# Nikon D750 announced & "NEW" Sensor (recycled) & AF!



## xps (Sep 12, 2014)

Report @ Dpreview:
http://www.dpreview.com/articles/7222282087/nikon-d750-fx-dslr-announced

Nikon _seems_ to recycle the D610 sensor....
_
"The D750 features a 24MP CMOS sensor with an AA filter, and although Nikon (as usual) claims that this sensor is 'newly developed' it is probably based on the same sensor that we've seen in the D610 (and Sony A7)...."_
cited from: http://www.dpreview.com/previews/nikon-d750/3

_"The D750 inherits a version of the 51-point Multi-CAM 3500FX AF system that we've seen used in the D800/E and D810 but its 'II' version is actually more sensitive -* rated down to -3EV*. We haven't been able to really get a feel for how much difference this makes in normal use but in theory, the D750 should offer superior AF reliability in poor light compared to the D810 and D4S, which is quite something (and which might prompt more than a few D800 owners to 'upgrade' to the D750). "_
cited from: http://www.dpreview.com/previews/nikon-d750/3


----------



## MichaelHodges (Sep 12, 2014)

FF, advanced auto focus, 6.5 FPS, and a class-leading sensor.

There's no reason at all to buy a 7DII.


----------



## Ebrahim Saadawi (Sep 12, 2014)

MichaelHodges said:


> FF, advanced auto focus, 6.5 FPS, and a class-leading sensor.
> 
> There's no reason at all to buy a 7DII.



Different cameras for different users and markets. 

Looks like the D750 is a winner though. Lovely all-arounder if you're not a demanding landscape (needing the 36 mps) or a demanding sports photographer (needing 10 fps, deep buffer, 1/8000 shutter, tougher body etc) this is a lovrly camera. and to be honest most of the market are not demanding landscape and sports photographers so this makes an excellent all-rounder for them. Lovely price to match too. I suspect the 7D mk II sill be priced similarly.


----------



## joejohnbear (Sep 12, 2014)

As a wedding photographer, I think this is a great backup camera, but we shoot with f/1.4 a lot, so the 15 cross type points and the 1/4000th shutter will take its toll. The -3ev is great though, if only the 15 cross type weren't a limitation. The mk iii and the 1dx are still the way to go and that's what our studio uses. The D810 and the D4s and D700 are still Nikon's wedding workhorses. 



dilbert said:


> Ebrahim Saadawi said:
> 
> 
> > MichaelHodges said:
> ...


----------



## ULFULFSEN (Sep 12, 2014)

joejohnbear said:


> As a wedding photographer, I think this is a great backup camera, but we shoot with f/1.4 a lot, so the 15 cross type points and the 1/4000th shutter will take its toll. The -3ev is great though, if only the 15 cross type weren't a limitation. The mk iii and the 1dx are still the way to go and that's what our studio uses.



a studio but no link to it?
shouldn´t you try to get a much exposure as possible?


----------



## joejohnbear (Sep 12, 2014)

Photographers here aren't clients or business leads. Simple as that. And I like to trash talk (internet posters, not people with real names) on occasion, so it wouldn't be good to mix business and fun here, haha. 



ULFULFSEN said:


> joejohnbear said:
> 
> 
> > As a wedding photographer, I think this is a great backup camera, but we shoot with f/1.4 a lot, so the 15 cross type points and the 1/4000th shutter will take its toll. The -3ev is great though, if only the 15 cross type weren't a limitation. The mk iii and the 1dx are still the way to go and that's what our studio uses.
> ...


----------



## JohanCruyff (Sep 12, 2014)

MichaelHodges said:


> FF, advanced auto focus, 6.5 FPS, and a class-leading sensor.


 
51 Focus points with "just" 15 cross-type. 
2 SD Cards Slots.
1/4000th max shutter speed.
No small RAW option.

End of possible complains, for me.

If there aren't quality/reliability problems, D750 will be a very good camera in a new sub-segment (between "cheap full frame" and "pro full frame"). 

Competition will help the whole industry. Let's see Canon's future proposals.


----------



## daniela (Sep 12, 2014)

xps said:


> Report @ Dpreview:
> http://www.dpreview.com/articles/7222282087/nikon-d750-fx-dslr-announced
> 
> Nikon _seems_ to recycle the D610 sensor....
> ...



The sensor on the D610 is very good. My husbands "backup Camera" (I do not know why he needs one as (he has an D800 and an D810) is an very good all-in-one Camera. 

I hope Canon has put -3EV in the 7DII too. That would be an good additional function to use the 7DII with an 100-400mm 4.5-5.6 and an 1.4x converter.


----------



## tomscott (Sep 12, 2014)

The answer to the 5DmkIII has arrived


----------



## sarangiman (Sep 12, 2014)

joejohnbear said:


> As a wedding photographer, I think this is a great backup camera, but we shoot with f/1.4 a lot, so the 15 cross type points and the 1/4000th shutter will take its toll. The -3ev is great though, if only the 15 cross type weren't a limitation. The mk iii and the 1dx are still the way to go and that's what our studio uses. The D810 and the D4s and D700 are still Nikon's wedding workhorses.



I hear you on the somewhat measly 15 cross-type points (by today's standards anyway, after the 5D Mark III and the 1D X), clustered near the center of the frame. 

That said, I still prefer Nikon's AF system for my f/1.4 prime wedding photography simply b/c the 3D AF tracking system is so reliable that I can trust it to automatically move the AF point to stay on my subject as I recompose (or the subject moves) after I initially acquire focus using the center point. This is much faster than manually moving the AF point (which of course I could never do fast enough when the subject is moving).

Thankfully, the D750 has the same 91,000-pixel RGB metering sensor in the D810, so 3D AF tracking will likely be just as good (if not identical).

I hope Nikon is working on 'catching up' to Canon's more extensive cross-type offering.

I've also wondered for some time if the high-precision, wider-baseline center points on the 5D Mark III and 1D X outperform Nikon's center AF points. I haven't seen any rigorous tests done here (other than Roger Cicala's - but I believe his tests were done under good lighting with high contrast targets).

Personally, I think the D750 will be a workhorse wedding tool for the Nikon side. It actually offers a potential advantage over the D810 given that it focuses (theoretically) in lower light. And its only disadvantages compared to the D810 are lower resolution and higher base ISO (or slightly lower dynamic range) - which are probably of very little import to many wedding photographers. Meanwhile, the slightly increased FPS is advantageous to wedding photography.

They've definitely packed a lot into this camera, and that's admirable. I just hope we see some more 'revolutionary' improvements in technology from Nikon soon. I suppose that could be said about everyone, though!


----------



## lo lite (Sep 12, 2014)

xps said:


> Report @ Dpreview:
> http://www.dpreview.com/articles/7222282087/nikon-d750-fx-dslr-announced



Too bad it doesn't sport 4k Video. Not that I would have bought the D750 if it had but having 4k Video would have set the bar for the upcoming 5DIV. So Canon can dodge 4k Video in the 5D series again.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 12, 2014)

DP Review]
The D750 inherits a version of the 51-point Multi-CAM 3500FX AF system that we've seen used in the D800/E and D810 but its 'II' version is actually more sensitive rated down to -3EV. We haven't been able to really get a feel for how much difference this makes in normal use but in theory said:


> FF, advanced auto focus, 6.5 FPS, and a class-leading sensor.
> There's no reason at all to buy a 7DII.



Troll much? How well will the D750 work with Canon lenses...or are they no reason to buy a 7DII? 




daniela said:


> I hope Canon has put -3EV in the 7DII too. That would be an good additional function to use the 7DII with an 100-400mm 4.5-5.6 and an 1.4x converter.



I don't think you understand how AF systems are specified. The low light sensitivity spec (-0.5 EV for the 7D, etc.), has nothing to do with the AF functionality for a given maximum aperture. The 1D X and 5DIII are spec'd to -2 EV, and can AF at f/8 (e.g. 100-400 + 1.4x); the 6D is spec'd to -3 EV, but cannot AF with an f/8 combo.




tomscott said:


> The answer to the 5DmkIII has arrived



Yep, and just in time 2 years late.


----------



## joejohnbear (Sep 12, 2014)

To support Thom's assertion that the D750 is two years too late: http://www.dslrbodies.com/newsviews/d750-too-little-too-late.html


----------



## MichaelHodges (Sep 12, 2014)

> As I've stated before, people make too much of this spec. Consider an example of the difference between -2 EV and -3 EV light levels: f/2.8, 1/15 s, ISO 51200 vs ISO 102400. Neither of those is likely to result in a very good image in most situations.



It's nice to have. The sum of minor improvements creates a nice package.





> Troll much? How well will the D750 work with Canon lenses...or are they no reason to buy a 7DII?



Trolling would be spending days on the forum, constantly engaged in brand wars with little regard for objectivity. Know anyone who fits that description?

I'm giving my sincere feelings. This will be my next camera, and I'm choosing it over the 7DII.


----------



## psolberg (Sep 12, 2014)

joejohnbear said:


> To support Thom's assertion that the D750 is two years too late: http://www.dslrbodies.com/newsviews/d750-too-little-too-late.html



fanboy talk. it will sell quite well in the face of comments like that. Nikon had a LOT of demand on the wings for this camera. It would be like saying a high MP canon body is 2 years too late. It isn't because a lot of people locked into the canon system will buy it. 

and BTW the sensor is not recycled (also fanboy talk). Nikon always tweaks their sensors and dXO will confirm it. it may be the same basic sensor but likely has better process and tweaks to yield better IQ than the 6xx series.

I realize he shoots a lot of nikon, but while his technical articles are good, Thom Hogan is an absolutely blow hard. His obsession with DX, hostility towards sony, and dimissal of anybody but his power point charts make his sales forecast absurd.


----------



## joejohnbear (Sep 12, 2014)

I mistyped that, it was Neuro's assertion. It will sell as well as the D600/D610.


psolberg said:


> joejohnbear said:
> 
> 
> > To support Thom's assertion that the D750 is two years too late: http://www.dslrbodies.com/newsviews/d750-too-little-too-late.html
> ...


----------



## quod (Sep 12, 2014)

Yo OP, so what?


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 13, 2014)

MichaelHodges said:


> The sum of minor improvements creates a nice package



So the D750 which uses a recycled sensor and has some improvements is a nice package, but the 7DII which (probably) uses a recycled sensor and has some improvements...no reason to buy that. Whatever. :


----------



## 9VIII (Sep 13, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> tomscott said:
> 
> 
> > The answer to the 5DmkIII has arrived
> ...



That was my first thought. They really should have called it the D650, or the D800 For Cheapskates.
It really just combines the worst features of each, and gives you a middle of the road price. I have no idea why Nikon didn't give this 8FPS, there is literally no reason to get this other than the price (unless you're allergic to large files).
Honestly I would rather have a 7DII. You can bet Canon is going to works some magic with the AF there, and just watch that shutter fly.
It's a camera with a purpose. The D750, is just another good all around camera.
Nikon must be really nervous about their D4 sales.

To be fair, it is about a grand less than the 5D3, so at least you get something for your time.


----------



## sagittariansrock (Sep 13, 2014)

I think it is a bit foolish to argue that Nikon's neglecting the high-end DX market and overcrowding the entry-mid level FX market is not a great marketing strategy. I think the D600, with a bit better QC and better marketing, could easily have survived a couple of years till a D610 around early 2015 (with the same features as the D750). On the other hand, Nikon could have brought out a D400, if you will, to provide all those poor souls who need tough build quality, high fps, great AF system and don't have the dough to pay for the D4/s or super tele lenses.
@Jrista: You would have bought such a camera if Canon could (well, technically still might) deliver it with great sensor tech! Now think about Nikon users- they KNOW Nikon has a great sensor and all the additional features variously in FX cameras- why can't they get it in a DX camera?

In the same breath I say that Canon's ignoring the high-MP FF market isn't a great strategy, but while that might have something to do with R&D abilities, Nikon doesn't even have that excuse.

It seems that Nikon is great at starting something wonderful and then following it up really poorly. Take the D700, the D7000 and the D300s. Most unfortunate for a venerable company.


----------



## xps (Sep 13, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> MichaelHodges said:
> 
> 
> > The sum of minor improvements creates a nice package
> ...



Maybe the reason for this behavior is, that the exprected pressure that the 7DII has to be a stellar succesor to the 7D is very very high. And now some of us are dissatisfied, because of not meeting their needs and expectations.


----------



## xps (Sep 13, 2014)

Yesterday there was an interesting film report on German television on the coming Photokina.
There will be a lot of releases, a lot of new products...
Interesting was an statement on the future of photography and filming from an japanese fotographical association: mirorrless gets better (AF, IQ). More development and research on ML Cams and opimized lenses. Product renewal frequency will be 1-1.5 years.
DSLR: cheap and middle priced cameras will loose market to Handycams and ML cams. trend to high quality cams is stable, but costs of development and research will visibly increase the price of those products in the next years. Product renewal frequency will sink.

And: Joint ventures will increase. And the specialisation of development and research on specific items. (like Sony: sensor, pentax or some other brands on AF systems.... Only Canon will not join other companies. Nikon will buy sony sensors and maybe some other parts for ML cams.


----------



## Hannes (Sep 13, 2014)

Looks like nikon raided the parts bin to try and come up with a direct 5DIII competitor. It doesn't seem that they actually tried to make it any better, just cheaper. I wonder if it'll work for them.


----------



## sarangiman (Sep 13, 2014)

neuroanatomist said:


> [quote author=DP Review]
> The D750 inherits a version of the 51-point Multi-CAM 3500FX AF system that we've seen used in the D800/E and D810 but its 'II' version is actually more sensitive rated down to -3EV. We haven't been able to really get a feel for how much difference this makes in normal use but in theory, the D750 should offer *superior AF reliability in poor light* compared to the D810 and D4S, which is quite something (and which might prompt more than a few D800 owners to 'upgrade' to the D750).



As I've stated before, people make too much of this spec. Consider an example of the difference between -2 EV and -3 EV light levels: f/2.8, 1/15 s, ISO 51200 vs ISO 102400. Neither of those is likely to result in a very good image in most situations. 
[/quote]

Whatever (likely hardware?) change that enables focus to work down to -3 EV might, just might, make the system also work better and more reliably at, say 1 or 2 EV. That would be advantageous.

I'm not saying that's the case, I'm just saying it's likely and that if it *is* true then that would be pretty worthwhile. 

What'd be nice would be if someone tested this thoroughly. But before that, I think it's premature for anyone to make the comment you did - completely ignoring the potential benefits at slightly higher, yet still low, light levels. We all know very well that precision of AF points drops with lower light levels and lower contrast; anything that increases the SNR of what the AF sensor 'sees' could help performance in situations other than just -3EV. 

Let us know if you think that's completely false.

All that said, I do wish Nikon put some more revolutionary changes into the AF system. Canon's been, admirably, iterating quite a bit on their AF sensors, if I understand correctly.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Sep 13, 2014)

xps said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > MichaelHodges said:
> ...



I wonder how those Nikon shooters expecting a replacement for the D300s feel about their needs and expectations bring met?


----------



## 123Photog (Sep 13, 2014)

one thing is for sure, nikon and canon seem to do as small steps as possible.

tech is dripping down from the top models and enhanced a bit (RGB metering sensor, AF system etc.).

ok DPAF is nice for the amateur video crowd.
i like it! 
but then, where is 4K video?

for still shooters who are not action shooter, what has canon done?
canon has not done much for the studio, landscape and portrait shooter.
when will we see a real 1Ds III successor?
a successor that pushes the resolution and dynamic range into sony realms and beyond? 

now look at samsung.
out of nowhere a 28 MP camera with 15 FPS and 4K video?
if that´s true i say it´s impressiv.

the whole camera system or camera may not be as polished and perfect, but at least on paper it looks impressive.

hell... after the 5D MK2 who was honored for it´s video features, why not 4K video in the 7D MK2??

i think Canon COULD have done all that too and have built a way better camera than samsung (built quality, ergonomics etc.). 

but they don´t.. that´s what "upsets" me a bit.
they are so conservative. 

i mean why was apple so big in the past years, because apple was not conservative.
i don´t have a single apple product but their marketing and products worked.... for the masses.

it can´t be enough for canon to keep the status quo in a shrinking market?
but with their conservative approach they will not get many new customers i guess.
there are many more alternatives to DSLR´s today then 5 years ago.

same is true for nikon.


----------



## Hillsilly (Sep 13, 2014)

The D750 sounds nice, but apart from good AF, it seems to lack the ruggedness and speed that most people would expect from a wildlife and sports oriented camera. But then, apart from the D4s, I'm not sure if any Nikon is really aimed at that market? 

On first glance, the camera sounded interesting, but then it doesn't seem like much of an improvement over a D610 and if you were intending to spend more, wouldn't you just get a D810?


----------



## rfdesigner (Sep 13, 2014)

If I was starting out and I could only choose the 5DIII or 750... I'd be picking the 5D

For me, KISS (Keep It Simple Stupid) is important and I don't care about video, so I'll actively avoid tiltable/rotatable LCDs.. just too vulnerable.

I'm sure there's just as many others that want this, but not me... I wonder what the pros think on this count?


----------



## verysimplejason (Sep 13, 2014)

rfdesigner said:


> If I was starting out and I could only choose the 5DIII or 750... I'd be picking the 5D
> 
> For me, KISS (Keep It Simple Stupid) is important and I don't care about video, so I'll actively avoid tiltable/rotatable LCDs.. just too vulnerable.
> 
> I'm sure there's just as many others that want this, but not me... I wonder what the pros think on this count?



I quite agree on some points but non-fixed LCD isn't actually useless for photography. Rather it is a useful tool that can be used depending on situations. E.g., landscapes, selfies ;D, astrophotography.


----------



## rfdesigner (Sep 14, 2014)

verysimplejason said:


> rfdesigner said:
> 
> 
> > If I was starting out and I could only choose the 5DIII or 750... I'd be picking the 5D
> ...



I use an Atik383L+ for astrophotography. Even when I was using my DLSR, I always went teathered.. so much easier to judge focus on a computer, and you don't disturb anything pressing buttons etc.


----------



## sarangiman (Sep 17, 2014)

sarangiman said:


> neuroanatomist said:
> 
> 
> > [quote author=DP Review]
> ...



Whatever (likely hardware?) change that enables focus to work down to -3 EV might, just might, make the system also work better and more reliably at, say 1 or 2 EV. That would be advantageous.

I'm not saying that's the case, I'm just saying it's likely and that if it *is* true then that would be pretty worthwhile. 

What'd be nice would be if someone tested this thoroughly. But before that, I think it's premature for anyone to make the comment you did - completely ignoring the potential benefits at slightly higher, yet still low, light levels. We all know very well that precision of AF points drops with lower light levels and lower contrast; anything that increases the SNR of what the AF sensor 'sees' could help performance in situations other than just -3EV. 

Let us know if you think that's completely false.

All that said, I do wish Nikon put some more revolutionary changes into the AF system. Canon's been, admirably, iterating quite a bit on their AF sensors, if I understand correctly.
[/quote]

Interesting that this went unanswered. Neuro: if you don't have any solid evidence that the -3 EV rating *doesn't* help in other, less drastically low-light settings, then please don't go around spreading misinformation that its of no utility to shooting scenarios other than those extreme ISOs (51k and above) you mentioned. 

I'm saying I don't know, as I haven't had a chance to test it yet, but common sense dictates that if the AF sensor can focus in lower light, then it's probably going to better in other, more reasonable, low light scenarios as well (like EV 2 or 3 or what have you). 

This was certainly the case for the A7S, for example. Just b/c it was rated down to EV -4 didn't mean that's the only place it was useful. It'd focus far more quickly and reliably than the A7R in less low-light scenarios as well. And this isn't surprising - if you're not pixel-binning, then each pixel used for focus has significantly lower SNR. Thus, AF is more likely prone to failing in low light, especially with low contrast subjects. And if you're only pixel binning at the software level, you've got all the extra read noise of the extra A7R pixels (which, importantly, don't individually have lower read noise than the A7S' pixels).

Of course, the fact that the A7S' EV -4 rated AF is still only CDAF usually meant that a 5D Mark III, for example, would still outperform it when shooting actual moving subjects in low light (b/c PDAF only needs to make a few measurements to nail focus, whereas CDAF needs to continuously hunt - during which time your subject may move significantly, throwing CDAF completely off.). That said, Sony was correct in saying the A7S would focus in lower light levels than any competitor DSLR - but I found that was only true for static subjects. The sampling intervals get longer in lower light (so AF slows down) and if your subject is moving - good luck to any CDAF system. The subject usually ends up moving before CDAF is able to make enough measurements to complete focus.


----------

