Tag Archives: sensor

What the f/#?

The Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 Di VC USD zoom lens has a focal ratio of f/2.8. This defines the largest aperture the lens is capable of having at all focal lengths throughout the zoom range. Operating at f/2.8, the focal length selected will be 2.8X the size of the aperture. While the focal length range is 70-200mm, the range of largest apertures is 25mm at a 70mm focal length to 71mm at 200mm focal length.

The Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 Di VC USD zoom lens has a constant focal ratio of f/2.8. This defines the largest aperture the lens will have throughout the zoom range. Operating at f/2.8, the focal length selected will be 2.8X the aperture. With a focal length range of 70-200mm, the widest aperture varies from 25mm at a focal length of 70mm to 71mm at a 200mm focal length. (Bill Ferris)

Let’s nerd out with some tech talk. Let’s chat about focal ratio.

Focal ratio is a rarely seen or heard phrase in online photography blogs and forums, which is surprising when you consider the important role focal ratio plays in photography. Focal ratio describes the size of a lens’s focal length relative to its aperture. It is typically expressed as an f-number, such as f/2.8. Ironically, when photographers start talking about lens aperture, it’s more than likely they’re actually discussing focal ratio. Let’s see if we can sort all this out.

We’ll begin at the beginning. Focal length is typically the first number mentioned when describing a lens. A 50mm lens has a focal length of, wait for it…50mm or roughly two inches. One may be inclined to think focal length is the distance from the front of the lens to the back, but it’s not. Focal length is the distance from the optical center of the lens to the image plane (film or sensor) where the image is formed. The optical center is usually inside the lens and is sometimes referred to as the point of convergence; the point where two light rays converge and cross.

The above diagram shows a cross section of the Nikkor 50mm f/1.4 lens. The focal length of the lens is 50mm, which is measured from the optical center of the lens to the image plane at the sensor.

The above diagram shows a cross section of the Nikkor 50mm f/1.4 lens. The focal length of the lens is 50mm, which is measured from the optical center of the lens to the image plane at the sensor.

Focal length determines how much the image is magnified. This is typically described as the angle of view produced by the lens. A 50mm lens produces a 47° (on a diagonal) angle of view at the image plane of a 35mm camera body. A 24mm lens delivers an 84° angle of view and a 200mm lens presents a 12° angle of view. Since the angle of view produced by a 50mm lens is similar to that of normal vision, it is known in 35mm photography as a normal lens. 24mm is a wide angle focal length and a 200mm is a telephoto lens.

Of course, 35mm is just one of many photographic formats. A photographic format is defined by the physical size of the medium used to record the image. In film photography, 35mm describes the length of the long side of a slide or film negative. Today’s digital cameras use light-sensitive CMOS sensors to record images. In full frame digital cameras, the sensor measures 36mm on the longest side. APS-C digital cameras have sensors that are about 23mm on the longest side. The camera in your smartphone or tablet is probably built around a sensor no larger than about 10 millimeters. What does sensor size have to do with this topic? A lot.

The above diagram illustrates the relative sizes of common digital camera sensor formats. The largest shown is a full frame (FX) sensor. The smallesst (lower left corner) is representaive of a typical smart phone (1/2.3") sensor.

The above diagram illustrates the relative sizes of common digital camera sensor formats. The largest shown is a full frame (35mm equivalent) sensor. The smallest (lower left corner) is representative of a smartphone (1/2.3″) sensor.

The smaller the sensor or film medium, the farther you need to be from your subject to match the field of view delivered by a given focal length lens. Imagine standing 10 feet from your subject with a full-frame DSLR camera and framing your subject head-to-toe using a normal 50mm lens. If you were to mount the same lens on an APS-C camera body, that camera’s smaller sensor would cut off or crop a portion of the image produced by the lens. You would need to step back to a distance of about 15 feet to reproduce the angle of view you had with the full frame camera body.

Another factor to consider when shooting with a “crop sensor” body is the effect of sensor size on depth of field. Depth of field (DOF) is the range of distances – nearest to farthest – in an image that appear acceptably sharp and in-focus. DOF is determined by magnification (lens focal length) and by the lens focal ratio or f-number. In a nutshell, bringing the subject closer decreases depth of field. Moving the subject farther away increases depth of field. As depth of field increases, a deeper portion of the image appears in focus. As depth of field decreases, only a narrow or shallow range looks sharp and in focus.

Both photographs were made using a Nikon D610 with Tamron 70-200 Di VC USD zoom lens at 125mm. The image on the left was shot at f/2.8 and has a much shallower depth of field. The image on the right was shot at f/32 and presents a much wider depth of field.

The above photographs were made using a Nikon D610 and Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 Di VC USD zoom lens at 125mm. The image on the left was shot at f/2.8 and has a much shallower depth of field. The image on the right was shot at f/32 and shows much more of the field in focus.

As mentioned, focal ratio also has an effect on depth of field. For any given focal length, increasing focal ratio (making the f-number larger) increases depth of field while decreasing focal ratio (making the f-number smaller) reduces depth of field. We’ve already discussed the cropping effect of shooting with a smaller sensor. Stepping back to reproduce a desired angle of view increases depth of field. Zooming or changing lenses to shoot with a shorter focal length (to match the field of view provided by a full frame sensor body) increases depth of field.

One can compensate for the increased depth of field which results from the adjustments commonly made to expand the angle of view delivered by a crop sensor camera by shooting with smaller f-numbers. For example, shooting with a 35mm lens at f/1.4 will allow an APS-C sensor body to produce photographs having the same framing and depth of field as images made from the same position using a 50mm f/2.0 lens on a full frame body.

Let’s explore this in a bit more detail. Suppose you’re shooting with two cameras, one full frame and the other a crop sensor, and using the same 50mm lens with both. Its effective focal length (the focal length matching the angle of view delivered to the sensor) will be 50% longer or 75mm on the APS-C body. At f/4, the 50mm lens will have an aperture of 12.5mm. If we step back to compensate for the more narrow angle of view, the effective focal ratio (the focal ratio delivering an equivalent depth of field from the distance at which this lens matches the angle of view delivered to a full frame camera) will be f/6. Its effective 75mm focal length divided by the 12.5mm aperture equals six.

Do you see the relationship? We’re using an f/4 lens on an APS-C body. When the goal is to match the angle of view and depth of field produced by a full frame camera, we can determine the effective focal ratio at which a crop sensor camera needs to operate by dividing the focal ratio of the lens by the crop factor. The crop factor is 1.5 and the effective focal ratio (for depth of field) is f/6.

Here’s an illustration.

These images illustrate how to use a crop sensor camera to match both the angle of view and the depth of field delivered by a full frame body. I used a Nikon D610 and Nikon D90 to make photographs of the same toy caboose. Both cameras used a Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 Di VC USD lens. The lens was mounted on a tripod and the bodies switched out to ensure the lens would not move from its position during the test. The D610 uses a 36mm sensor and shot at 105mm, f/4 to make both images. The D90 uses an APS-C sensor with a 1.5X crop factor. I shot at 75mm, f/4 to make the first image. Comparing the first (top) images, we see that the D90 delivered a similar angle of view as the D610 but a comparison of the background shows the D610 to have a more shallow depth of field. The background in the D90 image is just skosh nearer to being in focus. For the second image, I applied the conversion factor and shot with the D90 at 70mm, f/2.8. A comparison of this image with the D610 image shows both to have delivered similar angles of view and similar depth of field. (Bill Ferris)

These images illustrate how to use a crop sensor camera to match both the angle of view and the depth of field delivered by a full frame body. I used a Nikon D610 and Nikon D90 to make photographs of the same toy caboose. Both cameras used the same Tamron 70-200 f/2.8 Di VC USD lens. The lens was mounted on a tripod and the bodies switched out to ensure the lens would not move from its position during the test. The D610 is built around a 36mm sensor and was used at 105mm, f/4 to make both images. The D90 has an APS-C sensor with a 1.5X crop factor. I shot at 70mm, f/4 to make the first image. Comparing the first (top) images, we see that the D90 delivered a similar angle of view as the D610 but a comparison of background detail reveals the D610 to have a more shallow depth of field. The background in the D90 image is just a skosh nearer to being in focus. For the second image, I applied the conversion factor and shot with the D90 at 70mm, f/2.8. A comparison of this image with the D610 image shows both to have delivered similar angles of view and similar depth of field. (Bill Ferris)

So, we’ve demonstrated that, in comparison with full frame cameras, crop sensor camera bodies produce images having narrower angles of view and, when adjustments are made to compensate for this, increased depth of field. We’ve also demonstrated that you can compensate for these performance factors. Either increase the distance between you and the subject or use a shorter focal length to increase the angle of view. Shoot at a smaller focal ratio (f-number) to make the depth of field more shallow. Next, we’ll explore the relationship between sensor size and length of exposure. Here’s a heads up, the outcome may not be what you expect.

I used my Nikon D610 (full frame) and Nikon D90 (APS-C) to take a series of exposures of a toy train engine. The toy steam engine was set up outside on a small tray table. The sky was overcast with nice, even lighting throughout the test. Both bodies used the same Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 Di VC USD lens, which was set at 70mm. I selected ISO 200 on both cameras for all exposures. The zoom lens was set up on a tripod and the camera bodies were switched out without changing the position of the lens. I used each camera to make exposures at f/2.8, f/4, f/5.6, f/8, f/11, f/16, f/22 and f/32. I shot in aperture priority on both cameras and let their internal brains select the proper exposure.

Below, are pairs of images showing the photographs made at the same settings with the two bodies, side-by-side. All are unedited JPEGs. Keep in mind that the sensor in the D90 body cropped the image to match the angle of view produced by a 105mm lens.

In this comparison, photographs of the same subject made with a Nikon D610 (left) and a Nikon D90 (right) are shown, side-by-side. Both cameras shot at ISO 200. Both cameras used the same Tamron lens at 70mm. The lens was mounted on a tripod to ensure it would remain in the same position throughout the test. For each focal ratio, both cameras used the same exposure. (Bill Ferris)

In this comparison, photographs of the same subject made with Nikon D610 (left) and Nikon D90 (right) cameras are shown, side-by-side. Both cameras were set to ISO 200. Both cameras used the same Tamron lens at 70mm. The lens was mounted on a tripod to ensure it would remain in the same position throughout the test. At each focal ratio, both cameras metered the scene as having the same brightness and chose the same exposure. (Bill Ferris)

Let’s talk more about this f-number thing. You’ll recall that focal ratio describes the ratio of the focal length of the lens to the aperture of the lens. A 50mm lens at f/2.0 has a focal length that is 2-times its aperture. Therefore, the lens aperture at f/2.0 will be 25mm. At f/4.0, the aperture is 12.5mm; at f/8.0, 6.25mm and so on. The relationship between aperture and focal ratio is pretty straight forward: for any given focal length, decreasing aperture increases focal ratio and increasing aperture decreases focal ratio.

Rarely, however, do photographers talk about the f-number as a focal ratio. More commonly, they talk about it as a lens aperture. They talk about an f/2.0 lens having a larger aperture than an f/4.0 lens. It’s an accurate statement, if we’re talking about the same lens at different focal ratios. But this is just one of many scenarios where focal ratios are compared.

Let’s consider the scenario of discussing different lenses. Suppose we’re comparing a 50mm lens to a 100mm lens. Suppose the 50mm lens is being used at f/2 and the 100mm lens is set to f/4. One might think the 50mm lens, by virtue of having a smaller f-number, will have a larger aperture. In fact, both lenses have identical 25mm apertures. It simply isn’t the case that every f/1.4 lens has a larger aperture than every f/8 lens. In reality, it is quite common for a lens operating at a large f-number to have a larger aperture than a lens working at a small f-number. I would wager to guess that there isn’t a focal ratio at which a 600mm lens doesn’t have a larger aperture than the fastest focal ratio smartphone.

One quality that does translate across different lenses and cameras, is the speed of the imaging system. What does speed have to do with photography? To understand, it helps to think of a properly exposed photograph as one where a certain intensity of light needs to fall upon the sensor at the image plane. Think of light as water, the sensor as a container used to collect water (light) and the lens as the opening through which water is poured into the container.

That said – and this next point is critical – a properly exposed image is not determined by the total quantity of light delivered to the sensor. The length of a proper exposure is determined by the average brightness of the image falling on the sensor. To better understand this, we’re going to introduce a new concept: surface brightness.

The above illustrates the concept of Surface Brightness in photography. For a properly exposed image, the camera's optical system must collect and deliver light having a surface brightness (brightness or intensity per square millimeter) to the sensor. This is represented by the evenly deep layer of "blue" light collected bu the sensor. If you use the same lens on a crop sensor body, the same intensity of light (represented by the central red region) is delivered to the sensor. Being smaller, the crop sensor collects less total light. However, the surface brightness of the image (the brightness per square millimeter) is identical to that of the larger sensor. (Bill Ferris)

The above illustrates the concept of Surface Brightness in photography. For a properly exposed image, the camera’s optical system must collect and deliver light having a surface brightness (brightness per square millimeter) to the sensor. This is represented by the thick layer of “blue” light collected by the sensor. The thickness of the layer represents the intensity or average brightness of the image. If we use the same lens on a crop sensor body, the same intensity (thickness) of light is delivered to the sensor. This is represented by the central red zone on the sensor. Being smaller, the crop sensor collects less total light. However, the surface brightness of the image is identical to that of the larger sensor. (Bill Ferris)

Earlier, a correct exposure was described as one where a container (sensor) is filled to the correct depth (intensity) with water (light). It doesn’t matter if the container is large enough to hold one gallon or 100 gallons. As long as it’s filled to the proper depth, the exposure will be good. In this example, the depth of the water represents the average brightness of the image at the image plane. Another way to describe the average brightness or intensity of light, is to talk about image surface brightness.

Surface brightness is defined as a brightness per unit area. In photography, we can define surface brightness as the brightness of light per square millimeter falling on the film or sensor. It is not a total volume or quantity of light. Rather, it is an average intensity of light. Surface brightness is strictly determined by the focal ratio of the optical system. The lens f-number determines the length of the exposure needed to deliver light of a certain intensity to the sensor. A full frame camera, crop sensor camera and smartphone camera focused on the same subject – and all operating at f/2.0 – will deliver the same light intensity per square millimeter (the same surface brightness) to their respective sensors during the same length exposure.

The relative sizes of full frame (pink) and APS-C (blue) sensors is illustrated above. The effects of a crop frame sensor include an increase in effective focal length and an increase in effective depth of field.

The relative sizes of full frame (pink) and APS-C (blue) sensors is illustrated above. The effects of a crop frame sensor include an increase in effective focal length and effective depth of field.

Despite the fact that a crop sensor doesn’t collect as much total light during an exposure as a full frame sensor, the intensity or surface brightness of the images formed on both sensors will be the same. We saw this at work in the above illustrations comparing exposures made with the D610 and D90. Despite the fact that, during each set of exposures, the D90’s smaller sensor collected less total light than the full frame sensor of the D610, the image made by the D90 was still properly exposed. This is because the exposures made by both cameras produced images having identical surface brightness at the image plane.

This set of images compares performance between crop sensor and full frame DSLR bodies. The images in the left column were made with a Nikon D90. Images in the right three columns were made with a Nikon D610. Both cameras used the same Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 Di VC USD zoom lens, which was set up on a tripod to ensure it would not change position during the test. Both cameras used ISO 200, center point average metering and were operated in Aperture Priority. The subject in these photos is a scale model of the Lunar Excursion Module (LEM) from the Apollo program.

This set of images compares performance between crop sensor and full frame DSLR bodies. The images in the left column were made with a Nikon D90. Images in the right three columns were made with a Nikon D610. Both cameras used the same Tamron 70-200mm f/2.8 Di VC USD zoom lens, which was set up on a tripod to ensure it would not change position during the test. Both cameras used ISO 200, center point average metering and were operated in Aperture Priority. The subject in these photos is a scale model of the Lunar Excursion Module (LEM) from the Apollo program.

The above illustration allows us to compare the performance of crop sensor and full frame cameras. The first column of D610 exposures matches the settings of the D90 images in the left-most column. Focal length and focal ratio are the same. In most cases, both cameras’ metering systems selected the same exposure. The most obvious difference between the D90 and first set of D610 images is the wider angle of view delivered by the full frame sensor. For the second set of D610 images, I zoomed in to match the effective focal length of the D90. The angles of view of these images closely match the corresponding D90 exposures. The second set of D610 images were shot at f/2.8 and clearly display a more shallow depth of field. For the third set of D610 photographs, I changed the focal ratio to match the depth of field presented in the D90 images. Notice that the exposures for these images are all 1/800-second. They’re longer to compensate for the larger focal ratio.

Focal Ratio is the key to understanding how different cameras, lenses and sensors are able to make good photographs using the same or similar length exposures. Focal ratio determines the length of time needed to collect enough light to make an image having the required surface brightness. For any two cameras operating at the same ISO and delivering the same angle of view, the exposure times will typically be the same.

So, the next time you read or hear a photographer talking about an f/1.4 lens having a larger aperture than an f/2.0 lens, stop and give that statement some thought. If the lenses being compared are a 20mm f/1.4 and a 50mm f/2.0, the 50mm lens will be operating with a larger aperture. The 50mm lens will have a 25mm aperture at f/2.0 and the 20mm, f/1.4 lens aperture will be just over 14mm. However, due to its faster focal ratio, the 20mm lens will deliver more light per square millimeter to the sensor, faster. Because the f/1.4 lens produces a brighter image – an image having a higher surface brightness – the length of the exposure will be shorter.

In photography, the objective is not to deliver the largest volume of light to the sensor. The objective is to deliver the needed intensity (surface brightness) of light to the sensor. Speed is everything and focal ratio is the key.

Now, get out there and shoot!

Bill Ferris | August 2015

Nikon D750 – Let the Stoning Begin

The Nikon D750 (image used courtesy of Nikon USA)

In photography as in life, it sometimes seems no good piece of kit goes unpunished. In 2012 as the world imaging community prepared to descend upon Cologne, Germany for the biennial imaging fair known as Photokina, the two leading manufacturers of consumer and professional digital cameras introduced major new products. About a week before the fair Nikon introduced the D600. Days later, Canon introduced the EOS 6D. Marketed as entry level full-frame CMOS sensor bodies, the D600 and 6D were intended to attract enthusiasts and crop-frame camera users to make the move into full-frame. The D600 joined Nikon’s flagship D4 and professional D800 and D800e in the FX category of full-frame DSLR bodies. Canon’s flagship 1DX and professional 5DMkIII welcomed the EOS 6D in completing that full-frame lineup.

Fast forward to the present day and, as the 2014 edition of Photokina opens, Canon has not introduced a new full-frame body since 2012. By contrast, Nikon has introduced four new FX (full-frame) DSLR cameras, including the just announced D750. The D750 features an impressive spec sheet:

  • An all-new 24.3 MP CMOS sensor
  • Nikon’s most advanced 51-point auto focus system (incl. group area AF)
  • Nikon’s flagship Expeed 4 image processor
  • Native ISO range of 100 to 12,800 (expandable to ISO 50 and 51,200)
  • Full 1080p/60 HD video (incl. auto aperture/auto ISO smooth adjust)
  • Light but strong carbon fiber and magnesium alloy frame
  • Nikon’s first FX body to feature built-in WiFi
  • The first full-frame DSLR by any manufacturer to sport an articulating rear LCD screen
The Nikon D750 features an articulating rear LCD screen (image used courtesy of Nikon USA)

The Nikon D750 features an articulating rear LCD screen (image used courtesy of Nikon USA)

The response to the D750 on the InterWeb has been immediate and impassioned. Much of the response has been intensely negative. Peruse the popular rumor and fan boy sites, and you will likely see comments such as – Another toy camera from Nikon…It’s disappointing…This is an instant fail IMO…This sucks.

So, why all the venom directed toward a camera that, on paper, makes a strong case for being the best all-around DSLR on the planet? To understand, we need to go back in time to another Photokina summer. In July 2008, Nikon introduced the D700, a professional full-frame DSLR body. It was just the second FX body developed and released by Nikon and was packaged with many of the performance specs of the flagship D3. The D700 featured the same sensor as the D3, a rugged frame, similar controls and layout as the top line pro body and a burst rate that, when paired with Nikon’s battery grip, topped out at an impressive eight frames per second. D3 shooters bought the D700 as their backup body and many pros bought the D700 as their primary body. Adding the rugged crop sensor (DX format) D300 to the mix gave Nikon a trio of professional bodies to meet the needs of dedicated still photographers,

In digital photography, the lifespan of a flagship body generally runs between two and four years. Canon unveiled the EOS 1DX in October 2011. This body replaced the EOS 1DsMkIII (2007) and was a shot across the bow of the long-in-the-tooth Nikon D3. Thus, it was not at all surprising when Nikon announced the all-new 16 MP D4 in January 2012. The D4 replaced the D3 and immediately established itself as a worthy adversary to the 1DX. With the D4’s release, D700 and D300/D300s shooters waited for the next shoe to drop. Which would it be, a replacement for the D700 or the D300?

One month later in February 2012, Nikon announced the D800 and D800e. Previously, Nikon had built a reputation of developing low megapixel (relative to Canon) pro bodies that excelled in low light. With the 36 MP D800 and D800e, Nikon more than doubled the resolution of the Flagship D4. These bodies quickly became favorites of landscape and portrait photographers. However, loyal D700 shooters were left wanting more. While the D700 could make images at an impressive 8 FPS, the D800/D800e barely made 4 FPS. What they wanted was the D4’s sensor, Expeed 3 processor and auto focus system in a D800 body.

An overhead view of the Nikon D750 (image used courtesy of Nikon USA)

By mid-2012, the Web was abuzz with talk of a D700 replacement being announced at the next Photokina. When the D600 emerged as Nikon’s major announcement in Cologne, D700 fans were not pleased. Despite its 24 MP (two-times the D700’s resolution) CMOS sensor, superior low light performance and 1080p video recording capability, the D600 was missing several key features in the eyes of D700 loyalists.

  • No professional build quality. The D600 offered weather resistance but didn’t have the D800’s rugged full magnesium alloy frame.
  • No 51-point auto focus system. The D600 inherited the D7000’s 39-point AF system.
  • Not a pro layout. The controls and menus were designed to be familiar to D90 and D7000 shooters.
  • No 1/8000-second shutter speed. The D600 peaked at 1/4000-second.
  • No 1/250-second flash sync speed. The D600 peaked at 1/200-second.
  • No 8 frame per second burst rate. the D600 peaked at 6 frames per second.

What D700 owners had asked for was a D4 imaging system in a D800 body. What the D600 offered was basically an FX version of the consumer D7000. What was Nikon thinking? Well, they may have been focused on costs and customer retention. In business, one of the keys to maximizing profit is to reduce operational costs. The rugged, pro-build quality of the D4 and D800 bodies were more expensive to produce than the consumer quality D7000. While a hypothetical D700 replacement would need to be manufactured in Japan at greater expense and narrower margin, the D600 could be manufactured in Thailand at lower cost and a higher profit margin.

Another factor Nikon must have considered was the migration of point & shoot photographers to smart phones. The rise of the smart phone had given the general public a take everywhere camera with immediate access to Facebook and Twitter where they could share photos with family and friends. Point & shoot camera sales were in free fall in 2012 and Nikon must have been concerned this trend would eventually hit the crop sensor market. Rather than invest in a format they considered to have a questionable future, Nikon chose to entice enthusiast and crop sensor photographers to upgrade to full frame. The D600 was priced at 1/2 to 1/3 the cost of Nikon’s professional FX bodies yet delivered comparable image quality. Yes, the D4 was better in low light and, yes, the D800 delivered higher resolution, but the D600 was no slouch. It offered comparable performance at a consumer price…or so it seemed.

Soon after D600 bodies started shipping. Reports surfaced on the web of oil and dust particle build up on the camera’s CMOS sensor. One D600 owner produced a time lapse video showing an accumulation of debris and oil that would choke a horse. Nikon had a problem. Their gift offering to enthusiast photographers was turning out to be a Trojan horse. However, Nikon refused to acknowledge what the reports and evidence clearly indicated – the D600 shutter mechanism had a problem. Nikon’s failure to immediately address the problem would allow it to grow into a major public relations disaster that deeply tarnished the company’s reputation as a manufacturer of quality imaging products.

In February 2013, Nikon finally issued a service advisory on the D600. The advisory offered guidance on the correct procedure to use when removing the natural accumulation of dust from a sensor. In essence, Nikon was dismissing the reports as normal dust accumulation. Meanwhile, D600 owners continued to report problems with their cameras and the impact on sales was immediate. When the camera was first introduced in September 2012, a launch price of $2,097 had been set. By November, Nikon was offering instant $100 rebates on their new body. By Christmas, customers were offered a free 24-85mm lens with the purchase of a D600. In January 2013, grey market distributors were pricing the D600 at $1,686. In May, a factory refurbished D600 was priced at $1,560. The camera’s value was in rapid decline and its reputation as a product that had been rushed to market too soon was forever sealed.

In October 2013 – only a year after the first D600 bodies shipped – Nikon introduced the D610. It was announced as a minor upgrade to the D600 but everyone knew it was an attempt to bring and end to the dust and oil disaster. The move backfired. If anything, Nikon’s decision to reissue the D600 with a new shutter mechanism was seen as tacit admission that the dust and oil problems were real. In February 2014, Nikon issued a service advisory to D600 owners offering a free inspection, cleaning and shutter assembly replacement, regardless of the warranty status of their cameras. In March, China ordered Nikon to stop selling the D600. This was followed soon after by a third service advisory that mentioned the option of, on a case-by-case basis, replacing defective D600s with D610s. In August, Nikon reached a settlement in a class action lawsuit with D600 owners. As part of the settlement, litigants were offered new D610s in exchange for their D600s.

To date, Nikon has yet to publicly acknowledge and take responsibility for delivering a camera with a poorly designed shutter mechanism that allows the accumulation of dust, debris and oil on the sensor.

A view of the Nikon D750 interior reflex mirror system (image used courtesy of Nikon USA)

To fully appreciate the damage the D600 dust and oil debacle has done to Nikon’s reputation, consider that DxO Mark tested the D600 soon after its initial release and ranked it as the third-best digital camera sensor on the market. This should have been a time of celebration, with Nikon reaping the rewards of having delivered an outstanding entry level full-frame DSLR camera. Instead, they spent a year in denial and are still in damage control. Even the D610, which by all accounts does not suffer from the dust and oil issue of the D600, has not been able to distance itself from that long, dark shadow.

Which brings us back to the just-announced Nikon D750. In early August when Nikon Rumors announced Nikon’s plan to introduce a new full-frame body at Photokina, the early reports described it as an action camera. Then, came the rumor that the new DSLR would be called the D750. This generated an immediate buzz as people made the obvious connection to the dream of a long-awaited successor to the D700. The online comments quickly focused on the wants of D700 owners: professional build quality, fast and accurate auto focus and a lightning quick burst rate. A D4s sensor in a D810 body is what D700 owners had come to expect.

That is not the D750.

Nikon markets their DSLR cameras in three categories: Entry-level, Enthusiast and Professional. The D750 is Nikon’s top Enthusiast level DSLR camera. Nikon does not market the D750 as a professional camera body. It is not the D4s sensor in a D810 body. Neither is it, as the many critics have claimed, a souped up D610 sensor in a D610 body. And this, friends, is where the D750 story gets interesting. One could fairly describe this camera as a cross over. It borrows features from all digital camera categories.

The D750’s outward appearance is almost identical to the D610. Beneath that enthusiast level surface, lies a completely new animal. The frame is a magnesium alloy, carbon fiber blend resulting in a rugged, weather resistant and relatively lightweight body. The layout of the interior components is completely new for Nikon. This internal redesign created space for fully-integrated WiFi while substantially reducing the size and weight of the camera body. WiFi is pretty standard stuff in consumer bodies. Small size and low weight are definitive qualities of mirrorless cameras. Rugged build and weather resistance are qualities that define professional DSLR bodies.

A side view of the Nikon D750 showing the articulating rear LCD screen (image used courtesy of Nikon USA)

The Expeed 4 processor and 51-point AF system are taken straight from Nikon’s flagship D4s and professional D810. Other features borrowed from Nikon’s professional lineup include full 1080p/60 HD video, auto aperture and auto ISO during video recording, and an industry-leading focus detection range of -3 to +19 EV. The articulated rear LCD is another feature taken from their consumer line of camera bodies. Performance characteristics shared with the enthusiast level D610 include a 1/4000-second maximum shutter speed and a 1/200-second flash sync speed.

In the D750, Nikon has delivered a camera designed and intended to appeal to a broad audience. In so doing, they’ve made a camera that – while incorporating features from several genres – is impossible to peg into any one category. The 24 MP sensor is among the best available…but it’s not the D810’s 36 MP sensor. The 6.5 frame per second burst rate is among the fastest in the market…but it’s not as fast as the 1DX or the D4s. (or the D700) The 1080p/60 HD video recording capability is very good…but it’s not 4K. The build quality is rugged and weather resistant…but it’s not weather proof. It’s impressive feature set is packed into a small, lightweight body…but it’s not mirrorless small.

In a nutshell, the D750 seems to be a Jack of all trades and a master of none. There is, perhaps, one exception. Could the D750 be the master do-it-all camera?

If you enjoy shooting sports, the AF system and burst rate will more than get the job done. In the professional full-frame DSLR category, only the Canon 1DX and Nikon D4/D4s have faster burst rates. If you enjoy portraiture and landscapes, the 24 MP sensor will deliver gorgeous, detailed images. Only Nikon’s D8XX lineup offers higher resolution. On paper, no DSLR does a better job of achieving focus in low light and the high ISO performance of the D750 is among the best in the market. If you enjoy shooting video, the D750 allows production in full HD with stereo audio. The dedicated video professional may be better served by the Panasonic Lumix GH4 or the Sony A7s. However, the D750 offers video functionality that is more than adequate for the enthusiast.

In short, the Nikon D750 looks for all the world like one of the best – arguably the best – choice as the camera that can do it all. If you are a professional photographer looking for a second body, wouldn’t it be nice to replace your current backup with something that is a little smaller and lighter? Something with outstanding resolution and low light performance? A camera with industry-leading auto focus? A camera you can use to capture quality video and sound? A backup body that does all this at a price point below $2,500? If you are an aspiring professional looking for one body that can take on any assignment (or an enthusiast seeking the same) does the D750 look like the perfect all-around performer? This is a camera body that, on paper, appears capable of shooting anything: editorial, sports, wedding, landscape, portraiture, wildlife, street, video…you name it.

Is the new Nikon D750 the best all-around DSLR camera in the world?

Bill Ferris | September 2014