New D780 formally announced.

[Chip Chipowski]

Thom Hogan has a lot of knowledge but his writing is dominated by nit picking. 

[chambeshi]

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.

[Tristin]

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.

[Ilkka Nissilä]

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.

[CS]

Very surprised by this sort of reaction. Thom Hogan has often proved to be right, even if the message displeases..

+1

[Ilkka Nissilä]

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!

[CS]

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.   

[Jack Dahlgren]

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.

[Erik Lund]

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

[Erik Lund]

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.

Not blaming you or your linking to Thom!But the content he is just bad at writing IMHO Getting much worse with wrong assumptions.

[Erik Lund]

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

[Erik Lund]

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 

[Ilkka Nissilä]

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.

[OCD]

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.

[RobOK]

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.