The upcoming full frame DSLR camera will be called Nikon D750

Nikon-D750-DSLR-camera-logo
I can now confirm the name of the upcoming full frame DSLR camera: Nikon D750 (see also the rumored specifications).

I am also pretty confident (over 95% probability) that the new Nikon D750 camera will have a 24.3MP full frame sensor and will be released for Photokina. I am still not sure about the focusing system and whether or not the sensor will have an AA filter.

If you have any more details on this new camera, you can contact me anonymously here. You can also anonymously submit any pictures by using any of the listed services (BayimgRapidshareAnonfiles).

This entry was posted in Nikon D750. Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • Satrio

    Hmph….another choice to think about for upgrading my D90 into a full-frame nikon camera..

  • NikonFanboy

    Hi Admin,

    thanks for the update once again. It looks like 7DII is getting released after all. I guess nikon is avoiding their D9300 release for this sept? may be in dec?

    Anyhow, D810 thermal noise issues has been verfied by nikon

    http://photographylife.com/nikon-confirms-the-d810-thermal-issue-and-offers-a-solution#more-85949

    cheers

  • YES! That’s great news <3

  • KR Productions

    Seems like an odd model name choice… 750. But whatever. Looking forward to seeing what all it actually has.

  • David Peterson

    Fingers crossed for 4K! I wouldn’t consider it otherwise 😛

    • Sebastian Rasch

      Haha not gonna happen, it’s Nikon after all! 😉

      • David Peterson

        Why not? After all, it was Nikon who offered us the first ever HD DSLRs! 😀 With the Nikon D90.

        • TheShepherd

          Because no one is doing 4k video on full frame.. except consumer rez, off low mp sensor, and external storage.. and as Nikon has nothing to do with sensor design or manufacturing they have no means to change that.
          Just take a look at the flak Sony is taking with their A7S, you think Nikon wants to jump in that fire knowing they would likely have the additional weight of heat related hardware issues to boot??

          • David Peterson

            What flak… the only key negativity I’ve seen about the A7s is that it does *NOT* have internal 4K recording!!! :-/ 🙁

            If only the Sony A7s had internal 4K recording then I’d be getting one, but as it doesn’t, I’m almost sure to get a Panasonic GH4 instead by this summer. (and I say this as a person who both had his first DSLR be a Nikon, years ago, and now my current DSLR is a Nikon too. A D5200. And who has a considerable sized lens collection which is in the majority for the Nikon F mount)

            • TheShepherd

              Yes, I was referring to the limitations currently imposed by the full frame sensor and 4k recording, thermal issues, which is why the A7S records 4k externally – and which would only be exacerbated with an even higher mp sensor.

              In ‘flak’ they are taking I don’t mean what Sony might be dealing with directly in emails and letters, I would have no knowledge of that, I am referring to the flak from the community publicly such as those claiming it the primary reason the GH4 is better. As well as others like DPR, who felt it so significant and so disappointing that it could not record internally they would literally just leave out any 4k video specifications (fps, bit rate, etc) for the A7S in the Video Specifications section of their preview comparison against the GH4. (and they didn’t claim it to be an oversight, they specifically stated because it was not an internal capability…)

            • KnightPhoto

              Aha then for heat reasons 4K video is where bodies may need to diverge for video bodies from still to manage all that heat. On the GH4 does it record 4K internally? For the GH4 they’ve also got that ginourmous add on, do you have to have that to record the 4K?

            • TheShepherd

              Well in Sony’s case the thermal issues are primarily due to how it charges and reads the sensor in video mode (the entire sensor is read) so there could be a higher thermal threshold if it did line skipping like most other slr/vid equipment, but Sony wanted it that way. It should result in less rolling shutter effect, or at least smoother less noticeable effect, and moire reduction, but unless it has more (yet to be seen) benefit in 4k output it doesn’t seem to be a significant reduction in 1080p. It also contributes to its increased ISO sensitivity for video as more data is read by the sensor. Thermally speaking, something with a smaller sensor (like the GH4) generates less heat by comparison regardless of how the data is read.

              The GH4 does record internally hence the rationalization that some have that it is ‘better’ than the A7S, all else being equal, and depending on the need that may be a significant factor.
              To my knowledge there is nothing gained in external recording on the GH4 except bit level of the data (10bit externally versus 8bit internally) the other specifications (bit rate, fps, rez) are the same regardless. External recording does of course provide more storage, though that would be a benefit for anything capable of recording externally so not specific to the GH4.

            • KnightPhoto

              Thanks I appreciated your thoughts on 4K recording. In a way the restriction of the A7S to external recorders for 4K make sense and for serious work shouldn’t be that big of a deal. It sounds like we will need a new breed of 4K-capable sensors and low heat electronics to work with them.

              Personally I’m not rushed as we also need additional resources in post in terms of storage, processing power, 4k monitors, agreed 4K standards, and not to mention zero delivery-to-client options at present 😉

        • Sebastian Rasch

          That was only 1280×720 however and it took years before Nikon introduced 1080p. Most other manufacturers already had 1080p video by that time. The D4S is the first camera to have 1080p@60fps.

          • David Peterson

            Sure, FHD didn’t come for a while after for Nikon. But Nikon was certainly the first to not just implement video, but HD video too.

            Is a pity how they slacked off afterwards, but now Nikon has firmly grasped the lead again in the Canon vs Nikon battle for video. As since the D5200’s release Nikon has now been a much better choice for 95% of people than Canon. (is just a pity most don’t realise that :-/ )

            Oh, and the D4S wasn’t the first DSLR to get FHD 60fps. That was the Nikon D5300 which was released the year before 😀

            Though Sony and Panasonic beat Nikon to it, but they’re mirrorless, not DSLRs.

            • Sebastian Rasch

              The entry level cameras upscale. They don’t do real FHD.

            • David Peterson

              It is true many cameras don’t actually resolve 1080 lines, Canon DSLRs are known for being notoriously bad at this. They’re soft.

              But the Nikon D5200/D7100/D5300/D3300 are very *very* good video cameras 🙂 Certainly the resolve a higher resolution than say a 5DmkII does.

    • neversink

      And why do you want 4K? The standards haven’t been established yet, and once the standards are agreed to one way or another, then some of the equipment out there will suddenly become worthless and obsolete. There are very few production being shot in 4K. 4K televisions don’t really exist, but expensive monitors do. Are you on the cutting edge of production technology. But if that’s what you want, I hope you enjoy it.

      • David Peterson

        You don’t need a “standard” or for 4K TVs to be wide spread for it to still be very worthwhile to shoot in 4K 🙂 I’ll be getting a 4K camera by the end of this year for production work.

        • neversink

          The signal has no standards, which is very confusing if you want one device to work with another. That’s one of the major problems with 4K so far – you will need some kind of conversion algorithm or conversion box. But each broadcast outlet seems to have developed their own signal with different quality outputs, with Quad-link HDI being the most used, but certainly not yet accepted by the industry.
          So i suggest looking at the different 4K transmission signals of the device before buying to suit your purposes. I have no idea what will be the accepted protocol in the future. Something else might pop up before this settles. Buyer beware.

          • dclivejazz

            I thought the main benefit of 4K now is improved IQ when it is downsampled to 1080p. Could be wrong, though, since I know practically zilch about video, but that might be enough for some to crave 4K.

            • Depends on the downsampling used and the source quality.

          • David Peterson

            You’re fundamentally missing my primary point. It doesn’t matter if 4K is not yet sorted on the delivery side. As it already makes sense in production use (such as myself), even if you’re just outputting at 1080 (or less).

        • mikeswitz

          Have you actually seen 4k on a real monitor? I have and right now it sucks–doesn’t look nearly as good as Vision Stock. why so many amateurs are screeming for 4K is beyond me.

          • David Peterson

            a) I’m not an amateur videographer
            b) I’m not going to be shooting on film, *NOBODY* does for my market. So comparing it to film is pointless (even though the difference between film and high end video is such nearly everybody can not tell the difference, but that debate is irrelevant to the core point here), rather it is best to compare against what is currently being actually used.

            • mikeswitz

              If you think I was saying you should shoot film than you are not a pro. Because you can shoot “video” with your DSLR does not make you a pro. If you don’t understand 4K and want to use it “for your market” without having ever tested it and thoroughly understand it’s application makes you an amateur screaming for the latest technology.

            • David Peterson

              I regularly shot paid video gigs that I make a living from. Sooo… you’re saying I’m not a pro, what are you?

              When it comes to the depth of my knowledge of where current technology is going I can quite comfortably say I know more than most video professionals that I know, even ones who have been working at it longer than I have.

              So yes, there is absolutely undoubtedly benefits for 4K. It isn’t an essential that everybody needs. But certainly all camera companies should be bringing it in, and it isn’t just that they’ll be adding 4K but also that it is a strong indicator that the company is finally taking video seriously as they should and I expect that mind change would be filtering through elsewhere.

            • mikeswitz

              Trust me, I’m a professional filmmaker, been shooting and directing movies since the seventies. Most of my credits can be found on IMDB.
              Your third paragraph is just a word salad, not making ac ace for anything, much less the need for 4k in a DSLR. You want to become a real pro use a camera that is “video” dedicated. If you’re shooting weddings with a 4k DSLR and the bride sees your dailies she’ gonna hit you over the head with that camera. If you’re shooting local industrials for the internet you absolutely do not need or want 4k. Until 4k is ready for prime time you are just a lackey for the electronics industry by sreaming “I want my 4k and I want it now.” I actually applaud Nikon for not putting 4k in their cameras until they are ready.

            • David Peterson

              Bride? Dailies? I LOLed you put those two words together in the same sentence! 😛 Somehow after that I doubt you’re doing wedding cinematography?

              There is benefit in post to use 4K, even when shooting talking head corporates for the web!

              Would you want to shoot photos with only 5 megapixels? Or even only 12 megapixels?

            • mikeswitz

              Isn’t “wedding cinematography” an oxymoron?

            • David Peterson

              Not at all. Google it. It is at a totally different level to your usual “Uncle Bob with a handycam”.

            • mikeswitz

              Oh, if Google says it’s so,,well then….. Although I think the ASC and the ACS might disagree.

            • mikeswitz

              Isn’t “wedding cinematography” an oxymoron?

  • I know the tilting LCD screen is a feature that some people might like…. but I still hope it doesn’t have one.

    • Scott

      Don’t use it. What difference does it make to you if it has one but you never use it?

      • TheShepherd

        Maybe they don’t want something they have an interest in using to become something that ends up broken and flopping around…

        • Scott

          Leave it set to open and never use it and there is no reason it would end up ever being broken and flopping around.

          If you hit your camera hard enough to break the hinge while it’s in the recessed position then you’re probably going to break the camera that lacks the ability.

      • It’s not about using it or not. It is about avoiding more vulnerabilities of a camera to damage. More exterior moving parts, more things to be cautious of.

        • Allen_Wentz

          So just do not use it; very little vulnerability when closed. But do note:

          1) Flip LCD is a huge value add for many different kinds of pix.

          2) Flip LCD allows the display to be closed against the body. IMO much preferable to toylike plastic snap-on LCD covers.

          • T53

            Well, to each his own. I’m sure many would love to see it for video and crazy perspective stills but I I’d much prefer it not be on the new body. Nikon has never put it on the top pro bodies including the new D4s and the just released D810 and I suspect the reason is it compromises the integrity of the body.

        • Scott

          I’ve been using my D5100 for 2 full years now. 60,000+ frames including sports, concerts and landscapes (sand, water, climbing) and have never run into any issues with the screen and I use it flipped out all the freaking time.

          I think you’re worry about nothing honestly and you’re missing out on the functionality.

          I’m definitely going to miss it if/when I upgrade cameras and it’s not available on my next camera. It will certainly feature heavily in my decision process.

  • KR Productions

    Seems like maybe the 750 designates a new configuration, as it’s out of the expected 610,810 model nomenclature.
    Maybe it will be a mirrrorless model.Someone was speculating Nikon was using the 1 line as a testbed for mirrorless tech.
    Looking at the Nikon 1 autofocus system in Live View mode, it is definitely top notch. I use my V1 and FT1 adapter w/ good glass for shooting video, and it is simply awesome.
    If this new 750 incorporates that kind of tech… look out! It’s going to be sweet!

    • Mirrorless…… really?

    • Sebastian Rasch

      Gonna be a common-or-garden DSLR.

    • TheShepherd

      A ‘mirrorless action camera’ is an oxymoron..

      If the specs we have heard are real, and Nikon really has that usage slated, it will not be mirrorless.. Not to mention, as nice as some think Nikon mirrorless lenses are, they pale in comparison to FX lenses in the AF performance needed for ‘action’.

  • Sebastian Rasch

    The names keep getting weirder. I thought I just understood the new nomenclature and then this – D750? Why 50? All other cameras are at 10 or 100 (D810, D7100) at the moment. So D720 would’ve made sense.

    • so it will take years before they update again the D750 to D760.

      • Sebastian Rasch

        Hehe like the D700 which was on the market for more than four years. That actually makes sense. 😉

    • Rock Kenwell

      To signal that this is a big jump up from the D700. The upgrades to the D800 and D600 were mid-cycle refreshes. The D750 will have significant leaps in technology relative to the D700.

    • Allen_Wentz

      Logically, such a significant jump in pixel count should be more than just an x10 change in nomenclature.

  • Larrry

    Now that they have over-saturated the DSLR market, stacking models on the same full frame sensor, time to lose the bulk and look at mirrorless alternative with the same sensors. They already have the form factor, just dust off the FM2 which can be a little narrower due to the lack of a film drive requirement, and retain the depth for current lens, perhaps with a removable attachment to support dedicated lens.
    Consider FM2 dimensions 5.6 x 3.5 x 2.4 vs Sony A7 5.0 x 3.7 x 1.9 and the weight, 19oz vs 14oz would obviously drop with replacement of mechanicals.

    • arachnophilia

      keep dreaming. look at the Df. the electronic stuff takes a lot of room. if you’re going to have a circuit board and LCD behind the requisite f-mount flange distance, you have a thick camera.

      • amaas

        Stick the Df next to an F80 and an A7. Realize that the Df is so big because Nikon engineered it to use as much in the way of off the shelf bits as possible (it’s really a mix of D610 and D5200 with a new top cap & front cap).

        If you stuck a mirror box & prism on an A7, you’d get something about the size of an F80, just a little deeper.

        • arachnophilia

          look at the top plate of the A7. notice where the sensor is set, according the mark.

          you’re looking at about 27.1mm behind the sensor on the A7 models. plus the 46.5mm for the nikon flange focal distance, and you’re looking at 73.6mm. the Df is 66.5mm thick. if you stuck a mirror box and prism on an A7, you’d get something bigger than the Df.

        • KnightPhoto

          The Df is so big because it supports autofocus and has an LCD. It can’t get much smaller.

          • amaas

            The F80 also supports AF and has a FX pentaprism finder and is barely larger than the A7, the LCD only adds depth, not width or height, which is where the Df is oversized.

            The DF is significantly larger than it needs to be, however if you consider how much of it comes from the equally oversized D6x0 bodies (which should be a LOT smaller for their build & ergonomics) it makes sense. Lots of D600 bits in the Df.

            • KnightPhoto

              the width of the F80/Df are only 2mm apart (call that a wash). The Df is 11.5mm taller. But the Df is also 5mm narrower than the F80D.

              I do agree there are lots of D600 bits in the Df. I just think a mirrored FX DSLR can’t get a lot smaller than a Df.

              A mirrorless FX camera, yes that can be designed smaller than a Df.

  • Quasimodo

    Oooh no that won’t do at all.

    D700/D750 sounds so dated. That won’t look good on the strap.

    I was hoping for D900, or D810H at least

    • Jonathan

      Get a Blackrapid strap. Problem solved.

  • neonspark

    well, for all that said they wouldn’t buy the D800/810 because of the high pixel count but would buy a 5DmkIII killer, let’s see if you put your money where you mouth is.

  • ereshoping

    Now theyve done this will it be a D450 next???

    • groucher

      DFm or DFe I hope.

    • neonspark

      this is the D400 only with an FX sensor. Why people keep holding on to that DX camera as anything exciting is beyond me.

      • Jonathan

        I hold on to it because I don’t want to sell my excellent DX glass, and spend 1.5x-3x more to get FX glass.Though I’m happy for the D700 folks.

    • bgbs

      They will probably have a rotating nub to switch it from 750 to 450. In 450 mode you will get 1.2 crop DX and 4.5 fps.

  • frostphotography

    I am also wondering about the D750 name, I can only assume that Nikon sees it as halfway between the D700(12mp) and D800(36mp), therefore the D750 which is 24mp..

    • nobody

      It will do 7.5fps, that’s why 🙂

      • frostphotography

        or.. it will be 750 minutes after you buy it that nikon will issue a recall notification…

  • Duncan Dimanche

    ….16mpx is plenty enough for an “action” camera !!!!!
    ummm I really thought that they would try to compete with the amazing low ISO of the Sony A7s…. but at 24mpx it doesn’t stand a chance really…

    i’m still exited !
    1080p at 60fps will hopefully be there…

    • ul

      SO true!

    • amaas

      What amazing low ISO of the Sony A7s?

      Right now the D810 beats the A7r in IQ by a massive amount due to Sony’s boneheaded lossy RAW compression and Nikon’s better image processing and lower base ISO
      D610 beats the A7 in IQ by a moderate amount, for the same reasons as the D810 vs A7r, only Sony’s cripple
      Df beats the A7s in IQ by a significant amount due to higher-resolution sensor with similar high ISO.

  • nik

    too much fuss on its name.. Nikon can call it BABOON for all i care .. just make sure it came with D4 internal

  • Jose Victoriano

    native ISO 200-6400 not good and Willl be the same price of the old but good canon 5d MK III

    • Stephen Corby

      I’m sorry… where did you see native 200-6400 ISO? I haven’t read that anywhere.

      • Jose Victoriano

        Under ” New Nikon D750″ found a post post even with some photos.

        • State your source or don’t speak at all.

        • Stephen Corby

          Link it here or I don’t believe it. A 200-6400 Native ISO? That would be one of the dumbest moves Nikon could possibly make.

          • Neopulse

            ISO 100 is the base pretty much for Nikon sensors and has been for a long time. I wouldn’t dwell on his comment to be honest.

            • amaas

              Actually, it does make sense for a DX body, which other aspects of the rumoured spec do as well. 200-6400 is believable for a 8+fps 24MP DX sensor.

              I’m wondering if there’s a mix of D9300 and D750 specs mixed up (which makes sense if Nikon does the right thing and launches the D9300 at the same time using basically the same body).

            • Neopulse

              The Nikon D300/s could also do 8 fps and was able to go down to Low ISO 100 (around mid-2009 as I recall when it was released). And yeah, it is quite the standard ISO 100 now even on DX cameras like the D7100 and even the D3300. It’s definitely a standard amaas and even higher than 6400 is possible already even on the D3300.

              I wouldn’t talk about the D9300 to be honest. it’s kinda the pseudonym for the D400 that many are hoping for. But I don’t get what you meant by a mix between those 2 models if there isn’t even concrete stats of either to even make such a assumption. It’s all speculation at this point.

              What I will say is that why hasn’t Nikon done something similar to what Canon did with their 7D model by having dual processors that help with faster processing, longer FPS bursts and buffer size with any past model. A high MP DX (like a 24MP sensored) camera with high fps would benefit from a similar setup especially with such features (I’d like to believe that). Although I fear it’ll be quite pricey though.

            • amaas

              The D300(s)’s ISO range was 200-3200 with ISO expansion to Lo 1 and Hi 1 (100 and 6400 equivalent, although in reality it was ISO 125 and ISO 4000, the D300 lied about its ISO ratings), the D7100 has an actual ISO 100 setting. Many of the Nikon DX bodies have had a base ISO of 200. Of course expansion above 12,800 is common now.

              A higher frame rate pushes the sensor & processing harder, which generally means a restricted ISO range compared to similar but slower bodies (the D7100 acheives its max frame rates by reducing the amount of sensor it’s reading, rather than by reading the sensor faster, which doesn’t have the same effect).

              So a 200-6400 native ISO range makes sense for a high-fps DX body. It doesn’t for an FX body where even the fastest has a wider range. I’d expect expansion to a minimum of 25,600 and possibly 51,200 as well as a Lo 1 setting for an ISO 100 equivalent

              As to what I mean about a mix of two models, the specs don’t make sense for a single model, but do make sense if you consider two closely related action camera’s, one DX and one FX, of which we have seen a mix of specs for, so some of the specs are for the DX body and some for the FX body.

              As to the D9300 name, I don’t expect to see a new DX body with the old naming convention, so a higher-end DX body would be in the D9x00 series rather than a D400 (which would instead be something like an FX body based on the D5x00 frame, not that I expect such a thing).

            • Neopulse

              The naming bit you mentioned does make sense. Let’s see if they follow through on it 🙂 and thanks for the ISO explanation before by the way. Very informative.

            • KnightPhoto

              There is a processor architecture difference preventing Dual processors from helping on our Nikon’s. There are some threads around, probably it was on the dpreview FX forum where i read the explanations…

            • Neopulse

              I’m pretty sure though there could be problems with past processors in that aspect. But every 2-3 years a new EXPEED processor is made. And it is possible to create a form of compatibility when designing the chip before testing and then mass production. My two cents though.

            • peter

              FPS in NOT limited by CPU. It’s limited by sensor readout speed.
              The Fujitsu Milbeaut does 12FPS @ 24MP, so processing speed will not really help empty your buffer faster.
              Simultaneous write to dual cards would thought…

            • Neopulse

              Could’ve sworn it had to be processed the image output format before being written onto the card (since it is recorded in RAW, jpg, DNG, etc).

  • Stephen Corby

    Please have at least 8-9 FPS and a deep buffer… we’ve been asking for years! Not all of us can afford a D4S, yet we still shoot sports!

    • Brent Busch

      Amen! I love my D700 for drag racing. I’d love to have a D4/D4s but my finances won’t allow it.

    • Alderaan

      8-9 fps 24mp sensor vs 11fps 16mp sensor of the D4s… I would choose the 8-9fps 24mp sensor every time, even if they were at the same price point… I am afraid there must be some real drawbacks to maintain any interest in the D4s if these are the specs of the 750. What would you choose in this hypothetical situation?

  • Exm3racer

    Well this sucks…. for my bank account. Love mostly everything about my D600, size, weight, handling, sensor, viewfinder, mode dial, drive modes, and was planning on keeping it for a long time. Don’t love FPS, focus area, focus speed, crippled bracketing, crippled LV, metering could be improved on D600. Unfortunately this new camera sounds like they will be upgrading all the things I don’t like about my D600, a perfect camera for me. I shoot professionally real estate, non-pro landscape (but selling prints), non-pro portraits, amateur sports, and general all around.

    why do you guys think they need to improve the sensor beyond the D800? It has pretty much same noise and DR as D800 already.

  • catinhat

    Smaller/lighter body and the flip screen make me think that whatever Nikon want to name this new arrival and however they may want to market it, it won’t have the solid pro feel of the D700, nor will it have the D4 sensor like the D700 had the D3 sensor. Ergo, it will be no real D700 replacement for those who believe that D810 isn’t. A real D700 replacement would be the D4 sensor in the D800 body with a slightly downgraded processor relative to the D4/D4s, which would result in slightly slower AF and lower FPS. Anything less than that will simply be a signal from Nikon that the D700 line is dead. I expect a camera which will stand in the same relation to the D700 as D7100 is to the D300, better in some ways, much chincier in others.

    • bgbs

      what if it’s mirrorless? Why not? Nikon 1 has a very capable AF.

      • I seriously doubt that.

      • Fark

        Because… mirrorless… requires… a …. different…. lens … registration.

        • amaas

          Nope.

          Mirrorless can benefit from a shorter lens registration, but does not require it.

          The Pentax K-01 shows that. Yeah, it sucked, but not because they kept K mount. Also the Sony SLT’s are basically A mount mirrorless (ok, they have a mirror to enable PDAF, but Sony’s probably going to retire it with the next generation as they’ve finally gotten a handle on on-chip PDAF)

        • What amaas said. The big difference between mirrorless and mirrored cameras is that one must use a TV relay from the sensor, while the other shots the image from the lens through mirrors, to the eye. That’s it. The mount is completely unrelated. Ditto the lenses, ditto the flange.

          What a mirrorless Nikon F camera could do is return Nikon’s FF cameras to traditional SLR sizes, rather than continue on the modern vein of creating SLRs that at their smallest, are still double the volume of their film forebears.

        • OttoVonSchriek

          This is not really correct. One of the advantages of mirrorless is that the flange distance is less, meaning that wide angle lenses can be smaller lighter and achiece better image quality, but there is no optical reason why legacy lenses cannot be used on them simply by adding a tube to fill the space that was occupied by the mirror.

          In fact many mirrorless users are using legacy lenses.

          The catch comes with autofocus. Traditional AF lenses designed for phase AF sensors have a single shot servo mechanism whilst the contrast AF (which was the only option in early mirrorless cameras) required a continuous servo. This meant that finding the correct focus meant itterating any number of single shot focus attempts.

          This made foccussing very slow, as seen when focussing a traditional DSLR in live view or using the EOS-M with legacy lenses!

          The latest generation of mirrorless cameras have on sensor phase detectors; this means that traditional AF lenses can be used in thier normal phase AF mode and hence with the same performance.

          The phase detectors are argualbly not yet as good as those found on top sports DSLR’s such as the D4s, but are considered as good as if not better than those deployed on more economic or non sports models.

          Nikon’s V series mirrorless cameras produce very effective AF results, and there is no reason to suspect that this technology could not be deployed on a larger sensor. In fact it should be easier.

          Nor is there any reason to suspect that V series technology could not be used with existing F mount lenses to achieve the same performance as they did with a DSLR. It would make sense for Nikon (and Canon) to pursue this feature, as the biggest handicap of Sony’s system is the lack of lenses whilst makeing a mirrorless with F mount makes it much easier for Nikon users to stay with Nikon.

    • Is the D700 the only body you would like to reference? Obviously the D3 without the upgraded buffer had it’s downfalls too…but I don’t beat on about that either…

      It is highly unlikely there will be a one for one “mini D4” aka D3/D700. You have to let go of this absurd idea.

    • Jonathan

      I sincerely hope the body is pro with an AF-On button, and a large buffer, at the very least. Then it would be a welcome upgrade/replacement for the D700. Even if it didn’t match the low light capabilities of the D3s-D4s. The D610 low light is still quite good and an improvement over the D700. Hopefully this will not be like the D7100 is to the D300. I picked one up in the store, promptly put it back down. Felt cheap compared to my D300.

  • D700s

    There is simply no way to please people. Cry babies, want, want, want. Nothing is ever good enough but, you keep buying. I’m thinking most of the complainers here are people you hate to be around. Always unhappy, feeling like they are cheated, complaining life isn’t fair, and believing everything should be free. It might be a hit, might be a lemon, but one thing is certain, it will be bashed to no end here in the forum. We haven’t even seen it yet and it’s already total crap. HaHaHa! Rage on haters! Oh, and please threaten to switch to Canon. That always makes me chuckle….

    • neversink

      Complain, complain, complain
      Whine, whine, whine
      Oy Oy Oy

    • Harry

      i dont agree with everything you said but still couldn’t help the smile on my face as I read it and the nice laugh at the end for the Canon punchline 🙂

    • Sebastien

      Agreed. Even if the body is perfect, they will complain about the name D750

    • catinhat

      There have been two requests made: D700 body “as-is” with all the specs “as-is”, and an updated sensor (not 36MP); and a D300 body “as-is” with all the specs “as-is”, and an updated sensor. If Nikon made these two and didn’t screw up quality, they would be receiving the greatest praises all around. Simple.

      • D700s

        Says you. You would be happy but there would be an uproar because it doesn’t have GPS, WiFi, and 4k video. Face it, there isn’t a camera out there that meets every desire. Even if there were, everybody would complain that it wasn’t free. That’s why I dismiss all these comments and buy each new camera anyway. So far, I’ve been very, very happy. I love my Nikons and I guess that makes me a fan-boy since I prefer the best equipment out there. And no amount of rebuttal will sway my opinion. Have wonderful day….

        • Neopulse

          I applaud your comments, glad I’m not the only one who feels the same way.

        • catinhat

          I love my Nikons too, but that’s probably because I don’t buy every model they come up with. 😉

      • mikeswitz

        That makes absolutely no sense. First of all there have been so many requests made that is impossible to address them all. Secondly how can “specs” be “as is” with updated sensors. If you want everything “as is” why do you want a new model?

        • catinhat

          This obviously makes sense to me. The only area where D700 and D300 can use some improvement is low light performance, which is why an updated sensor could help a bit. But you’re right, I don’t really care for a new model all that much as I like the colors coming out of the older models quite a bit better. So, a new model with the current Nikon color palette may not convince me after all, who knows. A D300 update could also use a slightly beefed up AF to bring it in line with the D700, — but I’m nit-picking here. As for everything else, those two dinosaurs are still doing a fine job for me, and when I really need super low light, I can pick up the D3s.

          • mikeswitz

            okay, then.

  • Rock Kenwell

    At long last, the Goldilocks of FX bodies is coming!

  • Jonathan

    if the D300 replacement is not hot on the heels of this D750, I may have to bite the bullet, sell my DX gear and go full-frame. Falling right into Nikon’s trap….

    • Sports

      At least, if the D750 offers all the “action features”, the trap would be …. ahem… acceptable. We’re forced to pay more, and we get more. Not the case with the D810 … you got something excellent, but MUCH more expensive, and not at all what you really wanted.

    • You might as well start saving up now – the D7000 series is as close as you will ever see as a D300 replacement.

  • PhotoLaw

    Well, let’s just hope there’s not a need for a D760 in six months. I don’t know though… it seems like they want retail to be $3k+(usd) before you get the 51 focus points. Like the D700/D3s, if it has close to the same spes as the D4s, it’s going to cut into sales. Price -vs- AF points is what I’m watching on this this one. If it’s under $3k, my gut says 39 AF points. If it’s over $3k, why not just get a D810?

    • Sports

      I don’t think you’re right, but IF it turns out to be the case, the product is a joke (“action camera” with an inferior AF). Then, Nikon would deserve to go out of business.

    • amaas

      D7100. $1k, 51-point AF.

      I can see 39-point for a $2K FX body, but not one over $3K (the Df was such a 1-off in terms of engineering that caused the price bump or Nikon’s paying stupid prices for the 16MP sensor, it should have been cheaper than the D610, not more expensive)

  • Pixyst

    All it means is that whatever your needs, there will be no reason to buy a non-Nikon DSLR.

  • Michiel953

    I want an 850. Oh wait, a 950!

  • Richard

    8fps
    24mp AA covered sensor
    1x CF card slot
    Tilt/flip LCD
    1080p/24/25/50/96
    2,899$

    Something like that?

    • peterortphoto

      Considering the D610 has two SD slots, I find it unlikely this would only have one slot.

      • Stephen Corby

        It could have a CF/SD slot… One of each.

        • It would be nice if both were of the same type. Having to carry two different types of cards is expensive, and in the event of failure, a bugger to chase down.

          • Stephen Corby

            True, but other recent Nikon cameras have done one of each and I image it will be all SD or a split between the two… I don’t see two CF cards in this thing.

            • Certainly. I would prefer Nikon to go dual SD or dual CF. Not one of each.

            • KnightPhoto

              Get with the program guys, this is an action cam, dual XQD cards or go home!

            • Oh, sure, why not? But not one XQD and one in SD or CF. Nikon need to make up their mind. Actually, the entire Japanese camera industry needs to do that.

              I have a Fujifilm X-T1 and X-Pro 1 and X100s. Each operate completely differently, have a different hardware interface, etc. I can pick up a Nikon D5000 and use it similarly to a Nikon D800 without fuss. Yes, a few functions are menu-buried, but at least the hardware interface is somewhat translatable.

              But a lot of stuff in the Nikon interface is poor, one being the mixing of different card types. That is, however, Japanese culture. There isn’t a standard interface anywhere for anything here.

            • Allen_Wentz

              Dual XQD we wish.

  • Jan74

    I think the D750 will be the first mirrorless FX from Nikon. Lighter, faster, better video performance because of the missing mirror….. When this is getting real, it´ll be my next cam.

    • jtorral

      Sony will be light years ahead in this area. Nikon and Canon are coming into the mirror less arena a day late and a nickle short. That shipped sailed a long time ago on the SS Sony and they are the clear leaders in this technology. If only Nikon would have entered the game back then, it would have made a real difference. But for now, I will take the A99 or A99II whenever it is released with the same focus performance of the A77II. NOTHING can focus as quickly and intelligently as that little camera. Would love to see this technology on the A99II.

      • Nikon and Canon are indeed behind. But a lot of us who have ‘jumped’ to other camps because their mirrorless cameras are good, did so because mirrorless cameras are the same size as our favourite Nikons of all time: FA/FM/FE.

        If Nikon can release an F-mount mirrorless in a traditional size, I’ll say piss off to all of my Fujifilm gear. I wont’ be alone. Behind or not, Nikon and Canon still have a LOT of clout, and carry expectations.

      • Neopulse

        The A99 II is indeed a camera I’d like to see

  • D700 family, tilt screen, action, small and light.

    Am I the only one who thinks this doesn’t add up?

  • John Martinec

    Anyone want to play “Guess the launch defect with the D750”?

    • karel moonen

      OK. Tilt Screen, ding thats one

      • T53

        Deal breaker for me.

  • David

    The 7×00 family inherited features from the D700, possibly there’ll be a DX beneficiary for the D750 features. Really *really* tired of waiting for Nikon to give some love to the DX semi-pro body and lens lineup. Canon seems to be positioning themselves to benefit from this..

  • Foot of our stairs

    I’m not sure if Nikon is ready to jump yet, but if they are I would do it here at this price point. And if were my decision I would do it now. This would be a Mirroless DSR style camera with reduced back focus and new lens mount.

    • catinhat

      “reduced back focus” — lol, — not eliminated, just reduced.

      • OttoVonSchriek

        I do believe he was thinking abount the flange distance and meant to use the term retro focal 😉

        Of course if it is a mirrorless then the focus would be spot on.

  • artdecade

    Ah could this be the one where Nikon finally get it right for the D700 upgraders, good high iso with low noise, fast and effective focus, 51 point AF, decent but not too big mp, good buffer, pro quality, and decent price (you can keep the video…). Fingers crossed.

    • Brent Busch

      And the ability to bump up the FPS with a grip/battery combo like the D700 and D300(s).

      • mikeswitz

        And the ability to bake killer carrot cake!

    • Connor

      Everything except the pro build quality and ergonomics it looks like. That would be my dream camera if it did have the same video features as the D810 as well. One can only dream…

  • Brian Richards

    The name doesn’t seem to make sense. Is this Nikon admitting they are 5 generations behind on the 700 series? Will we soon see a D499?

    • artdecade

      I think the D750 name is probably to distance themselves from the troublesome D600 and make a (re)connection to the past success of the D700 and its fans/target audience.

  • karel moonen

    BOOO shame on Nikon, “Tilt Screen” Knock that S**T off

    • Carleton Foxx

      No good photo has ever been shot with the camera between 1.5 and 2 meters from the ground…so why is a feature that makes it easier to get shots from unusual angles such as above your head or below your knees a bad idea?

      • karel moonen

        Really Carleton! what are you haveing issues shooting up-skirts, Wait till you jam that flip screen or rip it off the body, Then you can say wow this is a bad idea.

        • Allen_Wentz

          Nonsense. There is no history of Nikon tilt LCDs having substantial breakage issues. And the benefits of tilt LCDs are very substantial.

          • karel moonen

            Sure thing Al, just keep telling yourself that. Oh buy the way ” Did you think the flip phone was cool”.

  • Fark

    Predictions:

    1) On the product box features checklist will be an item reading: I’d like people to wonder if I’m a professional when I’m out shooting in public. Will a D750 camera allow me to continue this ruse?

    2) The camera will be crippled. By crippled we will mean it doesn’t perform at nearly the same speed as $6000 USD D4.

    3) The price is unfair because Nikon *owes* the people who’ve bought second hand D700s something. If Nikon would only cut the price by 99 percent they could grow through increased market share! Or something.

  • Stilllearning

    Question I have is will this be announced before or after Labor Day?

  • stuck_788

    D750? it would be better call it D710/D720

    • FredBear

      Well with the frequency with which Nikon have updated the D700, this model will be ‘mid life cycle’ when the D650 and D850 are released so Nikon are looking to keep it ‘current’ for some time by naming it the D750.

  • ernie824

    Finally lol a replacement for D700 again let’s wait and see

  • stormwatch

    Ok. I woudl be satisfied with new AF module, new redesigned Expeed, Gps, Wifi, 24mpix, 8fps, rotating display, 1080p 120-60-30 4K 30,24,25, double card slots and no hidden problems like in the previous model. This has to be grejky perfect!

  • ZZ

    Can this be Nikon’s preemptive answer to 7D Mk II? … alas, no D400 will be forthcoming … Nikon saying yet again, go FX …

  • xrb

    If D750 comes with 24mp (same with D610) with D8xx body, 51 AF and 6-8 fps..gps and wifi would be great! I’d be over this..flip out screen wouldn’t be bad too but not necessary. I’m still on the fence for D810..price and 36mp file size is kind of putting me off..

    • Connor

      Same with me, but this is rumoured to have a mostly plastic body like the D7100 in which case I’ll deal with the huge file sizes and get the D810. I said it when the DF came out and I’ll say it again, no camera above 2,000$ that is supposed to be used for action should have such a cheap build. If I want a journalism/ action camera but don’t have 7,000$ for a D4S and don’t want soft video, then I need to get a D810.

      • xrb

        That sucks if it is a plasticy body 🙁 D8xx body would be awesome.

  • luca

    D750 is for upgrade the 7xx series and has specs between the D700 and the d8xx series. So 24 MP, 51 focus point and 9/10 fps. Price around 2200/2300 dollars/euro. It’s sufficient to make a side by side comparison between D610, D700 and D810 on dpreview.com to have the answer.

    • Marcel Speta

      i guess 8fps with Battery Grip, for sure not 10fps otherwise it would kill D4s sales …

      • Allen_Wentz

        Such a camera at 9/10 fps would have 10x D4s sales. Vendors like Nikon should fear sales losses to competitors and not be overly concerned about cannibalization.

        • Marcel Speta

          i don’t want to steal your illusions, but try to count MPx and frame rate and compare it to Expeed4 capabilities. By simple interpolation you may realised that 24Mpx @ 10fps is over Expeed4 bandwidth…
          So 8fps is realistic, 9fps is at the edge and from marketing point of view i do not believe Nikon will do that. Honestly 8fps@24Mpx is just fine for many of us….

          • Allen_Wentz

            8 fps suits me just fine. I was just responding to the killing D4s sales comment.

  • Rishi O.

    I think the D750 will use the Sony A7s 12 Mpix sensor and will be a hybrid high iso photo/video camera that does 4k.

    • Neopulse

      Sorry, but I seriously doubt it

    • Alderaan

      I hope not

    • KR Productions

      That’s very similar to the Sony a7s…. and if Nikon is doing all that jazz in a regular sized DSLR body with ample easy to access controls, I’ll gladly take one.
      That a7s definitely has amazing low light performance. Would love to have that in a full sized body just for ergonomics.

  • Matthew Saville Baldon

    When is Photokina, and might there be any upcoming Nikon press events that are likely release dates? I think for previous Photokina announcements, both the Nikon D3 and D700 were already announced by this point in August, but I could be wrong…

    =Matt=

    • Jeff Hunter

      September 16-21, 2014. Google is your friend 😉

  • yrsued

    Why Speculate and bash Nikon on your speculations.

    If it is what you want, you will buy it, if it isn’t, you won’t. Simple!!

    I can’t make an intelligent assessment on this body until I see the REAL Specs the day of Release, from NIKON Directly. I will make a decision that day.

  • Satrio

    In term of price, would you think that D750 be higher than D610 ?

    • Neopulse

      Most likely yeah

  • Neopulse

    They named it “D750” because it takes Nikon several years to update once the D700 while the other ones are getting almost yearly updates.

  • catfish252

    Sounds like a souped up D600/D610, may have been the D650 until the D600 problem struck and now it’s too early to bring out the successor to the D610 — just added a new processor board and a swivel screen to the D610 chassis

  • Sebastien

    Where did you get the D750 name? I hope it’s not from this old 2009 rumor http://m.digitalrev.com/#article?id=4270 😉

  • kassim

    D750 vs D810 -> 24mp@8fps vs 36mp@5fps..don’t you all think that’s too close? But if D750 is cheaper, decision making will be easier.

    • FredBear

      If it’s cheaper than D810 and with similar specs then the sales will pour in.
      Nikon needs sales.

      • Alderaan

        Even at the same price I would take the hypothesised 750 without any hesitation…

        • FredBear

          At the same price as the D810 I would still evaluate both and buy the one which is most suitable to my needs, even if it is the one considered as the ‘lesser model’.

  • Back to top