D750 bundle costs more then its parts...

TheLost · Sep 23, 2014

Anybody else notice this?

D750 bundle w/ 24-120 f/4 lens = $3,596.95
Nikon D750 DSLR Camera with 24-120mm Lens 1549 B&H Photo Video

or..

D750 Body = $2,296.95
Nikon D750 DSLR Camera 1543, Nikon D750 Body B&H Photo Video

Nikon 24-120 f/4 = $1,296.95
Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-120mm f/4G ED VR Zoom Lens 2193 B&H Photo

Total Cost: $3593.90

It's cheaper to not buy the bundle... Maybe it costs more to put everything on one box?

or..

Maybe we should expect the bundle to drop in price before the holidays?

astroNikon · Sep 23, 2014

$ 3.05 for a big Nikon box.

Braineack · Sep 23, 2014

oh course it costs more than the sum of the parts; how else would Nikon, the shipping company that boated them from a foreign land, the vendor, and the shipper make money on the deal?

I'll tell you what though: I'd consider selling my 24-70 2.8 VC for that 24-120 f/4.

TheLost · Sep 23, 2014

I guess it comes down to who Nikon expects the buy the D750.

As a DX user who doesn't have any FX glass in the 'normal' zoom range... I'm going to hold off until Nikon offers another body+lens bundle sale.

It just seems Nikon keeps going out of their way to avoid taking my money :confused-72:

jaomul · Sep 23, 2014

Is this a new 24-120 f4. I was going to buy one about a year ago and most reviews were only lukewarm.

astroNikon · Sep 23, 2014

TheLost said:
I guess it comes down to who Nikon expects the buy the D750.

As a DX user who doesn't have any FX glass in the 'normal' zoom range... I'm going to hold off until Nikon offers another body+lens bundle sale.

It just seems Nikon keeps going out of their way to avoid taking my money

You can send me your money if you must.

Braineack · Sep 23, 2014

jaomul said:
Is this a new 24-120 f4. I was going to buy one about a year ago and most reviews were only lukewarm.

that might actually be why i didn't buy it. I just want a little more reach than 70mm.

jaomul · Sep 23, 2014

Ya I went from Canon to Nikon and wanted a lens that matched Canon's 24-105L. From what I read this wasn't the lens

TheLost · Sep 23, 2014

astroNikon said:
You can send me your money if you must.

I would probably end up regretting that less then buying a D750 right now

But i think i'll wait for the next lens rebate before i buy my new D750.

KmH · Sep 23, 2014

Same price for the bundle at Amazon.com.
Nikon D750 FX-format Digital SLR Camera w/ 24-120mm f/4G ED VR AF-S NIKKOR Lens

Nikon expects people who can afford, want, or need FX to buy FX.

Frankly, I'm amazed at all the FX furor.

When do you ever get to look at a photo at 100% that has 6016 x 4016 pixel dimensions (image resolution), not counting making prints?

Derrel · Sep 23, 2014

jaomul said:
Ya I went from Canon to Nikon and wanted a lens that matched Canon's 24-105L. From what I read this wasn't the lens

I think the NEW Sigma 24-105mm f/4 stabilized lens is the new leader in this segment of the universal, wide to short telephoto zoom category. My understanding is that it is better than the Canon 24-105-IS USM L-series, and also sharper and better than the Nikkor 24-120 VR.\

As for the "FX furor" KmH mentioned...one can literally SEE the more-pleasing images made by FX cameras in many portrait and social photography situations. Instead of one's short telephoto prime lens choice being a crappy-bokeh Nikkor 50mm lens, instead, FX users can take portraits indoors and in real, actual rooms, and in real, actual places like patios, back yards, restaurants, and so on using a high-quality 85mm lens which has better optics and better lens drawing characteristics than a 50mm lens. Same thing in garage studios and smaller shooting areas; the FX format cameras throw moderate distance backdrops more out of focus than do smaller-format sensors, using the lenses that actually exist in the marketplace.

The single biggest issue with DX and smaller format cameras for "people" work is that at the distances encountered in studios, homes, churches, back yards, and office rooms, with APS-C, and even worse with m4/3 sensors,is that the Depth of Field is rapidly approaching the hyperfocal distance of the short lens lengths used on those smaller formats AT THE DISTANCES we actually encounter in the real world. At 10,15,20 feet, everything in the background on shots made on a smaller-format camera looks pretty recognizable. Measured out, the DOF on APS-C is around 2.7x deeper than on FX in many people photography situations that are greater than a few meters' distant. Depth of field is not simply a linear thing: the difference in DOF ranges from nil, to 1.6x more to 2.7x more, depending on macro, close-up, and then over about 4 meters distance.

Depth of Field, Digital Photography and Crop Sensor Cameras - Bob Atkins Photography

There's a real reason the top shooters in many genres prefer FF or FX d-slrs to crop-body or m4/3 cameras. And the same is true for even larger formats. The REAL LURE of FX is the way the LENSES FUNCTION...not the sensor noise, not the price, but what lenses work where, and also HOW they draw their images!