p.3 #2 · D810 D750 D610 for the average human, my silly comparison summary
beji wrote:
One thing to add in favor of D810 is the video. 810 is more convenient for video productions. I compared 750 and 810 hands on, from video /movie production perspective before picking up the 810.
Base ISO 64 is very handy for movie shooting as well.
that surprises me that the D750 isn't as good. is it only the ISO 64 that pushes the D810 ahead? or more? can you touch on any other tidbits?
p.3 #4 · D810 D750 D610 for the average human, my silly comparison summary
beji wrote:
One thing to add in favor of D810 is the video. 810 is more convenient for video productions. I compared 750 and 810 hands on, from video /movie production perspective before picking up the 810.
Base ISO 64 is very handy for movie shooting as well.
I'd also like to hear more about this. Maybe in a new thread in this forum?
I have a Nikon D810 now, after selling my D750 in December (for the better ergonomics of the pro D810 body, and the quiet shutter, which I absolutely needed.)
I also have a D800 and a D550, but I have never shot video with any of them. I wouldn't mind a quick summary.
+++
I have been shooting 4K video for the past year with a Panasonic G7 (I had a GH4 too) and a Samsung NX500. I also have a Canon 7DII which I will keep for the great AF in video mode, especially for wildlife and similar.
I use Canon lenses with an active adapter on the G7 (with AF, IS/VR, and in body aperture control), and use my Nikon lenses with manual focus & aperture on the NX500.
p.3 #7 · D810 D750 D610 for the average human, my silly comparison summary
mmurph wrote:
I'd also like to hear more about this. Maybe in a new thread in this forum?
I have a Nikon D810 now, after selling my D750 in December (for the better ergonomics of the pro D810 body, and the quiet shutter, which I absolutely needed.)
I also have a D800 and a D550, but I have never shot video with any of them. I wouldn't mind a quick summary.
...........
Cheers!
Michael
form wrote:
35mm format, Canon has more MP right now for dslrs. I didn't count medium format cameras because they're another tier/different class.
Hello Both,
My experience is been with shooting events and shortfilms. What I felt(strictly personal opinion) was that D810 was better for video for the following 3 reasons
1)Pro controls on the 810 is very handy when you are on the run(this was huge help for me)
2)810 rig felt more balanced when I put it on flycam or any hand held grip and walking around. 750 felt unbalanced and I always had to struggle. And after couple of hours of shooting I had a more sore arm with 750 than 810, which was a surprise as 750 is lighter. (this is a result of choice of lenses as well. this may not be an issue with lighter lenses).
3)ISO64 was really helpful every single time for me. I haven't had to put on any ND filter on it yet.
Others may not find these as issues at all. But these stood out for me and I am glad I went with 810, and is very happy with it. I am sure 750 will do as well, if I change workflow.
My short-film is currently under post production. Feel free to watch this space for release if you are interested: https://www.facebook.com/brmotionpictures/
Shot exclusively on D810s. Expecting the release in a month.(end of May)
p.3 #8 · D810 D750 D610 for the average human, my silly comparison summary
This probably wouldn't be the deciding factor for many people, but the difference in screen quality is overblown. All three have a 640x480 pixel screen. But the D750's pixels are made up of Red, Green, Blue, and White dots rather than just RGB like most. It's basically a difference in brightness and power efficiency but not resolution.
I do think the D750 screen looks a little crisper than the D610's but I suspect that has to do with the quality of the image processing (the little JPEGs being generated for playback mode being more compressed on the D610).
p.3 #10 · D810 D750 D610 for the average human, my silly comparison summary
I could see a d750 update, it would be more like a d500 with an fx sensor - pro body, round (closing) eyepiece and all. Don't have to worry about not losing the viewfinder cover like on my d600.
p.3 #11 · D810 D750 D610 for the average human, my silly comparison summary
that surprises me that the D750 isn't as good. is it only the ISO 64 that pushes the D810 ahead? or more? can you touch on any other tidbits?
Sure, if ya have a few minutes
Besides the add'l 12MP you have a dedicated AF-ON button, 1/8000th shutter
(a VERY quiet one at that) and an oft overlooked 5:4 crop mode for zippin' 8X10's
off to the print lab after a gig. A real VF, Pro controls, 200,000 shutter life, USB 3.0,
10 pin connector, etc., etc. HTH.
p.3 #12 · D810 D750 D610 for the average human, my silly comparison summary
trenchmonkey wrote:
Sure, if ya have a few minutes
Besides the add'l 12MP you have a dedicated AF-ON button, 1/8000th shutter
(a VERY quiet one at that) and an oft overlooked 5:4 crop mode for zippin' 8X10's
off to the print lab after a gig. A real VF, Pro controls, 200,000 shutter life, USB 3.0,
10 pin connector, etc., etc. HTH.
I think he was referring for video use - not stills. In which case they're pretty similar, but as elaborated on earlier the D810 does pull ahead unless the articulating D750 screen is needed.
p.3 #13 · D810 D750 D610 for the average human, my silly comparison summary
Nice write-up and thank you for that, but I'm not any longer sure that the answer is full frame except for those who really need the very high resolution of the D810 or the extreme low light capabilities of the D5, and obviously for those who mostly shoot f/1.4 lenses wide open.
The D500 has a body that runs circles around any of the FX bodies except the D5, it has much better AF, a great viewfinder, articulated LCD etc. With the flat colour profile, the image quality approaches that of the D810 except the lacking megapixels (even the D5500 image quality is approaching that level), and in addition to saving money on the body, those who use telephoto lenses will also save money, lots of it, on smaller, lighter lenses.
Again except for those who need lots of megapixels, FX for amateur photographers is mostly kept alive by ancient superstition and clever marketing. An interesting tool and part of a long tradition, but that's about it. I've recently sold a D700 and a D810. Unless a D820 offers something really out of the ordinary, my next Nikon body will most probably be a D500 or a future D7300.
p.3 #14 · D810 D750 D610 for the average human, my silly comparison summary
People wanting to buy FF will keep buying FF and people wanting to buy crop will buy crop.
I can't see myself going back to crop only because there isn't any crop lenses I like and I shoot in close quarters indoors a lot so FF works better for me.
Saying that, I wish FF cameras has the AF point coverage that crop cameras do. I kinda miss the coverage on my 7D.
p.3 #15 · D810 D750 D610 for the average human, my silly comparison summary
Elisha82 wrote:
People wanting to buy FF will keep buying FF and people wanting to buy crop will buy crop.
Obviously
Elisha82 wrote:
I can't see myself going back to crop only because there isn't any crop lenses I like and I shoot in close quarters indoors a lot so FF works better for me.
Ah... but I don't use crop lenses on crop cameras, and except for WA lenses, it isn't really required. When I sold my FX bodies, I was going to sell the 24-120mm as well. That was until I understood that I suddenly had a 36-180mm eqv. lens with much sharper corners when used on DX. So I sold my 180mm instead, saving weight and saving lens changes.
Mount an 85mm f/1.4 on a DX camera, and you get that ultra-sharp, large aperture 135mm lens that Nikon FX users have waited for for ages. It's only 127mm eqv., but the f/1.4 vs. f/2.0 easily compensates for the one stop ISO advantage that the D750 has over the D500.
p.3 #16 · D810 D750 D610 for the average human, my silly comparison summary
I agree that the D500—D300 reborn—places a big question mark over current FX bodies. The exception is any single-digit FX body which offers a different shooting experience: integrated grip, more controls, spaceous layout, unmatched build quality. I use a D500/D3X pairing and find them complementary.
p.3 #18 · D810 D750 D610 for the average human, my silly comparison summary
trenchmonkey wrote:
D810/D500 best of both worlds
If money were no object, I would have both. It is, and I came to the conclusion that the D810 is a more expensive camera to own, not so much because of the price of the body, but because of the price of the lenses.
If I had the need for the image quality that the D810 offers, there's no competition. It's when we start to talk about the D750 and D610 that things become complicated. I would choose the D500 over the D750 and the D7200 over the D610. For my use, both of those DX cameras are better than their FX relatives. But it's an individual thing, and I'm quite sure that I would have had a different answer 18 months ago, before the D7200 and the D500 were launched.
Who knows, maybe we'll see an FX sensor in a 420g D5500 body next year. That would stir things up
p.3 #19 · D810 D750 D610 for the average human, my silly comparison summary
The big expense is the FF lenses. Why not buy a used D800 and use budget priced DX Kit lens(es)? The D800 will go into the cropped mode where you get 15 mP images. Then you can take your time figuring just what FF lenses you want.
p.3 #20 · D810 D750 D610 for the average human, my silly comparison summary
Dj R wrote:
which of the following do you expect Nikon to replace first?
and will there be any new "game changing" features?
D610
D750
D810
?
I hope the next fx camera (not sure if it'll be considered the 810 or 750 replacement) takes the d5 sensor and AF system and puts it in a d500/810/750 body while keeping the fun 750 features, like wifi and tilt screen (both are super handy once you use them). That, to me, would be the ultimate pro-sumer fx camera.
