Nikon D810: $1,999, D750: $1,299 (grey market)

Nikon-D810-camera
Nikon-D810-lowest-price
The Nikon D810 camera (grey market) is currently listed for $1,999 on eBay. This is the lowest price we've seen so far. The MSRP of the D810 is $2,796.95 after a $500 rebate.

Grey market Nikon D750 is now available for $1,299.

FYI: tomorrow Pentax is expected to announce their new 36MP full frame DSLR camera that will be priced at $1,799.

This entry was posted in Nikon D810, Nikon Deals. Bookmark the permalink. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.
  • HD10

    The Pentax K-1 at this price … and the even lower price a few months later … plus the Tamron and Sigma lenses, will be quite a challenge to CaNikon and Sony. This will be an interesting battle to say the least.

    • Eric Calabros

      Challenge? How their DX models with these features challenged D7200/70D? Heck even DPR guys don’t bother to review them. ANY Pentax body is only good for one who has many Pentax lenses, and that’s it.

      • Max

        Why what is wrong with Pentax bodies?

        • Eric Calabros

          Bodies are fine, the system is not. in a collapsing market that even the big two struggling to survive, jumping on a much smaller player is just silly. and they’re not innovative fast to market Sigma style small, they’re conservative lazy small. Add to that hard to find lenses, hard to find spare parts, hard to find service centers, in many countries.

          • Doug Henry

            Not sure why everyone keeps talking about Nikon being part of the big two (I know, historically they are a big name). Nikon is one of the smallest in terms of income/revenue, least diversified companies in the camera space. In a true collapse, I would expect nikon to be one of the first casualties. Ricoh and Fuji are much better competitors of Canon if your making the “size” comparison. Nikon is not even close.

            Of course, in reality things are moving slowly, in a real collapse the others would pull out before nikon and redirect their efforts to other, more viable parts of their business (like samsung seems to be doing). So, in that scenario nikon may be the last one standing, but that is not a scenario that makes sense to plan for.

            • Fly Moon

              You have no idea what you’re talking about

            • Doug Henry

              that is possible.

            • Patrick O’Connor

              Being rude is worse than being ignorant.

            • Aldo

              I prefer ‘uninformed’… ignorant is over used in a derogatory manner. Also when you call someone ignorant it gives the impression he/she doesnt know anything about everything… eg a doctor may know know this info

            • Patrick O’Connor

              I generally think in terms of exact definitions (I read more than I communicate). Of course some people will misunderstand at times but that’s always a danger. In this case, your word is equally correct and less likely to be misunderstood. While I agree with your reasoning, I’m sure habit will prevail and I’ll continue to use “ignorant.” 😉

              edit: I’ve been to too many doctors who were ignorant concerning various aspects of medicine as well… 🙂

            • Aldo

              I think uninformed is as vague a term as ignorant when nothing else is specified… however I personally incline for friendlier terms =]

            • Patrick O’Connor

              Agreed. You and I just don’t belong here. 😉

            • mikeswitz

              +1 on the doctors

            • Michiel953

              I would.

            • Michiel953

              Are you sure of that?

            • Patrick O’Connor

              For future reference, everything I say is my opinion but in this case, yes, I’m sure. There’s no shame in ignorance as we all are and have no choice. Rudeness, however, is avoidable even though, again, we all are. 😉

            • Michiel953

              Well, uhh, I’m as ignorant as the next guy (or girl), so what am I expected to know about “rude”(-ness?)?

              I covet my ignorance, I’m an ignoramus. Being that protects me from the reproaches, frowns and general critical approach of those in the know.

            • Patrick O’Connor

              Maybe if we knew more about rudeness, we wouldn’t be rude as often……nah!
              Actually, ignorance saves me from immense embarrassment when visiting my wife’s family in Japan. I can get away with innumerable faux pas due to the assumption that I’m an ignorant gaijin (foreigner). If ignorance is bliss, I should be the happiest guy in the world!

            • Michiel953

              Making the best of your “foreignness”…

              There was a discussion, on some other photo blog, recently that derailed on the unexpected subject of the alleged inborn rudeness of Chinese mainland people (apparently, Taiwan was excluded).

              Very funny.

              Internet manners are interesting from a scientific point of view. For the ignorami. Obviously.

          • Max

            Yes I can hardly find a Pentax DSLR for sale in South Africa

      • gamer

        In this logic any Canon is only good for one who has many Canon lenses and any Nikon is only good for one who has many Nikon lenses, right?
        Fortunately Sony is good for those who have both Sony and Canon lenses. Hopefully one day there also will be an adapter for Nikon lenses.

        • Eric Calabros

          There is already adapter for Nikon lenses and it does AF.

        • FroBro

          What utter rubbish. The adaptors to put canon and nikon lenses onto sony bodies are less than good at doing their job. The only benefit this offers, is that you can quickly switch the camera body, and slowly migrate your lenses, but if you want optimal performance you wouldn’t bother with the adaptors, and every photog wants optimal performance which is why they look at switching bodies and buying lenses.

    • this is the only way they can make this work – they are too late to the game

      • HD10

        I have never used Pentax and until the K-1, I did not consider getting one. But the K-1 with the pixel-shift feature has me interested … simply because given Nikon’s reliance on in-lens VR, it is unlikely that Nikon will have an in-body image stabilization that will enable it to implement a pixel-shift feature. Hopefully, Nikon will reconsider this position in its mirror-less camera design (doubtful however due to its in-lens VR approach in the Nikon 1 series).

        For the same reason, I am waiting for the E-M1 Mk 2 which hopefully will further improve on a similar feature found in the E-M5 Mk II and the Pen-F can do.

        This feature is of interest to me because it seems to be the best way to get better image quality without resorting to a very high resolution sensor which in turn will require even bigger, heavier and more expensive lenses that can handle the high resolution sensor.

        • PhilK

          The beauty of Nikon (and Canon’s) approach is that if they felt like it, they could implement sensor-shift functionality any time they felt like it. Whereas the mirrorless camp is married to that tech, they cannot retrofit all of their lenses overnight to add lens-based VR.

          Which puts Canikon in a pretty good position, I’d say. If they wanted to, they could implement both, and have the best of all current possibilities. In the meantime, we get lens-customized VR which works better, and stabilized optical viewing of what is currently happening in the subject. (Rather than “what happened in the past”) I’m cool with that.

          • HD10

            It does not exactly pan out that way. Implementing optical stabilization in lenses is fairly easy and straight forward but not so when this in incorporated in the body using the sensor. I am sure that CaNikon can do it but I would see them as coming from behind rather than leading from behind.

            Moreover, the mirrorless camp is actually ahead here in that it has implemented both IBIS and OS on the lens. The Panasonic GX8 for example has IBIS and works together with the OIS in various Panasonic lenses. The IBIS in the Olympus E-M1 works well with the OS of the recently released Olympus 300mm f/4.0.

            • PhilK

              Where do you come up with such a conclusion? A lens design with VR is far more complex than one without, on a variety of levels. And if you’re like Ricoh, who probably has a significant number of lenses made by OEM manufacturers like Tamron, that presents an additional challenge. At least they don’t have very many lenses to worry about. 😉

              The sensor shift on the other hand is implemented in a static, controlled environment, and does not have to deal with all the dynamic optical changes inside a lens such as focus/AF operations, zoom operations, etc.

            • HD10

              You should be asking yourself that question … “Where do you come up with such a conclusion?”

              A lens with VR is more complicated than a lens without one but having VR in a lens is no longer novel or difficult. It has been done by most lens manufacturer. That is my point.

              “Whereas the mirrorless camp is married to that tech, they cannot retrofit all of their lenses overnight to add lens-based VR.”

              First, the K-1 is a dSLR and thus comes with a mirror. So how is that in favor of your argument?

              As to the matter on the mirrorless camera, Panasonic has IBIS on its camera and OIS on its lenses. Olympus has IBIS on its camera and OS on its 300mm f/4. So again, how is that in favor of your argument?

              Going back to the Pentax K-1 again, your reply really shows how much you need to read up on the Pentax Pixel Shift Resolution to better understand this.

            • PhilK

              Re: a “learning curve” with IBIS – I think you underestimate Nikon. That kind of area is something they are very strong in. The fact that they have chosen lens VR historically is almost undoubtedly not because they have no ability to implement IBIS, it is a philosophical choice. Something which I believe they have specifically explained in the past, actually.

              Those in the mirrorless camp and other lines that chose this IBIS route (with possible exception of a few Panasonic lenses) are married to IBIS because their lenses, almost without exception, do not incorporate VR, nor is it likely any substantial portion of them will be produced with in-lens VR. With some very very rare exceptions. The entire argument for IBIS is that it doesn’t require special lenses to work. Adding the cost and bulk of such features in lenses makes a laughing-stock of those longtime claims.

              And once again, Nikon has the luxury of being able to create a “hybrid” system, if they choose, any time they want to. A company like Pentax has no such option, because their already ridiculously sparse lense collection would have to all be discontinued in favor of more expensive VR versions. Not going to happen any time soon.

              So once again: Canikon are in a much better competitive position here, which should be pretty obvious to an impartial observer.

            • HD10

              With Nikon as my primary platform, I would like nothing better than to see Nikon implement IBIS, and make this work together with on-lens VR. As I said earlier, I think both Canon and Nikon can do this. But as this has not happened, it cannot be said that both are leading in this area.

              Re Pentax, I commented that it has gone one step farther by using its IBIS for Pixel Shift Resolution (and Astrotracer). And this is what I wish Nikon to do. Given Nikon’s approach to the Nikon 1 on image stabilization, I doubt however whether Nikon will do IBIS any time soon. Given this, it is unlikely that Nikon will be able to implement a similar multi shot pixel shift feature. I very much however look forward to doing this.

              As to Pentax, at no point did I suggest that Pentax is in a much better competitive position to implement a hybrid IBIS-OS solution. What I did say is that Pentax has IBIS, and is able to implement a multi-shot pixel-shift feature. My point was wanting Nikon to have this feature to get better SNR, DR, color and being moire-free. I also said that mirrorless cameras from Panasonic and Olympus have already implemented a hybrid solution.

              I posted nothing on the matter of Pentax being ahead of Canon and Nikon on implementing a hybrid IBIS-OS solution.

            • PhilK

              I don’t think it makes much sense to conclude that it will not happen since it has not happened already. The most likely reason for that, by far, is that neither Canon nor Nikon have felt the competitive pressure to do so.

              The difference is, Olympus for example cannot just release a new camera body and have hybrid AF on all or most of their existing lenses – whereas Canon or Nikon absolutely can do that, if they feel the need to.

              Re: the K-1’s new sensor-shift mechanism, I noted with great interest that they are touting this “brand new technology” for that model to do some kind of motion-compensation to try to address *precisely* the issue I anticipated in my prior post: weird motion artifacts likely to occur due to some degree of subject/camera movement between each of those separate exposures. IF that actually works (which will never be perfect because the matter at hand is simply too complex to eliminate entirely), then I’d be slightly less inclined to judge this sensor-shift resolution enhancement as a “hack”, but then again we still have the problem that the resolution only affects the chroma component of the image, not luminance – so it is still NOT actually equivalent to an traditional higher-res sensor besides the motion issue.

              Tho I would personally rate the value of a feature like HDR shooting to be a much more useful feature overall, than another different type of “fiddly” feature such as this. And I also think there’s only so many “fiddly features” one can incorporate into a camera before it just becomes “too fiddly”. 🙂

      • Jeffry De Meyer

        ff digital bodies have only recently become open to the consumer market thanks to the lower prices. Someone that only has aps canikon glass would need to buy new lenses anyway so why not jump to the player that offers more bang for the buck.

        Same is true for the pro, a wedding photographer can now pick up a d5 or get a 645z for about the same money and offer something uncle bob can’t.

        The market evolves along with technology.

    • Hardcore_Fanboy

      isn’t pentax K-1, till now, a crop sensor only? so lenses are for crop sensor? any how…d810 for that price – good luck you potential D500

      • the K-1 will be their first full frame DSLR camera

        • HD10

          He likely mistook the K-01 for the K-1. Completely understandable under the circumstance.

        • Vertex

          and their last i guess….

          • PhilK

            Heh. Perhaps.

      • Shutterbug

        I don’t think too many people are cross shopping new D500’s and grey market D810’s.

        • HD10

          D500 has many new nice features … better grip, joystick for AF designation, articulating touchscreen, really wide AF coverage, AF fine-tune using LV, quieter and fast 10fps shooting with 200 shots RAW buffer, etc. I am tempted with the D500 but will await its FX version.

          • jarmatic

            The FX version is the D5.

            • HD10

              I have a D5 on pre-order but that is not the FX version I had in mind.

              I want a D500 body with the D5 AF and sensor when I need a smaller body. Ever heard of the D700 (D300 with D3 AF and sensor)?

            • jarmatic

              Ever heard of not being a condescending asshat? It seems to be your theme in this article’s comments. Good day.

            • HD10

              Condescending? How? By asking if you know of the D700 that has a D3 AF & sensor? Then now you resort to name calling? Check your six. Have a good day too.

    • AYWY

      Considering Nikon’s update cycle, Pentax is entering the 36MP arena… in the year Nikon is leaving it, probably for an even higher MP body.

      Still good news for Pentax owners who refuse to migrate, and the 36MP Sony sensor is well-proven and gives more resolution than most people will ever need.

      • HD10

        Nikon going even higher resolution will mean requiring bigger, heavier and more expensive lenses, a race which I refuse to be drawn to anymore. When one considers that a good bulk of the Nikon camera owners who buy multiple bodies and lenses are already in their middle age or much older even and will thus be willing to carry on with heavier equipment, one has to wonder whether going higher in resolution is an enlightened decision or ultimately a self-defeating endpoint.

        • CERO

          how so? we already reached the current lenses resolution limit?

          • HD10

            A few of the current lenses can go higher but the majority will no longer do as well. Observed how some 3rd party lenses which performs ever better than its Nikkor counterparts (and thus do very well with the 36mp D800/D810) no longer perform as well when mounted on the 50mp Canon 5DSR.

            • CERO

              hu, wasn’t the issue with the 5DSR its very noisy and grainy sensor even at ISO 800 or lower?

            • HD10

              That’s another issue still in addition to requiring better lenses. The bottom line is that higher resolution sensor requires higher resolving lenses. This is not technically difficult but it will mean that the higher resolving lenses will be bigger, heavier and priced higher.

            • 24×36

              Your error is in the notion that higher resolution sensors “require” higher resolving lenses. You’re only looking at one side of the equation.

              When you were stuck with a lowly 12MP, did you shoot only with poor quality lenses because the sensor didn’t “justify” higher resolution glass? Nonsense, of course.

              Did higher resolution glass not perform better than lower resolution glass on low resolution sensors? you bet it did.

              Did the same lenses perform better when used with a higher resolution sensor? You bet they did.

              Is there some point of diminishing returns? Sure, but we haven’t hit a wall yet, even with existing glass.

          • 24×36

            This is an old fallacy, and one that persists. People see the “perceptual megapixel” DxO “ratings” below the pixel count of the latest cameras and conclude that the lenses “aren’t up to” the sensor resolution. What they fail to realize is most of the lenses didn’t achieve 100% of the resolution of lower resolution sensors, either. There aren’t many “perfect” lenses. Resolution advantages work both ways, and higher resolution sensors give you more bang for the buck than buying all new lenses.

        • PhilK

          Actually a key part of the “megapixel race” is driven by the inanities of the marketplace, where the typical customer makes buying decisions largely based on such superficial specifications.

          When the time comes that customers stop making buying decisions for such superficial reasons, then the vendors will probably stop incessantly pushing those specifications forward to the same degree.

          Secondarily, maybe the end result of the MP race is that people will eventually just shoot everything with a wide lens, and just crop most of their “long” shots out of the center of the wide shots.

          • Patrick O’Connor

            I seem to remember shortly after the D800 came out, reading comments like, ‘makes me want to reshoot everything all over again.’ Now, people are saying, well… what you wrote. I’m quite convinced that photographers are some of the most fickle, contrary folks around. 😉

            • PhilK

              Having spent over 10 years in retail, I think you could apply that to the majority of people who purchase complex products, of which they rarely fully understand. So the majority of them end up making purchasing decisions based largely on whim, emotion, status, aesthetics, and popularity.

            • Patrick O’Connor

              I understand your point but the first set of comments came from actual, working, professional photographers with real names and viewable galleries. Only the second set came from, well… here and other similar venues.
              I have to say I’ve become jaded to the collective opinions of NR readers. Not all of course, but as a whole.

            • PhilK

              I think the caliber of online discourse in general tends to follow certain predictable patterns, including more “complainers” than “praisers”. And in this field in particular, I think the “artists” generally have far less interest in studiously following these “equipment blogs”, than the “equipment geeks”. Which I think explains a lot of it.

            • Patrick O’Connor

              Agreed.
              I don’t consider myself an artist but definitely not an equipment geek. I mostly come here to see what’s new or coming but allow my baser nature to take over and chime in on the comments. 🙁

            • CERO

              Who cares, thanks to those “equipment geeks”. The camera makers keeps improving their sensors and designs and we do not have to pay ridiculous huge amount of cash like in the older days.

              I’m thankful I could buy my old D610 for just 1,500 USD with a tons of goodies.
              Something that was not exactly usual years before.

              Not to mention, the new sigma lenses, upping the game at decent prices.

            • Patrick O’Connor

              I wasn’t disparaging anyone, just stating I’m not a member of that group. I do, however, think you’d be hard pressed to attribute cost or available technology to them. I think it’s just as likely that folks who upgrade incessantly have no idea what’s in “the box”.

        • 24×36

          “Nikon going even higher resolution will mean more expensive sensors,
          which in turn means requiring bigger, heavier and more expensive lenses.”

          This is a fallacy. Resolution benefits work in both directions. You may not “get the most from your sensor” without the highest resolution lenses, but you ALSO “don’t get the most from your lenses” without the highest resolution sensor. A higher resolution sensor gets MORE from every lens you already own. Think of it as an upgrade to every lens you’re got.

    • JoeFunny30

      I’d love it but the sensor is old and unless they raise the raw iso capability then the other features aren’t enough, especially given the lack of lenses. If they can match the d500 in a crop sensor body then I’d get that one. But wow, they’re slow coming out with new models. How about a new Ricoh GR with sensor and AF improvements?

    • PhilK

      The whole “increase resolution with sensor shifting” seems like kind of a pathetic hack. Even a “static” landscape has elements that move to some extent over time, so producing a pic that is a compilation of several exposures is bound to have weird motion artifacts in it, it seems to me.

      Granted, I don’t have a camera to test with that has this (eg Olympus), but from a theoretical standpoint it just sounds kind of dicey.

      • HD10

        It would help if you were to look up the he H5D-50c MS and H5D-200c MS. Let me know if you think this is just a “pathetic hack”.

        • Vertex

          do you have at least an A3 printer… lol….
          or do you just put 500pixel images on facebook?

          you know how much of these cameras are sold?
          i tell you it´s not a big number..

          again specs alone don´t sell cameras.

          • HD10

            Most of my prints are in 36″ x 24″, though quite a few are much bigger. And you?

            • Vertex

              epson r3880 here.
              and i have a house to hang them on walls.

            • HD10

              Good enough I suppose. I have several buildings on which I hang mine.

            • Vertex

              of course and you are handsome and rich and you have many friends.. thats why you spend 24/7 on internet forums i guess….

            • HD10

              Nothing much to add huh?

        • PhilK

          Most people that shoot Hasselblad do so in a studio. A studio is one of the few places in the world where you can completely control the motion (or lack thereof) of the subject.

          Shooting pictures of a grassy field: not so much.

          • Vertex

            and hasselblad owners often have real use for the resolution…..

          • HD10

            The K-1 pixel shift resolution is usable in some though not all shooting conditions. Where it is usable, it has its merits and its value.

            • PhilK

              Yep.

    • Vertex

      one camera does not make a good system,
      everyone with at least a two digit IQ knows that.

      specs mean not much in this market
      way less than internet fanboys think.

      samsungs nx1 was praised.. where is samsung now?

      • HD10

        Non-sequitur.

        • Vertex

          im pretty sure im right..
          the past showed i am right. 🙂
          i don´t look at the market from a fanboy perspective. i look at the market from a consumer perspective. specs alone does not sell cameras. that´s a fact.
          pentax will have less market share at the end of this year.

          • HD10

            Your reply brings to mind a quote made famous by George Carlin. Enough said.

            • Vertex

              yeah well i am right you are wrong.. learn to live with it.

      • However true your statements are, is inversely proportional to the intelligence of consumers.

        If specs mean “not much in this market”, as you say, then that’s pretty sad.

        Obviously though, there is plenty of truth to what you say, considering that Pentax has offered “better” DSLRs than Canon or Nikon for many years now. They’ve put weather sealing and big, bright viewfinders in even their most basic beginner DSLRs back ~10 years ago, and plenty of other impressive, unique or downright superior features and specs over the last decade.

        So, if you’re interested in nothing more than “I’m right, you’re wrong” comebacks, here’s what I have to say to you:

        Who cares about market share? You certainly shouldn’t, if you’re NOT a fanboy like you say. Because only fanboys like to use the argument “my brand has more market share than yours!”

        Really, at the end of the day, all that matters is the company staying afloat, period. As long as someone can get their hands on a K-1, and as long as Pentax is still around in the future to service that camera, …nothing else matters to a non-fanboy.

        Of course that means the assertion “this camera will give Canon and Nikon a run for their money” is much less true. However I do think Pentax’ market position as a whole has indeed been a catalyst for competition between them and Nikon / Canon. If not for the third “little guy”, Nikon and Canon would have indeed not pushed as hard. Just like how Sony will be the catalyst that pushes Canon and Nikon to begin competing in the mirrorless market more earnestly, very soon.

        • PhilK

          I think Sony is unquestionably a competitive threat, Pentax, not so much.

          What RiPentax is doing with this camera is the same thing that Ricoh did for many years: produce a product with a lot of features for a low price. And with a fit/finish that wasn’t exactly top-shelf. (Case in point, the cheesy, cheap-looking silkscreened model number on the front of the K-1, on that flat, un-textured plastic. That is *exactly* what Ricoh’s camera bodies used to look like back when I was in the camera business.)

          One of my good friends at the time was the local Ricoh rep. He was endlessly frustrated because he had a product that had more features at a lower price than the Nikons/Canons/Minoltas/Pentaxes of the era, and had a wholesale margin that actually allowed retailers to make a decent profit on them, even at that lower selling price. But regardless all of that, *no one wanted to sell them*. And people certainly didn’t come in asking for them very much.

          And while I chalked up a lot of that to poor business habits in the photo retail industry, another big issue was the product’s perception, ecosystem, fit/finish, etc.

          So while I think it’s great to have a new option in this segment, I don’t think it’s much of a surprise, nor do I think they will likely sell many of them. Especially if they don’t do something about their lens line beyond rebadging a few 3rd-party lenses.

    • Michiel953

      Great features (gadgets, gimmicks, trickery?), if you want to use them. Where are the lenses that are up to 36Mp plus?

  • mrterrabyte

    Yep, probably a monster challenge…because of the price…for the same reason people swung to Sony…because people don’t want to pay semi/pro pricing for semi/pro equipment. Any Sony body was only good for folks who had Minolta lenses. Right?

  • Joseph

    Does this signal, in any way, shape or form, a refresh to the D810 line? Maybe that D810(s) rumor you shared a while back?

    • Shutterbug

      The D810 successor is due July of this year, or thereabouts, based on Nikon’s release history. The logical upgrade will obviously be Expeed 5, D5 AF, D5 metering, etc. along with a sensor refresh. Should be a winner.

      • HD10

        A D500 body, D5 AF with D5 sensor would do quite well I think. So would the same setup but with a high-resolution sensor.

        • Shutterbug

          No doubt, that would be well received. My hope personally is that the D810 successor has high enough resolution that they have to make a similarly spec’d lower resolution alternative, whether that is done as an “S” version or simply as the D750 replacement, I don’t care. If they continue to make it an “all rounder” body as the D810 is currently, it’s less likely we will see a lower resolution sensor in the D8XX body.

          • 24×36

            I think it’s highly unlikely you’ll see a “D500 (really D810) body with a D5 sensor,” but we should get a terrific D810 successor with the new AF, metering, processor, etc.

        • 24×36

          Not gonna happen. Nikon isn’t going to undercut its high margin pro body by putting the same imaging chain in a non-integrated grip body. They did it in D3/D700 days ONLY because that’s the only FF sensor they had to use at that point for a more affordable price point body. Now there are plenty of other choices.

    • As much as I’d love to see a D5 sensor in a D810 with D500 upgrades, …I don’t know if that’ll come within 365 days of the D5’s release. If this is anything like the D3-D700 product release schedule, or the D700-D800 release cycle, we still have a ways to go before a “D900” makes an appearance. Maybe a D850, but again I doubt that Nikon will be putting their D5 AF system in a $3K body any sooner than 1 year after the D5 release. I’d love to be wrong, of course.

      • Davide

        My guess (take it for what it is) is that it might come very soon actually 🙂 The D500 is too good for current Nikon portfolio. I bet many amateurs (or low budget pros for that matter, I see many doing weddings with D300s still) who were considering a move to full frame are now considering D500. Anti-flicker, amazing AF… these are all features that may make a difference between a usable photo and a scrapped one. True, FF is higher IQ, but only if the photo is usable!
        Nikon now needs a couple of FF cameras with same AF and features as D500. Call them 870 (40+ MP) and 770 (20 MP). Body won’t be weather sealed, though, to ensure they don’t steal share from D5. US price will be around $2,400 for D750 and $3,200 (again wild guesses).

        • I don’t think Nikon needs to worry about their semi-pro weather sealing standard encroaching on their flagship-grade weather sealing standard.

          I hope we’ll see at least one more better-than-the-D610 FX body this year, but I just have no idea where they’ll go from here. D820, D760, D900, who knows. All I know is that I’d like to see the D500, D5, and D810 have an offspring, and I put the gestation period for such offspring at 12 months. (from the announcement date of the D5…)

      • 24×36

        Oh I think you’ll get the D5 AF system, just not with the D5 sensor and frame rate. Rather, you’ll get a high resolution body targeted at a different group, much like the D810 is vs. the D4s.

        • I dunno, it seems like we’re much longer overdue for a D5 sensor in a D810 body, than a D810 update. And considering what they did with the D500 just now, I think we’re headed in the 2007-2008 direction of D3 + D300 = D700. But of course, just hopeful speculation. 😉

  • Espen4u

    Hope they’re clearing out old stock so I can get my hands on a d810s/d850 sooner.

  • FroBro

    these people are selling grey market cameras at this price, and still earning profit.
    Makes you question the profit that the official outlets get when they are charging almost an extra 50% on top all in the name of a “manufactures warranty” which should be free, not charged for! (and since all manufactures defects are still fixed on grey market anyways, it proves the warranty is a rip off) Not once has my grey market body ever been denied a fix.

    • nwcs

      You’re speaking out of your fro, dude. Warranties are legal obligations that are essentially underwritten insurance. That costs money. Simple fact of life. And warranties cover more than just the defects Nikon officially recognizes.

      Or are you one of those people who think all companies that want to make a profit are evil?

      • Fly Moon

        Agree with you. It’s not charity

    • Shutterbug

      Warranties cost companies money (shipping, staff, parts, support center, etc.) Guess who pays for that? Haha. The grey market price is basically the cost of the warranty AND post-purchase service of any kind. Also Nikon won’t officially work on grey market products even for a price, however they will honor service advisories & recalls.

      In 20+ years of photography I’ve never had a single issue with Nikon bodies, I love grey market stuff.

      Profit margin on bodies like the D810 aren’t nearly as high as bodies like the D4S and 1DX, there is at least $3K or so of margin in there (friend of mine used to work for Canon) because they sell at much lower volume – pretty standard business practices.

      • PhilK

        Yes warranties cost money, but I’m inclined to think, with this new legal regime eg in the USA where manufacturers are now allowed once again to dictate retail prices, that the resale margins are much higher here than they used to be.

        When I was in the camera business, typical retail margins on 1st-tier brand-name camera bodies were ridiculously low, like 3-5% or something stupid like that. It certainly wasn’t the retailers that were making the profit on camera bodies.

        • nwcs

          The retailer is the last part of the chain and usually has enough turnover to accommodate a lower profit margin. But it’s not usually direct to retailer from the manufacturer so the different entities also play a role in the pricing game.

          • PhilK

            When I was in the photo retail business we most certainly bought directly from the *major* manufacturers, even when I was at a tiny store with a handful of employees.

            Later when I was doing home electronics retail, more products were sold through distributors but that’s mostly because there are far more brands in that industry than there are in the camera business. Distributors in the photo industry typically only distribute low-volume brands, the “top 5” (or whatever that number is today) typically all sold direct. Because among other things, they had much broader product lines, a more important brand to protect, and had the resources to have their own full sales/service organization.

            Unless you were an unauthorized seller or an authorized dealer violating your resale agreement and buying grey market product.

  • doge

    If I had the money I’d buy one. Grey market is the best market.

    • If you buy your gray market stuff after the product has been on the market long enough to establish a reliability track record, you’ll still save money in the long run even if you get a bad apple every once in a while.

  • T.I.M

    Do you feel the wind of change ?
    It’s coming….

    • nwcs

      Yes, the hot air exiting your 30×30 🙂

  • …Still not as cheap as a brand new USA Pentax K-1. 😛

  • bgbs

    the price looks very tempting right now.

  • nzswedespeed

    It would be awesome (although very very unlikely) if Nikon released this old but faithful 36mp sensor into a prosumer body and sold it cheaply, once they release the d810 successor.

    • I could go for a “D750A” with a D810A sensor, that’s for darn sure! Throw in illuminated buttons and a GPS, and you’ve got a real serious adventure camera on your hands. Then again, as a wedding photographer I’d rather have a D750 body with the D5 sensor, actually.

      • While I was always happy with the 12.3mp in the D700, 18-22mp really gets to a place where I’m 99% satisfied. I’d be thrilled to have that D5 sensor in my primary wedding bodies.

        • Yes, for pretty much all the paid work I do, I barely care about megapixels. I shot with 12 megapixel cameras for at least half a decade, actually.

          Now, having the D750 though, it is nice to be able to “cheat” with my 35 1.4 and use DX mode to get ~50mm equivalent snaps of guests and such, for the “hey can you take our picture?” stuff that you don’t want to spend too much time on in post-production, nor ever print larger than 4×6…

    • Captain Megaton

      It will happen sooner or later. Entry level FX cannot sit at 24MP forever. And resolution is always a “cheap sell” (c.f. D3200) … it costs relatively little to implement, and impresses people like you.

  • Not sure if they adjusted the price and made an error, but the same body is now listed at $3,299.95 – That’s higher than the current US warrantied version 🙂

    • I guess the sale is over. It will come back again.

  • Back to top