DPReview TV: Nikon D780 review

How does Nikon release a camera with the Z6 live view before the Z6 is produced? I am often amazed at how people know what Nikon can do. All I know is if I want the camera I will buy it. If not, I won't. The advancements are quite appealing to me.

I think the OP was suggesting that the live view technology used in the Z6 was already available to Nikon in 2017. We don't know that, of course, but even if true, I think it was smarter marketing-wise to release the Z6 first.

Not really a competitor in either price or segment. Will have to wait for the D850 replacement

@2nd_Wind - No, I simply like the photos Chris made.

Each of these cameras has good points and each has bad points. Each offers a completely different shooting experience. You pay your money and you make your choice.

Personally, if I was a Nikon user, I wouldn't buy either - if I wanted the best-specified stills DSLR on the market, I'd get the D850, which sells for the same price as the D780.

If I wanted a Nikon MILC, I'd wait a few months for the Z8/9 announcement, as although the Z6/7 are great cameras, they lack certain features and capabilities that I need.

But we all have different needs and different priorities....

Good. None of those features are required for making good photographs.
I sold my Z6.

This DSLR on the other hand will serve a certain aspect of customers well

@platinumkid
Nikon DLSR doesn't use IBIS, they use VR or in lens stabilization.
This is F mount, so it use huge number of F lenses.

@entoman, you wrote " I'd get the D850, which sells for the same price as the D780."

In the US, right now the price of the D850 is $2999, while the D780 is $2299. So I'm puzzled by your assertion that the two cameras cost the same.

But I do agree with you that ultimately we all have different needs/wants and priorities, and that is why choice is a wonderful thing.

I sold my Z6 too. And still consider it a better camera than this. People have different preferences about what features are more important in their camera model of his choice. The 780 is lacking things I consider important or convinient. And the F-mount argument is the dumbest of them all. They work absolutely fine on the Z body. I had 3 of them - no difference whatsoever.

Thoughts - Yes, since last checking the price of the D850 is now slightly higher, but there's not much between them.
D750: £930
D870: £1770
D850: £1840
Panamoz prices, 23 Feb.

Entoman: thanks for the clarification. So different country/currency.

All Nikon’s do as you can control +/- any flash you attach without diving into the flash menu.

The pop-up flash on the D750 is great, good (enough) balance of flash vs. natural light.

Was it cost cutting when they removed it from the D850 and the D500, or cost cutting by not including it on the D3, D4, D5 and soon to be D6?
No, it allows Nikon to make the camera better weather sealed and better built (full magnesium alloy) as all know that the flash was the Achilles heel of weather sealing.
Also, that pop up flash was useless for anything further than 5 feet.
Sheesh, a great camera with the beat features of a DSLR and a Mirrorless and that is what you came away with?

I don't know how large the D780 viewfinder is but D750's is really unimpressive so by cutting out the flash results in a bigger view, it's worth the price

NexLupus - Yes there is some truth to that - a built-in flash is a minor risk to weather-sealing, but it was extremely useful as a means of triggering the R1 macro flash, which is a lot cheaper than the R1C1 with it's commander unit.

A built-in flash is also extremely useful as a fill-in for those who don't want to carry an umbrella everywhere (although the latter will of course provide better fill-in).

And as you are so concerned about weather-sealing, presumably you are also concerned about durabilty, yet you seem quite happy to have another "Achilles heel", namely a tilting rear screen...

So "sheesh" dude, do you only ever think about your own particular usage and never consider what others need or want?? (as it happens, I *don't* use a built-in flash, for various reasons, but at least I'm not blind to the needs/wants of others).

What in the world does your above post have to do with your statement about "cost-cutting removal of the built in flash".

You made a statement and I commented on that statement showing you "historical evidence" that Nikon has done that across the board with ALL of their upgraded cameras and specifically with their higher end cameras.

So my POINT was/is that the removal of the flash is not a cost cutting move, but a move that brings this camera in line with the other high end full magnesium, fully weather sealed cameras in Nikon's DSLR line up.

Stop coming up with straw man arguments to try and refute my points to your original post.

NexLupus - My reply addressed the opinions you expressed.

You believe that Nikon's motive was to increase the durability of the camera by removing the "Achilles heel" of a pop-up flash. I pointed out that you were quite content that NIkon retained a different Achilles heel, namely the flappy rear screen.

I believe that Nikon's primary reason for removing the flash, AND removing the option to attach a vertical grip, AND failing to fit a proper AF joystick, are commercial (i.e. cost-cutting) decisions.

continued...

I don't blame Nikon for doing this, they need to reduce costs to keep the D780 a viable economic option in a market where their own Z6 undercuts it. In the past Nikon have always crammed as many usable features and as high a specification as possible into their DSLRs.

What disappoints me about the D780 (still a fine camera) is that they seem to be changing direction, by *removing* valuable features such as integral flash and battery grip compatibility, in order to cover the cost of introducing other features, that for some users, are less desirable.

You dont need the built in flash to remotely trigger a Nikon flash

@NexLupus is right: all of the upper end Nikon bodies do not have built in flash. This is simply moving the D780 into the same upper league category.

And who knew that built in flash was such a coveted feature? Funny thing is that before someone needed a way to criticize this camera for that, built in flash was considered a lower end amateur feature on lower end cameras. Funny how the pro's make do without it on models like the D850, D5, the upcoming D6, etc.

Let's face it: people want to find some way to gripe about this camera, and one way is that it took away the built in flash feature, but simply because the model has been upgraded into a higher category.

"Never thought the D780 would get less DPR-points than the D750"

That just shows you how far the industry has advanced. DPreview points are not absolute but relative to time and price. So the D780 would have received more points in 2018 and more points if it would only cost 1799$.
The fact that a camera better in virtually every way gets fewer points just shows how far expectations have advanced

Traditionally, the pro-grade models from CaNikon never had a built-in flash, presumably because it's seen by them as a consumer feature. But when you remove a feature from a camera line that previously had it, it's very likely a cost-cutting move, especially when there is no clear marketing message suggesting that the model has been repositioned in the lineup. Nikon is targeting the D780 at the same level of user as the D750.

Thoughts - NexLupus is correct in as much as Nikon don't fit built-in flashes to pro models, but the D780 isn't a pro model, it's an enthusiast model, i.e. aimed at the same market as the D750, as pointed out by Revenant.

What I'm criticising is the fact that very useful features have been removed from an existing model (D750) i.e. the bult-in flash, and the ability to accept a vertical battery grip. Both are retrograde steps, in a camera that is supposedly an "upgrade"...

Nikon of course aren't the only company who do this. Sony were heavily criticised for similarly removing features from one of the a6xxx cameras. And if Canon did the same thing, some people here would be crucifying them for "crippling" the camera.

And that's exactly what Nikon have done to the D780 - they've "crippled" an excellent stills camera, by removing the flash and the grip option, in order to keep costs down and reposition the camera as a stills/video hybrid.

I assume he means people will stop buying SLRs, not that existing cameras will vanish.

raztec - IBIS is pretty useless on a DSLR because while the sensor can be stabilised, the view through the OVF can't.

I agree entirely about the pop-up flash, but that I assume is a cost-cutting measure (as is the unavailability of a vertical grip).

Nikon clearly recognise the fact that the DSLR market is shrinking rapidly, and they know that there is little that can be done to improve an already mature product-type, so it's vital to their long-term surviavl to get people into their Z system as quickly as possible.

Personally I like the Z cameras a lot, although I much prefer the upcoming Canon R5. I think Nikon will be able to grab a big enough slice of the MILC market to keep them profitable. If they relied only on DSLRs, sadly they'd be out of business in 5 years.

entoman "raztec - IBIS is pretty useless on a DSLR because while the sensor can be stabilised, the view through the OVF can't."

Why does that matter? Please explain your thinking. Ibis just counteracts minimal movements when you press the shutter. By definition those movements are to small or to quick for you to do anything about it. You're not in any way helped by seeing the corrected view in the viewfinder as you can't react to the information quickly or precisely enough. If you could you wouldn't need ibis in the first place...

Lessiter - I disagree that you are "not in any way helped by seeing the corrected view in the viewfinder".

If you can *see* the effect of stabilisation, it gives you the confidence to know that the stabilisation is working well enough to make it worthwhile pressing the shutter button.

On the other hand, if you're using a telephoto or macro, and when you look through the viewfinder you see a wobbly image, it takes away that confidence. Further, it tends to increase the time you spend trying to steady the camera before taking the shot. Leading to missed shots.

It is also a great deal more difficult to locate and follow a subject, such as a bird in flight, if the viewfinder image is shaky.

entoman: "IBIS is pretty useless on a DSLR because while the sensor can be stabilised, the view through the OVF can't".

Hmm. I thought the main purpose of IBIS was to help get sharper images. If it does that, then it's hardly useless. Pentax have put IBIS in every DSLR for years. Having a stablized viewfinder can be helpful too, but it's not the primary function.

entoman your description of judging correct shutter speed from viewfinder shake sounds very advanced. I never new of anyone with such amazing skill before.

Your point about seeing stabilization is interesting. It seems to tally with people who really like the viewfinder focus animations. Seeing the boxes track makes them feel as if they'll get the shot. As we know though the having evf animations doesn't mean having all shots in focus because real life moves faster than the animations and to some extent even your ability to perceive.

gfrensesn - It pays to think before opening your mouth.

Before so ignorantly suggesting that my argument is "completely stupid", perhaps you might like to consider the fact that Canon has actually patented more than one design in which the live feed from the (potentialy stabilised) sensor is redirected to an EVF screen that is viewed through the OVF ocular.

The idea is that you press a button, causing the mirror to flip up and lock in position. Instead of sending the sensor feed to the rear screen, instead it sends the sensor feed to the viewfinder, via a set of small prisms. So you get a stabilised live view through the OVF ocular. Get it?

I owned a Minolta 7D myself, for a brief period, and although the set of bars did indeed give a good representation of the degree of shake being corrected, and helped a lot when bracing the camera, it didn't automatically stabilise the viewfinder image, unlike the Canon patent.

You are probably right about the value comparison in such reviews being directed at newbies. But, don't know if you have seen anything like this, but folks here are frequently telling me to switch to a z camera either citing the lower price as one reason or just disregarding my budget entirely. Just for one example, I use an old 28-105 for my mid-range zoom needs. I would need to get a lens with another zoom range at much more than the $100 I spent on this lens. Without the cool semi macro capability. Going for Sony or Fuji would make almost as much sense financially for me as going Z. I am not blind to the fact that I may choose mirrorless at some point down the line. Getting the D780 later in the year for around $1500 by waiting for a good sale and selling my D610 makes a lot more sense money and photography wise for me right now.

Switching is always expensive if you have many lenses in your existing mount. For new buyers, it is worth discussing. But then, Nikon gives 2 options: Buy D780 of you want to continue/use DSLR, buy Z6 if you want more portability and have access to better lenses. Win-win for Nikon.

Nikon are in an unfortunate position regarding mounts. Canon users can easily adapt our lenses to Panasonic or to Sony, with almost no loss of AF functionality/performance. We can also of course use them on the RF mount bodies, with zero loss of functionality/performance, as compared to using them on our DSLRs.

It's highly unlikely that anyone will switch from Canon, Sony or Panasonic, to Nikon, simply because their existing lenses can't be adapted successfully, so Nikon can basically only sell their Z cameras to existing Nikon DSLR users, or to people just starting out in photography.

A shame, because the Z mount Nikons are very well designed, and no doubt the Z8/9 will be even better.

Entoman, thanks to shortest flange distance almost all camera lenses in existence can be adapted to Z mount (in theory). Medium format, Canon EF, Canon RF, even m43 lenses :) There already is an adapter with which you can adapt Canon EF lenses in Nikon Z cameras with AF, IS etc.. and it works fine.

No evidence that will happen at all. Sure maybe $300 to $500 off in a year, but that is about all I would predict, not a firesale. Around $2K for body by next Dec. sales. You are basically getting a camera similar to D750 but with the fantastic video abilities of Z6 with great autofocus in liveview and 4K recording. What is not to like! ... and you can keep using your FX lenses if you have them, without having to buy expensive Z lenses.

@stonejack: But Nikon told us that great lenses are only possible with the Z-mount, not with the F-mount, because the F-mount is to small to make great lenses possible... :)

@gfrenzen He said “amazing” lenses, not “great” lenses. There might be amazing F-mount lenses, just not great ones. ;)

Gfrensen, Nikon and Canon said new mounts gives lens designers more freedom and we see the results in both systems. Especially in Z system new lenses are so much better than F lenses.

@panther fan
Wedding shooters nowadays have to shoot as much video as photographs or even more. If you got F lenses but want good video, you can't get good video from a DSLR (I know cause I have one) due to lens hunting typical for Nikon DSLR, but with Z on the contrary you will get excellent video. But for that you have to have Z body. D780 gives a unique opportunity to shoot both photos and videos of high quality with F lenses.

@Stonejack - Most weddings are shot with a Canon 5D mkIII or 5D mkIV, both stills and video.

But we are talking about Nikon wedding shooters.

@Stonejack - "...you can't get good video from a DSLR ..", that was the point of my post.

@StoneJack I really don’t want to get caught in this discussion, especially because I don’t do video. But I think the Panasonic GH4 was for a long time the king of video, despite its weak AF(?) It was because videographers used MF I believe.

So saying you can’t get good video out of a Nikon DSLR because of the AF is only half-true imho.

Yes, they shouldn't have eliminated the flash, but the alternative Z6 doesn't have one either.

From reading the tea leaves (including interviews with Nikon executives), it's obvious that for most people, especially those without a good number of expensive F-mount lenses, the Z series is the upgrade (or starting out) path. I'm waiting to see what the next generation of Z cameras will bring to the table.

I really like those inbuild flashes that can be tilted upwards that can be found in some mirrorless and compact cameras without viewfinder hump. They are not powerful but they are definity quite useful and sufficient in many situations for indirect lighting.

I've used the flash on my D300 and D800 for many years as a controller for my off-camera external flash(es) in both studio and wedding settings. Just great.
In fact I never used any flash units otherwise. I never use on-camera flash - ugly light

(sorry for my non-native english here)

@ SToneJack
Built-in flash is VERY useful, especially on those Nikon DSLRs that can control external flashes (ever heard of CLS?), and also to provide fill flash under harsh sunlight or "drag the shutter" at night. It's such a shame Nikon omitted it on D780 :-(

I don't know about Nikon, but Canon has/had a small 90EX flash that allows to control and trigger other Speedlites and uses its own power source (2xAAA). But now everyone is using radio triggers. So, what's the problem really?

I was about to buy a new Corvette but the cup holder was 2.5mm too far to the right. Unforgivable! What were they thinking!! Back to the drawing board morons and get it right next time!!!

@ Old Cameras
No, it's like a Corvette with a significantly weaker engine.

More like a Corvette with optional headlights :)

@ecka84
Haha, I like your analogy 👍

https://www.nikonusa.com/en/nikon-products/speedlight-flashes.page
Really, those moans about lack of inbuilt flash do sound like excuses :)

@kociasek
Thanks. It's a fairly obvious analogy :)

Wouldn't the more obvious complaint be that camera manufacturers still not integrate their wireless triggers into the camera body, than complaining that an ancient optical slave system is missing?