D750 build?

[chuxter]

D750 is NOT built as good as D300 was.
D300= D800/810 build wise
D750= D7000/7100/600/610

D300 was built tough as a pro body should
Not saying D750 is cheap or flimsy at all but D300/D700/D800 series is just notch above. It is obvious the moment you pick up the cameras side by side...

--
http://www.pbase.com/jps1979/galleries

It's funny that the 800/810 has a pro build and yet their not even considered pro cameras. As dpreview suggests, Nikon has three "semi pro cameras" -- the 610, 750, and 810. They really should match the semi pro 810 with the appropriate, corresponding semi pro body.

This is simply DPR's opinion. If you look at Nikon's list or "pro" cameras, the D810 is on it.

Let's face it, the 610/750/810 are all semi pro cameras--each one exhibiting some pro features. However, none of them are even close to the flagship, professional d4. Thus, it costs 2-3x as much.

Let's face it, price is not the only parameter that determines what Nikon calls a "pro" camera. If that were true, then there would only be ONE "pro" camera [the most expensive].

nikonpro.com lists 18 cameras that qualify for NPS membership:


The qualifying cameras for NPS membership...

It doesn't matter what DPR thinks. It doesn't matter what you think. The above is THE LIST.

 

[chuxter]

Let me check..yep, my D750 still takes great pictures despite the crappy build quality some of you are b1tching about..

Yep, you need to dump that POS. ;-)

Note that in the list of bodies that qualify for NPS, the D750 is there. It's just the only one that doesn't have a cast Mg body. You found one that was different. If you can't stand the attention, dump it...

BTW, IMO, the D750 is a most desirable camera. Perhaps you should give it to me. It doesn't bother me in the least to be different.

 

[NikonShoot3r]

Let me check..yep, my D750 still takes great pictures despite the crappy build quality some of you are b1tching about..

Yep, you need to dump that POS. ;-)

Note that in the list of bodies that qualify for NPS, the D750 is there. It's just the only one that doesn't have a cast Mg body. You found one that was different. If you can't stand the attention, dump it...

BTW, IMO, the D750 is a most desirable camera. Perhaps you should give it to me. It doesn't bother me in the least to be different.

I'll trade you straight up for your mag alloy body D810, ranked #12

 

[chuxter]

Let me check..yep, my D750 still takes great pictures despite the crappy build quality some of you are b1tching about..

Yep, you need to dump that POS. ;-)

Note that in the list of bodies that qualify for NPS, the D750 is there. It's just the only one that doesn't have a cast Mg body. You found one that was different. If you can't stand the attention, dump it...

BTW, IMO, the D750 is a most desirable camera. Perhaps you should give it to me. It doesn't bother me in the least to be different.

I'll trade you straight up for your mag alloy body D810, ranked #12

I'd need some coin too... :-0

While it doesn't bother me to be different, it does bother me to be poor.

 

[dustyj]

This thread is cracking me up. Over 100 responses discussing the build quality of the D750 and arguing about what a pro camera is? I currently own a D3s and a D750 and no doubt the D3s is more solidly built but I definitely don't treat my D750 any different or worry about if it will hold up.

I've used and abused some of Nikon's most plasticky dslrs and they've always held up just fine. Treat them like cameras and they should all hold up just fine. If you are a frequent breaker of camera bodies maybe switch to a flagship body.

 

[Bender73]

You say "carbon fiber" and all men dream of F1 cars and say "ohhhhhhh!" The D750 is not precision-woven layers or carbon fiber over aluminum. It is plastic. Yes, ABS polycarbonate "plastic" with some injected fragments of carbon fiber, which likely serves as sort of a suspension and minimizes WEIGHT as its main benefit, which is why car companies are loving it so they can save money and take the load off their engines.

I have not seen an authoritative source ID what plastic is used in Sereebo. Teijin seems to be keeping it a secret? How do you know that it is an ABS/polycarbonate blend? DO we know what proportions of ABS vs polycarbonate?

No. But, I personally would not trust letting a 70-200 f/2.8 lens hang for 8-12 hours from a pseudo-plastic body

Now you're REALLY pulling out the hyperbole. Using the word "plastic" isn't damning or insulting enough for you - now we're discussing "pretend" (pseudo) plastic. Mate, honestly, I'm pretty sure the D750 is made of genuine plastic.

with some special sauce secret CF formula. I would indeed trust a solid metal alloy mount that has been proven time and again over years of abuse. I may be wrong and that is ok. It would be AWESOME if this 'plastic' proves to be stronger than the mag alloy Nikon uses in the flagship bodies. When the D5 comes out we will know since if this material is lighter, stronger, and cheaper then it is a given it will be employed as the main shell for all pro bodies. Am I wrong?

Usually.

Here's a thought. Polycarbonate was developed some time in the late 1960's or early 1970's to make the visors in spacesuits. That's almost 50 years ago!! NASA wanted something that could withstand small dust particle strikes when astronauts went for a "space walk". I saw a demonstration in the 70's where a rep selling polycarbonate belted a sheet of it with a 7lb sledge-hammer as hard as he could. I honestly don't think your magnesium alloy would have stood up well at all to a test like that, in sheet form or otherwise. I have used and purchased many polymer materials over many years in engineering and I have a healthy respect for their many and varied remarkable properties. You show apparent ignorance (in the literal sense) of plastics, yet you are still broadly opinionated about their failings and shortcomings. I've had enough - you can't argue with people like you. I should have realised that several posts ago.

 

[stevef1961]

This thread is cracking me up. Over 100 responses discussing the build quality of the D750 and arguing about what a pro camera is? I currently own a D3s and a D750 and no doubt the D3s is more solidly built but I definitely don't treat my D750 any different or worry about if it will hold up.

I've used and abused some of Nikon's most plasticky dslrs and they've always held up just fine. Treat them like cameras and they should all hold up just fine. If you are a frequent breaker of camera bodies maybe switch to a flagship body.

 

[MisterHairy]

...I bet the D5 will be a solid hunk of metal again.

If it were not, all of the ignoramuses out there who decry the capabilities of modern materials engineering would dismiss it as "plastic and cheap" and refuse to buy it.

 

[Bender73]

Let me check..yep, my D750 still takes great pictures despite the crappy build quality some of you are b1tching about..

That is not the point. The D750 makes great pics. Some of the best out there. The issue is more about how long it will be capable of taking great pics with the abuse pros dish out to cameras. My camera body looks like it was dragged behind a tank. I drop them. Toss the 2nd body down to run and grab a shot. I bang them into walls as I carry soft boxes, bags, and stands across reception halls. I shoot in the rain. I sometimes have limited time and toss bodies in the trunk together while the original camera bag is at another location. I put them down in the snow during a winter engagement session. I shot a photo for a calendar and it was in the middle of a snowstorm. The camera was soaked.

Sure, any camera can take great photos despite being built to consumer specs, but those that do this for money (part-time or full) often beat their tools of the trade simply by using them to get the job done.

 

[chuxter]

...I bet the D5 will be a solid hunk of metal again.

If it were not, all of the ignoramuses out there who decry the capabilities of modern materials engineering would dismiss it as "plastic and cheap" and refuse to buy it.

Amen. That is the issue that Nikon or any other manufacturer faces: PERCEPTION IS EVERYTHING! Most idiot consumers [and the "pros" are some of the biggest idiots] don't like facts and data. SO, even if the newest plastics are "better" than Magnesium, Nikon will have to take a chance that their idiot customers will not boycott a new plastic flagship.

Undoubtedly, at some juncture, modern plastics will replace a lot of metal in our products. That, of course, assumes that we don't run out of oil... :-0

 

[Bender73]

D750 is NOT built as good as D300 was.
D300= D800/810 build wise
D750= D7000/7100/600/610

D300 was built tough as a pro body should
Not saying D750 is cheap or flimsy at all but D300/D700/D800 series is just notch above. It is obvious the moment you pick up the cameras side by side...

--
http://www.pbase.com/jps1979/galleries

It's funny that the 800/810 has a pro build and yet their not even considered pro cameras. As dpreview suggests, Nikon has three "semi pro cameras" -- the 610, 750, and 810. They really should match the semi pro 810 with the appropriate, corresponding semi pro body.

This is simply DPR's opinion. If you look at Nikon's list or "pro" cameras, the D810 is on it.

Let's face it, the 610/750/810 are all semi pro cameras--each one exhibiting some pro features. However, none of them are even close to the flagship, professional d4. Thus, it costs 2-3x as much.

Let's face it, price is not the only parameter that determines what Nikon calls a "pro" camera. If that were true, then there would only be ONE "pro" camera [the most expensive].

nikonpro.com lists 18 cameras that qualify for NPS membership:


The qualifying cameras for NPS membership...

It doesn't matter what DPR thinks. It doesn't matter what you think. The above is THE LIST.

That list says nothing about durability. Meaningless.

--
MY WEBSITE AND BLOG

Photographer | Chris Bilodeau Photography | United States

Photographer | Chris Bilodeau Photography | United States

chrisbilodeauphotography.com

http://chrisbilodeauphotographyblog.com

Log into Facebook

Log into Facebook to start sharing and connecting with your friends, family, and people you know.

www.facebook.com

 

[Bender73]

...I bet the D5 will be a solid hunk of metal again.

If it were not, all of the ignoramuses out there who decry the capabilities of modern materials engineering would dismiss it as "plastic and cheap" and refuse to buy it.

Amen. That is the issue that Nikon or any other manufacturer faces: PERCEPTION IS EVERYTHING! Most idiot consumers [and the "pros" are some of the biggest idiots] don't like facts and data. SO, even if the newest plastics are "better" than Magnesium, Nikon will have to take a chance that their idiot customers will not boycott a new plastic flagship.

Undoubtedly, at some juncture, modern plastics will replace a lot of metal in our products. That, of course, assumes that we don't run out of oil... :-0

Where do you get your info? How are pros some of the biggest idiots? I am sure McNally, Brenizer, Mautner, Stripling, Moose, et. al. would love to have a chat about how dumb they are and how much they would distrust a new body made of modern materials.

...this ought to be good

 

[chuxter]

D750 is NOT built as good as D300 was.
D300= D800/810 build wise
D750= D7000/7100/600/610

D300 was built tough as a pro body should
Not saying D750 is cheap or flimsy at all but D300/D700/D800 series is just notch above. It is obvious the moment you pick up the cameras side by side...

--
http://www.pbase.com/jps1979/galleries

It's funny that the 800/810 has a pro build and yet their not even considered pro cameras. As dpreview suggests, Nikon has three "semi pro cameras" -- the 610, 750, and 810. They really should match the semi pro 810 with the appropriate, corresponding semi pro body.

This is simply DPR's opinion. If you look at Nikon's list or "pro" cameras, the D810 is on it.

Let's face it, the 610/750/810 are all semi pro cameras--each one exhibiting some pro features. However, none of them are even close to the flagship, professional d4. Thus, it costs 2-3x as much.

Let's face it, price is not the only parameter that determines what Nikon calls a "pro" camera. If that were true, then there would only be ONE "pro" camera [the most expensive].

nikonpro.com lists 18 cameras that qualify for NPS membership:


The qualifying cameras for NPS membership...

It doesn't matter what DPR thinks. It doesn't matter what you think. The above is THE LIST.

That list says nothing about durability. Meaningless.

True, it is NOT about durability. Neither I nor Nikon said it was about "durability". It's about being "professional" vs being "non-professional". It's about business vs hobby.

There are many anecdotal accounts of how much abuse a Nikon "professional" camera can be subjected to and still deliver excellent images. Some are in this thread. Note that these accounts don't prove that a "professional" camera body made of plastic could not ALSO survive a lot of abuse.

Nikon can't survive if every camera body they make is qualified for their NPS "club". Membership involves having access to loaner bodies if you damage yours. Yes, even sturdy metal camera bodies can be damaged and need repair. By limiting the bodies to those 18, they limit the stock they have to maintain. They simply didn't include bodies unlikely to be used by true "professionals".

This discrimination doesn't mean that the "consumer" bodies are bad, just that they are unlikely to be used by a "professional".

 

[chuxter]

...I bet the D5 will be a solid hunk of metal again.

If it were not, all of the ignoramuses out there who decry the capabilities of modern materials engineering would dismiss it as "plastic and cheap" and refuse to buy it.

Amen. That is the issue that Nikon or any other manufacturer faces: PERCEPTION IS EVERYTHING! Most idiot consumers [and the "pros" are some of the biggest idiots] don't like facts and data. SO, even if the newest plastics are "better" than Magnesium, Nikon will have to take a chance that their idiot customers will not boycott a new plastic flagship.

Undoubtedly, at some juncture, modern plastics will replace a lot of metal in our products. That, of course, assumes that we don't run out of oil... :-0

Where do you get your info? How are pros some of the biggest idiots? I am sure McNally, Brenizer, Mautner, Stripling, Moose, et. al. would love to have a chat about how dumb they are and how much they would distrust a new body made of modern materials.

...this ought to be good

Those mentioned pros already know how stupid "professional" photographers are.

There is a Forum here called "Pro Digital Talk". I get my info from reading posts there. :-0

It is obvious that a LOT of "pros" don't have a clue what their cameras do or how they are designed and built. They are simply not interested in being educated about their equipment. Thus, they often make terrible mistakes and give awful advice to others.

 

[yray]

...I bet the D5 will be a solid hunk of metal again.

If it were not, all of the ignoramuses out there who decry the capabilities of modern materials engineering would dismiss it as "plastic and cheap" and refuse to buy it.

Amen. That is the issue that Nikon or any other manufacturer faces: PERCEPTION IS EVERYTHING! Most idiot consumers [and the "pros" are some of the biggest idiots] don't like facts and data. SO, even if the newest plastics are "better" than Magnesium, Nikon will have to take a chance that their idiot customers will not boycott a new plastic flagship.

Undoubtedly, at some juncture, modern plastics will replace a lot of metal in our products. That, of course, assumes that we don't run out of oil... :-0

Where do you get your info? How are pros some of the biggest idiots? I am sure McNally, Brenizer, Mautner, Stripling, Moose, et. al. would love to have a chat about how dumb they are and how much they would distrust a new body made of modern materials.

...this ought to be good

Those mentioned pros already know how stupid "professional" photographers are.

There is a Forum here called "Pro Digital Talk". I get my info from reading posts there. :-0

It is obvious that a LOT of "pros" don't have a clue what their cameras do or how they are designed and built. They are simply not interested in being educated about their equipment. Thus, they often make terrible mistakes and give awful advice to others.

Don't underestimate the aesthetic and tactile pleasure of working with a nicely designed and beautifully crafted tool as opposed to the dubious pleasure derived from reading spec sheets on the properties of unknown materials. Folks who spend more of their time with the their equipment than the rest of the mortals are entitled to enjoy it. I would go as far as to suggest that they might be better at doing what they are doing by using tools which are pleasurable rather than onerous to use. To argue that this is ignorance is a little arrogant IMO.

 

[Dyun27]

Those mentioned pros already know how stupid "professional" photographers are.

There is a Forum here called "Pro Digital Talk". I get my info from reading posts there. :-0

It is obvious that a LOT of "pros" don't have a clue what their cameras do or how they are designed and built. They are simply not interested in being educated about their equipment. Thus, they often make terrible mistakes and give awful advice to others.

Don't underestimate the aesthetic and tactile pleasure of working with a nicely designed and beautifully crafted tool as opposed to the dubious pleasure derived from reading spec sheets on the properties of unknown materials. Folks who spend more of their time with the their equipment than the rest of the mortals are entitled to enjoy it. I would go as far as to suggest that they might be better at doing what they are doing by using tools which are pleasurable rather than onerous to use. To argue that this is ignorance is a little arrogant IMO.

This is very true for a lot of people. Sometimes the beauty and feel of the tool inspires you to be more creative, even inspires confidence (real or false), which also helps creativity. You have to love the feel and look of it, it's not always just about the specs.

The Df is the perfect example. Although you could arguably shoot technically better photos with a D600 or D750 due to the increased dynamic range and increased number of megapixels, people just love the way the Df looks and feels. It brings back memories of another time, helping them get into that creative mindset. Nevermind that the D600 has the same exact AF module and the D750 a better one. For that reason some people want that "pro" feel, regardless of whether it's technically actually any better. If it's heavy, it feels "pro". To badly quote the lawyer from Jurassic Park when he's talking to the boy about the night vision head-set; "Is it heavy?" "Yes" "Then it's expensive. Put it down".

I think some people need more inspiration than others to get to work. While tools like the D750 would hold up just as well doing the type of work some of them do, they just need to feel that heft and size in their hands to feel "pro". Clients may also judge your ability based on what you're holding in your hands. It's like driving a Mercedes-Benz. You must be rich, and successful and doing something right if you're driving one!

 

[toomanycanons]

...I bet the D5 will be a solid hunk of metal again.

If it were not, all of the ignoramuses out there who decry the capabilities of modern materials engineering would dismiss it as "plastic and cheap" and refuse to buy it.

Amen. That is the issue that Nikon or any other manufacturer faces: PERCEPTION IS EVERYTHING! Most idiot consumers [and the "pros" are some of the biggest idiots] don't like facts and data. SO, even if the newest plastics are "better" than Magnesium, Nikon will have to take a chance that their idiot customers will not boycott a new plastic flagship.

Undoubtedly, at some juncture, modern plastics will replace a lot of metal in our products. That, of course, assumes that we don't run out of oil... :-0

Where do you get your info? How are pros some of the biggest idiots? I am sure McNally, Brenizer, Mautner, Stripling, Moose, et. al. would love to have a chat about how dumb they are and how much they would distrust a new body made of modern materials.

...this ought to be good

Those mentioned pros already know how stupid "professional" photographers are.

There is a Forum here called "Pro Digital Talk". I get my info from reading posts there. :-0

It is obvious that a LOT of "pros" don't have a clue what their cameras do or how they are designed and built. They are simply not interested in being educated about their equipment. Thus, they often make terrible mistakes and give awful advice to others.

Don't know if this is related to this discussion but here goes:

A few years ago I went on this "Photowalk" sponsored by the biggest camera store in my area. I thought I'd check out areas that I'd been to before only being led by someone with probably different views on what to shoot than me.

There were D800s, there were D4s, there were Sony A7s, there was me with my D5200 and Tamron 17-50. I knew I fit right in.

Then there was the guy with two Canon whatevers (might have been 1DX or some such "pro" camera") with two monstrously huge white telephoto lenses hanging from the two bodies. The entire kit must have weighed close to a ton, dangling and swaying from his neck. That was his idea of what he had to carry to go on this innocent Photowalk.

He, indeed, looked like an idiot. OK, back to our regularly scheduled hotly contested debate about plastics and whatnot.

 

[MisterHairy]

Indeed. Little men feel big behind large cameras. Compensation.

--
Really beautiful photograph!

 

[Kaso]

Indeed. Little men feel big behind large cameras. Compensation.

Little men feel "pseudo" big behind huge, heavy, "solid hunk of metal," "professional" cameras.

 

[HyperCypher]

agree ... crazy "is/is not" thread!

A "pro" camera is the one the pro is holding at the moment ...

I have used Nikon D40, D300, D7000, D700, D600, and now a D750

of those only the D700 had to go to Nikon for repair (twice) plus I had to replace the "skins" myself...

go figure

I should also add, my 750 is a better camera than my 700 in every way (except for frames per second with a grip). There is nothing the 700 does better. I prefer the feel and lightness of the 750. I program the back button of the 750 for AF-on and don't miss that one single dedicated button at all - (remember, the 750 has a dedicated bracket button, the 700 does not).

Side by side, the 700 just looks less "precision" than the 750. The finish is to my eye less refined, the screws and seams look rougher - that sort of thing. Because of its extra weight and the rigidness of the metal shell, I am not at all sure a 700 would survive a tumble better. Plastics give a little bit on impact. That might decrease the shock to internal parts for instance.

When I go out to do my real estate photography (so I guess I am a "pro"?), the 750 with battery grip and Kirk L-bracket sure looks the part (as much as any Nikon)- and most of my clients who think I've got top of the line gear, just because of the size and general shape, when in fact, except for my 14-24, most of my kit is consumer grade. But I long ago stopped making that distinction

The actual result is truly up to me.