Nikon D750 & D780

I quite fancy trying an 85. Would I notice much difference between it and my 70-200 at 85mm? Obviously lighter etc. Mpb, wex or Grays don't have any second hand though.
 
minnnt said:
Sharper and less lactic acid building up in your shoulder are the main thing. :D

The 85mm would be stopped down to f2.8 in theory if you were comparing which would improve it further.
Click to expand...
Which 70-200mm? My 70-200mm is sharper wide open than the 85mm f1.8G I had tbh, so maybe sample variation plays a part? Probably is the case as DXO score the 85mm 1 score sharper, but if you look at this to my eyes the 70-200 is sharper, even taking the CA into account. With the 85mm stopped down to f2.8 the 70-200 still looks fractionally sharper to my eyes. The 85mm would be my lens of choice if I was doing portraits though, the 70-200 is a bit of a lump ;)

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/...meraComp=614&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=1&APIComp=0
 
I have to admit, I thought I would never really use the movable screen as much as I have. It is useful on the tripod when I am in a Lazy mood, and it is very good at almost emulating the feel of a TLR camera. This is very useful for street shots:


Chill by Nick, on Flickr
 
snerkler said:
Which 70-200mm? My 70-200mm is sharper wide open than the 85mm f1.8G I had tbh, so maybe sample variation plays a part? Probably is the case as DXO score the 85mm 1 score sharper, but if you look at this to my eyes the 70-200 is sharper, even taking the CA into account. With the 85mm stopped down to f2.8 the 70-200 still looks fractionally sharper to my eyes. The 85mm would be my lens of choice if I was doing portraits though, the 70-200 is a bit of a lump ;)

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/...meraComp=614&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=1&APIComp=0
Click to expand...

You and 85's don't mix. We all know that after listening to you rabbit on about how crap they all were for 50 pages when in reality you had a fubar'd camera like we all said. Did you listen? No.

:D
 
I would like the 85mm, but it's a bit of an extravagance when I have the 135.
I don't do much studio shooting, where space might be an issue, so I can't really justify it.
I think the 1.8 is 95% of the performance of the 1.4, for 30% of the cost.
The question is, is the extra 5% performance worth the extra £900 ish?
For some, it definitely is.
 
I was asked to take some photos at a Christening I was invited to (paid), it was a big church but the lighting was really bad and I wasn't allowed to use flash, so I used min shutter 1/200 with Auto ISO and 90% of the shots are at 12800 iso whilst I wasn't really that happy the recipient is very happy with them. (although I did convert most to B&W)

Here is an example at 12800 which isn't too bad in the grand scheme of things
De La Huliniere Christening-65 by Alan Cook, on Flickr
 
minnnt said:
You and 85's don't mix. We all know that after listening to you rabbit on about how crap they all were for 50 pages when in reality you had a fubar'd camera like we all said. Did you listen? No.

:D
Click to expand...
They were the f1.4's :p I did have an f1.8 briefly ;)
 
After a 2am start and a 7 hour round trip, The mist of corfe castle fail on me :facepalm: ahh well you win some you lose some :LOL:
 
snerkler said:
Which 70-200mm? My 70-200mm is sharper wide open than the 85mm f1.8G I had tbh, so maybe sample variation plays a part? Probably is the case as DXO score the 85mm 1 score sharper, but if you look at this to my eyes the 70-200 is sharper, even taking the CA into account. With the 85mm stopped down to f2.8 the 70-200 still looks fractionally sharper to my eyes. The 85mm would be my lens of choice if I was doing portraits though, the 70-200 is a bit of a lump ;)

http://www.the-digital-picture.com/...meraComp=614&SampleComp=0&FLIComp=1&APIComp=0
Click to expand...

I have the vr2, might just stick with it and try not to spend any money:whistle:
 
phil_b said:
I have the vr2, might just stick with it and try not to spend any money:whistle:
Click to expand...
Where's the fun in that ;)

TBH I've given up on the 85mm idea, and for the extremely rare time I take a portrait I'll just use the 70-200.
 
snerkler said:
Where's the fun in that ;)

TBH I've given up on the 85mm idea, and for the extremely rare time I take a portrait I'll just use the 70-200.
Click to expand...

I did order a new 70-300 yesterday:D
I have joined our local camera club so need to start taking a few more portraits.
 
phil_b said:
I did order a new 70-300 yesterday:D
I have joined our local camera club so need to start taking a few more portraits.
Click to expand...
I keep toying with joining a club in the hope of getting involved in different shooting opportunities but I'm a bit wary as read mixed reviews about camera clubs.

I'm not buying anymore lenses until I decide whether I'm sticking with Nikon or not. New D750's coming on Monday so that'll be the decider.
 
snerkler said:
I keep toying with joining a club in the hope of getting involved in different shooting opportunities but I'm a bit wary as read mixed reviews about camera clubs.

I'm not buying anymore lenses until I decide whether I'm sticking with Nikon or not. New D750's coming on Monday so that'll be the decider.
Click to expand...
I think you have been unlucky with the d750 you had, hopefully the new d750 will solve everything. Over the years Nikon have had a few problems with new releases, sadly it's the early models that are mainly affected. It's one reason I won't be buying a new model again, I would rather let the early adopters do the 'beta' testing and also benefit from the price drop too. If you read the thread that Stuart of lens hire has posted about canon 24-70 L IS mkII de-coating issues (13 out of 18 lenses affected) you wouldn't buy anything from any manufacturer ever again.
 
rob-nikon said:
I think you have been unlucky with the d750 you had, hopefully the new d750 will solve everything. Over the years Nikon have had a few problems with new releases, sadly it's the early models that are mainly affected. It's one reason I won't be buying a new model again, I would rather let the early adopters do the 'beta' testing and also benefit from the price drop too. If you read the thread that Stuart of lens hire has posted about canon 24-70 L IS mkII de-coating issues (13 out of 18 lenses affected) you wouldn't buy anything from any manufacturer ever again.
Click to expand...
True enough. Nikon's inability to fix the problems, and on numerous occasions saying the camera is fine when it clearly wasn't only for them to find the fault later hasn't filled me full of confidence though should I have any future issues. Also the fact they calibrated my lens and camera together only to find it still needed adjusting and was different at the short end to the long end isn't good. I know this is an issue with zooms (begs the question why Nikon don't allow fine tune at both ends like Canon), but when it's been calibrated with the camera you'd expect it to be right all the way through the range.
 
snerkler said:
True enough. Nikon's inability to fix the problems, and on numerous occasions saying the camera is fine when it clearly wasn't only for them to find the fault later hasn't filled me full of confidence though should I have any future issues. Also the fact they calibrated my lens and camera together only to find it still needed adjusting and was different at the short end to the long end isn't good. I know this is an issue with zooms (begs the question why Nikon don't allow fine tune at both ends like Canon), but when it's been calibrated with the camera you'd expect it to be right all the way through the range.
Click to expand...
That's fair enough, if they have 'calibrated' it (I say that as I do sometimes wonder what their calibration process and tolerances are) then it should be all good. I'm glad they have seen sense and are sending you a new d750, it's about time too. Nikons customer service seems to be awful at times and their reputation is taking a beating. Let's hope it's all solved for you. Your problems have put me off sending mine in as I'm going with the idea of if I can't see a problem why fix it, I don't want it to come back worse than it went in especially when I can't find a fault.

Ive had problems over the years, I had a d7000 that was awful for back focusing (a known issue that affected some early models), it was my first Nikon and at first I put it down to being a beginner and user error. As got new lenses some worked well and some were awful. I had a 70-200 vr1 that back focused badly even when set to full adjustment. I could never see why people raved about the 70-200 and was thinking of getting rid of it cheaply, that was until I tried it on a d7100 and it sang, perfect focus with no adjustment needed. After that I rarely used the d7000 as I just didn't trust it. Strangely others had an awful time with the d7100 but for me it was one of the best nikons ive had. I honestly think it depends on if you get a good copy or not.
 
Last edited:
The reliability of my 750 hasn't been great but I'm buggered if I'm paying canons body prices. When I made the switch I lost out on a 70-200 but I'm back to where I was again now. The release of the new 5D has reaffirmed my decision, that price point is scandalous, or it is for a hobbyist like me.
 
Livin The Dream said:
The reliability of my 750 hasn't been great but I'm buggered if I'm paying canons body prices. When I made the switch I lost out on a 70-200 but I'm back to where I was again now. The release of the new 5D has reaffirmed my decision, that price point is scandalous, or it is for a hobbyist like me.
Click to expand...
Yep, that's the only thing that stopped me swapping, £3500 for the body is silly money. Perhaps Canon's pricing will work out for the best for me and I'll fall in love with the D750 again :love:
 
snerkler said:
Yep, that's the only thing that stopped me swapping, £3500 for the body is silly money. Perhaps Canon's pricing will work out for the best for me and I'll fall in love with the D750 again :love:
Click to expand...

I could see it panning out like that with Canon. I had a 5D2 but the 5D3 just wasn't attractive, especially at the silly premium. They have crafted the upgrade route now and demand that premium.

There's no lenses that I miss at all and so it was an obvious choice for me. I have considered the 810 to replace my 610 as that would be great for the studio stuff but I'm happy with the output I get, it's just GAS.

I can't really see how much of an improvement the next generations will have so be interesting to see whether any of those will be tempting. For once, I'm quite happy with what I have.
 
Livin The Dream said:
I could see it panning out like that with Canon. I had a 5D2 but the 5D3 just wasn't attractive, especially at the silly premium. They have crafted the upgrade route now and demand that premium.

There's no lenses that I miss at all and so it was an obvious choice for me. I have considered the 810 to replace my 610 as that would be great for the studio stuff but I'm happy with the output I get, it's just GAS.

I can't really see how much of an improvement the next generations will have so be interesting to see whether any of those will be tempting. For once, I'm quite happy with what I have.
Click to expand...
Benefits of upgrades are getting less and less tbh, especially in sensor performance. That being said I do wish the D750 had cross type sensors on the outer points (maybe the next gen will as I'm sure it'll have a tweaked version of the D5/D500 AF system) and as mentioned before it'd be nice if Nikon allowed 2 AF fine tune adjustments. Other than that I don't think I need anything else.

Oh, better AF in liveview ;)

I did kind of expect a D750 and D810 replacement announced at photokina tbh but now that it wasn't I'm not expecting to hear anything until at least spring.
 
snerkler said:
Benefits of upgrades are getting less and less tbh, especially in sensor performance. That being said I do wish the D750 had cross type sensors on the outer points (maybe the next gen will as I'm sure it'll have a tweaked version of the D5/D500 AF system) and as mentioned before it'd be nice if Nikon allowed 2 AF fine tune adjustments. Other than that I don't think I need anything else.

Oh, better AF in liveview ;)

I did kind of expect a D750 and D810 replacement announced at photokina tbh but now that it wasn't I'm not expecting to hear anything until at least spring.
Click to expand...

I wasn't surprised not to see replacements. There seems to have been flurry in recent years of upgrades to tempt consumers to buy. Upgrades have been coming quicker and quicker but I don't think technological advancement is moving as quickly now.

And it will depend whether the £1999 launch price of the replacement will be worth those small incremental changes, for me, probably not. Technology seems to have plateaued with sensors and so I'm quite happy with what I have for the medium term. The flagship models should be a guide and so the D5 isn't that much better for what I need a camera for.
 
Last edited:
To me the most important upgrade to the 750 would be the D500 autofocus module.
I have both and the D500 is more accurate and more consistent.

A few other things could be improved but overall it is a good camera and I enjoy it a lot.

Nikon UK service are not that good IMO, I Paid for calibration and it came back miles out.
 
Livin The Dream said:
I wasn't surprised not to see replacements. There seems to have been flurry in recent years of upgrades to tempt consumers to buy. Upgrades have been coming quicker and quicker but I don't think technological advancement is moving as quickly now.

And it will depend whether the £1999 launch price of the replacement will be worth those small incremental changes, for me, probably not. Technology seems to have plateaued with sensors and so I'm quite happy with what I have for the medium term. The flagship models should be a guide and so the D5 isn't that much better for what I need a camera for.
Click to expand...
The D5 is a step back in terms of sensor (maybe Nikon instead of Sony sensor????), hope this is not a sign of things to come from Nikon.
 
1st time out with the D750 for a few months.

I purchased an Olympus E-M5 MKII with 12-40mm f/2.8 pro lens as a holiday set up so with every new camera I had to give it a good test run, that run lasted about 3 months. The D750 has been locked away until today.

I forgot how good the Nikon is - I had a walk around Preston city centre today.

1. Snap the snapper


2. Surgeons Court


3. Conchita Wurst?


4. Lads night out
 
Whats peoples thoughts on the 24-120? I shoot weddings with a a 35-85 set up mostly, but also have a 24-70 for groups and dance shots, as these often get shot at F4+ anyway I am thinking about changing, the 24-120 won't be much use in poor light but if the lights bad enough to need F2.8 I would be using my primes anyway Im thinking it might be a decent option for groups, and for outdoor candids with the range.
 
I purchased my D750 as a kit with the 24-120mm as a walk around lens for a holiday to New York, it's a very capable lens but it's sat in the cupboard since February as I just seem to use the 24-70mm for 90% of my shots.
 
I can't get the peak designs strap to work for me. With just the 50mm attached I can't get it to sit well.

I picked up the new black rapid sport breathe today and was initially impressed until the brad strap worked its way loose on back connection.

2 years in development apparantly and such a lousy job!!! Strap itself is great, but imo has a serious flaw!
 
JJ! said:
I can't get the peak designs strap to work for me. With just the 50mm attached I can't get it to sit well.

I picked up the new black rapid sport breathe today and was initially impressed until the brad strap worked its way loose on back connection.

2 years in development apparantly and such a lousy job!!! Strap itself is great, but imo has a serious flaw!
Click to expand...
I had the BR sport and never had a problem with the brad strap, maybe user error not fitting it right ;) :p

I didn't get on with the peak design slide first time around as I too found it didn't sit right. Hiwever I tried it again and now wouldn't use anything else. What's the difference this time around? Well I have one side attached to the lug on the camera and one attached to the tripod plate. First time around I just attached to both camera lugs.
 
AndrewSt said:
Whats peoples thoughts on the 24-120? I shoot weddings with a a 35-85 set up mostly, but also have a 24-70 for groups and dance shots, as these often get shot at F4+ anyway I am thinking about changing, the 24-120 won't be much use in poor light but if the lights bad enough to need F2.8 I would be using my primes anyway Im thinking it might be a decent option for groups, and for outdoor candids with the range.
Click to expand...
I used the 24-120mm at a wedding (just as a guest) and was very happy with the performance. That being said as a guest AF speed wasn't critical, if it is then very little can compete with the Nikon 24-70mm f2.8.

But the 24-120 didn't let me down and the venue was VERY dark, so overall I was quite impressed.
 
snerkler said:
I had the BR sport and never had a problem with the brad strap, maybe user error not fitting it right ;) :p

I didn't get on with the peak design slide first time around as I too found it didn't sit right. Hiwever I tried it again and now wouldn't use anything else. What's the difference this time around? Well I have one side attached to the lug on the camera and one attached to the tripod plate. First time around I just attached to both camera lugs.
Click to expand...

This is the new black rapid sport. Only arrived in shops on Tuesday.

The way the brad attaches is completely different from the older sport.
 
JJ! said:
This is the new black rapid sport. Only arrived in shops on Tuesday.

The way the brad attaches is completely different from the older sport.
Click to expand...
Didn't know they'd redesigned it. Not good if they've made it worse :confused:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top