Nikon D750 - Report from a fanboi
 

http://petapixel.com/2014/10/14/nikon-d750-review-nikon-youve-created-monster/

or http://tinyurl.com/k4prl8h
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

Nikon D750 - Report from a fanboi
 

In article , Eric Stevens wrote:

http://petapixel.com/2014/10/14/nikon-d750-review-nikon-youve-created-monster

Seems to be an amazing camera, like the D700 before it. I moved from the D3s to
the D4 though, and got the D800E for a smaller substitute, but it certainly lacks
the dynamic range at high ISO that the D4 so effortlessly provides.

I wonder what he would have thought about the D4s? It seems most of the review is
his amazement that a D*** met his expectations as a D* replacement, so if he had
bought a D4, his review would probably have been "yeah, it's better - as
expected" really :)

--
Sandman

Nikon D750 - Report from a fanboi
 

Sandman wrote:
In article , Eric Stevens wrote:

http://petapixel.com/2014/10/14/nikon-d750-review-nikon-youve-created-monster

Seems to be an amazing camera, like the D700 before it. I moved from the D3s to
the D4 though, and got the D800E for a smaller substitute, but it certainly lacks
the dynamic range at high ISO that the D4 so effortlessly provides.

Not true.

The D800E and the D4 are virtually identical in high ISO
dynamic range. See the graphs that Bill Claff produces,
or any other quality data, such as from DXO, for dynamic
range of these cameras.

http://home.comcast.net/~NikonD70/Charts/PDR.htm

The D800E at ISO 12800 gets 4.92 fstops and the D4 gets
4.99 fstops. That is about the amount of difference at
any point from ISO 400 to ISO 25600.

Of course at lower ISO's than 400 it is the D800E that
"so effortlessly provides" very significantly more
dynamic range than a D4. The D800 and and D810 are
virtually identical to the D800E, while the D4S is
slightly better (5.2 fstops at ISO 12800).

And note that the D750 at ISO 12800 gets 4.82 fstops of
dynamic range. Not significantly different except from
the D4S (the difference there is still only 0.38 fstops
and you'd be hard pressed to see that in actual
practice.)

I wonder what he would have thought about the D4s? It seems most of the review is
his amazement that a D*** met his expectations as a D* replacement, so if he had
bought a D4, his review would probably have been "yeah, it's better - as
expected" really :)


--
Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska)

Nikon D750 - Report from a fanboi
 

In article ,
Eric Stevens wrote:

http://petapixel.com/2014/10/14/niko...reated-monster
/

or http://tinyurl.com/k4prl8h

As I've written befo I think that the D750 is the true successor to
the D300s. What's your take?
--
teleportation kills

Nikon D750 - Report from a fanboi
 

Whisky-dave Wrote in message:
On Tuesday, 3 March 2015 14:22:27 UTC, android wrote:
In article ,
Eric Stevens wrote:

http://petapixel.com/2014/10/14/niko...reated-monster
/

or http://tinyurl.com/k4prl8h

As I've written befo I think that the D750 is the true successor to
the D300s. What's your take?

It's bloody silly naming system if it's true.

There can be only one ?4? and that's on the one that Sandy has!
All them D40 have should have entered recycling mode by
now...
--
Bats can't tell us apart!


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

Nikon D750 - Report from a fanboi
 

On Tue, 03 Mar 2015 15:22:22 +0100, android wrote:

In article ,
Eric Stevens wrote:

http://petapixel.com/2014/10/14/niko...reated-monster
/

or http://tinyurl.com/k4prl8h

As I've written befo I think that the D750 is the true successor to
the D300s. What's your take?

In my case, it's the successor to the D300, which in turn was the
successor to the D70. While there was a very noticable jump from the
D70 to the D300 there seems to be an even bigger jump from the D300 to
the D750.

There is a marked improvement in dynamic range which gives rise to
improved low light shooting at even moderate ISOs. Focussing seems to
be more reliable but I have yet to try out all the focus settings.
There is no comparison between the sensors: the 24 MP D810 noticeably
exceeds the capability of the 12 MP D300 both in colour and in dynamic
range. Her is a cropped shot using the 70-200mm f/2.8 at f/8, ISO 400
and 200mm.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...R--7500147.jpg I don't
think I could have done that with the D300.

It's not like the D300 to set up and operate. Instead of having the
four sets of shooting banks and custom banks, both of which you both
set and select via the menu, the D750 has but two sets of banks. Each
one is set via the menu and selected by an external rotary selector on
the top-left corner of the camera. There is also a button "i" to
provide quick access via the menu to frequently changed settings. I
haven't even started to explore this yet but I think I prefer it to
the D300.

To see the way the capabilities of the cameras have improved, see
http://home.comcast.net/~NikonD70/Charts/PDR.htm#D70,D300,D750
which shows the way that the dynamic range of the D70, D300 and D750
have improved over the years. From D300 to D750 is a bigger step than
from D70 to D300.

D300 successor? Perhaps.

D300 supplanter? Definitely.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

Nikon D750 - Report from a fanboi
 

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

As I've written befo I think that the D750 is the true successor to
the D300s. What's your take?

In my case, it's the successor to the D300, which in turn was the
successor to the D70.

it may have been what you bought after owning a d70 but that doesn't
make it a successor.

the d300 was *not* a successor of the d70. it was the successor of the
d200 which was the successor of the d100.

the d70 was a consumer slr, which was succeeded by the d80, d90 and
then the d5000 series.

While there was a very noticable jump from the
D70 to the D300 there seems to be an even bigger jump from the D300 to
the D750.

that's because the d70 and d300 different product tiers and the d300
and d750 are not only different product tiers but also dx/fx.

There is a marked improvement in dynamic range which gives rise to
improved low light shooting at even moderate ISOs.

no ****. the sensor in the d300 is much better than what was in the
d70, plus it didn't have the electronic shutter that hobbled the d70.

Focussing seems to
be more reliable but I have yet to try out all the focus settings.
There is no comparison between the sensors: the 24 MP D810 noticeably
exceeds the capability of the 12 MP D300 both in colour and in dynamic
range.

the d810 is 36 mp. the d750 is 24 mp.

both are full frame, so it should be no surprise that a full frame
camera of 2015 blows away a dx sensor from 7 years earlier.

Nikon D750 - Report from a fanboi
 

On Tue, 03 Mar 2015 16:32:54 -0500, nospam
wrote:

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

As I've written befo I think that the D750 is the true successor to
the D300s. What's your take?

In my case, it's the successor to the D300, which in turn was the
successor to the D70.

it may have been what you bought after owning a d70 but that doesn't
make it a successor.

the d300 was *not* a successor of the d70. it was the successor of the
d200 which was the successor of the d100.

the d70 was a consumer slr, which was succeeded by the d80, d90 and
then the d5000 series.

While there was a very noticable jump from the
D70 to the D300 there seems to be an even bigger jump from the D300 to
the D750.

that's because the d70 and d300 different product tiers and the d300
and d750 are not only different product tiers but also dx/fx.

There is a marked improvement in dynamic range which gives rise to
improved low light shooting at even moderate ISOs.

no ****. the sensor in the d300 is much better than what was in the
d70, plus it didn't have the electronic shutter that hobbled the d70.

Focussing seems to
be more reliable but I have yet to try out all the focus settings.
There is no comparison between the sensors: the 24 MP D810 noticeably
exceeds the capability of the 12 MP D300 both in colour and in dynamic
range.

Whoops! I meant the 24 MP D750.

the d810 is 36 mp. the d750 is 24 mp.

both are full frame, so it should be no surprise that a full frame
camera of 2015 blows away a dx sensor from 7 years earlier.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

Nikon D750 - Report from a fanboi
 

Eric Stevens Wrote in message:
On Tue, 03 Mar 2015 15:22:22 +0100, android wrote:

In article ,
Eric Stevens wrote:

http://petapixel.com/2014/10/14/niko...reated-monster
/

or http://tinyurl.com/k4prl8h

As I've written befo I think that the D750 is the true successor to
the D300s. What's your take?

In my case, it's the successor to the D300, which in turn was the
successor to the D70. While there was a very noticable jump from the
D70 to the D300 there seems to be an even bigger jump from the D300 to
the D750.

There is a marked improvement in dynamic range which gives rise to
improved low light shooting at even moderate ISOs. Focussing seems to
be more reliable but I have yet to try out all the focus settings.
There is no comparison between the sensors: the 24 MP D810 noticeably
exceeds the capability of the 12 MP D300 both in colour and in dynamic
range. Her is a cropped shot using the 70-200mm f/2.8 at f/8, ISO 400
and 200mm.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...R--7500147.jpg I don't
think I could have done that with the D300.

It's not like the D300 to set up and operate. Instead of having the
four sets of shooting banks and custom banks, both of which you both
set and select via the menu, the D750 has but two sets of banks. Each
one is set via the menu and selected by an external rotary selector on
the top-left corner of the camera. There is also a button "i" to
provide quick access via the menu to frequently changed settings. I
haven't even started to explore this yet but I think I prefer it to
the D300.

To see the way the capabilities of the cameras have improved, see
http://home.comcast.net/~NikonD70/Charts/PDR.htm#D70,D300,D750
which shows the way that the dynamic range of the D70, D300 and D750
have improved over the years. From D300 to D750 is a bigger step than
from D70 to D300.

D300 successor? Perhaps.

D300 supplanter? Definitely.

Thank you for your report.
I also think that it's very generous of you to show pictures of
your family that way. Are you sure that they are comfortable with
that? Stupid me. You had them sign a release, off course... :-)

--
Bats can't tell us apart!


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

Nikon D750 - Report from a fanboi
 

On 4/03/2015 10:06 a.m., Eric Stevens wrote:


To see the way the capabilities of the cameras have improved, see
http://home.comcast.net/~NikonD70/Charts/PDR.htm#D70,D300,D750
which shows the way that the dynamic range of the D70, D300 and D750
have improved over the years. From D300 to D750 is a bigger step than
from D70 to D300.
There's an option to view the chart for D750 in "DX crop mode".
As well as reduction in read noise, QE has improved from about 25% (D70)
to 35% (D300) to over 50% (from about D7000/D800).
Canon has similar QE, but higher read noise, hence high ISO performance
is comparable.
So from the Nikon D70, actual improvement to the latest generation
sensors is about 2 1/2 stops.
If you believed what you read on the internet, then in "generations" of
cameras, the D50 was "at least a stop better than the D70", the D300 at
least a stop better than the D50, the D90 better than, the D7000, D7100,
probably now the D7200 "massively improved sensor performance" will be
raved on about by morons on DPReview forums etc.
Look closer at Bill Claff's data, and it's clear that the big
improvements aren't happening any more, except in cases where some
dishonest makers (Fuji and Olympus) "cook" noise reduction in to high
ISO raw files, irreversibly losing image data - if better noise
reduction programs are available in future, then those raw files can't
be re-processed, as the image data has already been lost.