Nikon D750 -- General Discussion

JonMcGuffin

@PB_PM - Nice summary.

It's my assumption though that in terms of manufacturing costs, the 24Mp sensor is truly not going to cost much less (if at all) than a 36mp one. The process by which the machine generates the FF sensor is just not going to run for less, the input materials are virtually the same, etc. Licensing costs associated with the development of that sensor is far more likely to drive costs and none of us would ever know what those are/were.

The post above which mentioned that the retail price of cameras is frankly an almost entirely exclusive decision than based on cost. Yes, cost matters; a lot. But when you're in this market, producing this type of product, the reality is that R&D, Marketing, etc is where a big chunk of the costs are, not the physical body construction of the camera.

Volume of sales drives all as we all take dollars to the bank, not %'s or margins.. It may cost Nikon (and I'm absolutely just pulling numbers out of air) say $2000 to make a D810. A D750 may cost them $1880. That may still be worthwhile for them to offer the D810 @ $3200 and the D750 @ $2699. Yes, they make a lower margin on the D750, but sales of that body might be double than that of the D810 and thus, they are taking much more profitable cash into the bank.

My guess is that the pricing side of Nikon's strategy is really all about delivering at whatever price makes the market consume the most amount of bodies relative to the generation of the most amount of revenue.

IMO, if they're smart, they'll deliver a pretty close to D810 camera inside a slightly lighter body, do the dual SD Card thing, etc and make it 24Mp and 7fps and price it at $2699.00. This would (I think) really compete very well against a 5DM3 and this is frankly where the volume of sales are right now that Nikon could start stealing away.

If they go the D610 "consumer" route, it probably won't work. If they price it too cheaply, they may not be able to justify the D810 market. There's plenty of room inbetween the D610 and the D810 to deliver a mostly D810 camera in the middle and price it around $400 - $600 cheaper than the D810 and really make the market move on this.

Photobug

+1 on this one...and I quote @JonMcGuffin:
If they go the D610 "consumer" route, it probably won't work. If they price it too cheaply, they may not be able to justify the D810 market. There's plenty of room inbetween the D610 and the D810 to deliver a mostly D810 camera in the middle and price it around $400 - $600 cheaper than the D810 and really make the market move on this.

I still expect a bigger body than the D610 with more of a pro layout for the controls. I know the reference keeps coming up about being "lightweight" and I expect it will not be the magnesium body that I wanted like the D300/D800/D4, etc. Perhaps something new or the same materials like the D600/D610.

henrik1963

Nikon is not going to do a D810 version two so soon after the D810 version one. The new D750 or whatever is going to be different - like not even close to the D810.

They could do a real update to the D700. But That would be 16MP to be a real update to D700.

Rumors of 24MP and tilt LCD and lower price than D810 all point to an update to D600. At least that would be the logic answer.

Sports

... all point to an update to D600 ...

No update has had a price increase this big, or a name change this big. It's not just an update. (Unless the rumors are wrong.)

JonMcGuffin

Let's face it, there are elements from the rumors here (usually true) that point - or at lease scare us - toward a juiced up D610. Then there are elements we know that suggest it would be a D700 replacement (D750 name would indicate an 'upgrade' from a D700, market conditions, competitions offerings,etc).

There's a lot of speculation floating around here all based on a very limited set of rumor information and lack of true knowledge on the inter workings over there at Nikon. I'm going to make my prediction which is mostly with my head but I'll admit has a little of my heart into it as well and putting everything we know as of now say that we'll most likely see the following:

- Body with build materials and structure of the D610 along with the newer/better LCD that also tilts.
- Controls however will come down from the D810 as well as all the same video capabilities (no 4K support).
- Sensor will be very similar, if not the exact same, as the D610 & utilize full Expeed 4 processor
- We will get the state of the art D4s/D810 AF system complete with 51 points + Group area AF, etc.
- We will get 8fps and maybe more with the grip.
- It will still shoot at 1/8000th and sync with flash to 1/250th
- It will ship with dual SD Cards, no CF Support
- It will still have a built in flash ala D700 (looks good against Canon)
- Will be weather sealed as as much as D810
- Buffer will last 25-35 shots at full RAW (aka 3-4 seconds of continuous burst)
- Same EN-EL15 battery and last 1300+/- shots (similar to D810).
- Price will be $2600-$2700

All three cameras will be capable of any genre of photography that you'd need to shoot. Each will be a little more specialized towards a few. D610, jack of all trades, entry into FX. D750 sports, wedding, live event, etc. D810 studio, landscape, etc.

It's a camera that will pull from some of the things in the D610 as well as from the D810. Where it will matter most, it'll come from the D810.

This is going to be a good camera and I think a perfect bridge between the two out now.

Jon

Bokeh_Hunter

I think JonMcGuffin has the correct outlook on his posts.
Cost to build say a D810 is probably $2,500. Logic: Currently some places have D810s at $2,900 (I wouldn't trust those sellers though) and that reflects a 12% drop. That is probably the cost to the dealer though and they just want the sell and make their money on accessories. Now I have seen Nikon saying they make somewhere around 10-15% on DSLRs. Take 13% (round it to 25% total to consumer) of that and you get $2,475.

Just because the camera will be smaller and lighter does not mean it has to be a cheap plastic consumer camera, with compromised build quality and controls.

That IS an argument for a 24mp D810 for $2,500. You are saying it is unacceptable to compromise on anything. My imagination is not running wild - it is a pragmatic look and a background in understanding where the costs are. You can not deliver a cheaper product without cuts and compromises.

That is unless they want to actually re-create the scenario of the D700 cutting into the pro body sales. The D700 cut into the D3 sales badly, but it sold a bunch of units. (Part of that was also they didn't have much competition with other FX systems at the time either.)

Note that my D810 logic on the cost. 12% markup for retail only gets that to 2,800. Considering their financial performance in the last 4 quarters along with a new team in place, they need sales. If they really wanted the sales, I think it would be a smart business move to release the D4 16mp chip in a D810 body, price the camera slightly above cost, and gain sales margins on lenses. Now if they wanted to make a bunch of money, just take a D610 body, and slap the 16mp sensor in it. But that is just a pipe dream. I do believe a 24mb D810 would cut into it's sales and I just don't see them doing that.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Look at it another way - put an articulating screen on a D610 (those add cost) update to the Expeede 4, better D4 or D4s AF, 610 metering, 610 build, 610 pentaprism, SD slot/s (cheaper than CF), & 610 on everything else, I think you have your camera.

Golf007sd

Ok...so I have read all the comments, but know I would like to chime in given that, I, do shoot with an action camera: D4.

Question for you all: How many of you have spend 3-5 hours shooting with a D3s, D4 (D4s) at a sporting event or taking pictures of fast moving subject...constantly? If you haven, then you will understand my approach.

Lets say Nikon came up to me and ask: Hay, Ali, as a D4 owner, what would you like us to offer you, should we consider building a smaller action camera?

My response would be:

1) More MP -- so I would have more of an image to work with when cropping. But, I do not want anything close to 36MP!!!!! I do not want to spend hours and hours downloading image only to keep 4-6% of them.
2) A lighter body -- D7100 weight class
3) Same processor as the D4s
4) 51 AF point
5) D4s AF System /w group area AF
6) 8 FPS -- without needing a battery grip
6) Good battery life/usage
7) Dual XQD card slots [Why? The faster write speed will allow for a smaller buffer, thus keeping cost down]
8) No need for flash
9) Video would be OK...but willing to give it up to keep the price down.
10) Price: $2800.

Msmoto

Cost factors on a camera body are very difficult to determine. Development costs may be spread over several different iterations of a basic body configuration. Also, the development cost diminishes per unit as the number of units sold increases.

My guess as to the actual cost to build a Nikon body may be very low, but I would guess the individual cost of a body to be about 25-35% of the retail selling price. Then, the development cost, advertising, distribution, retailer's markup all come in to create the final pricing.

An example of marketing/development costs can be seen in the pharmaceutical industry where marketing is nearly 20 times as much of a cost as the research. Thirty years ago this was quite different, but as media commercials have become a daily vent for the pharmaceutical folks the costs have sky rocketed. And, guess who pays for all this (in the USA at least)?

As to the D750, the development may be almost all from the development of the D8XX and D6XX. The retail price, a matter of why the folks at nikon think the market will bear.

henrik1963

@Sports: It all depends how you look at it.

Take D3s and D3X. Similar names similar bodies and similar feature sets but in the end very different cameras.

Compare that with D3xxx and D5xxx cameras. Different names different bodies but in the end the same camera.

If you have a D3s you may find that sometimes you wish you had a D3X - that is - to me - the real difference.

Question: If you have a D810 do you sometimes wish you had a D610? I don't think so. In the end the two cameras do the same thing.

If Nikon comes out with a D810 body with a D4s sensor in it with faster frame rate then some D810 owners would sometimes wish they had such a camera - because it would allow them to do different things. The same goes for D4s owners - some of them may wish for a D4X.

henrik1963

BTW Nikon should build a D4BS camera. BS as in bird shooter :-)

24MP DX sensor with clean HI ISO performance
HI framerate.
Lots of X-type AF points covering all of the big and bright VF.
Very fast and accurate AF.
Silent mode so you don't scare the birds.

This is just to show that the follow up on the former Nikon BS - the D300s - camera does not have to look like a D400.

Some birders spend a lot of money on long lenses, tripods, heads, plane tickets and so on - why not give them a camera body too?

The D4BS would be different - would make some want to have more than one camera.

Maybe Nikon should come up with a better name - like D4rf - as in rapid fire :-)

WestEndBoy

Just put a D810 sensor in a D4s and shoot in DX mode. Hmmm....you want 24 megapixels, maybe the 50 megapixel D820 sensor.

Fritz

It sure will be interesting to see who guesses right.

PB_PM

1) More MP -- so I would have more of an image to work with when cropping. But, I do not want anything close to 36MP!!!!! I do not want to spend hours and hours downloading image only to keep 4-6% of them.
2) A lighter body -- D7100 weight class
3) Same processor as the D4s
4) 51 AF point
5) D4s AF System /w group area AF
6) 8 FPS -- without needing a battery grip
6) Good battery life/usage
7) Dual XQD card slots [Why? The faster write speed will allow for a smaller buffer, thus keeping cost down]
8) No need for flash
9) Video would be OK...but willing to give it up to keep the price down.
10) Price: $2800.

XQD would push the price up, due to higher licensing costs, so I cannot see that happening. It also makes no sense considering that even the top of the line D4s doesn't have dual XQD. Don't agree about the iffy video support, or price. Admin has already noted that the rumored price is $2500 and he has been very actuate when it comes the price of upcoming models as of late. Otherwise I think what you've listed is what Nikon needs to aim for.

Bowsider

Perfect for me: 20-24mp FX, d600ish size, full magnesium (would love titanium) weather proof, similar controls to D810 but somehow with U1 & U2. 2x SD UHS2 compatible. 8fps. Same D810 viewfinder. AF systems as D4s with group. ISO 64-25600. 5 second buffer on full raw. Articulating (high res) screen. Built in wifi (with great app) and GPS. I'll keep my fingers crossed. Who's with me?

Bokeh_Hunter

Dumping flash would help with a lot of things. Fewer things to seal weather out, cost, etc. I almost never use the flash on my D800. Probably the times I have I could count on my hand. I just always have a flash with me.

I have often thought of the XQD slot as well. If you really want to get past hardware limits, that would be the way to go. I kind of wish they would push it into more cameras. Licensing cost are zero or close to that - Nikon was one of the original developers of it.

It still comes down to what they will cut from a D8xx body to make this.

One thing that would be interesting to see is if they add some features from Canon's user interface in the body. It doesn't look good when highly visible people like Kelby jump ship because of them.

spraynpray

I think they could cut the in-body flash to the advantage of the camera - it is often damaged by a drop or bump that does no other harm but then triggers a return for service. Good marketing!

JonMcGuffin

I feel pretty confident we're gonna get the D610 sensor (along with base ISO) inside the D750. All that speaks to a lower cost body yet minimal sacrifice in performance/resolution. The D610 sensor isn't what holds the that camera back, it's the "consumer" controls, the relatively week AF system, slower shutter, and the prosumer build.

It would also make financial sense for Nikon to capitalize on tech that's already in production. Sensor wise, all points to similar to D610 body. Much else points to D810 features.

Bokeh_Hunter

I don't get the D610 AF is garbage talk, same thing came out of the DF discussions. That nonsense seems to come from people who haven't used many cameras and are trying to line up marketing specs and words rather than using different systems. That and blame their failures of getting an image on a device rather than learn to use the tool in their hands. The little I used it and the DF, it was on par or better than my D300 - which was the D3's AF. It was way better than any other DX system that came before the D600. There is always room for improvement but from what AF was years ago, it is blazingly fast and accurate. Just because there is a "better" pro version, doesn't mean it is garbage. The pure fact is that you are going to miss a lot of shots if you shoot under f/8.

JonMcGuffin

@Bokeh_Hunter. I'm not sure who you're referring to in regards to blasting the D610's AF. If it was me, I'd like to clarify my statement was "relatively weak AF" and what I meant was just that, in a modern relative sense. I'm sure had the D610 AF system been available in the prior few generations of cameras it would have been state of the art but that's just simply not the case today with D4s, D810, D7100 and the Canon 5d3.

That's not even taking into consideration the less than desirable spread of AF points across the frame. I'm sure in the right hands the D610 can produce amazing footage and it's AF shortcomings are probably mostly mitigated in somebody's care who knows what they're doing but the plain and simple fact is that it is inferior to other bodies in the lineup and if the D750 is released with the exact same AF module and point density and spread as the D610 you're going to hear some "serious" disappointment across the photo enthusiast community.

PB_PM

I don't get the D610 AF is garbage talk, same thing came out of the DF discussions. That nonsense seems to come from people who haven't used many cameras and are trying to line up marketing specs and words rather than using different systems. That and blame their failures of getting an image on a device rather than learn to use the tool in their hands.

Nobody has said the D610 is garbage, at least that I've seen. It may be less advanced, or desirable for some uses, but garbage, really? I don't think there is a Nikon DSLR available today that has a "garbage" AF system.

Considering that you have no idea what cameras the people here have or have not used in the past, or even currently (beyond those of us who post it in our signatures), nor their level of experience, your comments come across as arrogant. How about we stick to opinions on the rumored camera and not making personal attacks on people we know nothing about. But what do I know, I'm just a stupid ignorant person who has never used any cameras before. )

Bokeh_Hunter

@PB_PM - The point is if the D750 has the D610's AF people will be screaming constantly about why Nikon didn't put the pro AF system in it. That is what everyone did the DF and even you are speaking to not compromising on the AF system. By saying it must have the Pro AF system in is saying anything but that is sub-par and that is implying the D610 is not good enough.
And it is quite easy to know what people are shooting since they do talk about it or ask questions about their systems. Don't pretend that every post is someone's first. Maybe my memory is just better at recalling those things.


@JonMcGuffin - I was not pointing anyone out - just in general as people are speaking to the pro AF systems.
There will more than likely be large disappointments all around unless it is a 16mp D4s chip in the D810 body with 4k video. That is about the only camera that would make 90% happy.


I'm still waiting for someone to be able to come up with a set of compromises that gets a D810's price down to a $2,500 level or even get a D610 to a $2,500 level.

WestEndBoy

I don't get the D610 AF is garbage talk, same thing came out of the DF discussions. That nonsense seems to come from people who haven't used many cameras and are trying to line up marketing specs and words rather than using different systems. That and blame their failures of getting an image on a device rather than learn to use the tool in their hands.

Nobody has said the D610 is garbage, at least that I've seen. It may be less advanced, or desirable for some uses, but garbage, really? I don't think there is a Nikon DSLR available today that has a "garbage" AF system.

Considering that you have no idea what cameras the people here have or have not used in the past, or even currently (beyond those of us who post it in our signatures), nor their level of experience, your comments come across as arrogant. How about we stick to opinions on the rumored camera and not making personal attacks on people we know nothing about. But what do I know, I'm just a stupid ignorant person who has never used any cameras before. )

We all have our pet peeves on here. Mine is getting chastised on a public forum by a self appointed moderator. And I am pretty sure that I have annoyed a few people, particularly with my "DX is a stopgap to cheap FX" view.

PB_PM

@PB_PM - The point is if the D750 has the D610's AF people will be screaming constantly about why Nikon didn't put the pro AF system in it. That is what everyone did the DF and even you are speaking to not compromising on the AF system. By saying it must have the Pro AF system in is saying anything but that is sub-par and that is implying the D610 is not good enough.

We all have our own expectations and usage scenarios in mind. If the 39 point AF system is subpar for my usage, what difference does that make? I happen to use the outer points of the 51 point system often, and I won't complain if the D750 has the 39 point system. I simply won't buy one. It's okay for us to disagree, strange as that may be.

manhattanboy

I thought the D7000 AF was good until the D7100.
Its faster, more accurate, and gets fooled less often.
Tell me who wouldn't want those things?
That is the reason everyone complains about the AF in the D610 and Df.
The 750 IMHO has a huge bar to overcome. Is it really going to be worth twice the price of a D7100?
Nikon has a great $1k benchmark with the D7100. It makes many of their cameras seem overpriced by comparison.

spraynpray

I thought the D7000 AF was good until the D7100.
Its faster, more accurate, and gets fooled less often.
Tell me who wouldn't want those things?
That is the reason everyone complains about the AF in the D610 and Df.
The 750 IMHO has a huge bar to overcome. Is it really going to be worth twice the price of a D7100?
Nikon has a great $1k benchmark with the D7100. It makes many of their cameras seem overpriced by comparison.

Very true and it's performance and AF makes the jump to the D610 much more difficult than if you hadn't owned one.

Perhaps that is the problem with an 'all guns blazing' D9300 - it would stop sales of a lot of D610 and D750's.