time) sensors (hopefully not from Canon).