Nikon announced D750

[x-vision]

D610 is the one I think will be most cannibalized ...

If the more expensive model cannibalizes the cheaper one, that's good news for the company, as they are making more money.

The reverse scenario is the one that you don't want.

 

[ritholtz]

DPReview is very positive about this.

http://www.dpreview.com/previews/nikon-d750

 

[sagittariansrock]

...
I think the D810 is still quite a bit at risk of cannibalization, especially due to the price difference.
D610 is the one I think will be most cannibalized, unless they lower the price substantially.
...

Better that you cannibilize your own sales than have someone else do it.

It wouldn't be cannibalization if someone else did it

 

[sagittariansrock]

D610 is the one I think will be most cannibalized ...

If the more expensive model cannibalizes the cheaper one, that's good news for the company, as they are making more money.

The reverse scenario is the one that you don't want.

That's not how it always works. The item to look at is profits, not revenue.
If Nikon was making more profits from the D610 (and that could easily be the case despite the lower price- same body type as D600, fewer features, almost a year into its life cycle) then cannibalizing the D610 will hurt them.
However, as many suggest it might be a way to quietly wrap up the controversy-ridden D6xx line.

 

[x-vision]

That's not how it always works. The item to look at is profits, not revenue.
If Nikon was making more profits from the D610 (and that could easily be the case despite the lower price- same body type as D600, fewer features, almost a year into its life cycle) then cannibalizing the D610 will hurt them.

True. But the safe assumption is that the higher the price, the higher the margin.

However, as many suggest it might be a way to quietly wrap up the controversy-ridden D6xx line.

Hmm. I haven't thought about that - but it makes a lot of sense, actually.

 

[bardamu]

This is the kind of camera that makes people change systems.

Ouch!! Way to throw Molotovs on a Canon forum!

Actually, I don't really agree, but it could certainly have an impact on new entrants to the FF market. The system-change-inducing camera was the Nikon D800/D800E (and, perhaps, the 5D mk iii, for all the disgruntled D700 owners put off by too many megapixels).

Plus, I think the 7D mk ii could be system-change-inducing camera as well, because it is something that Nikon doesn't yet have - a true replacement to the D300s. The D7100 is very nice, but for serious sports / wildlife etc the 7D ii will probably be all over it (buffer, fps, focus etc). However, if Canon could have released the 7D ii with a relevant lens such as a refresh of the 100-400, 300 f/4 or 400 f/5.6 then it might have been a stronger punch into the ribs of Nikon.

The D750 will probably have the effect of dragging down 5D mk iii prices, and resale values.

 

[sagittariansrock]

This is the kind of camera that makes people change systems.

Ouch!! Way to throw Molotovs on a Canon forum!

Actually, I don't really agree, but it could certainly have an impact on new entrants to the FF market. The system-change-inducing camera was the Nikon D800/D800E (and, perhaps, the 5D mk iii, for all the disgruntled D700 owners put off by too many megapixels).

Plus, I think the 7D mk ii could be system-change-inducing camera as well, because it is something that Nikon doesn't yet have - a true replacement to the D300s. The D7100 is very nice, but for serious sports / wildlife etc the 7D ii will probably be all over it (buffer, fps, focus etc). However, if Canon could have released the 7D ii with a relevant lens such as a refresh of the 100-400, 300 f/4 or 400 f/5.6 then it might have been a stronger punch into the ribs of Nikon.

The D750 will probably have the effect of dragging down 5D mk iii prices, and resale values.

+1, except the last comment.
MkIII prices are already on their way down, Canon has made tons of profit on them. Just imagine, if a store could resell a US-model 5DIII for $ 2.7K with commissions for CPW while the MRP is $ 3.2K, then what kind of margin Canon still commands, 2 years after the camera is launched.
What it will do is drag down the prices of the relatively new D810, and that is not good for Nikon.

 

[Sporgon]

..Let's think for a second: who will buy the D610 if they can pay a few hundred more for a D750?
I am more envious of the 20/1.8. I wish Canon made something like that...

As for the 20/1.8... I'm salivating just thinking about it.
I use an old AIS MF 20/2.8 and an AI 20/3.5 and they're both very good, the 3.5 being very compact and light.
it there's slightly better corner sharpness with lower CA in this new lens, it will be very welcome

I'll be interested to see if this lens is anything other than a blurry mess at 1.8, and how deep an aperture it takes to sharpen up the mid frame.

I'm unclear on the real application of these very fast ultra wides. I can appreciate that at f2.8 they have much less vignetting than a f2.8 lens yet they are inevitably worse across the frame in resolution.

An ultra wide that is very good at 2.8 would be interesting because of the high dof produced by that focal length at that aperture.

I'll be interested to see if Nikon have been able to do this but I doubt it.

 

[sagittariansrock]

..Let's think for a second: who will buy the D610 if they can pay a few hundred more for a D750?
I am more envious of the 20/1.8. I wish Canon made something like that...

As for the 20/1.8... I'm salivating just thinking about it.
I use an old AIS MF 20/2.8 and an AI 20/3.5 and they're both very good, the 3.5 being very compact and light.
it there's slightly better corner sharpness with lower CA in this new lens, it will be very welcome

I'll be interested to see if this lens is anything other than a blurry mess at 1.8, and how deep an aperture it takes to sharpen up the mid frame.

I'm unclear on the real application of these very fast ultra wides. I can appreciate that at f2.8 they have much less vignetting than a f2.8 lens yet they are inevitably worse across the frame in resolution.

An ultra wide that is very good at 2.8 would be interesting because of the high dof produced by that focal length at that aperture.

I'll be interested to see if Nikon have been able to do this but I doubt it.

1. 20mm is a range not covered by my 24-70 II (which is excellent at f/2.8- obviating the use of f/2.8 primes between 24mm and 70mm).
2. If it opens as wide as f/1.8 then it is more likely it will be very sharp at f/2.8, which will make it an excellent fast lens for landscape and street.
3. If I need to take shots in very low light, f/1.8 at 20mm still provides sufficient depth of field.