The last Nikon (premium) DSLR

BillN_33

BillN_33

Suspended / Banned
Messages
13,952
Name
Bill
Edit My Images
No
What do you think, will the D850 & D6 be the last premium DSLR's from Nikon

The D6 seems to be a disappointing upgrade from the D5 for many reviewers

and the D850 seems to have been heralded as "the best Nikon DSLR" to date and for the money at around £2,000 it would appear to be a very good buy and has many of the technical features of the D6.

The reason I ask is that I have a D750 and a D810 and I'm thinking of upgrading/adding - initially I planned to add a D5 or D6, (mainly for birding), but the more I read about the D6 the more I move in favour of the D850, although I have just missed a very low shutter count D5 for £3k, which seemed a bargain.

I shoot all kinds of stuff as a hobby, I'm retired so have plenty of time and have most of the Nikon glass that I will ever need, so even though "mirrorless" seems to be the latest, I'm sticking to the Nikon DSLR's for the next few years at least.

This may have been discussed, but if so I cannot find the thread.
 
Get the D850 - at that point the D810 & D750 will be superfluous.
 
I agree; the D850 is a brilliant camera. (y)

I had the D810 before this and thought that was good, but this is far more than I thought it would be. You will need good glass though.
 
I think D6 and D850 are the last "premium" as you call them.
Canon have been more open and have stated they are no longer developing DSLR/EF tech.
Nikon haven't been quite as explicit but have recently admitted they should have started and concentrated on the mirrorless tech sooner than they did.

D850 is still probably the best overall high res body you can get for £2K. Plus added benefit of all the cheaper tele lenses which you may already own anyway.
It's certainly a worthwhile purchase IMO especially you plan on keeping it for a fair number of years to come.

on the other hand if you plan on switching to mirrorless one day (and I am not saying you should).... you can probably get more money selling your gear now than later.
 
Last edited:
If that's the case, it looks like Nikon will lose me as customer then, because I think mirrorless cameras are horrible - I'd rather go back to my film cameras.
 
Sky said:
If that's the case, it looks like Nikon will lose me as customer then, because I think mirrorless cameras are horrible - I'd rather go back to my film cameras.
Click to expand...
As a mirrorless fanboi (a long time convert too, especially of the EVF) I feel very differently. I don't much care about the brand though.

But Pentax are committed to DSLRs as far as their latest message goes.

Regardless no DSLR is disappearing any time soon. There's really only one mature mirrorless system (half the people seem to dislike/hate them for whatever reason) and till there is another equally mature system DSLRs will be around.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sky
I think that I probably had some of the first "mirrorless" - in the M4/3 format and then the Nikon V1 - which I still use - I don't dislike any camera but I find the straight "vanilla" mirrorless body quite "soulless" .......... but then i got my "paperweight" Nikon F2P out yesterday - such a heavy chunk of metal, which I almost "brassed out" - but the innovation at the time was quite exciting.

As is always said and there's no harm in repeating it, "investment in good glass" is always the way to go.

I used my D750 mainly for birds with a 600mm f4 and a 300PF, plus the Nikon tele-converters

I find the D810 is stellar with the 24 70 f2.8, (got to be one of the best ever Nikon lenses for what you get), and 70 200mm f2.8VR Nikons, and sometimes with the Nikon 300mm f2.8VR

I have quite a few MF Nikkors lenses - but I tried a couple today and boy what a pain - at my age and eyesight AF is a godsend

I am just an average amateur, but although some will disagree, for me, I find that camera bodies with matching lenses can be (quite) situational, especially if you are aiming for a desired image "type" - that's why a Leica will always have a good following and I find my MF M8, with Leica or Zeiss glass just so good in certain situations as are the 2 Sigma Merrills that I purchased some years ago, they are old, slow and frustrating, but they produce great images. It's a pity the Leica M9 can have sensor problems that are now un-fixable as I would love a FF Leica RF

I think that I'll spring for a D850 as I have not read a negative report, but if a D5 comes up at a good used price, that is worth a punt......... I'll pass on the D6

In the meantime I also want to try the (new?) Nikon 105mm f1.4, I have always been pleased with the macro 105mm f2.8VR ....... of course I realise that the 2 lenses have been built for different purposes.

Thanks for your comments
 
Last edited:
I never really understood the whole "soul" thing for cameras. It's just a tool for a job. Buy the best one you can afford for your photographic needs.
I am not even sure about soul in humans let alone inanimate objects.

If I need to screw something in, I'm not going to look at my electric drill and think "this thing is soulless, I ought to many my life harder by using the soulful screwdriver instead" :LOL:
 
Last edited:
nandbytes said:
I never really understood the whole "soul" thing for cameras. It's just a tool for a job. Buy the best one you can afford for your photographic needs.
I am not even sure about soul in humans let alone inanimate objects.

If I need to screw something in, I'm not going to look at my electric drill and think "this thing is soulless, I ought to many my life harder by using the soulful screwdriver instead" :LOL:
Click to expand...

do you think cars and motorbikes have a "soul" - it depends how you define soul or what word you chose to use?

I have always felt "connected" to the motor bikes that I have ridden - low cost or expensive

my 1989 911 has something that a 2020 Ford Fiesta does not have ........ or indeed the latest electric cars
 
Last edited:
nandbytes said:
As a mirrorless fanboi (a long time convert too, especially of the EVF) I feel very differently. I don't much care about the brand though.

But Pentax are committed to DSLRs as far as their latest message goes.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure the only reason for that is because Ricoh don't want to invest. The problem is that they are so far behind the game where mirrorless is concerned that if they did eventually bring out a mirrorless body no one would buy it over a Sony/Nikon/Canon. IMO they are just milking their customers for whatever they can get now, the latest APS-C DSLR body is £1900, the new crop 16-55mm f/2.8 is £1500. Mad pricing.

Shame as I enjoy using my Pentax gear, I really do think the K-1 is superb (and it has soul, my A9 doesn't) but they are slowly driving the remainder of their customers away
 
Last edited:
BillN_33 said:
do you think cars and motorbikes have a "soul" - it depends how you define soul or what word you chose to use?

I have always felt "connected" to the motor bikes that I have ridden - low cost or expensive

my 1989 911 has something that a 2020 Ford Fiesta does not have ........ or indeed the latest electric cars
Click to expand...
No not really. as I said I am not sure I believe humans have a soul, so associating that with inanimate objects is a long way off.

Sure I do have some emotional attachment to certain things like my first watch or a gift from the missus etc.
I don't really have any with my camera or vehicles. To great extent I avoid developing such attachments as much as possible since it reduces heartaches in the future.

In fact if electric vehicles are indeed better for humanities future I'd be happy to see the "gas guzzlers" off the road.
I do admire certain cars like the 1989 911 you mention but that's just me liking the looks of something just as I like the look of the new Nikon Z Fc. Wouldn't go buy one though over something more practical.
 
nandbytes said:
No not really. as I said I am not sure I believe humans have a soul, so associating that with inanimate objects is a long way off.

Sure I do have some emotional attachment to certain things like my first watch or a gift from the missus etc.
I don't really have any with my camera or vehicles. To great extent I avoid developing such attachments as much as possible since it reduces heartaches in the future.

In fact if electric vehicles are indeed better for humanities future I'd be happy to see the "gas guzzlers" off the road.
I do admire certain cars like the 1989 911 you mention but that's just me liking the looks of something just as I like the look of the new Nikon Z Fc. Wouldn't go buy one though over something more practical.
Click to expand...

I know that it is difficult these days with all these regs surrounding motorcycles and getting a license etc., - I passed my motorcycle test in 1965 when it was easy "just ride the bike" and you pass - but if you ride an old bike, "man and machine", hopefully you will feel something rather than just sitting on a seat - I had a few MGB's in my youth - if I get in one today it does still feel special and after I few miles I do feel more a part of the car and driving experience versus say my wife's X1 - but riding a motor bike is something quite special .......... unfortunately now at my age it's not a good idea ........ although I still have a couple.
 
Some devices feel more involving than others, but jelly-mould electronic cameras don't have that generally and all the Nikon DSLRs I've handled up to and including D750 felt plasticky and uninvolving. My Sony mirrorless system isn't any more involving, but it feels better made than DXXXX and DXXX (enormously better than my D70) cameras and more rewarding to use.

In the end it's just a means of creating pictures, and if I want something with character instead then I'll find a Bronica or Zorki.
 
Retune said:
Surely the whole point of having a camera is to steal the souls of your victims?
Click to expand...

Could be

TP_Rasta.jpg
 
I think it's maybe that the tech is more visible in mirrorless that makes them "soulless" to some. I don't agree and certainly build quality wise the newer "soulless" cameras at least feel miles ahead of the often cheap feeling mostly plastic boxes many SLR / RF / compact film age cameras were. I see modern cameras as just as involving as I'm still setting everything I used to set, aperture, shutter, ISO, and I'm setting them the same way, with dials.
 
My crazy theory is that our perception of 'soul' in cameras and other gadgets comes down to how much metal they have in them. The cameras that people seem most attached to, including most rangefinders, SLRs from the manual focus era, and high end AF SLRs are serious chunks of metal. My 4 year old Nokia 6 phone, rather underpowered but apparently milled from a block of aluminium, is a much more attractive, tactile object than the plastic Xiaomi I just bought.
 
BillN_33 said:
do you think cars and motorbikes have a "soul" - it depends how you define soul or what word you chose to use?

I have always felt "connected" to the motor bikes that I have ridden - low cost or expensive

my 1989 911 has something that a 2020 Ford Fiesta does not have ........ or indeed the latest electric cars
Click to expand...


Not "soul" but some definitely have more character than others. (Applies to cars and bikes.)
 
Retune said:
My crazy theory is that our perception of 'soul' in cameras and other gadgets comes down to how much metal they have in them. The cameras that people seem most attached to, including most rangefinders, SLRs from the manual focus era, and high end AF SLRs are serious chunks of metal. My 4 year old Nokia 6 phone, rather underpowered but apparently milled from a block of aluminium, is a much more attractive, tactile object than the plastic Xiaomi I just bought.
Click to expand...

I suppose it is how it makes you feel when you are using it, it's just natural for many that they prefer "this" to "that"

If you enjoy the experience you are (probably) more likely to take better images, IMHO
 
BillN_33 said:
If you enjoy the experience you are (probably) more likely to take better images, IMHO
Click to expand...

That's true of almost anything isn't it?
for example if you enjoy your job you are more likely to perform better in it.

At least for me I enjoy taking pictures and I prefer using a camera that is least in the way of doing that or one that makes it easier to achieve the image I am after.
For me it all about taking the picture than the device itself. There are some cameras that I have found annoying and fiddly to use but I see them as such since they got in my way while taking pictures.

for example someone above said they'd rather use film SLRs than mirrorless. A film SLR would totally get in the way of most things I shoot. it wouldn't work for me and I see that as a rather unenjoyable photographic experience for me.
 
Last edited:
BillN_33 said:
If you enjoy the experience you are (probably) more likely to take better images, IMHO
Click to expand...
That's possible but I remember a successful press photographer who told me, about 50 years ago, "knowing what you want to show is what gets the picture. The camera is just a box to expose the film". I'm sure dozens of people have been given that advice and only realised how good it is long after the event!
 
nandbytes said:
I never really understood the whole "soul" thing for cameras. It's just a tool for a job. Buy the best one you can afford for your photographic needs.

If I need to screw something in, I'm not going to look at my electric drill and think "this thing is soulless" ...
Click to expand...
Using the word soul in this context is just a manner of speech. And a camera is a lot more complex in function & operation than a drill! I think that the term, if used about a car or a camera for instance, refers to a certain style or character of design blended with a certain je ne sais quoi - more in the cultural realm than in the mechanical. It's a realm in which some things get to be regarded as 'classics'. To deserve that term, though, requires a level of consensus.
 
Last edited:
BillN_33 said:
If you enjoy the experience you are (probably) more likely to take better images, IMHO
Click to expand...
Not sure if that's correct, but I'm fully in favour of enjoying the experience!
 
droj said:
Using the word soul in this context is just a manner of speech. And a camera is a lot more complex in function & operation than a drill! I think that the term, if used about a car or a camera for instance, refers to a certain style or character of design blended with a certain je ne sais quoi - more in the cultural realm than in the mechanical. It's a realm in which some things get to be regarded as 'classics'.
Click to expand...
I had to Google "je ne sais quoi".
I don't really get it tbh.
I will continue to buy the camera that's best for the job.
If this je ne sais quoi gets in the way of me taking pictures then I don't really appreciate it.
 
Myself i dont think we have seen the last of DSLR`s but they are on the way out
 
nandbytes said:
I will continue to buy the camera that's best for the job.
Click to expand...
That's fine if you're commercial, but many of us also appreciate using a camera that we like the user interface of - including the vf experience, & how it is in the hand - the whole experience.

The tech has evolved so much that in a way we're spoilt for capability, these days, and you can get into hair-splitting. But the image is the thing, and it's a curiosity that many with expensive, technically advanced equipment come up with what are less than ordinary run-of-the-mill snaps!
 
droj said:
That's fine if you're commercial, but many of us also appreciate using a camera that we like the user interface of - including the vf experience, & how it is in the hand - the whole experience.

The tech has evolved so much that in a way we're spoilt for capability, these days, and you can get into hair-splitting. But the image is the thing, and it's a curiosity that many with expensive, technically advanced equipment come up with what are less than ordinary run-of-the-mill snaps!
Click to expand...

I am not commercial and I like having good user interface and ergonomics too. Basically one that doesn't get in the way of my photography.

Just as tech most ILC cameras I find are all good enough in this respect. Could get used to any of them. I am not very fussy :ROFLMAO:
 
I doubt it. The Dx series have always been Nikon’s high end offering. If you need that sort of camera then mirrorless won’t figure
 
nandbytes said:
I had to Google "je ne sais quoi".
I don't really get it tbh.
I will continue to buy the camera that's best for the job.
If this je ne sais quoi gets in the way of me taking pictures then I don't really appreciate it.
Click to expand...

I think the properties can be summed up if we really want to try and whilst this may not be the case in this thread sometimes it is possibly IMO just a bit of mild or even hard core fan boy bias.

The closest I get is probably with film era or even modern lenses but with old style build as I do prefer using them to using modern fly by wire lenses because they look lovely and are tactile things which are nice to use. The fly by wire lenses are just functional in comparison. Functional, efficient and better in just about every possible measure but just not as good looking or nice to handle and use.
 
Personally, D4s + D810 is great and covers everything very well.
The D5 + D850 has some marginal gains, but I wouldn't pay a whole lot for them. The focus systems are different between the sets, and they behave a little differently... for difficult/fast action I prefer the tracking behavior of the earlier models. Sometimes you can actually benefit from the increased resolution the D850 offer; but not all that often, and how often it actually matters is even less.
FWIW, I owned the D4/D810 and currently use the D5/D850... I refuse to buy the D6; and I am waiting until Nikon comes up with a mirrorless FF comparable to the Sonys (preferably better) before I even consider them.
 
nandbytes said:
As a mirrorless fanboi (a long time convert too, especially of the EVF) I feel very differently. I don't much care about the brand though.

But Pentax are committed to DSLRs as far as their latest message goes.

Regardless no DSLR is disappearing any time soon. There's really only one mature mirrorless system (half the people seem to dislike/hate them for whatever reason) and till there is another equally mature system DSLRs will be around.
Click to expand...

Yes and because of this I got 2 645z's :D

I liked the 5ds I also got :D. I've been out with it. I've found it fine so far. The dynamic range isn't up there with the 645z but it's not terrible and the 100-400 is really ideal for certain things.

Hopefully Pentax will upgrade the K1 to the full phat 61mp of the A7RIV and we also get a 100mp 645z. If they can get their act together lens wise they should scalp a few Canikon customers wedded to the OVF. My concern is their lens range is quite limited and the Sony system is as you say, very very mature with the bonus of being able to adapt EF and other glass to it through adaptors. This will hold back disenfranchised DSLR users moving over, and whilst the Canon RF and Nikon Z bodies don't have the latest native less range of Sony, EF to RF and F to Z adaptors mean they can carry over their existing lenses and use them on these cameras.

My gribe with Sony camera's is I find them a bit small, and I prefer the handling of a larger camera. It is what I am comfortable with. I do also prefer an OVF.
 
Last edited:
I looked at swapping my D810 for a D850 but the trade-in on the 810 is about 7-800 quid and a new D850 is nearly two and a half grand; I very much doubt the D850 is £1800 the better camera so it looks like the D810 will see me to my grave now.
 
ShinySideUp said:
I looked at swapping my D810 for a D850 but the trade-in on the 810 is about 7-800 quid and a new D850 is nearly two and a half grand; I very much doubt the D850 is £1800 the better camera so it looks like the D810 will see me to my grave now.
Click to expand...

I sold my immaculate, 4k shutter count D810 at a low £850.00 and bought the D850 for £1900.00 from Panamoz (now £1810). In addition I got a pair of XQD cards from them with a £200.00 saving, so effectively my shiny new D850 only cost me £850.00 - this was in my opinion worth every penny. Almost six months later and I'm still over the moon with it. :cool:
 
Sky said:
I sold my immaculate, 4k shutter count D810 at a low £850.00 and bought the D850 for £1900.00 from Panamoz (now £1810). In addition I got a pair of XQD cards from them with a £200.00 saving, so effectively my shiny new D850 only cost me £850.00 - this was in my opinion worth every penny. Almost six months later and I'm still over the moon with it. :cool:
Click to expand...

I've just ordered a D850, I'll keep my D810, it will always come in hand as it is still a really good camera
 
BillN_33 said:
I've just ordered a D850, I'll keep my D810, it will always come in hand as it is still a really good camera
Click to expand...

I did that initially, as the D810 is such a great camera I really didn't want to part with it. However, once I had my hands on the D850 I knew I would never go back to it - the D850 knocks it for six. The only downside is you must give it good glass to see through - it shows every flaw (in the glass and in your technique).
 
Last edited:
Sky said:
I did that initially, as the D810 is such a great camera I really didn't want to part with it. However, once I had my hands on the D850 I knew I would never go back to it - the D850 knocks it for six. The only downside is you must give it good glass to see through - it shows every flaw (in the glass and in your technique).
Click to expand...
Thanks, when I am shooting birds from a hide, or out in the field, I use two bodies - one on a tripod with the Nikon 600mm and the other hand held with the Nikon 300mm PF
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sky
I upgraded from the D810 to the D850 for two specific reasons... the flippy screen so that I didn't have to lay on the ground or use a right angle finder, and the FF raw silent photography capability. In both cases the advantages turn out to be minimal... an external monitor w/ hood is much better than a flippy screen pointed up towards the sky; and silent photography is fixed focus for the sequence (I somehow missed that bit of info). While I do agree that there isn't really any reason to keep both, I don't really agree that the D850 is much better in 90% of situations.

Be aware that with the D850 (all 153pt cameras) the blocked shot settings for focus tracking have nothing to do with the focus point/area actually being lost/blocked like it used to. The D810 (51pt cameras) will not quit focus tracking unless the focus area is lost/blocked for a given amount of time... no matter how long you are holding AF active. The D850 will... and it reverts back to the original selected focus point pretty quick regardless of the settings (~ ≤1sec). With the previous AF system I used 51pt tracking for composition all the time (focus/recompose w/AF active); I find that much harder to do with the D850. And with a subject that is difficult to track precisely, it can make a notable difference as well.
 
Last edited:
sk66 said:
I upgraded from the D810 to the D850 for two specific reasons... the flippy screen so that I didn't have to lay on the ground or use a right angle finder, and the FF raw silent photography capability. In both cases the advantages turn out to be minimal... an external monitor w/ hood is much better than a flippy screen pointed up towards the sky; and silent photography is fixed focus for the sequence (I somehow missed that bit of info). While I do agree that there isn't really any reason to keep both, I don't really agree that the D850 is much better in 90% of situations.

Be aware that with the D850 (all 153pt cameras) the blocked shot settings for focus tracking have nothing to do with the focus point/area actually being lost/blocked like it used to. The D810 (51pt cameras) will not quit focus tracking unless the focus area is lost/blocked for a given amount of time... no matter how long you are holding AF active. The D850 will... and it reverts back to the original selected focus point pretty quick regardless of the settings (~ ≤1sec). With the previous AF system I used 51pt tracking for composition all the time (focus/recompose w/AF active); I find that much harder to do with the D850. And with a subject that is difficult to track precisely, it can make a notable difference as well.
Click to expand...

I thought that 3D focus tracking with the D850 was similar to the D500 and although the same system as the D5, not quite as effective - are you saying the D850 loses focus after less than one second........... no matter how long you hold the shutter button down ......... or am I misunderstanding your point?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top