NikonGear'23
Gear Talk => Camera Talk => Topic started by: Netr on January 07, 2020, 04:55:50
-
A sort of DSLR version of the Z6, with no flash. https://www.theverge.com/2020/1/6/21051980/nikon-d780-dslr-camera-announcement-specs-price-update-ces-2020
-
BSI sensor with 2 stops more ISO. Maximum shutter speed now 1/8000 with electronic shutter. 4K video. From the B&H site:
When working in live view or when recording video, a Hybrid AF system is used that features 273 phase-detection points on the sensor, which cover approximately 90% of the imaging area. This helps to achieve fast and accurate focusing performance for both stills and video and also avails sophisticated subject tracking technologies, including Eye-Detection AF. This focusing system works in low-light down to -4 EV, or down to -6 EV in the dedicated Low-Light AF mode for stills.
[bold added]
That adds interest to the 12 frames per second rate in live view. The shots will presumably be in focus, actually.
Nice improvements. For me personally, not $2300US nice, but still some nice features and an indication of some things that can be expected on a D850 successor.
-
Does indeed look like the specs of Z6 with a mirror - Very much targeted at video 8) A sign that DSLR is definitely not out-phased in Nikon land ;)
-
Why not get a Z6 or D850 instead? You can get a used D850 for that price. And it's got the same sensor as the Z6 but 500 euro higher price and the Z6 allows you to use all its functions with the EVF, such as eye autofocus. Is this product targeting videographers?
-
4k and 1/8000 is nice, but is quite an incremental improvement. Seems they axed vertical grip for it too, that's a shame. I hope the gripless Zs and D780 are not the new normal. Looks like my D750 will be sticking around for quite some time. Don't mean to be a negative Nancy, we can't have leaps and bounds every release cycle.
-
Why not get a Z6 or D850 instead? You can get a used D850 for that price. And it's got the same sensor as the Z6 but 500 euro higher price and the Z6 allows you to use all its functions with the EVF, such as eye autofocus. Is this product targeting videographers?
The D780 has the optical viewfinder which many enjoy, and now for the first time in Nikon DSLR, features a more generally useful LV AF with OSPDAF, which should be nice for low and high shots (e.g. crowd view from above) even with the subjects moving. Also it autofocuses screwdriver AF Nikkors which the Z6 does not. The price is higher than the current price for the Z6 but will no doubt be reduced once it has been available for a while and the initial surge has gone.
I don't think Nikon targets videographers who only do video, but photographers who also do some video, but a lot of people now are finding themselves in situations where video is expected.
The D850 autofocus during video ... well, it's best used to prefocus before the video recording starts. It's not really something you want to use during the recording. OSPDAF should change that. Hopefully Nikon launch a standard zoom with AF-P to complement the 70-300 AF-P to further improve video AF. The D850 does have focus peaking but it's not available during 4K recording; I would expect this to work in the D780 even in 4K recording.
Personally what I'm interested in is better LVAF, not so much video.
-
4k and 1/8000 is nice, but is quite an incremental improvement.
Well they added support for Nikon's radio flash which I use, that's nice. And there is support for faster cards (UHS-II) whereas D750 was quite buffer-constrained with 2.3s 14-bit lossless NEFs on continuous high before the camera slows down (an increase in burst depth from 17 to 68 frames is quite nice!).
-
Interesting. This one is better-spec’ed than I had anticipated. I look forward to the opportunity to handle one. I have D5 and D850 cameras, and had been considering adding a D500, as a “compact” body, but the D780 is, now, a contender.
-
I noticed something interesting in a video which was showing the D780 settings. It allows autofocus fine tune to be set in a focal length dependent way for zoom lenses.
-
The D780 has the optical viewfinder which many enjoy, and now for the first time in Nikon DSLR, features a more generally useful LV AF with OSPDAF, which should be nice for low and high shots (e.g. crowd view from above) even with the subjects moving. Also it autofocuses screwdriver AF Nikkors which the Z6 does not. The price is higher than the current price for the Z6 but will no doubt be reduced once it has been available for a while and the initial surge has gone.
I don't think Nikon targets videographers who only do video, but photographers who also do some video, but a lot of people now are finding themselves in situations where video is expected.
The D850 autofocus during video ... well, it's best used to prefocus before the video recording starts. It's not really something you want to use during the recording. OSPDAF should change that. Hopefully Nikon launch a standard zoom with AF-P to complement the 70-300 AF-P to further improve video AF. The D850 does have focus peaking but it's not available during 4K recording; I would expect this to work in the D780 even in 4K recording.
Personally what I'm interested in is better LVAF, not so much video.
I appreciate the posibillity to take photos while in LV in some circumstanses (silent and raw). If Nikon fix the AF in LV, we get the best of two worlds in one camera (love the OVF
-
fyi http://dslrbodies.com/newsviews/nikon-2020-news/january-2019-nikon-canon/the-dslr-cash-cow-is-alive.html
http://dslrbodies.com/newsviews/nikon-2020-news/january-2019-nikon-canon/the-nikon-d780-is-announced.html
-
fyi.............
Warning! Click Bait!
Wow!!! :o :o :o What a ridicules writing style. So negative and hollow. What a waste of time even reading a few lines of this utter *I know better' rant omg I'm chockedWarning! Click Bait! >:( >:( >:(
-
Wow!!! :o :o :o What a ridicules writing style. So negative and hollow. What a waste of time even reading a few lines of this utter *I know better' rant omg I'm chockedWarning! Click Bait! >:( >:( >:(
Very surprised by this sort of reaction. Thom Hogan has often proved to be right, even if the message displeases..
-
Wow!!! :o :o :o What a ridicules writing style. So negative and hollow. What a waste of time even reading a few lines of this utter *I know better' rant omg I'm chockedWarning! Click Bait! >:( >:( >:(
I agree. I am really disappointed with myself that I clicked the link. I don't really understand how anyone could be negative towards having a perfect viable choise for f-mount lens owners. I would guess this is the perfect camera for most of the wildlife photographers out there. It is how the internet has evolved. The most outrageous statements gives the highest revenue. This kind of articles is a cash cow for TH. I guess those who expect miracles from the camera companies is in for the long haul.
-
For this asking price I would have preferred the D780 goodies in a D500/D850 type of body...
-
Thom Hogan has a lot of knowledge but his writing is dominated by nit picking.
-
Very surprised by this sort of reaction. Thom Hogan has often proved to be right, even if the message displeases..
Shooting the messenger(s) does kill the reality. If this ranks as clickbait then where does this place the real dregs of the WWW?! TH knows his subject and his manuals published on Nikon cameras since 1990s speak for themselves. Moreover, he shoots professionally for sport with at least 3 current brands... and he understands the photographic industry better than most. Plus he has direct experience in R&D in software and developing early digital cameras... Yes he loves to criticize - he always buzzing Nikon to do better, which we benefit all of us.
https://petapixel.com/2010/06/15/interview-with-thom-hogan/
He is correct in explaining the the burgeoning trend that is clear when reading forums and other widespread responses. "I'm very happy with my D3, Df, D610, D850...". Most cameras (especially the Nikons) are still shooting work so very well for so many of us. Thus each of us see no need / nor wish to upgrade. Attracting new owners of Nikon or some other brand
The good times of peak DSLR sales of a few years ago are long gone. Only mirrorless has an edge in attracting significant sales. The reality that is pending is the camera companies such as Nikon Imaging will have less revenue to justify R&D.
-
I'm surprised people find TH's opinion to be anything other than expected given how marginal a change the D780 is from the D750 after half a decade. Adding 0.5 FPS is negligible, 4k is nice but video focused users aren't using DSLRs, 1/8000 is nice but niche. The Z6 has inferior IQ to the D750, which may not bode well for the D780, but perhaps the Z6's banding is due to the sensor being continually on, and perhaps the D780 won't inherit the same AA softness the Z6 has. Stack on the loss of an AF lamp, flash and vertical grip, it's hard to see how this amounts to much more than a wash. The only thing that stands out as a solid upgrade is the buffer, but the D500 exists for those with speed needs. I don't see why you would benefit going D780 rather than Z6 for video, D500 for speed or D750 for general photography.
Now one may find these changes positive depending on their usage, granted. But I don't see how anyone can tout this as improvement befitting half a decade without a firm foundation of fanboyism. Nikon's recent body releases have clearly been taking a strategy of slow-walking improvements as much as they can. None of this changes me being a Nikon fan, still am just as ever, it just is what it is.
-
Very surprised by this sort of reaction. Thom Hogan has often proved to be right, even if the message displeases..
Even a broken clock is right twice a day.
-
Very surprised by this sort of reaction. Thom Hogan has often proved to be right, even if the message displeases..
+1
-
I'm surprised people find TH's opinion to be anything other than expected given how marginal a change the D780 is from the D750 after half a decade.
The most advancement is put to the top cameras, this is intermediate-level, so they make more modest changes usually.
Adding 0.5 FPS is negligible
Yes, but the applicability of 6.5 fps is very limited in the D750 due to the small buffer. Only 2.3 seconds of continuous shooting at 6.5 fps with 14-bit lossless NEF is possible with the D750. The D780 allows 7 fps bursts of up to 9 seconds before slowing down (and the slowing down is less obvious due to the higher speed UHS-II cards so one can shoot at a higher fps rate even with buffer full). IMO this is the difference between the continuous high mode being useful or not being useful. The point isn't the 0.5 fps difference, but the difference between 2-3 fps (which is what you get when the D750 buffer is full) and 7 fps.
4k is nice but video focused users aren't using DSLRs
I know several professional videographers who do use DSLRs (along with dedicated video cameras) as part of their video gear.
1/8000 is nice but niche.
Correct.
The Z6 has inferior IQ to the D750
The photographic dynamic range (PDR) is better in the D750 from ISO 100 to 640 than in the Z6 but the PDR is better in the Z6 from ISO 800 upwards. I would argue that for most people the image quality at low ISO in all contemporary cameras is good enough, whereas at high ISO all the extra quality and editability that you can get is a significant advantage.
For low-ISO shooting the OSPDAF-free sensors seem to a little bit better, but then the question is how do we reconcile this with the (alleged) need to go mirrorless?
And sometimes shooting convenience is more important than perfection in the deepest shadows.
I personally think that Nikon should offer both regular sensors without OSPDAF and ones equipped with it in some DSLR models so that the users can choose which they prefer.
perhaps the Z6's banding is due to the sensor being continually on
I believe it is thought to stem from the OSPDAF sensors and their effects on some light rays and Nikon's attempts at algorithmically removing those effects.
If you want good live view AF, and you don't have stepper motor lenses or equivalents, then this is what you have to put up with in the Nikon implementation.
Canon have implemented an alternative approach called dual-pixel AF where there is no banding but each pixel of the image requires two photosites on the sensor so there is twice as much data to process to create each image and a huge amount of AF data to process, so there are drawbacks.
perhaps the D780 won't inherit the same AA softness the Z6 has.
AA thickness is a minor issue really, there is a balance between effective elimination of aliasing and image sharpness, and there is no "right answer" to this, it is just a tradeoff.
Stack on the loss of an AF lamp
I don't like this feature. When the AF assist lamp is on, I find that people generally turn towards the camera to watch what on Earth is going on. I would like to remain discrete when shooting and prefer my cameras to be black and not emit any obnoxious visible light.
flash
Along with the AF assist lamp, I am delighted that Nikon are removing the pop-up flashes from their mid and advanced level cameras now systematically.
The pop-up flash
- leaks water inside the camera
- has a capacitor which can potentially cause a hazard when opening the camera
- takes space which could be used for more free movements of the 24 PC Nikkor and to make a better viewfinder (larger prism, for example)
- when used as main light, gives the impression of a point-and-shoot camera being used, with red eye and an extremely unflattering appearance of people with exaggerated blemishes in skin, even when used as a fill flash
- frequently the light is shadowed by the lens or lens hood
- when used as a commander, it still always emits some visible light into the foreground of the picture (just the triggering sync flash contaminates the image with light)
- when used as a commander, rarely triggers the remote flashes reliably
- when used as a commander, the pre-flash sequence is really slow and causes a lot of eye closures in pictures
- slows down the camera due to the extremely long recharge time
The presence of the pop-up flash has long annoyed me and I'm glad that today all my three Nikon cameras are free of it.
vertical grip
The absence of the option to attach a vertical grip is unfortunate but understandable from the perspective that this camera was designed to be small, and by attaching the vertical grip this objective is no longer met, and most users probably want to use it without the grip. Nikon may not have sold enough grips for the D750 to continue supporting them in this camera.
However, the grip is a genuinely useful feature and it's regrettable that it is not possible in this model.
The only thing that stands out as a solid upgrade is the buffer, but the D500 exists for those with speed needs.
The D500 is a DX camera so you lose some high-ISO performance. The D750 is a popular event photographers' camera and often used in low light. The D780 seems to give half a stop extra in terms of PDR at high ISO so you can shoot with better quality at a given ISO than with the D750, or a bit higher ISO with similar quality. Additionally, my experience is that with short focal length lenses you get better quality (more detail) with FX than DX because of lens aberrations limiting the quality.
I don't see why you would benefit going D780 rather than Z6 for video
Z6 may be better for video but one may often need to shoot both video and stills and during photography, the D780 offers the optical viewfinder (no lag, dynamic range as we see with our own eyes rather than computer's rendering) and arguably better autofocus of moving subjects in low light. And you may still want to shoot some video with the camera that you have on hand rather than always bring specialized cameras for each task.
D500 for speed
I often find myself photographing moving subjects in low light and DX just isn't the best choice for that.
D750 for general photography.
General photography often includes photography from low or high angles and this means LV can be very beneficial, and good LV AF is provided by the D780 which is really important for those situations.
Some improvements in the D780 not mentioned:
- improved AF fine tune for zoom lenses
- improved AF algorithms for viewfinder shooting
- improved LV AF
- USB-C connectivity with faster transfers when tethering
- USB-C charging of the battery in camera, can probably be done in the car etc. via USB power sources
- wifi / bluetooth allows background transfers of small jpgs and now also RAW files to mobile devices (convenient for quick messaging of images, I do it often when traveling and shooting, keeping my friends updated)
- additional thumb button (now both AF-L/AE-L and AF-ON), presumably these can be reprogrammed to do user preferred tasks
- 12 fps silent photography in LV with full AF tracking
- negative digitizer function
- touch screen functions throughout user interface
- radio advanced wireless lighting support
- time-lapse videos
- automatic focus stacking
- manual exposures up to 900 seconds without needing to use a remote release
I probably forgot some features that have been added or improved.
As a whole I find there to be many improvements which together make a significant whole.
I don't see how anyone can tout this as improvement befitting half a decade
I would have preferred Nikon to have put good LV AF into all cameras since 2007. They didn't. However, I am more than happy to see them finally rectify the situation and the long wait does in no way invalidate the need for this feature.
Nikon's recent body releases have clearly been taking a strategy of slow-walking improvements as much as they can.
I haven't noticed that. The D850 in particular made great improvements in many areas (resolution, autofocus, fps rate, many convenient features) to its three-year-old predecessor. The only drawback is that it's quite a bit louder than the D810, and as a result I sometimes use the Qc mode.
I understand that some would like to see revolutionary changes to cameras on a frequent basis. However, the fact is that for many years now cameras have been more than good enough for most people's purposes and there are huge creative possibilities that haven't been tapped. The main limitation is the user, not the camera. There is no great urgency to drastically improve cameras as they currently are. Minor improvements and refinements are perfectly fine as far as I'm concerned. If you don't feel the need to upgrade this time around, enjoy the money that you save!
-
There is no great urgency to drastically improve cameras as they currently are. Minor improvements and refinements are perfectly fine as far as I'm concerned.
One thing about opinions, everyone has one. ;)
-
Very surprised by this sort of reaction. Thom Hogan has often proved to be right, even if the message displeases..
Thom is often accurate. Less often he is correct. This is my opinion.
Perhaps I'm just tired of his seemingly constant writing about Nikon management and how if they only listened to him they would be doing so much better.
People seem to think highly of his explanations in his camera manuals.
-
Very surprised by this sort of reaction. Thom Hogan has often proved to be right, even if the message displeases..
This has nothing to do with right or wrong! re read the post ;) Thank you
-
Shooting the messenger(s) does kill the reality. If this ranks as clickbait then where does this place the real dregs of the WWW?! TH knows his subject and his manuals published on Nikon cameras since 1990s speak for themselves. Moreover, he shoots professionally for sport with at least 3 current brands... and he understands the photographic industry better than most. Plus he has direct experience in R&D in software and developing early digital cameras... Yes he loves to criticize - he always buzzing Nikon to do better, which we benefit all of us.
https://petapixel.com/2010/06/15/interview-with-thom-hogan/ (https://petapixel.com/2010/06/15/interview-with-thom-hogan/)
He is correct in explaining the the burgeoning trend that is clear when reading forums and other widespread responses. "I'm very happy with my D3, Df, D610, D850...". Most cameras (especially the Nikons) are still shooting work so very well for so many of us. Thus each of us see no need / nor wish to upgrade. Attracting new owners of Nikon or some other brand
The good times of peak DSLR sales of a few years ago are long gone. Only mirrorless has an edge in attracting significant sales. The reality that is pending is the camera companies such as Nikon Imaging will have less revenue to justify R&D.
Not blaming you or your linking to Thom!But the content he is just bad at writing IMHO Getting much worse with wrong assumptions.
-
I'm surprised people find TH's opinion to be anything other than expected given how marginal a change the D780 is from the D750 after half a decade. Adding 0.5 FPS is negligible, 4k is nice but video focused users aren't using DSLRs, 1/8000 is nice but niche. The Z6 has inferior IQ to the D750, which may not bode well for the D780, but perhaps the Z6's banding is due to the sensor being continually on, and perhaps the D780 won't inherit the same AA softness the Z6 has. Stack on the loss of an AF lamp, flash and vertical grip, it's hard to see how this amounts to much more than a wash. The only thing that stands out as a solid upgrade is the buffer, but the D500 exists for those with speed needs. I don't see why you would benefit going D780 rather than Z6 for video, D500 for speed or D750 for general photography.
Now one may find these changes positive depending on their usage, granted. But I don't see how anyone can tout this as improvement befitting half a decade without a firm foundation of fanboyism. Nikon's recent body releases have clearly been taking a strategy of slow-walking improvements as much as they can. None of this changes me being a Nikon fan, still am just as ever, it just is what it is.
His opinion has always been the same ;) Right or wrong.
But; His writing style has declined, now reaching the lowest of levels IMHO
-
Even a broken clock is right twice a day.
He he ;)
Thank you for taking the time to point out so many of the points and use cases where D780 differs and indeed is a brand new camera with lots of features that are new or collected/inherited from other cameras.This is the sort of facts I would expect from Thom as well, but yes that usually come later,,, when he is trying to milk the cow second time ,with a book how to use the fantastic camera :o ;D
-
Perhaps I'm just tired of his seemingly constant writing about Nikon management and how if they only listened to him they would be doing so much better.
Yes, me too. It's arrogant, very tiring, and in my opinion not based on any particularly unique insight or knowledge about photography.
What bothers me above all is that Hogan thinks the manufacturers need growing sales volumes. In my opinion the world is already filled with cameras and the state of the world's environment cannot afford unnecessary industrial production. The supposed need for growth will burn this planet much like Australia is burning now, but worse. Businesses should design their operations with the protection of the environment in mind, and not aim for unlimited growth.
Nikon's financial presentation materials show that they expect the hobbyist/pro market to stay roughly the same size over the years, and Canon have stated the same. I take the hobbyist to mean in this context the same as we often call "enthusiast". The consumer segment (non-hobbyist/non-pro in Nikon's materials) however will decline to a small fraction of the total sales. This means there will be reduction of the market size but there is a bottom to it and it will probably be reached fairly soon. I think this is sound thinking and they need to restructure their operations with the future market size and constitution in mind, which I believe they are doing.
-
Yes, me too. It's arrogant, very tiring, and in my opinion not based on any particularly unique insight or knowledge about photography.
What bothers me above all is that Hogan thinks the manufacturers need growing sales volumes. In my opinion the world is already filled with cameras and the state of the world's environment cannot afford unnecessary industrial production. The supposed need for growth will burn this planet much like Australia is burning now, but worse. Businesses should design their operations with the protection of the environment in mind, and not aim for unlimited growth.
Nikon's financial presentation materials show that they expect the hobbyist/pro market to stay roughly the same size over the years, and Canon have stated the same. I take the hobbyist to mean in this context the same as we often call "enthusiast". The consumer segment (non-hobbyist/non-pro in Nikon's materials) however will decline to a small fraction of the total sales. This means there will be reduction of the market size but there is a bottom to it and it will probably be reached fairly soon. I think this is sound thinking and they need to restructure their operations with the future market size and constitution in mind, which I believe they are doing.
Pretty much agree, although Nikon's production must be a drop in the bucket compared to iPhones, etc. The path for all this stuff is simply not sustainable, not just as business practice, but for the planet.
-
Nikon has some live presentations at CES. Obviously they are sales oriented presentations by Nikon Ambassadors.
https://www.nikonevents.com/us/live/
I think they will have replays available.
-
What bothers me above all is that Hogan thinks the manufacturers need growing sales volumes.
I don't recall seeing anything like this in his commentary. He has repeatedly stated that ILC volume is going down and will go down farther. His suggestions are intended to mitigate the severity of this drop in sales, not reverse it.
-
I don't recall seeing anything like this in his commentary. He has repeatedly stated that ILC volume is going down and will go down farther. His suggestions are intended to mitigate the severity of this drop in sales, not reverse it.
Here is direct quote from Thom:
.... Put a different way, what the camera makers need most right now is More Sales Volume. What they're doing in product development won't generate that.
Jan 7, 2020 at 3:43 PM
-
Two paragraphs above Erik's quote, Hogan wrote:
"Is that really the optimal product approach for a declining market with a loyal customer base, though? I don't think so. Indeed, I'm predicting another big (-20%+) down year for cameras in 2020, despite the fact we're likely to see quite a few new (and some overdue) models announced. The reason? Those new cameras just aren't appealing enough to the remaining customers to attract a big update cycle. The recently announced new DSLRs are witness of that."
Hogan is saying, as I read it, that total sales will go down even further than projected because the new cameras from both Canon and Nikon are not attractive enough to encourage upgrades from existing customers. This is is because they are too focussed on making more profit for each individual camera sold, instead of focussing on maximising profits from the sale of the camera model by adding, or not taking away, features that people want.
-
Sorry, but I really don't want to ague about what I think Thom is thinking Nikon is thinking :o ;D
-
Hogan is saying, as I read it, that total sales will go down even further than projected because the new cameras from both Canon and Nikon are not attractive enough to encourage upgrades from existing customers. This is is because they are too focussed on making more profit for each individual camera sold, instead of focussing on maximising profits from the sale of the camera model by adding, or not taking away, features that people want.
The top-of-the-line models such as D5 and D850 rarely have features removed; OK, the D5 lost the AE-L/AF-L button but got a joystick in that area of the body and many people seem to like that (interestingly the D780 got the second thumb button!). The D850 lost the pop-up flash, for which I say "Hurraa!" to Nikon. Now, the bodies which are not top-of-the-line exist to make cameras accessible to less wealthy individuals as well as to enthusiasts and beginners. Usually smaller size and lower weight are benefits of the lower-priced models, but also some features have been removed or some parts are cheaper. Which features are removed to distinguish the models is a source of debate and Nikon seem to not be sure about it either, as we can see from the feature set being changed in the mid and lower-end models frequently.
I can see that this is annoying especially if you have a favorite feature which was removed. I find it difficult to find good laptops suitable for my use, as I want a screen that calibrates well, and a keyboard that gives a good tactile response so that I can type reliably and quickly without looking at the keys at any point. With laptops the goal seems to have been to make them thinner and this means the keyboard usually suffers. The only thing that I can do really is to buy the one that is best fit to my needs.
How would you solve the feature set problem in the mid- and entry-level bodies, without reducing the appeal of the top-of-the-line models?
-
Here is direct quote from Thom:
.... Put a different way, what the camera makers need most right now is More Sales Volume. What they're doing in product development won't generate that.
Jan 7, 2020 at 3:43 PM
Then he's contradicting himself, as he's stated various times that the camera market is going down and the manufacturers need to find a way to moderate that decline by better addressing user problems.
-
How would you solve the feature set problem in the mid- and entry-level bodies, without reducing the appeal of the top-of-the-line models?
With the features that only pros really need, such as file annotation, GPS along with pro level service packages, most importantly. Sony is unlikely to produce $7K "pro" bodies, and will instead continue to focus on their $2-3K bodies being as powerful as they can make them. Unless they take a similar approach, this will force Nikon/Canon to strip the mid level models of features (such as vertical grips...) in an attempt to funnel users to the pro bodies. I don't see that panning out how they'd like it to as they would be demolished by Sony in mid level sales. It wouldn't surprise me if we saw the DX/1D tier get scrapped in their mirrorless lines in favor of the Sony approach, the fact that Nikon didn't reserve the single digit model numbers for a "pro" Z is likely a foreshadowing of this.
-
Nikon is wasting numbers by bringing a D780 instead of a D760, so there is only one more Number left (if we wont see a D781 some times in the new future), maybe Nikon thinks a D7xx series will become obsolete anyway.
BTW I like the removal of the AF/AE-L button because it enables me to focus on the AF-ON button without the risk of accidentially activating the wrong one. If I need it i can use FN-button.
-
If D780 would have been released half a year earlier, I might have come back to Nikon DSLR. ::)
-
Nikon is wasting numbers by bringing a D780 instead of a D760, so there is only one more Number left (if we wont see a D781 some times in the new future), maybe Nikon thinks a D7xx series will become obsolete anyway.
They can add Mk II Mk III, or X or S to the name or come up with a new numbering scheme. There are infinite possibilities. A D760 would likely have been used for a "correct the bugs" upgrade but because they added significant new features, they made a bigger change to the name.
BTW I like the removal of the AF/AE-L button because it enables me to focus on the AF-ON button without the risk of accidentially activating the wrong one. If I need it i can use FN-button.
But you can program the two buttons to do the same thing - or different things - whichever you like. I don't like the front Fn buttons for this because they're a lot harder to press and hold than the thumb buttons. I wish my cameras had two thumb buttons that I could assign to e.g. different exposure or AF area settings.
For example, I might have AF-ON activate AF with 9-point dynamic area and AE-L/AF-L to activate AF with 25-point dynamic area, or 3D tracking, for example.
Another application which I currently use for the front side buttons is to switch between action-freezing exposure settings and differnet settings for a slow-moving subject (e.g., an animal that is not actively moving). I could have autofocus + 1/1600s set to AF-ON and autofocus + 1/200s to AE-L/AF-L. This way I could always easily react to a subject springing off into a run or flying off while not using any higher ISO than necessary for the time when the subject is not moving actively.
Two thumb buttons would be preferable to me for this purpose as I never really liked pressing the Fn buttons on the front side, as I lose the firm hold of the grip when I depress a front side button (to press and hold the button, the camera is no longer held from the grip but from the Fn button and this is less stable).
-
The D780 holds no interest for me, but I wonde how many of those discounting Hogan’s view of it are going to back their words by buying one.
-
The D780 holds no interest for me, but I wonde how many of those discounting Hogan’s view of it are going to back their words by buying one.
One can have a high opinion of a product, yet not purchase it. In fact, it is wise to not purchase everything. There are innumerable products I’m interested in which I will ever buy.
-
Jack, agreed. I guess I could sell all of my property and just buy gear ;D . Carl, I had a lot more time for Thom, and received a lot of help from him via emails, before a very large percentage of his Nikon discussion was basically, 'if Nikon listened to me....' . Sometime he made good points but other times he was just flat off the wall. I did buy his Z6 eGuide ;) .
-
I was hardly suggesting that anyone go on a gear buying binge. My remarks in this are limited to those who are actually looking to upgrade to a D780 while D750 prices are $800 less expensive.
-
I am planning on buying one Nikon camera sometime in 2020-1 but which it is dependent on what they bring to the market. If the D780 is the only OSPDAF-equipped DSLR they launch, and if my financial situation allows, then it may be the camera I buy. However, I'm more a D8x0 user type and tend to keep up with developments in that line.
-
Have to fess up that I like reading Thom. Don't always agree, but still interesting to read his thoughts tho.
eg. I don't think anything that the camera companies can do to 'reverse' the sales decline.
My thoughts re the sales decline is simply that the general masses have 'bought' their one good camera, subsequently find it annoyingly heavy and too large to use, and smartphone IQ has progressed to more than acceptable so the 'one good camera' syndrome died a fast and furious death. The heady days of DSLR sales figures are long gone .. nothing .. not even this advanced level of programmability will reverse this trend.
The sales highs of a decade ago were an anomaly.
Already the smartphone market is seeing signs of the same 'syndrome' .. so I always thought what he says about reversing the sales decline trend makes no sense.
But then he says:
"Sure, there's a lot of the usual top-of-the-line tweaking in it, particularly to the focus system, but the Mark III feels a lot more Mark II.5-ish to me"
of the Canon 1DXIII, and from what I've seen of it, is a bit unfair. What TH seems to want from Companies X,Y and Z is to totally revamp a product line that heavily relies on familiarity from it's customer base.
Having read that the 1DXIII has an AF joystick integrated directly into the AF-On button .. genius! Irrespective of if it works perfectly or not .. just the idea behind it .. ie. the potential revolutionary way to control AF(I've always been a huge AF-On type shooter).
But still TH isn't happy, because the camera can't rename his images on the fly .... in 15 different languages and formats, and won't make his breakfast and bed and do the dishes and whatnot.
Seriously tho, I understand that it's stupid that such cameras are limited to fine naming the way they are(just mad, and sad that there isn't not one single effort of thought to file/folder naming to make life a small amount easier in some way.
But to think that this is the holy grail of renewed interest in ILC camera sales by moms and dads ... is just plain pie in the sky.
The bulk of sales in serious type ILC level camera bodies is basically up to us .. the enthusiast, and there's only so much market level in that.
Making one greater than another is only cannibalising sales from one brand model to another .. will never increase overal sales the way TH seems to think it will.
He obviously has his wants and desires mixed up with what he thinks the mass consumer think is important to them.
eg. what I believe is important to me too .. simply not the same product types. I really wanted to get a D850 late last year(early this year), and I was a little disappointed that something so simple like the film scanning feature was so basically implemented(where it'd have better been done in Picture Control, and hence films scanned in NEF mode!) for me it was the lack of effort made(not the actual feature itself). Not about to reward a company for a half baked effort .. and the upgrade wasn't imperative .. just 'a thing' I could have done if it had been done well.
I believe that if the camera companies want to 'increase sales' of ILC cameras, then they have to look at a total revolution in product(not a revolutionary for of the same product) .. a totally new product type (for them).
And take back sales from smartphones.
So the only obvious path forward for Nikon/Canon would be to make a smartphone type small form camera, that also works as a phone, and accessorise it to high heaven with add on lenses and other module types.
It would be marketed as a ILC camera, just that it's a smartphone 'replacement'.
This is what made the smartphone so popular. Note all the add hype around them, and the marketing $ poured into them .. 99.9% of all this sales pitch is directed at the imaging side of the phone.
The actual comms side of the product is pretty much irrelevant.
So for Nikon .. make a sleek smartphone sized mirrorless camera that is marketed as the Nikon camera that you can phone home with. Good quality lenses .. etc, better quality images than current smartphones can do. etc.
From what appears to be the current trend, it seems that mr and mrs general public dont' spending US$1K on a stupid comms device because it's their every day 'good camera' too now.
-
Arthur, nice write-up of your experiences, too long to quote, but I think you are correct that the general photography market has moved on from iLC to smartphone.
It was inevitable that a simple device many people carry with them every day would replace something complex and heavy. For family events and daily use a phone cam is the best solution. Even smaller cameras like z50 require an intention to photograph if they are going to be carried. New features will not change the number of people who have that intention.
-
I believe that if the camera companies want to 'increase sales' of ILC cameras, then they have to look at a total revolution in product(not a revolutionary for of the same product) .. a totally new product type (for them).
And take back sales from smartphones.
So the only obvious path forward for Nikon/Canon would be to make a smartphone type small form camera, that also works as a phone, and accessorise it to high heaven with add on lenses and other module types.
It would be marketed as a ILC camera, just that it's a smartphone 'replacement'.
This is somewhat in line with Hogan's constant complaining---starting, I think, more than 10 years ago--- that the cameras need to be able to quickly transmit photos to the web, more like smartphones do.
IMO, the idea that Nikon or Canon, or any of the traditional camera companies could make a smartphone AND succeed is not credible. Both Red (the digital cinema camera company) and Garmin (the GPS device company) brought out smartphones and both were quickly disastrous in the marketplace. The ceaseless product development cycle of smartphones is more intense than any other product---a total mismatch for the capabilities of a GPS device company, a digital cinema camera company, or certainly a conventional camera company.
-
This is somewhat in line with Hogan's constant complaining---starting, I think, more than 10 years ago--- that the cameras need to be able to quickly transmit photos to the web, more like smartphones do.
IMO, the idea that Nikon or Canon, or any of the traditional camera companies could make a smartphone AND succeed is not credible. Both Red (the digital cinema camera company) and Garmin (the GPS device company) brought out smartphones and both were quickly disastrous in the marketplace. The ceaseless product development cycle of smartphones is more intense than any other product---a total mismatch for the capabilities of a GPS device company, a digital cinema camera company, or certainly a conventional camera company.
+1!
-
This is somewhat in line with Hogan's constant complaining---starting, I think, more than 10 years ago--- that the cameras need to be able to quickly transmit photos to the web, more like smartphones do.
IMO, the idea that Nikon or Canon, or any of the traditional camera companies could make a smartphone AND succeed is not credible. Both Red (the digital cinema camera company) and Garmin (the GPS device company) brought out smartphones and both were quickly disastrous in the marketplace. The ceaseless product development cycle of smartphones is more intense than any other product---a total mismatch for the capabilities of a GPS device company, a digital cinema camera company, or certainly a conventional camera company.
Yes similar, but not the same(thing). I don't think the underlying priority is simply the ability to share quickly tho(which is TH's take on it) .. easily yes! for sure, but from my observations of my circle of friends and family(admittedly a very tiny market sample!) .. is that they just want an easy way to get good photos .. smartphones allow this. The major subsequent benefit is then the ability to share.
I think Reds' major issue was the hype not living up to the reality.
People also seem to love the ability to accessorize .. just like we enthusiasts do with out cameras. Whether this accessory thing means bling, or actual useful addons is obviously different for each individual.
But, as said, such a product wouldn't be a smartphone as such. It would be marketed and sold as a mirrorless camera, and the accessory set would include lenses and ergonomic grips .. and whatever else.
The idea being that it's an even smaller than the current smallest mirrorless camera, but with the benefit of ILC. Seems to be where the market is headed(going by the recent CIPA numbers).
Should have been done years ago TBH so the foothold would have been already set.
If I think of it from my perspective. If Nikon had just such a product, I'm 99.999% sure it'd have bought into it. It wouldn't replace my DSLR geekiness, it would include me in the mirrorless genre, and I'd have a couple of lenses to play with. Such a proiduct would replace my phone! .. not my current camera.
Doesn't have to be the thinnest/lightest/smallest phone, as we currently see the phone market, it's gravitating towards larger now .. it just needs to be the most pocketable camera that has the ability to make phone calls, but much better and more flexibility in terms as a camera.
Samsung S8+ that I have apparently has very high quality photography ability .. I've never seen it, never thought to use it as such.
Currently I only use my smartphone as a camera because at work I need to be able to prove certain anomalies .. ie. just capture an image of the issue(eg. dent in bumper, scrape in bodywork).
Never once have I used it as a serious camera tool.
Update cycles wouldn't be an issue, as long as it's marketed as a camera(not a smartphone)
Can it be done well .. no idea. Tried before, for sure. But I think those previous versions failed due to little awareness and demand for those manufacturer names.
Anyhow, I think it would be an interesting camera product that would take off well in the world of CIPA figures.
-
Arthur, I think that's a pipe dream. Nikon can't handle SnapBridge, much less something that people actually want to use. They make fine photo gear, and lousy software. Best they stay out of a market that would eat their lunch, and probably put them out of business in the bargain.
-
The cameras in phones could be better, no doubt...and without the built-in Computational Photography creating fantasy images.
The super-slim form of the smartphone would be an attractive starting place for a conventional camera company to make a super-pocketable, advanced point and shoot camera.
Things like doubling the sensor size (from extremely tiny to tiny), adding a rotating ND filter wheel to offset the fixed f/2.4 aperture (more important for video than stills), adding some kind of viewfinder that enables easy use in bright sunlight, etc would make such a product of some interest to photographers.
Unfortunately for this dream, the current phone cams have been ruled by the marketplace to be good enough.
-
The cameras in phones could be better, no doubt...and without the built-in Computational Photography creating fantasy images.
Unfortunately for this dream, the current phone cams have been ruled by the marketplace to be good enough.
Images were so much more real when they were made from silver, gelatins and dektol. And sadly the wonderful large negatives of a century ago were replaced by tiny little things which were “good enough”
I have to add that if you timetraveled back to 1981 when I bought my first SLR and showed the camera seller the results you can obtain with a good cellphone they would burn you for being a witch. Sure, a well exposed 6x6 negative still beats them, but the cell phone sees in the dark and fits in your pocket.
Good enough has always driven photographic form factor. This is nothing unique to today.
-
"The Nikon D780, for instance, is essentially a Z6, but with a mirror box and an optical viewfinder as the primary compositional path. Put it in Live View, and shooting via the rear LCD on the D780 is essentially the same as shooting with a Z6."
http://www.sansmirror.com/newsviews/2020-mirrorless-camera/mirrorless-without-an-evf.html
A tactic to bolster DSLR sales, perhaps? The D780 could lead to "a hybrid, best-of-both-worlds camera" but if so probably only in 4 years or so (unless R&D has been busy in a skunkworks)
-
Here a link to a very well written article on Nikon and the new D780 and Z6:
The D780 And Why Nikon Is Smart to Continue Making New DSLRs
https://fstoppers.com/originals/d780-and-why-nikon-smart-continue-making-new-dslrs-444386
-
Thanks Erik - one of the more sane and reasoned articles that I have read in recent times.
Here a link to a very well written article on Nikon and the new D780 and Z6:
The D780 And Why Nikon Is Smart to Continue Making New DSLRs
https://fstoppers.com/originals/d780-and-why-nikon-smart-continue-making-new-dslrs-444386
-
And stirred by the siren call of this successor's erstwhile "improvement", however incremental, I can only hope to have enough money saved or earned in time to be in on the rush to unburden any number of G.A.S.-bags of their low-shutter-count D750, even mothballed D610, cameras for less then the cost of a night out for dinner and a Broadway show. (And I ain't talking Hamilton ticket money, either!)
In the end, everyone's happy, or wants to believe they are, except maybe Thom -- but we luvs him anyhoo! :-*
-
D780 Manuals are available
https://downloadcenter.nikonimglib.com/en/products/539/D780.html
-
This "disappointment tendency" concerning the D780 makes me wonder if this has to do with unrealistic expectations. Maybe this very slow incremental improvements is the new normal, ie every new camera upgrade/update now has more to do with functions like image stabilisation, video etc, and not so much about image quality. Just like the upgrade every two or three year when is comes to computers has slowed down, now perhaps digital cameras have matured at a level where big game changing updates is no more to be expected. And for many of us this might be something good, because it wont make the gear we have obsolete after a few years in the same way it used to. I understand this is a problem for camera manufacturers, who want us to buy new cameras, but from the point of view that adding more and more electronic waste to the world, it is IMHO positive if the cameras get an longer life-span.
-
I understand this is a problem for camera manufacturers, who want us to buy new cameras, but from the point of view that adding more and more electronic waste to the world, it is IMHO positive if the cameras get an longer life-span.
Absolutely. And this longer life-span can be supported via significant firmware updates such as has been happening with the Z6 / Z7.
-
The absence of the option to attach a vertical grip is unfortunate but understandable from the perspective that this camera was designed to be small, and by attaching the vertical grip this objective is no longer met, and most users probably want to use it without the grip. Nikon may not have sold enough grips for the D750 to continue supporting them in this camera.
However, the grip is a genuinely useful feature and it's regrettable that it is not possible in this model.
The desire to design a camera to be small and light that is a justification to construct it without an integrated grip, but it is no justification for the failure to make such a grip available as an option and give the user the choice between a small and light version of the camera, and a little heavier version which gives optimal functionality for vertical shooting.
It also is not justified by a supposition that most users do not use a vertical grip. The point is that a vertical grip with a shutter release button and controls increase functionality. In addition, there are quite a few third-party vertical grips for the camera models which are made with electronic contacts for a grip, these offerings would not exist unless users found a vertical grip to be a valuable addition.
The point is that a vertical grip with a shutter button and controls makes a whole world of difference, since the user does not have to twist the hand in order to shoot vertically. For those among us who frequently work with the camera in the vertical position, the vertical grip with controls is nearly indispensable. There is absolutely no excuse for making new cameras on this level without electronic contacts for a functional grip.
Per Inge Oestmoen
-
The point is that a vertical grip with a shutter button and controls makes a whole world of difference, since the user does not have to twist the hand in order to shoot vertically. For those among us who frequently work with the camera in the vertical position, the vertical grip with controls is nearly indispensable. There is absolutely no excuse for making new cameras on this level without electronic contacts for a functional grip.
It is certain that it is useful to people. So what must be Nikon's reasoning behind this?
1) Perhaps they are stupid.
2) Perhaps it is not in their economic best interests.
3) Perhaps they don't know how.
I expect it is the second option. What do you think their reason is?
-
A DSLR without a mirror?
So a Z6 with built-in Z-F mount adapter and additional AF-motor.
The AF-motor is a nice feature but no IBIS as far as I can see…..
-
The D780 does have mirror and optical viewfinder. Yes, no IBIS. Probably would have been more complicated to implement IBIS and counter to the objective of making a small full-frame DSLR.
-
What do you think their reason is?
They are basically saying that to get a vertical grip, you need to get a higher-end camera (D500, D850 or D5/D6). They want more money for that option, basically.
Z8 and Z9 will no doubt come with optional vertical grips.
-
It is certain that it is useful to people. So what must be Nikon's reasoning behind this?
1) Perhaps they are stupid.
2) Perhaps it is not in their economic best interests.
3) Perhaps they don't know how.
I expect it is the second option. What do you think their reason is?
I think it is because they never sold enough on previous models, combined with corporate cost-cutting.
One possible reason why they never sold enough might be the bad engineering of the previous grips.
The MD-B12 grips I have have a shockingly poor physical connection to the camera body. With the grip fully tightened against the body, you can grab the D800 body with one hand and grab the grip with the other hand, bend and twist, and actually see the flexing between the body and grip.
This makes the grip useless for critical tripod shooting---as with longer lenses at slower shutter speeds--- where the camera needs to be solidly attached to the tripod.
So... there is at least one significant user group who have no use for the grip.
-
The MD-B12 grips I have have a shockingly poor physical connection to the camera body. With the grip fully tightened against the body, you can grab the D800 body with one hand and grab the grip with the other hand, bend and twist, and actually see the flexing between the body and grip.
Hmm. The MB-D12 (for the D800/D800E/D810/D810A) is one of the better grips in terms of the rigidity of the joint with the body. With some of the other grip + body combinations, there is a lot more flex, e.g. with the D7100 + MB-D15.
I mainly find it an issue if I'm doing vertical close-ups with a short tele macro, and happen to have the grip attached with the D850 (MB-D16), there is some flex that makes it harder to get the composition right. So what I do is I simply take the grip off and mount the camera to the tripod with no vertical grip.
When using longer telephoto lenses, there is usually a tripod collar on the lens which means the camera is not mounted to the tripod, so the flex is not a major concern, mainly a slight annoyance.
Are the other camera manufacturers' accessory vertical grips better made in this respect?
-
The D780 does have mirror and optical viewfinder. Yes, no IBIS. Probably would have been more complicated to implement IBIS and counter to the objective of making a small full-frame DSLR.
Ok.....so now they have optical view finder and still a mirror…...then the only reason for that could be that it is the only way to implement the more advance AF sensors with tracking capability etc.
So Z6/Z7 is not that good at tracking? …..or not as fast as the top DSLRs?
-
Ok.....so now they have optical view finder and still a mirror…...then the only reason for that could be that it is the only way to implement the more advance AF sensors with tracking capability etc.
So Z6/Z7 is not that good at tracking? …..or not as fast as the top DSLRs?
One reason is that the optical viewfinder shows the subject with the full dynamic range of the human eye and brain, in real time, with no delays, no pixelation, no flickering, no blocked shadows, no noise etc. Another reason is that autofocus F mount lenses were designed with DSLR AF in mind, and DSLR AF works differently from mirrorless camera AF. Mirrorless AF works best with different AF motor solutions (stepper / linear motors), so it makes sense for manufacturers to make a separate line of lenses designed for mirrorless from the ground up. That way they can also use the space freed by removal of the mirror box to make better quality lenses (especially short focal length lenses). AF performance of Z cameras should be fine in the long run, Nikon just need some time to develop it.
-
Ok.....I can see I misunderstood the annoncement about "mirrorless tech". I thought it had an EVF......why not......think I would have preferred that.
-
When using longer telephoto lenses, there is usually a tripod collar on the lens which means the camera is not mounted to the tripod, so the flex is not a major concern, mainly a slight annoyance.
Are the other camera manufacturers' accessory vertical grips better made in this respect?
A) True, this is what one usually does with 300mm and up. And the 200/2, I assume.
B) I wondered the same thing. Does Canon do it better?
-
The Canon grips I've seen/own have their electrical connection via a dummy battery in the battery compartment. It's a more solid setup that also keeps the electrical connection securely secreted away from moisture and dirt. The attachment between grip and camera is more secure as a result. The door to the battery compartment comes off and fits onto the dummy battery so it's out of the way when the grip is attached. Unlike the Nikon grips, both batteries go into the grip so both can be replaced without removing the grip. Also, there's no electrical connection on the bottom of the camera to get dirty or wet, and no rubber cover over this connection to misplace or lose. It's a clever and functional design, and this is an area where IMO Canon has done much better than Nikon.
I just just did a direct comparison of the Nikon D750 with MB-D16 attached vs. the Canon 6D with the BG-E13 attached. The Nikon feels fairly solid but it's possible to produce a slight flex. The Canon feels rock solid.
-
Bill, I totally agree.
The Canon grips I've seen/own have their electrical connection via a dummy battery in the battery compartment. It's a more solid setup that also keeps the electrical connection securely secreted away from moisture and dirt. The attachment between grip and camera is more secure as a result. The door to the battery compartment comes off and fits onto the dummy battery so it's out of the way when the grip is attached. Unlike the Nikon grips, both batteries go into the grip so both can be replaced without removing the grip. Also, there's no electrical connection on the bottom of the camera to get dirty or wet, and no rubber cover over this connection to misplace or lose. It's a clever and functional design, and this is an area where IMO Canon has done much better than Nikon.
I just just did a direct comparison of the Nikon D750 with MB-D16 attached vs. the Canon 6D with the BG-E13 attached. The Nikon feels fairly solid but it's possible to produce a slight flex. The Canon feels rock solid.
-
The problem with this approach is that when not in use, the grip requires more space. Nikon have made this type of grips as well.
-
The problem with this approach is that when not in use, the grip requires more space. Nikon have made this type of grips as well.
IMO the increased bulk when in storage is well worth it. I'd call this a very minor problem compared to the benefits.
The Nikon grips I've had over the years, for the D7000, D610, D750, and D500, have all been the type with the electrical connection on the bottom on the camera. It's interesting that I acquired all these grips, except the MB-D11 for the D7000, for free under various sales promotions. I think Nikon has been too optimistic for a long time about how many of their overpriced grips would sell for full price.
-
IMO the increased bulk when in storage is well worth it. I'd call this a very minor problem compared to the benefits.
The Nikon grips I've had over the years, for the D7000, D610, D750, and D500, have all been the type with the electrical connection on the bottom on the camera. It's interesting that I acquired all these grips, except the MB-D11 for the D7000, for free under various sales promotions. I think Nikon has been too optimistic for a long time about how many of their overpriced grips would sell for full price.
I don't see how I would store an L-shaped grip in my camera backpack so that it's protected and doesn't hit anything, and where the space is used efficiently. Also it looks like the part that goes inside the camera's battery chamber could be soiled easily. But I have never used this type of a grip (all the ones that I have used have been with flat top).
From what I understand having spoken to local camera stores, the Nikon battery grips that provide functional enhancement (i.e. fps boost, such as the one for the D700/D300) have sold well but the ones that are just extra battery holders with controls but with no performance benefits have not sold as well. However, in the field I see many using one (many originals too), and many who aren't using one. It's a personal preference.
I'm pretty sure that Nikon know that many users of their cameras buy cheap knock-off grips but it's also possible that the decision not to include pins is partly because they are not interested in facilitating the knock-off grip business (but it also can lead to a simpler design for the camera, and thus lower costs and easier repair, as there are fewer connectors, wires and circuits).
Anyway, we don't have any direct influence on what features and accessories Nikon decide to offer for each of their cameras. What we can decide is which cameras and accessories we buy, based on their fitness to task and price. There is a lot of variety on the market and I am sure each of us can find suitable tools for our needs.
-
Nikon has published (on Apr.23, 2020) a firmware update (to v.1.01) for the D780.
See here: https://downloadcenter.nikonimglib.com/en/download/fw/358.html (https://downloadcenter.nikonimglib.com/en/download/fw/358.html)
It solves an incompatibilty issue with some SD card types.
Bella Ciao from Massimo
-
A recent review - fairly comprehensive with comparisons
https://www.slrlounge.com/nikon-d780-dslr-review/
-
Strange publications indeed. Why should every new camera be considered an "upgrade" ? DSLR have reached some kind of maturity plateau, so one should accept that D780 might not be a "worthy upgrade" for a D750 owner, but just a more or less state-of-the-art upper-middle range DSLR camera available to those who start using F-mount lenses, or need to replace their dead camera body. Not a booming business for sure.
From that point of view, the slrlounge review seems much more factual, to the point.
-
Thom Hogan review
https://dslrbodies.com/cameras/current-nikon-dslr-reviews/nikon-d780-camera-review.html
Surprised he does not hammer Nikon for their slip up - badly IMO - on yet another of their infuriating reverses. The D780 menu system has no options (unlike D850, D500 etc) to customize Pv/Fn to switch in a AF-On + Focus Mode [cf Tabulated options pg 628-9 in D780 PDF]. And unlike a Z MILC, D780 custom settings don't allow changing AF settings with the right hand only (eg red Video button + front/rear dials).
-
Surprised he does not hammer Nikon very for their slip up - badly IMO - on yet another of their infuriating reverses. The D780 menu system has no options (unlike D850, D500 etc) to customize Pv/Fn to switch in a AF-On + Focus Mode [cf Tabulated options pg 628-9 in D780 PDF]. And unlike a Z MILC, D780 custom settings don't allow changing AF settings with the right hand only (eg red Video button + front/rear dials).
Thats bad news. A camera filled with state of the art technology but with deficits in configurability. Jus tlike the Z6 where the shooting mode can'tbe put on one of the function buttons instead of the misplaced button on the rear right below side
-
I tried the D780 out a bit in a camera store to see how the LV AF worked with the 58/1.4 AF-S. I was pleasantly surprised how well AF-F maintained focus on a human subject's face as I moved slowly about to test what might be typical usage in an event or interview situation. There was no hunting or hesitation which is a bit surprising to me as it is, after all, a Nikon DSLR in live view mode. ::) I imagine I could easily work with this camera. Unfortunately the store was well-lit and I didn't have the chance to test how it might work in low light.
What I would like to know if is there any significant difference in LV AF between the D780 and Z6 with FTZ using the same lens? I realize the D780 will focus screwdriver AF lenses and the Z6 will not, and also the Z6 has got newer firmware that includes animal eye AF. However, is the basic functionality and AF performance of LV AF with F-mount lenses (AF-S mainly) closely similar or does the FTZ introduce a performance difference? I can't easily test both in a side by side fashion without spending a lot of money.
I have to say the D780 may have been unjustly ignored partly due to the pandemic. I personally would prefer having D780's LV AF capability and Multi-CAM 37K viewfinder AF in the same camera but unfortunately Nikon compartmentalized those into different cameras, at least for now.
I also felt the grip and overall "feel" of the D780 are an improvement over the D750.