I need help making an informed decision.

I dropped my Nikon D750. After, the image was dark, except for a horizontal band at the top of the image. The autofocus seemed not to be working. The focus ring would cycle in and out and stop.

The repair estimate is $770.

$345 for "replace autofocus system, clean calibrate, clean front group element, clean lens."

$425 for "replace CCD image sensor and squence plate [not sure if he meant 'sequence' plate], sensor clean, firmware update."

Some of my considerations:

I've sent this question to the repair shop also, but I'm sure many of you all are in the know: is the autofocus issue isolated to the lens or is it part of the camera repair? I want to understand if I eliminate the autofocus part of the repair, will I have a fully working camera, in which case I could use other lenses and/or get a replacement lens on my own.

I love that D750. It's my walk-around camera, but it's a hobby--I'm an enthusiast--not a professional. I also have a D500 mostly for sports, but that's a DX and the D750 is an FX. The D750 is almost 8 years old but it only has ~25K shutter actuations. I have to decide if it's worth $770 to repair that camera or would my money be better spent upgrading.

Thanks, y'all.

The $345 repair reads as if it is solely within the lens. Newer (mid-2000s and later) AF lenses utilize ultrasonic motors within the lens. Plus, the front group element is only within the lens.

Judgement call on whether to upgrade or not. If you can afford it and want to upgrade, by all means, have a look at the D850 or others.

quote:

Originally posted by VictimNoMore:
If you can afford it and want to upgrade, by all means, have a look at the D850 or others.

I salivate over the D850. The huge size discourages me a bit for walking around, especially all day on vacations. Plus I already had the D750, but without it, the D850 is more of a consideration.

From what I’ve read you own two of the best cameras ever made so fixing the d750 seems reasonable to me especially if heavily invested in F mount glass. I read that the Z mount glass is steps above the F mount so if not heavily invested in F mount lenses and are thinking about expanding the number of lenses you own it might be time to look at the Z mount.

I use a Fuji X-T1 for hiking and a d500 for wildlife photography. The d750 really interests me for its excellent low light capabilities.

Silent

I'm not an expert, but I do currently have 4 Nikons. You might consider this option:

For the $770 you should be able to buy a good used D750, possibly with some warranty from one of the big well known camera shops.

You should be able to sell your existing D750 for a couple hundred bucks for "parts" thus recouping that money towards a replacement D750.

Just a thought, best wishes to you.

I well remember when one of my Nikons somehow got wet (never figured out how hit happened) and went unnoticed for a few weeks. I sent it in for repairs, but got back a totaled out diagnosis, not repairable at all. That sucked. I have had bad luck getting electronics repaired.
.

quote:

For the $770 you should be able to buy a good used D750, possibly with some warranty from one of the big well known camera shops.

Googled used D750's, KEH comes up, haven't used them but they get 4.9 stars and close to 70,000 online reviews seems quite positive

Link Review

KEH has one for $874 in excellent condition, $994 for Excellent plus.

Seems like the $750 repair is still under a good D750 used price.


Link to Used D750

They also offer Buy or Trade options for used equipment... Perhaps check into the sell option for the camera, see what they offer and Trade up

Link Trade Sell

quote:

Originally posted by HRK:

quote:

For the $770 you should be able to buy a good used D750, possibly with some warranty from one of the big well known camera shops.

Googled used D750's, KEH comes up, haven't used them but they get 4.9 stars and close to 70,000 online reviews seems quite positive


Link Trade Sell

They are good to go. I bought many things from them. Lens, speedlights, and smaller stuff.

Their rating system is spot on. If anything the gear is often better than the rating they assing.

I've been a Nikon user since I purchased my Nikkormat FS way back in 1972. My current goto camera is a D750 and I feel your pain. I would advise that you pick up a lightly used D750 From KEH. I have purchased from KEH and it was an excellent experience, the lens set I purchased arrived in a better than stated condition and has functioned well for me for many years. I'll also note that seeing some of the prices posted in this thread I'm now playing with the idea of getting a spare for my D750.

The repair seems reasonable considering that Nikon sells a refurbished D750 body for $1250.
https://www.nikonusa.com/en/ni...750-refurbished.html

My first question would be how accurate is the quote?

Once that work is done will it be a "for sure" total fix or is it possible that they will then find another issue that needs repair at additional cost?

You don't mention which lens is involved. I am assuming you don't think the lens repair is worth it and you are only looking at the body cost?

It may be fate telling you it's time to go mirrorless

I bought my Daughter a D850 a few years back along with some lenses, I don't think she ever used it.
I can check to see if she wants to sell it, interested?

^^^^^Jump on that, Keystoner.

I would definitely not repair. It can be real iffy how well the repair goes and for how long. That amount is almost halfway to a Nikon Z5 with a Z24-200mm lens right now. Very nice next generation of Nikon.

quote:

Originally posted by comet24:

quote:

Originally posted by HRK:

quote:

For the $770 you should be able to buy a good used D750, possibly with some warranty from one of the big well known camera shops.

Googled used D750's, KEH comes up, haven't used them but they get 4.9 stars and close to 70,000 online reviews seems quite positive


Link Trade Sell

They are good to go. I bought many things from them. Lens, speedlights, and smaller stuff.

Their rating system is spot on. If anything the gear is often better than the rating they assing.

Agreed! ALL of my camera equipment over the past 20+ years has come from KEH, and they seriously underrate most everything; i.e., if is says EXC, it's gonna be better than that... EXC+ will get you one that looks brand spankin' new! Their gear comes with a 14 day return policy if you don't like it, plus a 6 month warranty. Buy with confidence!

quote:

Originally posted by 911Boss:
My first question would be how accurate is the quote?

Once that work is done will it be a "for sure" total fix or is it possible that they will then find another issue that needs repair at additional cost?

You don't mention which lens is involved. I am assuming you don't think the lens repair is worth it and you are only looking at the body cost?

It may be fate telling you it's time to go mirrorless

They warranty the camera repair for 4 months and the lens repair for 6 months.

The lens is the 24-120mm kit lens. I was happy with it but now I'm considering the probably inferior but longer range 28-300mm F3.5-5.6G. It's got to be inferior--right?--no gold ring.

As far as mirrorless--it's frustrating. I guess it's part of all technology becoming obsolete. In photography, you build up an investment of equipment and lenses, and then they go and change it on you. Nikon's Z series--they're ugly, boxy, primitive looking cameras to me. I haven't held one, but looking at them, I don't "see" how they can feel more ergonomic and comfortable than my D750. That camera fits me like a glove. And the D850--it's like cell phones--I don't want a bigger one.

Thanks for all the replies, y'all.

I had a 24-120 f/4 that I was happy with on a D80. When I got a D800, it really exposed how not-sharp that lens was.

Printing full frames at normal photo sizes you'd never notice, but big enlargements (either crop or print size) were much softer than the camera was capable of.

The original 28-300 was significantly worse, optically. I'm not sure about the second version.

I upgraded to the D800 around 2012, and also bought into the Panasonic/Olympus Micro Four Thirds compact mirrorless system at the same time.

I just bought a Z7II and some Z lenses about a month ago.

It's early days but I think I like the Z7II more than the D800.

I'm not sure where you got "primitive looking" for the Z series. "Boxy" I guess I get.

In order to accommodate the viewfinder mirror, a Nikon F-mount SLR the lens flange is 46.5 mm from the surface of the film or sensor. That's more than 1 3/4".

The camera body HAS to be THICK behind the lens - and above it, for the pentaprism/pentamirror arrangement. In order to be remotely comfortable to use, the camera has to be thinned out to the sides of the lens mount and the "shoulders" sloped down from the viewfinder hump. Smooth it out, and it looks blobby or rounded.

The distance from the lens flange to the sensor surface on a Nikon Z-mount camera is 16mm (about 5/8"). You don't need all that depth for the mirror, and you don't need space above the lens for a pentaprism/pentamirror. The entire camera body can be a lot thinner. You don't need to sculpt the body down away from the lens mount in order to make it comfortable to use. So it isn't all blobby and rounded.

So I can see the Z-series looking "boxy" to someone only used to SLRs. They don't have the hump for the "R" part of an SLR (the mirror and pentaprism/pentamirror arrangement).

As far as ergonomics... the Z-series have pretty much the same controls in the same places as Nikon DSLRs. The bodies are a lot thinner than SLR bodies, but they're still big camera bodies. The Z7II is less than 1/2" narrower than the D800 and the depth from the camera back to the front of the grip is less than 1/2" thinner. I haven't used any of the other Z-series cameras, but the ergonomics are perfectly fine on the Z7II. It has a big, comfortable grip and all the controls are within easy reach where I expect them to be.

There are some drawbacks to mirrorless, but improving technology has fixed most of them, and there are also some advantages.

When I started with the Micro Four Thirds system, the resolution and dynamic range of the EVF was pretty poor, and it was sometimes laggy. Mirrorless cameras at the time all used contrast detection autofocus rather than the phase detection autofocus used in SLRs. Both of those things were sometimes pretty frustrating.

Now the EVFs are much better and many mirrorless cameras have on-image-sensor PDAF sensors.

I see thinner camera bodies without a big viewfinder hump as a benefit. The much shorter flange distance means lenses can be made smaller. The EVF is much more usable in dim light than an optical viewfinder, and an EVF can do useful things like mark areas with blown highlights or mark the perfectly in-focus parts of the image live before you even take the picture. In some situations I find being able to turn those things on VERY useful.

But there's also nothing wrong with a DSLR, and if that's what I have in my hands, I'm perfectly happy using one.

Thanks, Mal. Yes, I've been considering the Z7II due to my present situation. I don't want to spend $3K though. I can't believe Nikon doesn't have something between the Z5 and Z9 quality-wise for ~$2K. The Z5 is too basic and the Z9 is too professional (plus hideous looking). The Z7 would be perfect at $2K. The esthetics have been growing on me.

Well, there’s always the Z6 or Z6II.

What?! How the hell did I miss that?!

Wow, the soul searching begins. I don't know how I completely missed that model, but it's a definite consideration now. That $2k figure is the Goldilocks price-point for me.