upgrade to D750?
- Thread starter eal1
- Start date
I finally found some comparison shots:
The smart one (@Rick M) is on the right, stupid Nikon on the left. Yes I know rediculous ISO, but that is what I'm looking for, working a lot in nature in twilight.
The question is what is logical for a Pro body, more and faster pictures or better pictures, I guess nobody can really answer this.
Nikon made a choice to go for better technology, FX can physically offer better pictures then DX, disadvantage is the loss of the crop factor for telelens people.
Yes Canon made what people expect, but Nikon made the better camera, if you read other reviews:
Nikon D750 Review | Destination Wedding Photographer
This German Canon guy is wondering which of his 4 Canon bodies to dump for the D750:
Test Review Nikon D750 Teil 1 (German / deutsch) - YouTube
I think he will not, but he needs several Canons to match the D750 performance.
Or this Nikon man on the keeper rate improvement:
https://www.flickr.com/groups/2682619@N24/discuss/72157648098752682/
The D750 offers super AF, good speed and buffer performance. It will never take away the crop, obviously, but it is probably the better allround camera.
From what I hear the D600/D610 is good, but if you need more the D750 is certainly a big step upwards.
As you might notice, NAS is getting to me, it seems at least Nikon is convincing me.
The D7200 under pressure from the Canon 7D II and the Samsung NX1, might indeed be quite an improvement, but I fear Nikon will have to change their plans for that and 2015 will be ambitious.
So a new input that represents what I wanted to check: https://flic.kr/p/prPXZ3
I'm not convinced, that what I want to reach is possible (at the moment), even if the result is incredible for the available light, 100% crop: https://flic.kr/p/ptS5mz
The issue is clearly that to approach animals close enough, you need more planning, time and probably talent. High ISO can not replace that easily.
From the light available here I suspect with my D7000 I would have nothing usable.
This picture with some PP in raw and downsizing will give a small online picture of animal with context that is usable if you accept the loss of colour (limted dynamic range at ISO 25600). Might be better to do ISO 12800 in raw and put the exposure up afterwards for the colour.
Conclusion of reading the experience of people (https://www.flickr.com/groups/2682619@N24/discuss/72157647586526236/): 1 stop better then the D600, a lot better AF (https://flic.kr/p/pc4CTy). So for me I expect at least 2 stops better then the D7000. e.g. D7000 @ ISO 3200 gives similar IQ then D600 @ ISO 6400 or D750 @ ISO 12800.
I'm not convinced, that what I want to reach is possible (at the moment), even if the result is incredible for the available light, 100% crop: https://flic.kr/p/ptS5mz
The issue is clearly that to approach animals close enough, you need more planning, time and probably talent. High ISO can not replace that easily.
From the light available here I suspect with my D7000 I would have nothing usable.
This picture with some PP in raw and downsizing will give a small online picture of animal with context that is usable if you accept the loss of colour (limted dynamic range at ISO 25600). Might be better to do ISO 12800 in raw and put the exposure up afterwards for the colour.
Conclusion of reading the experience of people (https://www.flickr.com/groups/2682619@N24/discuss/72157647586526236/): 1 stop better then the D600, a lot better AF (https://flic.kr/p/pc4CTy). So for me I expect at least 2 stops better then the D7000. e.g. D7000 @ ISO 3200 gives similar IQ then D600 @ ISO 6400 or D750 @ ISO 12800.
I keep scanning the internet, great review: Nikon D750 for Wildlife and Landscape Photography
- the AF in the dark is really exceptional
- ISO better then D6X0
- lacking a bit of buffer for a real wildlife camera (although spread and pray is not my style so I do not care)
- the AF in the dark is really exceptional
- ISO better then D6X0
- lacking a bit of buffer for a real wildlife camera (although spread and pray is not my style so I do not care)
Final video of the German speaker, Canon shooter: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZfY44xPwbQs
Conclusion:
- He hates that the Nikon works the other way around then a Canon and that getting it wrong on Nikon gets on his nerves.
- He likes the Canon inside white balance (more pink) and thinks the Nikon indoor whitebalance (greenish) is wrong and can not be corrected
- he swears on Nikon and recommends to buy Canon, but admits that if you are a Nikon shooter and you do not compare the pictures between Nikon and Canon there is absolutely no issue. It does seem his Canon preference is habit.
- he also admits the whitebalance outside is spot on
- he checked the AF with car races and BIF and has no negative remarks, it does what it needs to do in all configurations and situations (no 6,5fps or buffer issues merntioned)
Edit: - I missed that he loves the added dynamic range compared to Canon and the corrections he can do in Lightroom to express more of the scene.
- After testing the D5200, D4s, D610 and now the D750, it does seem he will keep the D750 for outside wildlife photography, where the other Nikons were sent back.
It seems you miss that "frisky" children are considered wildlife.
I guess for the author relatively dark rooms are possible with the D6X0, you just need more time.
Anyway when to use it is only his opinion, but the article shows the differences quite well.
Conclusion:
- He hates that the Nikon works the other way around then a Canon and that getting it wrong on Nikon gets on his nerves.
- He likes the Canon inside white balance (more pink) and thinks the Nikon indoor whitebalance (greenish) is wrong and can not be corrected
- he swears on Nikon and recommends to buy Canon, but admits that if you are a Nikon shooter and you do not compare the pictures between Nikon and Canon there is absolutely no issue. It does seem his Canon preference is habit.
- he also admits the whitebalance outside is spot on
- he checked the AF with car races and BIF and has no negative remarks, it does what it needs to do in all configurations and situations (no 6,5fps or buffer issues merntioned)
Edit: - I missed that he loves the added dynamic range compared to Canon and the corrections he can do in Lightroom to express more of the scene.
- After testing the D5200, D4s, D610 and now the D750, it does seem he will keep the D750 for outside wildlife photography, where the other Nikons were sent back.
It seems you miss that "frisky" children are considered wildlife.
I guess for the author relatively dark rooms are possible with the D6X0, you just need more time. Anyway when to use it is only his opinion, but the article shows the differences quite well.
Last edited:
An other comparison with the D810: ? View topic - Nikon D750 vs D810
Great low light review.
============================================
Did not thing they justified a new entry, I just found them today and they confirm previous points where they were tested correctly:
Ken Rockwell: Nikon D750 Review
For once he does not recommend the D3300
D750 or D810? | byThom | Thom Hogan
Good choice comparison, also includes D610.
Nikon D750 - Photo Review
I quite liked the Hi02 opinion in this one, that is 51200 ISO can be considered for very small print.
Seems a good idea to check Nikon Index review articles and more for the latest
Great low light review.
============================================
Did not thing they justified a new entry, I just found them today and they confirm previous points where they were tested correctly:
Ken Rockwell: Nikon D750 Review
For once he does not recommend the D3300
D750 or D810? | byThom | Thom Hogan
Good choice comparison, also includes D610.
Nikon D750 - Photo Review
I quite liked the Hi02 opinion in this one, that is 51200 ISO can be considered for very small print.
Seems a good idea to check Nikon Index review articles and more for the latest
Last edited:
Finally found some measurements:
Nikon D750 Review - Page 4 of 6 - Amateur Photographer
Sadly the Df and the D610 reviews do not have the charts: but here is D750
View attachment 118322
vs D4s
View attachment 118324
vs D810
View attachment 118323
It shows the D750 is a very strong performer, but the high ISO outperforming D810 seems unlikely from this chart. DXO mark gives the D810 at base ISO a lot higher, which seems more realistic, so these charts seem to have some (other) bias you have to corroborate with other proof to form an opinion.
DXO example:
I also seems to confirm the usability till 6400 ISO. Where this states little about noise from what I have seen a score above 8EV is needed to get results directly usable on internet.
Nikon D750 Review - Page 4 of 6 - Amateur Photographer
Sadly the Df and the D610 reviews do not have the charts: but here is D750
View attachment 118322
vs D4s
View attachment 118324
vs D810
View attachment 118323
It shows the D750 is a very strong performer, but the high ISO outperforming D810 seems unlikely from this chart. DXO mark gives the D810 at base ISO a lot higher, which seems more realistic, so these charts seem to have some (other) bias you have to corroborate with other proof to form an opinion.
DXO example:
I also seems to confirm the usability till 6400 ISO. Where this states little about noise from what I have seen a score above 8EV is needed to get results directly usable on internet.
Last edited:
i handled the 750. I wonder if others felt the same way: that it was a little small, kind of compact and not the most
comfortable to handle. I like an af-on button and the af-l/ae-l button is spread wide a bit too far for my comfort zone - at least that was my initial thoughts. Then i held the 810 and i was blown away by its ergonomics. Anyone experience the same?
comfortable to handle. I like an af-on button and the af-l/ae-l button is spread wide a bit too far for my comfort zone - at least that was my initial thoughts. Then i held the 810 and i was blown away by its ergonomics. Anyone experience the same?
DXO Mark is out:
Nikon D750 Sensor Measurement: Outstanding performance for Dynamic Range - DxOMark
Score is after the D600 / D610 but then so is the D4s.
It seems in the top ISO, but nothing spectacular (like the D4s the Expeed 4 seems to matter more then the sensor in this).
It scores very well on dynamic range (outperforms a D800).
Nikon D750 Sensor Measurement: Outstanding performance for Dynamic Range - DxOMark
Score is after the D600 / D610 but then so is the D4s.
It seems in the top ISO, but nothing spectacular (like the D4s the Expeed 4 seems to matter more then the sensor in this).
It scores very well on dynamic range (outperforms a D800).
SenScore™ Digital Camera Sensor Rating
came to my attention today.
D4s best camera on the DSLR market according to them, seems a reasonable score system.
D750 not a camera to get better IQ then the D600/D610, but then other features might be important for the decision.
came to my attention today.
D4s best camera on the DSLR market according to them, seems a reasonable score system.
D750 not a camera to get better IQ then the D600/D610, but then other features might be important for the decision.
Slipperman
Senior Member
i'm getting one for myself as an Xmas present. i'm gonna come into some money by Xmas and am planning on using part of it for the purchase. can't wait. i'm pretty confident in my decision. plus its a big step upward from the D5100 i currently have.
Last edited:
NOT WORTH IT
the only good thing about D750 is the focus all the others are crap
Some said for less noise... Ok it is less noise but it has the plastic effect on skin tone from the noise reduction algorithm and it is very visible So less noise does not mean better DR. I prefer D600 DR.
SHARPNES it is simply missing from D750. D600 is the winner here. I did some test on ISO 100 to 3200 on RAW and JPGs. D600 is way more sharp.
AWB it is better to forget it. Go with manual. AWB adds green yellow red.
Skin tones like canon. If I wanted a canon I would bought canon. (to warm for the people I shoot)
At the end of a working day when I sitting on the computer for post processing my pics I really like D600 colors and sharpness. D600 colors are shine and D750 is mud without the sharpness of D600.
PS
I also shoot D3s D4 D800 and for my needs an my eyes D750 is simply does not have the IQ the shine colors and the sharpness I need.
My lenses are Nikon 14-24 2.8, 24-70 2.8, 70-200VR2 2.8, 50mm 1.8g, 50mm 1.4g, 85mm 1.4g, 105mm VR macro.
the only good thing about D750 is the focus all the others are crap
Some said for less noise... Ok it is less noise but it has the plastic effect on skin tone from the noise reduction algorithm and it is very visible
So less noise does not mean better DR. I prefer D600 DR.SHARPNES it is simply missing from D750. D600 is the winner here. I did some test on ISO 100 to 3200 on RAW and JPGs. D600 is way more sharp.
AWB it is better to forget it. Go with manual. AWB adds green yellow red.
Skin tones like canon. If I wanted a canon I would bought canon. (to warm for the people I shoot)
At the end of a working day when I sitting on the computer for post processing my pics I really like D600 colors and sharpness. D600 colors are shine and D750 is mud without the sharpness of D600.
PS
I also shoot D3s D4 D800 and for my needs an my eyes D750 is simply does not have the IQ the shine colors and the sharpness I need.
My lenses are Nikon 14-24 2.8, 24-70 2.8, 70-200VR2 2.8, 50mm 1.8g, 50mm 1.4g, 85mm 1.4g, 105mm VR macro.
NOT WORTH IT
the only good thing about D750 is the focus all the others are crap
Some said for less noise... Ok it is less noise but it has the plastic effect on skin tone from the noise reduction algorithm and it is very visible
SHARPNES it is simply missing from D750. D600 is the winner here. I did some test on ISO 100 to 3200 on RAW and JPGs. D600 is way more sharp.
AWB it is better to forget it. Go with manual. AWB adds green yellow red.
Skin tones like canon. If I wanted a canon I would bought canon. (to warm for the people I shoot)
At the end of a working day when I sitting on the computer for post processing my pics I really like D600 colors and sharpness. D600 colors are shine and D750 is mud without the sharpness of D600.
PS
I also shoot D3s D4 D800 and for my needs an my eyes D750 is simply does not have the IQ the shine colors and the sharpness I need.
My lenses are Nikon 14-24 2.8, 24-70 2.8, 70-200VR2 2.8, 50mm 1.8g, 50mm 1.4g, 85mm 1.4g, 105mm VR macro.
I think you have bumped your head...
I own the D610. For me its not a financially justifiable upgrade. Only a little bit of gain for a lot of money (since naturally the resale value of the D610 tanked).
39 autofocus points? I usually leave it set on 11 for faster shooting. Its just faster for me. 51.....eh....thats a lot of scrolling. Also I tend to not make up my mind when given a ton of choices....
I don't need the extra speed. I don't mind 5fps. Buildings and trees don't move too much.
The difference in price, for me, could be put to better use putting better glass in front of my camera.
But this is just my limited view on things. If the D750 would add to someones photography then go for it. But for me its too close to the D610 to justify spending more money. I am holding out for the D810.....
39 autofocus points? I usually leave it set on 11 for faster shooting. Its just faster for me. 51.....eh....thats a lot of scrolling. Also I tend to not make up my mind when given a ton of choices....
I don't need the extra speed. I don't mind 5fps. Buildings and trees don't move too much.
The difference in price, for me, could be put to better use putting better glass in front of my camera.
But this is just my limited view on things. If the D750 would add to someones photography then go for it. But for me its too close to the D610 to justify spending more money. I am holding out for the D810.....
Horoscope Fish
Senior Member
sonicbuffalo_RIP
Senior Member
Doug....by then, the 810 will be a 820. But you could buy an 810 at a reduced rate.
Thank you for your kind words
If you don't like my opinion you don't have to be so rude Mr moderator.
I just wanted to open your eyes.
You will understand it in a couple of months.
My mistake
Bye