I love DSLR

[Godfrey]

Before going with D750 I would definitely suggest D810 - MUCH MUCH better in all respect!

Can you quantify that somewhat? What makes the D810 "much much better in all respects"?

I was at the camera shop last weekend and handled both the D810 and the D750. I liked the feel of the D750 much much more ... the D810 seemed too big and heavy to me. The D750 felt closer to my favorite DSLR, the Olympus E-1.

(I'm not really in the market for a new DSLR, but I am always curious. And I have a few very nice Nikkor lenses...)

G

 

[Jorgen Udvang]

Before going with D750 I would definitely suggest D810 - MUCH MUCH better in all respect!

I'm sure it's much, much better, but it's too big and too heavy. I have big, heavy cameras already. The D750 is about the same size as the D80 that I loved to pieces; small enough for travel but large enough, particularly with the grip, for most other uses... aaaaand it has a flipable screen.

 

[Jorgen Udvang]

ouch, what an inopportune moment for a camera rig to fail, Jorgen, still you managed to make some wonderful images during your Myanmar trip :thumbup:

.

Not the same trip, Steen. I go there every month, but often to places that I probably won't be able to get back to. I'm tempted to bring the D700 for the next one

 

[mjr]

I was looking at the D750 and the D810 and the differences in size and weight are measured in millimeters and ounces! Do you guys really feel that the D810 is too big and heavy?

I travel a lot and never know when or if I'm going to return, plus I'm getting on a bit, if I want to take a shot I want to take the absolute best quality file I can get, ounces and millimeters don't really matter to me, getting the shot on a small compact camera because it's easy and then wishing I had taken it on a better camera would be a nightmare!

We all want different things I suppose, it's all good.

Mat

 

[Jorgen Udvang]

It's more than millimeters and ounces, Mat. It's also about the shape of the camera. I have a D700 and an F6, two cameras that are almost exactly the same dimensions and weight. Still, the F6 feels much smaller and is easier to pack because it has a different shape and has a much thinner body. That goes for the D750 compared to the D810 as well:

I would love to have a camera with the D810 specs in a D750 body, but alas...

Edit: There's another problem for me with the D810. The grip is very thick, but shallow on the inside. I never feel I have a secure grip because of that. The D750 has a grip that is deep and relatively straight on the inside, making it possible to let it hang from a couple of fingers only.

 

[mjr]

I understand what you are saying Jorgen, I guess in the big scheme of things, the increase in size seems negligible when the shot counts and when a shot presents itself I want to capture it in the best way I can. I can understand also that for me size doesn't matter but for others it does.

For me a camera has to make me want to use it, normally that means because the images it produces are great, I can definitely live with the extra bulk.

Mat

 

[JohnW]

I've shot small boxy mirrorless for several years now. Whenever I pick up a DSLR, its heft and contours feel so right in my large hands. Even the plastic feels good. And then there's the OVF and instant AF. I doubt I'll ever go back, but I certainly get the appeal.

John

 

[ptomsu]

Can you quantify that somewhat? What makes the D810 "much much better in all respects"?

I was at the camera shop last weekend and handled both the D810 and the D750. I liked the feel of the D750 much much more ... the D810 seemed too big and heavy to me. The D750 felt closer to my favorite DSLR, the Olympus E-1.

(I'm not really in the market for a new DSLR, but I am always curious. And I have a few very nice Nikkor lenses...)

G

I used to have the D800E for years and liked it very much. One of the best things about this camera was the OVF and the possibility to add a special Nikon enlargement lens (forgot it's name) which additionally enlarges the already excellent OVF. Plus the sensor in the D810 has no AA filter, whereas the D750 comes still with AA filter.

I totally agree WRT size and actually would love a D750 with a similar OVF to the D810 as well without AA filter. I do not care about 36 vs 24MP so 24MP are mor than fine - actually preferably to me. Plus all the rest of the D750 would be fine for me.

So we can hope for a D760 which would have the features mentioned above. Actually such a camera would make me jump into the Nikon system again - mainly with the new breed of 1.8 lenses and the 4/70-200.

Hope that clarifies.

Peter

 

[ptomsu]

I'm sure it's much, much better, but it's too big and too heavy. I have big, heavy cameras already. The D750 is about the same size as the D80 that I loved to pieces; small enough for travel but large enough, particularly with the grip, for most other uses... aaaaand it has a flipable screen.

Actually I would love a D810 quality sensor in the D750 body, without any AA filer - could be 24MP, that would be enough. Plus the better OVF of the D810.

There is hope .....

 

[Godfrey]

It's more than millimeters and ounces ...

Indeed. Every time I pick up my E-1, I love it. I love shooting with it.

Then, after I've carried it for a day, I put it back in the closet and return to something smaller, lighter ... and realize again how much less of a pain to lug around that something is.

The Nikon D750 reminds me a lot of the E-1 in size, weight, etc. I have no problems with its 24 Mpixel sensor or AA filter. The A7 has an AA filter too, and I can't complain about its image quality. Same for the Leica X, with a half-size sensor. Image quality cannot be assumed entirely by the number of pixels or the lack or presence of an AA filter. The viewfinder seemed okay to me for the short time I looked through it.

Nothing I've seen in a reflex viewfinder is quite as good as what's in my Leica R8.

G

 

[Jack]

Sidebar comment --- are most current string of digicams so good technically that we are getting to the point we "don't really care" what we shoot with nowadays??? It seems we all migrate to ergos, weight, balance or what lenses we can mount. I get it all, just got me thinking it's interesting times for photographers. I mean, I would right now L O V E to go out with some sheet film and a light-weight 5x7 view cam again, but no frigging labs makes that a tougher proposition for me...

 

[Jorgen Udvang]

Sidebar comment --- are most current string of digicams so good technically that we are getting to the point we "don't really care" what we shoot with nowadays??? It seems we all migrate to ergos, weight, balance or what lenses we can mount. I get it all, just got me thinking it's interesting times for photographers. I mean, I would right now L O V E to go out with some sheet film and a light-weight 5x7 view cam again, but no frigging labs makes that a tougher proposition for me...

There are no simple answers to that question, Jack. Seen from one side, current technology has given us possibilities that we couldn't even dream about 15 or 20 years ago. Size, technical quality and price make it possible to take photos that weren't thinkable then. Nikon F5 vs. Panasonic LX100? The Panasonic would shred the F5 to pieces. Nikon D4s vs. Panasonic LX100? That's not a clear cut case, but the Panasonic is probably good enough for most to "not really care" about dragging the Nikon beast around.

However, when it comes to the "look" of the photos, things tend to come out differently. The look of large or even medium format film is very difficult to replicate with anything digital. The experience I have gathered over recent years also tells me that the look of 35mm digital sometimes can be hard to replicate with a sensor a quarter of the size, like in m4/3. Colour fidelity, detail rendering, bokeh etc. all look good with my GH3, at least most of the time, but it takes some premium glass to get there, and the D700 still looks better, even with cheap lenses.

The beauty of it is that we have access to both if we so wish. Here's an example:

I wish I could say that I needed my F6 or my big Fuji loaded with Portra to capture this, but I didn't of course. The only thing available to me at that moment was the Nokia in my pocket. That photo wouldn't have happened 10 years ago, and even if it had, it would have been difficult to get the image quality the Nokia offers with any camera available at the time.

 

[Jack]

The only thing available to me at that moment was the Nokia in my pocket. That photo wouldn't have happened 10 years ago, and even if it had, it would have been difficult to get the image quality the Nokia offers with any camera available at the time.

And that pretty much sums it up. :thumbs:

 

[Vivek]

So, there is no clear advantage to owning a DSLR?

 

[fotografz]

So, there is no clear advantage to owning a DSLR?

I suppose "Clear Advantage" would heavily depend on purpose/intent/application wouldn't it?

Mirror-less/EVF present no advantage in studio work. Currently, most are ill suited for wedding and event work compared to your average DSLR. None are the size of a cell phone, so "images of opportunity" are no better served than a DSLR would provide.

So, I can see a long trek landscape shooter loving the demure size, and those folks with couch-potato physiques, aging body parts or infirmities liking the feather weight shoulder effect.

However, to espouse that we couldn't take today's mirror-less images with yesterday's DSLR gear is fan-boy selective memory. Thankfully, that remains the domain of the photographer rather than what camera is in their hand.

- Marc

 

[ptomsu]

However, to espouse that we couldn't take today's mirror-less images with yesterday's DSLR gear is fan-boy selective memory. Thankfully, that remains the domain of the photographer rather than what camera is in their hand.

- Marc

Mirror-less just makes taking certain images much easier than this was in pure DSLR ages.

Peter

 

[Vivek]

Mirror-less just makes taking certain images much easier than this was in pure DSLR ages.

Peter

There is a thread going about replacing the screen in a Df. That brought back a lot of memories and further highlights why the EVF is so much better.

 

[Swissblad]

So, there is no clear advantage to owning a DSLR?

Yes, there is, staring with better AF and larger selection of lenses - especially extreme tele, macro, shift etc.

And the fact that no EVF to date is really suitable for high contrast scenes - try the X-T1 is the snow covered alps - its a **** nightmare.

In fact, like Jorgen, I'm debating dumping the Fuji and buying a D750.....

 

[Swissblad]

Mirror-less just makes taking certain images much easier than this was in pure DSLR ages.

Peter

Like what.....?

 

[Vivek]

And the use of an iPhone to make use of the live view (D810)..

Yes, there is, staring with better AF and larger selection of lenses - especially extreme tele, macro, shift etc.

And the fact that no EVF to date is really suitable for high contrast scenes - try the X-T1 is the snow covered alps - its a **** nightmare.

In fact, like Jorgen, I'm debating dumping the Fuji and buying a D750.....