< ! --Digital window verification 001 -->

First leaked Nikon D600 images

Pin It

The "cheap" full frame Nikon D600 DSLR camera is real, as those leaked images from xitek.com show:

You can find the updated Nikon D600 specs here.

This entry was posted in Nikon D600. Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • http://www.itsrich.info Richard hart

    looks like a d7000!

    doesnt a full frame need a bigger prism?

    • MJr

      And it has one.

  • EvanK

    Hmm, locking mode dial. Not sure what I think about that.

    • MJr

      If you look at its position, it’s no less than a necessity.

    • Karl Wicker

      If you have a D7000 you will know all too well that the mode dial can be mistakenly moved. I’m sure the addition of the lock on the mode was from D7000 wishing that was in the design.

      • Craig

        True. I rented a D7000 for my Honeymoon and that moving wheel was the one real annoyance that sticks in my mind.

        I told myself that I wouldn’t go for this camera and that I need a DX, but looking at these pictures I can feel myself wavering! :)

        • Sean

          HI all, I own a D7000 and have never accidentally moved the mode wheel. You must have big fat fingers :-)

          • timarts

            I own a D90, like Manuel below, and that moving dial happens to me too. It gets knocked while hanging beside me because I don’t like the weight of camera on my neck, especially when an 80-200 2.8 is mounted.

          • Mock Kenwell

            Nope. It moves. Not a lot, but typically when you really don’t want it to.

            • Stageshadow

              +1

          • John Tangney

            I have a D7000 and a D300. I like the IQ of the D7000, but the mode dial is a pain!!! Have missed several wildlife opportunities as it had been bumped into the wrong position.

      • Manuel

        +1

        I can tell stories about unwanted moving (D90) as well.

        • mehmet

          me too …

      • D400

        I own a D7000, and I know that it really really needs a locking mode dial

    • chris zeller

      I hope it does have a locking mode dial. My D7000 mode dial moves on me when I remove it from my bag. Its probably the only annoyance with the D7000.

      • Jason

        from the looks of it there is a potential of a lock on the mode dial but it looks like its in the center of the dial. visible in the second image.

        • Manuel

          Yes, of course. This tiny little button in the center of the dial has approved itself as functional since film-days. See the shutter speed dials on a Nikon F3 or F4.

          It’s comfortable to use and comforting to know the dial being locked for the rest of the time.

      • The Fantastic G

        I’ve had the dial move me once or twice. My real complaint about the D7k is the ISO button is not on top by the LCD…

    • I’ve been waiting for a locking mode dial for ages! No more accidental mode changes!

    • Luke

      +1, was thinking exaclty the same (yesterday)

  • http://www.bildami.de Bildami

    The build design looks better than the usual profi-design – it’s a good simple design.

  • Trevor Nelmes

    So, am I right in thinking it doesn’t have the 10 pin shutter connector, so that is more like the D5000 /D90 ranges that use the side usb port?

  • Arkasai

    Man, I might have to sell my D700…I’m thinking used prices on the D700 will instantly drop 25-40% after this camera comes out. Time for us D700 hold-outs to start making that hard decision, whether to sell the camera while it’s still got 70-80% of its original value or keep it and watch used prices plummet.

    • John

      If anything, sell it, and buy it again later.

      • jorg

        +1 planning to do that too. As much as i love my D800 i kind of miss my D700.will make a terriffic rebuy one day. On the other hand- D3 are getting cheaper too…

    • Z

      I’m in the same position, but where hell is the D800?

      I feel squeezed in between, first being unable to buy a D800 unless paying an extra fortune on top of official price, second being unable to sell my only camera, D700 before D800 purcahse. Once the D800 is widely available, D600 will be announced and 2nd hand D700 prices will considerably drop.

      Anyway, buying, selling or both, I’ll lose money. Or have a period with no camera (which is not an option).

      Can it be a deliberate plan of Nikon? win-win for Nikon, lose-lose for loyal customers…

    • Michael

      Don’t sell your D700. Most likely everything is better on the D700 except video, some gimmick and sensor.

  • Dave

    I was hoping for more of a D200 style body (my current camera) but this will do just fine. I wanted a FX body with video and make it as cheap as they come, and Nikon is delivering. All my angst against the D800 was misplaced.

    • Luke

      yeah, true, or why don’t they just take the D300(s) frame and design and pop it in.

  • http://www.livemusicimages.com NCW72

    …so just a couple of points re. a couple of posts – not quoted verbatim but you’ll get the point (assuming the images are genuine) :

    i) “it’s D90 size / it’ll be too small with the holy-trinity f2.8 lenses mounted.” In terms of general feel/handling, I’d agree* – I have a somewhat strange combo of a D3x and D90 with 14-24, 24-70 and 70-200 f2.8 lenses (plus 150-500 Sigma – I can no longer afford to stretch to a Nikon 200-400) and swap the lenses around on both without any real issue of handling balance on the D90*. But here’s the ‘*’ – I have the battery grip on the D90 which really does make all the difference. So if I went for a D600 (which I’m likely to to replace the venerable D90), the battery grip would be a must. Just my own personal preference though.

    ii) “it’s no pro enough”. Equipment doesn’t make you a pro, your imagination and technique expressed through your images does. Do you think a 28-handicap golfer will get down to scratch just by playing with pro-grade clubs? Of course not. All this “it’s not proper x/y/z” is just… amusing musings. Real pros probably won’t consider the D600 as they know it’s not targeted at them. You want a pro-grade camera? Buy the pro-grade models and pro prices an quit whining.

    • Big J

      It’s not a strange combo imo. I think it’s great.

      • http://www.livemusicimages.com NCW72

        Big J – you sir, are a man of considerable taste :)

    • Rich

      No pro equipment doesn’t make you a pro. However of you have the skills and knowledge to use advanced equipment it does make a huge difference; a good camera allows you to bring your creative vision into reality. It’s a fact that the newer full frame cameras have more dynamic range, color gradation etc. when I say more of a pro camera; I mean built to take the punishment of shooting daily in whatever weather I need to, having pro features like somewhere to plug a sync chord for my strobes if I need it. Not having a toy dial.

      • malchick743

        Couldn’t have agreed with this more!! Pretty much what I’ve had in mind all the times.

        Sadly some people just never understand (nor at least try to understand) this.

    • mcd

      I’ve always felt that digital SLR’s looked like oversize toys. Compared to my older film bodies the digitals feel like playschool stuff. I was always amazed at the marvelous engineering in the film bodies that packed so much into such a little package . I have always held larger lenses by the lens, not the body anyway. I’m thrilled to see a small body, go compare an F3 to a D4!

      • Jabs

        @mcd

        Unfair comparison and should be:
        F3HP-MD4-MN2 to D4 or D3S – D3
        F3HP to D700 or even D800 body only

        F4s and D700 almost the same thing and F3HP-MD4 was bigger. F3HP and F4s user here plus D700 and MD user now – so not much difference except in bulk of body, as in like a fat cousin now – lol.

      • Manuel

        DSLRs will be bulkier in terms of the distance between bayonet and display screen vs. bayonet and back-plane of a film body for at least some time in the future.

        On the other hand, the body width is getting smaller, as the space for the film cartridge on the left shoulder is obsolete and never really had been contributing to ergonomics.

        Therefore, proportions are changing. And: Yesteryear’s edged design may be still appear elegant today – for ergonomic reasons, I don’t miss it personally.

        • Sahaja

          I’m left handed – so I guess my ergonomic needs may differ from yours.

          I wish there was more space on the left side of camera bodies, as there used to be on film SLRs. This allows you to firmly grip the camera with both hands or with the left hand.

      • Patrik

        There is a lot in these DSLRs. A lot more than old film cameras. A lot more than a PC from a few years back too! My only gripe with the size arguments is the prism magnification. A always hear that the magnification and coverage is reduced because the prism would become too large. How is it that my FM-2 spanks the D700/D800 in viewfinder quality?!? The FM-2 it tiny compared to a D800, but when you put your eye up to it it like a whole new world! SOOOO bright and big. Its like the step between a D70 and D700. Or what!? (there, vented, for EVERYTHING else, I’m in paradise!)

        • Jabs

          @Patrick
          If I remember right – the Nikon FM2 and FA bodies had higher magnification prisms than the F3HP and thus the newer digital bodies are like the F3HP with lower magnification. The change was done to give 100% image magnification to the Pro bodies but the D700 has lesser prism magnification due to the inclusion of a sensor cleaning mechanism which the original D3 did not, but the D3s does have sensor cleaning.
          I preferred my F3 series to my FA.

          • Patrik

            The thing is that on an FM-2 the whole image is larger and brighter. The magnification is higher and the angle of view is greater. Makes it much esier to focus manually. Sure there are other things in the image path on DSLRs that could interfere, but not the clasic excuse of the sensor cleaning mechanism. That’s behind the mirror. In the end the focus screen must be the same size of a 35mm frame if it is a 100% viewfinder (as on a D800). It’s the optics after the focus screen that limit the view. I use a DK-17M but that only helps a little. Of course the mirror is semi-transparent (AF goes through) so there goes some brightness, but what about the size…?

            • Jabs

              @Patrik,
              The F3HP was designed for easier viewing with glasses or with your eyes away from the prism and thus HP or High Eyepoint.
              Had an FA and bought an FM-2N for my brother and the F3 was way brighter and more contrasty than any FM-2 to me. Also lot easier to focus with an F3 or an FA, as they both had better focusing screens.
              In the F3 series, Nikon had a wider variety of focusing screens and they were easy to change by simply removing the heads and plopping one in.
              Usually then, the consumer models had less than 100% viewfinders and lower quality prisms, so I don’t know what you are talking about except that the F3 series had a semi-transparent mirror that it metered through.

  • http://JonathanRphoto.com JonathanRphoto

    I don’t believe this to be real. It looks like a D7000 body in someones kitchen and some very good photoshop. If someone had there hands on a test version then they have a lock solid contract with Nikon to not leak anything. I would say this is FALSE

    • Foolishcfo

      I don’t think so. Look at the microphone. Its above the D600 logo. The microphone is lower on the D7000.

    • Trevor Nelmes

      Seriously, a photoshoped D7000? Look at the 3rd photo. Now go grab a D7000. There are some major differences in line, bodyshape and other bits. Go pick a D7000 up and get the same angle view. No way.

    • Alex

      That’s what people said when Pete first posted real pics of the D700 and D800. The left side panel has a different arrangement on the D7000. The video record button is on top on the D600, it is on the back of the camera on the D7000. In addition to those things, the side grips (including the red triangle) look completely different. As Trevor stated, the differences are major.

      http://www.nikonusa.com/Nikon-Products/Product/Digital-SLR-Cameras/25468/D7000.html

  • d

    If this is fake, it is an exceptionally well done fake. There are too many details that differ from the D7000 (the red swoosh, the triangular IR port, the seams on the flash, the record button), pictured consistently at multiple angles. Not to mention the bit of motion blur in the image itself, which actually is harder to reproduce convincingly when you’re trying to manipulate an image.

    For what it’s worth, I think these are real.

  • Edubya

    To those complaining that a real pro would never use a D7000-like body: Joe McNally has a D7000, at least according to his website. Maybe he uses it as a casual walk-around shooter, I don’t know. Still, is he PRO enough for you?

    • Orb Emmel

      … and so does Thom Hogan, Bob Krist,…

    • Manuel

      +1

      I can always roll away on comments like “I cannot use this camera, because it has a ‘green’ mode on the dial”.

      • Diego

        And with U1/U2, it will be Kockwell’s wet dream.

    • Sahaja

      Many pros have always shot with non-pro bodies. I had a friend, who was a regular photographer for Life and later joined Magnum, who always used Nikkormats in preference to F Series Nikons.

  • Simone

    Any chance that it could have CF and 2 SD card slots?

    Wishful thinking of course.

    • Z

      It will have no card slots, but it will have a non-removable internal memory & will transfer images to the “Nikocloud”, some sort of distant server accessible via internet :)

      • Orb Emmel

        “…some sort of distant server accessible via internet…”

        I think you meant “UNaccessible”.

      • Big J

        Hate to point out the obvious, but that’s a big money making idea. Patent that shyt as quick as you humanly can and then sell it to Nikon whenever it takes off for a nice fortune.

  • http://racinglight.blogspot.com Eric Eikenberry

    I think what the “we don’t need/want this” crowd is missing is this; what tweaks has Sony built into this sensor? If its based on the EXMOR-R design, then it could very well offer the same or even better low noise performance of the D800 at a significantly lower price point. I’ve long said that one of the Big Two needed to build an FX Rebel. The sensors have been there for a long time now. The orginal 5D was close, but didn’t carry the price advantage of plastic construction. Remember, these are the same two companies who made, for decades, entire ranges of 35mm film cameras, from the most basic fully-automatic plastic box SLR up to things like the F5/F6 bodies. Why no “plastic box” full-frame DSLR then? Well guess what? Here it is. It’ll offer IQ which blows away the point and shoots, manual mode for learners, pop-up flash with wireless flash control for advanced newbies shooting babies, families, etc. And… the resolution of the old Nikon D3X for less than 1/4 the price! So what if it won’t do 8 fps. Does anyone in that price bracket shoot their kids at 8 fps?

    Now personally, I want the D400, with a no AA-filter 24mp EXMOR-R-enhanced sensor with a pixel density equal to a 54mp FX sensor, and the low-noise shadow recovery of the D800, but with the 8 fps of the old D300. I shoot motorsports and cars for magazines. The extra reach is nice, and when I want the “FX DOF look”, I just slap on my 35mm f1.8G and shoot at f2.2! A camera is a tool. It is not the destination. As a tool evolves (which is what DSLRS are doing) they become better, more refined, and yes, cheaper. If the D600 uses the sensor from the upcoming Sony A99, then I’m willing to bet the images from it will be stunning; even better than those from the D3X of just 2 years ago. The D800 is showing us the way Sony and Nikon are headed with sensor development.

    Of course, I’ll bet the D800 buyers will be mad, just like the Canon 1D buyers were when the 5D debuted. At the suggested price, people should buy TWO D600s and get busy snapping all those great photos they were too lazy to get their D3/D4/D800 out to take!

    • Anonymous Maximus

      D600 will do the job, but D800 will always have an edge over D600 or whatever next El Cheapo body, both in terms of image or build quality & ergonomics.

    • Rot

      aptina sensor was a pretty consistent rumor so it’s 90% not a sony sensor

    • Manuel

      Dear Eric,

      quite a lot of text, but I agree with you absolutely.

      And I don’t believe that the D600 will obviate a D400 (DX), even if the latter is at the same price point or even more expensive. If the D400 features 8 or 9 fps, the same AF module as the D4 and some other ‘pro’ features, it’s a completely different game.

  • chris zeller

    It has an internal AF motor. I always thought that the idea of making this without an AF motor was hogwash. This will still be an expensive camera. The FX D3200 won’t be out for a while if ever.

  • Tom Leonard

    I’ve been using the 800E for about 3 weeks and haven’t seen moire yet. Shooting mostly flowers, landscapes, people, sometimes around buildings, it just hasn’t turned up. Online samples tell me when moire does occur, both the 800 and 800E will show it. This non-pro finds the concern overstated to this point. I have both models now and will continue to watch for moire. I’m told by my video pal it’s a real issue in video- and he was using the 800.

    • LP

      Hi Tom, if you try to photograph people with repetitive lines or designs, I am sure you’ll notice, I guess you’ve been careful enough to avoid that, I have also read a lot to NOT do it, but yes it happened once and it showed, I have a D800 no E. The other time I noticed it was with a cyclone fencing background when taking the photos far back enough, nothing to really worry about, but I’ll definitely avoid this 2 scenarios as much as I can, greetings

  • chris zeller

    Why are these spy photos always blurry? I would never trust my prototype with anyone who would post such lousy pictures. This is not the guy you want testing your gear and providing technical feedback.

    I think its real. The D800 spy pictures were equally crumby and they were right on the mark.

    • Alex

      It’s probably taken with somebody who quickly snapped a pic with his iPhone because he didn’t want to be seen taking the pic. Give people the benefit of the doubt.

    • http://nickyu.com nick

      Alex, I think Chris was being a bit facetious.

  • Michael

    I guess, I will need to sell my D700 soon.

    • Gary

      Need? Why? Is it broken?

    • Rob

      It’s questionable whether this camera would be an upgrade from a D700. It should have a cheaper build, worse AF, lower FPS, less bracketing ability, and worse controls (more menu-accessed settings). It may have a dimmer viewfinder too (mirror vs prism). It should have better video, greater DR, higher resolution, a larger viewfinder, a better LCD, and probably better high ISO (when down-sampled).

      If you shoot a lot of video and make lots of very large prints/crop a lot, it’s a definite upgrade. If you never use video, only print up to 8×10, and shoot a lot of action, it’s probably a step down.

      • Dad

        who siad fps is less? 5fps is same as d700, i just hope it gets the same boost with a grip. (to 7 fps)

        • Rob

          The boost is to 8 on the D700, which I believe is impossible @ 24MP with a single EXPEED III. They aren’t going to outclass the D800 and D4 on processing with a camera that is 1/2 and 1/4 their prices.

      • SiliconVoid

        So it will essentially be a digital 35mm camera… I can’t wait, that will be GREAT!!
        I doubt Nikon would put a pentamirror in a FF body, but even if they did it would still be brighter than a DX viewfinder due to size.
        IMO if you wanted the D700 replacement to be an updated sensor with the addition of video then the D600 will be just that. All the other features of the D700 are claimed to be inferior to the D800, so simply bringing the sensor up to date and adding video would still position the D600 well under the D800.

        • LP

          Sounds about right my friend.

  • Maji

    With Admin’s record of success, I would say this image is really of the D600 with 90% certainty. :)

  • Xebadir

    Looks to me as if it will take an IR remote as well given the sensor panel on the front right at the top. Also note the position of the metering button which I believe is different to the D7000. Nice work on showing this admin, the big question is, when is this going to be released given the leak level?

    • LeGO

      IR port in front and in the rear is a very nice feature. I only hope that Nikon has resolved that bug in the D7000 which disables the shutter button when Release Mode is on IR.

  • mikils

    Funny that It has to sport an old glorious 50/1.4 Af-d and not the very latest (and slower :-)) one

    • LeGO

      I think the idea is to show that it has a built-in motor and has an AF drive that will auto-focus “D” lenses.

      • Les

        Also this is a small lens (G’s are larger) and makes the camera look bigger than it is.

  • anoosh

    Nikon does not know what will work !
    D800 with 36MP was a stupid idea , With This advertising is done on it (Color Depth , Dynamic Range ,Low-Light ISO.. As for d7000 was also )
    But the result is not appropriate with Current lens , Especially zoom lenses (24-70 , 70-200 VR II ,24-120f4G…) All of them on d800 have lower performance than on the D700 so that we know of them. D800 is not applicable for this time until the new lens through which to reach.
    How long is it until the camera is raised? Three years? Four years? We now want to Photography ! Where is the successor to the D700? is it D600?! I saw pictures of d600 was very stupid and My answer would be whether the mutant d90???!
    We were waiting for a decent presentation, body of d800 with 24 megapixels..
    Show More
    How long is it until the camera is raised? Three years? Four years? We now want to Photography ! Where is the successor to the D700? is it D600?! I saw pictures of d600 was very stupid and My answer would be whether the mutant d90???!
    We were waiting for a decent presentation, body of d800 with 24 megapixels..

    Nikon authorities where to look to the needs of users who are unable to timely respond
    Not surprising If you get something that Kodak acquired
    I apologize if I had written the wrong

    • D

      Dude, what are you on?

    • HeyAnoosh

      Put that bath salt down, will you?

      • Nikola

        Hahahahaha !! U make my day !! ;)

    • Mock Kenwell

      Thank you for that stunning, literate and well-informed babble-fish rant, Tonto. It was like I was reading Mad Libs.

    • babola

      Good God…they should never give you a camera. Drop that dodgy weed and take it easy, brother.

  • Kevin

    damn you nikon… if you developed this earlier i wouldn’t have gotten my x pro 1… now i need to save up to buy this new full frame toy! :)… (maybe a D610 by the time i’ll get one)

    but a consumer full frame is definitely attractive!!!

  • chris

    Looks like a Canon EOS body to me.

    Nikon should try and differentiate their design aesthetic more and stop trying to look like EOS.

    • Mock Kenwell

      Riiiiiight. Nikon definitely has Canon envy. That’s why they made the D600 with shitty AF.

      • babola

        LOL! Great answer bud, made my day :)

        Still plenty of Canon trolls circulating Nikon forums and some just can’t keep their mouth shut.

  • Linda da Valise

    How about FPS performance, any rumour?

  • AM

    Funny how the same day two new lenses are announced, NR is flooded with comments on a rumored camera by 10 x 1. This only proves that very few people really care about those two unneeded lenses.

    • D600 =$1499

      Go check DPreview for announced products!
      THIS is a rumour site, and we come hear for rumours.

    • Alex

      I don’t care about those two lenses. I will get the 28-300 with my D600.

  • low

    it has begun…

  • Pablo Ricasso

    That plastic must be fantastic.

  • Jake

    I just went to my local camera store, and talked to one of the guys for about five minutes. Turned out he saw this post, and he let me “preorder” this camera! He put my name down on a list, and said that when it’s announced, they’ll call me to confirm! Since I was the first to ask, I will be the first once they call!
    Steve, if you’re reading this, YOU F**KING RULE!

  • anon743

    Quite unattractive so to speak. Also feels quite plastic. Would hang on to a D7000 for a camera body design like this.

    IMHO, for fullframe DSLR model, has to be pro grade level for me. Lack of PC and N8 ten-pin remote terminals is a no-no. All-alloy frame is also important as it gives more stability when handholding the body.

    • edubya

      This looks to be very similar to a D7000 body and would obviously be aimed at a similar market. As has been said probably hundreds of times on here, if you want a pro body, pay the pro price and buy a D800 or a D4.

      • Les

        Or new D700 now for only $2K.

    • huh?

      I’m glad you qualified that statement with an “IMHO”, because it’d make no sense otherwise. Why must a FX body have PC sync? I don’t see the reasoning there.

    • http://blogg.hogbergphotography.com Danonino

      What are you babbling about? I dont even know what PC-sync and ten-pin means, nore will I probably ever need it.. All I need is 1-2fps, big viewfinder, FF sensor, shutterspeed, aperture, iso and Raw-format. Thats all you need to take at least as good pictures as Bresson, Robert Frank, Garry Winogrand or any other out of this worldly stunningly good photographer that has ever lived.

      • Kerry33

        Of course u dont even need it cause obviously u dont know what it is and that means u are new in photography. And u making it even funnier by mentioning those legends that are not really related to this “pc sync” topic..

        I am very eager to see ur portfolio…some people just loves to do some clever talk without knowing what the real things are…

        • Michael Houghton

          I’ve looked at his blog portfolio. I’d say he has more than enough insight to support his opinion! Yours are where?

          I also wish Nikon’s locking PC-sync socket hadn’t gone away, but aren’t you using shoe-mounted radio triggers by now anyway? Surprisingly more practical.

          As to the N8 connector: I agree on this point; never been comfortable with the D7000′s approach compared to the D300′s robust connector, but these things disappear as the cameras get smaller.

          Whether I agree with you or not, I can’t disagree with Daniel’s core point, and it didn’t deserve the unnecessary patronising snark.

      • Drazen B.

        In other words – D700, a slowly fading away but not forgotten bright star and a great photographic performer in class of it’s own.

        Thanks for putting some people’s thinking back on track, emphasizing what really matters to some of us who couldn’t care much about extra connectors and technical mumbo-jumbo we may never need in real life.

  • MRGABE

    SWEET. time to sell the 35mm 1.8g and rokinon 85mm 1.4 and grab an 85mm 1.8d to complement the 50mm 1.8d

    • Michael

      My thoughts exactly

    • Mock Kenwell

      Nope. Keep the 35mm 1.8. It’s actually a great little lens on FX. Plus, it’s do cheap you won’t get much selling it anyway.

    • http://www.facebook.com/dsloanphoto Daniel

      I second Mock on this. Keep the 35mm f/1.8G. Yes it does vignette in the very corner of the frame, but it works well enough on FX to where you don’t need to sell it.

    • Drazen B.

      Yup, keep the 35mm DX lens for your future FX body…you may be surprised how well it works :)

  • Nikon_Boy

    I think this would be my first FX camera if i choose to buy it….. but are they serious with that mode dial, UGH, it looks very strange for a full frame

    • huh?

      right, which is why the 5D, 5D2 and 5D3 all have a mode dial?? i didn’t realize there was “full-frame look” that needed to be adhered to.

  • gladden

    Yes. I am looking forward to it. If it’s priced $1500 as rumored, I’d definitely upgrade my D90 to it. I love the d800, but d800 is an overkill for my amateur needs.

  • Alex

    If you think it doesn’t look professional enough for a full-frame, have a look at this full-frame camera.

    http://www.amazon.com/Fujifilm-Quick-Waterproof-Single-Camera/dp/B00004TWM6/ref=pd_bxgy_p_text_c

  • http://IslandNature.ca Dave

    I agree with @Nikon_boy – that’s the one thing that I don’t like about the D7000 from a design perspective. Looks like Nikon has taken the D7000 production line and tweaked it to produce the D600. I’d rather have seen a build based on the D700 or D300 but I guess that at the $1500 price point, using the D7000 body fits pretty well. The D7000 is currently selling at about $1050 CDN so going to $1500-$2000 for a FX version of basically the same body isn’t too much of a stretch.

    I’ve been thinking about upgrading to a full frame Nikon for awhile – this looks like a perfectly OK entry level camera. And if Nikon is currently touting the D7000 as the top of the DX line, then it makes sense to use the same body as the entry level FX camera. As an amateur, I’m definitely going to buy this camera – don’t want or need the D800 features/file size.

    Will be interesting to see what is eventually released … in July???

  • D

    U1/U2 – cool!

    Top-press then rotate to change dial? Hmmm. :)

  • E

    Ugh… So tired of everyone throwing the word “pro” around…..

    “pro” is a construct that may carry many different definitions based upon the persons opinion of characteristics that exibit a “pro”

    Is it the money? I know people with d5100′s racking in cash an clients based on good business plans and great shooting.

    Is it the gear??? Again maybe for some…. If your shooting involves you getting into locations where you NEED a beefy strong water resistant camera thats what u need…. By no means does this camera make u pro though.

    Is a pro based on skill???? I know tons of great shooters who are just moving to digital from 35mm and 120 who are getting amazing results and work from old d200′s

    Is it the megapixels??? Again for some maybe? If i have to do something commercial for big prints ill grab something that shoots 120film….

    But wait!!! What about bracketing, sync speeds, custom dials, blah freaking dah….

    If you dont use them….. It doesnt mean you arent worthy of being called a pro…lots of people still shoot 35mm, 120 manual cameras with no metering, autofocus, etc….are they not pro worthy?????

    And is pro defined by skill or success…. This is highly subjective…. I hypothesize…. A client is more comcerend most of the time with your results, prior business, and customer service and services……and yes… Some services may require a photographer to shoot at 8 frames a sec. Or take pics in the mud….. Or be discrete and use something that does not stick out.

    When i shoot film only two things matter…. Glass and film.
    When i shoot digital only 2 things matter…. Glass and sensor.

    Al the other stuff is gravey. Delicious gravey that help me enjoy my feel sometimes more than not having it….. But other times…. It makes zero difference im my overall enjoyment.

    Cant wait to compare my d800 to my fuji gw690 to x pro 1.

    This d600 looks like an amazing tool…. For everyone from beginner to “pro” if it suits your needs…. Everyone has different tastes.

    • Pablo Ricasso

      No man, to be a pro you HAVE to use a pro camera. When I’m in the pro mood, only my pro S will do. If lesser cameras were really pro, don’t you think they would say it? I’d talk more, but I’m scoping out a deal on a promaster lens…

      • E

        Haha:) i enjoyed that

  • http://racinglight.blogspot.com Eric Eikenberry

    Why would Nikon ever make an FX body without an AF motor in it? Half of their selling point is “all of the great lenses we’ve made in the past”. Until sensors are as cheap as bottled water, the in-body AF motor will continue for Nikon, increasing their prices slightly. As long as sensor development and cost is high, pushing people to buy Nikon for the “old, affordable lenses” will continue to be a useful marketing tool. With the ability of Photoshop (among other software packages) to correct for fringing, old lenses will remain viable options. Sony has this issue too with the Minolta legacy lenses. It’ll take a pretty big shock to make Nikon’s top brass give up on their old lenses, even for the sake of a few more points of market share gained by a point-n-shoot FX DSLR body like a D3200. I’m not sure that day will ever come.

    I’d see Nikon going to an interchangeable-sensor box before they give up on the in-body motor!

  • Thought

    If this rumor is true including the price point, this one single release will send shockwaves throughout the entire camera industry.

    This will be a gauntlet thrown down for other camera manufacturers to match. This will have Canon scrambling. This will be dagger to higher priced crop dslrs. Who needs a D400 or 7d mark ii?

    This basically would signal that crop sensors are for low end dslrs as well as mirrorless.

    In fact if Canon is smart they answer with the one camera that Nikon didn’t have the guts to release: a big sensor mirrorless…one that is super quick and responsive, has a big sensor, with nice lenses, one that is just plain fun to take with you all the time and just shoot.

    In the long run the dslr is a dinosaur and this just confirms it. Nikon is doing this because they see the handwriting on the wall: may as well cash in on dslr’s while they still can.

    As mirrorless takes over, you will one day see a sub-$1000 FF.

  • Boyan

    Key differences from the D800-D600 known so far:
    36-24MPx
    51-39AF pts
    11-9 crosspts
    4-5fps
    No info on the metering yet
    Probably some details in the video but I don’t care

    If the price is really $1600 and the ability to pull up shadows is comparable to the D800 then one has to wonder what Nikon is thinking. Smaller/lighter body, plenty of pixels, plenty good AF, 100% VF, probably non-interlaced LV, weather-sealed.

    I am guessing that one or more of three things must be true: price is north of $2000, the metering or AF is more neutered than the specs imply (not typical of Nikon), there is some other substantial difference not yet known.

  • Summary

    Whine… whine, whine. Whine (D800 reference), whine whine (D700 update?) Whine whine, D400 reference whine whine… miss film days whine.

  • Roberto

    I WANT IT!

  • Derek Matarangas

    This might be a good option as a back of for my D800E

    My d800E Comes in next week! OMG!!!!

  • Anonymous Maximus

    Imo, D600 is the most unnecessary body from Nikon. FX is not for the hobbyist. They could either stay in the DX ground, or start with a 2nd hand D700 if desperate for FX.

    If you want to feel real FX advantage over DX, then you must think it as a whole system, and shell out a great deal for D800 and the corresponding lenses. It’s more expensive, less tolerant & more bulky.

    Hi-res FX is mainly for professionals, it’s not a fun tool for college boys/girls. It’s like buying a hardcore 4×4 with a fairly low budget, and not being able to buy fuel or pay the tax plus insurance, for just driving downtown but not for what it’s intended.

    I bet half of the people who rush to migrate from their D90 or D7000 to D600 will soon find out themselves in an alien territory and will regretfully wish to resort back to the comfort of DX land.

    • Xander

      And who the heck are you to say that these people are not allowed to buy FX? Let them. I think the D600 is a brilliant idea, especially in terms of competing with Canon.

      Please stop being one of those elitist FX users (or even if you aren’t, you are still a close-minded person). So who cares if they use it for other purposes?

      Man, too many whiners. All from “Where is my D800″ to “where is the D400″. Consider this, you are still alive, and still able to shoot with what you have. Go shoot – though, I still think many of the whiners, will keep whining :P

      Cheers to those who actually aren’t gearf*gs.

      • Michael W

        +10000

        you have spoken wise words, my friend.

    • World

      “FX is not for the hobbyist.” – Are you joke? :) FX is the core of the world photography over the hundred years… DX is a joke create by marketers.

      • Michael W

        and you too +10000

      • Anonymous Maximus

        I meant FX digital for sure.

        Especially high resolution FX, past circa 20mp is getting closer to medium format which necessiates some kind of MF discipline to see any IQ difference. Otherwise it will be still ok but just digitally interpolated snapshots, not much different than were it taken by a D90 + 18-105mm, considering the photographic information.

        • Pablo Ricasso

          Is there a school that I should attend so that I can be ready to fully enjoy the benefits offered by these high powered sensors? I have had to give up full framing when I’m too cheap to buy film!

    • ld

      The funny thing is: if the pro gear would only be bougth by pros the price would be double.
      I am not a pro but i will buy one.
      Why? Because i want it.
      Need it? You guess it: no.
      But who really need the features of the gear he has? Very few (as discussed below).

    • Les

      Disagree here, there will be good cheap lens available for the D600, for example 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5G ED VR, 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 VR and the 50mm f/1.8 G. All have their fault, like any lens, however the main disadvantage is their high f numbers.

      One problem is a wind angle lens will be expensive for the cheap FX, for example 16-35mm f/4G ED VR = $1300 and is heavy.

      As long as you stick with the light and cheap lenses all will be fine on the D600.

  • Z

    Best thing about D600 is that it will take the strain out of D800 demand, and make it available earlier & easier. Some people who haven’t found the chance to buy a D800 may opt for D600, since it is cheaper plus he or she may not need the extra features.

    Then we may even see some slight discounts on the D800 & D800E. Marketing rules…

  • per

    In my judgement, 90 percent of those who bought a D90 or a D7000 are FX wannabees, but who do not like the price ‘n size of the current offerings. A D600 at the right price will sell like hot cakes. It will be the most sold digital full format camera in history.

    • Les

      Total agree +1000000. Every man and his dog will want and buy this camera. Is this the first nail in the coffin for DX?

  • I’ll be banned again

    This site looks more & more like it should be re-named earlynikonannouncements.com

    • Tripewriter

      KockMenwalllost itsspacebar

  • John

    Please don’t have a pentamirror. Please don’t have a pentamirror. I don’t care about green auto mode, I don’t care about the smaller size, I don’t care about some watered-down features, but please don’t cut me where it counts: making the image. I want that full frame 100% pentaprism, because that’s more important to me than a 10 pin connector. I want to be able to perfectly and accurately compose every little detail in camera. PLEASE.

    DON’T TAKE MY PENTAPRISM <3

    • Anonymous

      Then go buy a D800 :)

  • Michael

    If this D600 + 24-85mm is significantly more compact/lightweight than a D7000 + 17-55 while maintaining the same image quality, then they have my attention.

    However, if the IQ of this 24-85 f/3.5-4.5 is similar to a Tamron 17-50 f/2.8 on a DX camera (less than stellar sharpness and poor bokeh), then I don’t see the point.

    Plus they will need a 70-200 f/4 VR type of lens to have me completely convinced.

    • Les

      70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 VR is an excellent lens for FX. Very similar to 70-200 f/2.8 VR II except higher f numbers and funky highlight bokeh.

  • http://blogg.hogbergphotography.com Danonino

    I think Im going to keep my D3 as a backup somewhere in the attic.. Put it will probably never see the light of day again. I absolutely HATE IT because of the size and weight.. I just want to be able to carry it all day without getting a sore back or neck. I´ve actually shot almost exclusively with a D5000 the last two years because the difference in image-quality is hard to see. BUT, I still want small, easy to carry FF camera. I WANT THE D600 NOW!

    • Squidger

      Well you can’t have it.

  • Be Gentle

    Hi,
    I’ve been lurking on this site for a good few months now and would appreciate some thoughts/feedback.

    I’m currently still using a D90 but was thinking of upgrading to whatever replaces the D7000 but now I’m not so sure whether a D600, D400(?) or D7100 would be the best option for me.

    I shoot in P,A or S mode but keep meaning to try M and shoot in RAW. I guess I’m a general photographer though I do go to the occasional airshow and a small amount of wildlife/zoos I dabble in macro work (50:50 at home or outside)

    I currently own:
    10.5mm f/2.8G ED AF DX Fisheye-Nikkor
    105mm f/2.8G IF-ED AF-S VR Micro-Nikkor
    70-300mm f/4.5-5.6G ED-IF AF-S VR Zoom
    50mm f/1.8D AF Nikkor
    18-200mm f/3.5-5.6G ED-IF AF-S VR DX
    Sigma 150-500mm f/5-6.3
    So 2 DX and 4 FX compatible lenses?

    Body size doesn’t bother me either way.
    So bearing in mind I’d be coming from a D90 which I’m happy with, D600,D400 or D7100? :)

    Thanks

    • Be Gentle

      Ooops re-reading I mean I already shoot in RAW

    • Tom

      Looking at your lenses i see you got mostly tele lenses and are not very interested in wide-angle, so i would stick to a crop censor and get the extra zoom if i were you.

      • Rock Kenwell

        A DX sensor crops the image. If it magically added “extra zoom”, they would have nicknamed it “zoom sensor”.

        • trollingyou

          get some originality in you. anyone who continues to mock Ken is… well a douche.

          So anyway a crop sensor does magically add “extra zoom” that’s why it’s called a crop sensor.

          now go back to your moms cave.

          • Don’t Feed The Troll

            Personal attacks, name calling, and trolling aside…

            Do you really believe if you crop an image (firm negative, print, sensor, photoshop, etc.) that you magically alter physical focal length to the lens that was used to make the image? It changes the angle of view as if it were a different focal length, but it doesn’t change the focal length or match any other properties of that focal length. That other person is correct.

            Stick to reading the internet. I’ll keep thinking and experimenting.

            A crop sensor crops. That other guy is correct.

            • Tom

              Actually a FullFrame sensor also crops,
              but does it really matter what you call it? we all know that we are talking about the same thing…

            • catinhat

              Before D800 came about DX did magically extend the lens, or at least it had this effect. You had a D300 with 12MP. If you crop D700 to DX you get 5MP, which is a whole different ball game. Due to higher pixel density DX was more demanding on the lens, but it also used the center area of the lens (if it is an FX lens) where lens performance usually peaks, so image quality wise (not factoring ISO and DOF considerations) call this a toss up. Now with D800 you have a D7000 size DX crop, so things have changed there. However D800 is a whole package and not just a large DX crop, so fitness of D800 for specific purpose is a complex issue.

            • Rock Kenwell

              Apparently all of us, with the exception of trollingyou, agree. Tom: I routinely meet people who honestly believe that a DX sensor optically magnifies the image by 1.5X.

        • Sahaja

          @Rock Kenwell

          Using your reaoning, you may as well say an FX sensor “crops” a medium format sensor .

          If you go back far enough, a “full plate” camera was 6½ x 8½ inches, a “half plate” camera was 4½” x 5½” and a “quarter plate” camera was 3 ⅛” x 4 ⅛”. So almost every format was a crop of one that proceeded it – and almost every camera today has a “cropped” sensor or film size of one kind or another when compared to earlier cameras.

          When 35mm cameras were first introduced 6×9 cm (2¼ x 3¼”) roll film was a standard size for the enthusiast cameras of the time – real “pros” shot 4×5″ film or larger. 36×24 mm (“FX ” format) just happened to be the largest size you could get on 35mm film keeping the same 2:3 proportions as the standard 6x9cm roll film cameras of the time.

          The first serious photographers using Leicas were put down – pretty much the same way as someone saying they were a “pro” photographer using a small sensor point and shoot would be on online forums today. Indeed the IQ of early 35mm photos is terrible compared to the normal film sizes used at the time.

          36×24 mm was also once called called “double-frame” because of it’s to the “single-frame” 35 mm movie format – which just happens to be almost exactly the same as APS-C or “DX” format.

          The reason we have 36×24 mm sensors in digital cameras today is simply because most SLR camera mounts and their lenses were designed for that format – and those mounts are still standard in DSLRs.

          Today many people are proclaiming that, with cameras like the D800, that there is no longer a need for medium format. But as
          sensor and lens technology continues to improve in a few years there will probably be a DX camera that gives you the same IQ as the the best FX camera of today.

          • Rock Kenwell

            “Using your reaoning, you may as well say an FX sensor “crops” a medium format sensor .”

            “Copped sensor” isn’t using my reasoning or even my wording. The point was that using the same lens on FX vs DX doesn’t cause “zoom”, “more reach”, “make my lens 50% longer”, etc. The physics remain the same; it is just a smaller sensor.

            I do appreciate the background history. I wonder if anybody back then thought that a half plate increased the physical focal length of their lenses by 200%. ;)

    • evanR

      I agree. Based on your comments regarding your shooting applications and your lenses I think you would be disappointed in the apparent lack of reach/zoom if you moved to FX. You would find two of your lenses worthless on FX (18-200 and 70-300mm) and there is no FX equivalent to those lenses. I would suggest you chase after a D7100 or D400 (although I do not personally believe there will be a D400).

      • Jake

        The FX equivilant to the 18-200 is the 28-300.

        The 70-300 is already an FX lens, but you’re right in that there is no equivilent. The Sigma 150-500 is workable as an equivilent, though.

    • Eagle

      i was thinking to buy d7000 but i heard that the new camera ais coming so i thought to wait for it, i will buy whatever camera that replaces d7000 like d600 or d7100 or any cheaper full framer i will prrobably buy 70-300 i read that u have it in youre arsenal and was thinking to buy 18-200 but if i buy a full frame then i wont buy it cuz it is dX, what do u think about 70-300 ? and could u recomend any a bit cheper (400-700 euro/dollar) FX lens (wide or ultra wide) 10mm or 18mm or 28mm ?

      • catinhat

        70-300 is a good lens for travel and such. It is lightweight, with excellent color and contrast, and very good sharpness, though at the long end it is recommended to stop down a bit for best results. The AF is fast and VR could be helpful too. The build quality is so-so, so it won’t take much beating. The aperture is not fast enough to really speak of bokeh though it also depends on how you shoot. So, all in all, a very good but not stellar zoom, and a good buy for the price, IMO.

      • catinhat

        As for budget FX wide lenses, I would recommend to look at the older AIS manual focus options. They could be found for a very good price used in excellent condition. In my experience, in most cases AF is not all that necessary for the wide end. The build quality of the old AIS lenses is second to none and far superior to almost anything Nikon makes these days. They are very sharp, contrasty, with silky smooth MF, and just a pleasure to handle. Consider 20mm f2.8 or 28mm f2.8, but there are others that are equally good.

        • http://rearrangedphoto.tumblr.com rearranged

          how do these lenses handle wide open? Did you use them on higher resolution bodies? I have had a look on these but in germany on ebay they were so expensinve that they weren’t worth a look since they were almost the same price as the Af-D counterparts.

          When not on a budget I think the voigtländer 20mm would be a great lens for travelling.

          • catinhat

            My copy of 28 f2.8 is very good wide open, 20mm is good too, but might be a bit softer than the 28mm at f2.8. Both are excellent slightly stopped down. On the other hand, due to the way I shoot, I’m more picky with the sharpness of the teles wide open, but wide angle I rarely use wide open. I only used them on a D700, so how they would do on a D800 type body I have no idea. As far as price is concerned, 28 f2.8 could be had in the US used in excellent condition for about $200 give or take a few. The 20mm one is quite a bit more expensive though it is still well worth it, I think. I haven’t used their AF-D counterparts but in some other cases (e.g. 50mm f1.4) I like the AIS version better due to higher contrast.

            • Pablo Ricasso

              The 24s are both great when opened up. The 28 f2 is also and these lenses all use the same small standard handy 52 size filters. You might rather use the 20 f3.5. It is better for most things than the 2.8. The 20 f2.8 is a little better at infinity and very short distances, but not in between. Before the 14 – 24 I was seriously convinced that there would never be a zoom to match the quality of these. The colors are as saturated as can be without losing touch of reality, excepting the 28 f2 AI or pre AI. It gives whitish skies that resemble old jigsaw puzzles from 30 years ago. I’m not sure what filter would make it match the others. All of the 35′s are good also, with the fastest being sharpest and most saturated and then working downward from there. Fortunately the 35-70 2.8 AF zoom is good enough that you won’t see any difference without a lot of peeping and the lens can be bought for somewhere between the price of the 35 f2 and the 35 f 1.4. You could probably buy a 20, 24, and 28 for less than you can buy a 20-35 zoom for and maybe even take less space to carry them. From 35 mm on, most of the better zooms are more than good enough and only the best primes will beat them and then only slightly. There are also a lot more millimeters between the longer primes than the shorter ones, making the zooms more desirable. The 14-24 is a game changer that I never expected to see.

            • catinhat

              @Pablo

              Not really arguing against what you’re saying but size, weight, and cost are still serious considerations in favor of some of the old primes. Even in the longer focal lengths, the old 105mm f2.5 for instance can easily compete in image quality with the 70-200 zoom for about 10% of the cost and a small fraction of size and weight. Of course, no AF, no VR, and not a zoom. But it is built to last forever and may well outlast most lenses built today.

            • Pablo Ricasso

              I never had a good 105 2.5. I tried the early and late ones. I do think that the 1.8 is good. Of course, I tend to use those lenses at a distance and might have had different experience if focusing at closer distances. I keep that and a 105 macro, the 85 1.8, the 135 f2, the 180f2.8ed, and three versions of the 200 (qc, macro, and f2) I keep them because they all are slightly to much better than my “macro” 80 – 2002.8ed zoom when shot at a distance. The 85, 135, and 2oo f2 stand out the most. However, that 200 is twice the weight of the zoom. The 180 is only slightly smaller than the zoom despite not being any faster and fixed in it’s focal length. The 135 is nearly as large, and either of those lenses with any one other would be more weight than the zoom. In fact, the 85 is the only small one in the bunch. I suppose you could carry it with a small version of the 135 2.8 (yeah, I keep one of those also) and skip the longer lengths to save weight. But there are some days when I go with nothing but a 50-135 and a 25-50. I suspect that if I wanted more close up shots then I would find the zooms more distasteful.
              Another thing to remember is that none of those lenses are better than the zoom at f8. All the zooms I just mentioned peak at f8 and the primes at f5.6. The weaker primes that I don’t keep peak at f8 like the zooms. I believe that the AFS zooms peak at f5.6 also and offer f4 performance that rivals many of the primes I am keeping. That will relegate their advantage to being merely their smaller individual size and the ability to use an extreme f stop. I suspect that when I gain an AFS f2.8 zoom I will be much less likely to carry prime lenses. As it is with the zoom I have, I have to really look to see the slight edge the 105 and 180ed lenses have over it. But then, hey. I think that the closest one of those zooms will focus is FIVE feet. But there is a nice macro section on the 70-210 f4AF lens, and that lens shares the 62 filter with the 20 and the 35-702.8AF. Both of those lenses have macro settings that allow prime lens close up performance and use tiny filters just like prime lenses do. The f4 zoom is probably also a bit lighter and smaller than the 85 and 135 pair I mentioned above.

    • Luke

      :) interessting, you could be an acquaintance, he also nearly has the same lenses like you and the D90. But guess what, that dude bought himself a D800, wasted over 5k, for body and one lens. He wanted to go for the D400, btw.

      and personally I would wait for the next DX with that (nice) lense set! There’s really no hurry to replace your D90.
      I hope there will be a D400, (…) soon.

      • Luke

        lens*

    • Edubya

      As you’re happy with your D90, you should wait and see what comes of a D400 and/or D7100. We also need to see how the D600 performs. When everything has been released, I would highly recommend that you go and physically handle the models you’re considering. If the D400 shows up with a pro body, you might be surprised how different in feels and handles compared to your D90.

    • SiliconVoid

      The 70-300/G/VR is a great lens (unless you have a bad copy) and a very good cost effective alternative to the 70-200.. I use mine on a D700, and a friend now using his on a D800, with great results (sharpness/color/contrast). It isn’t as fast as the 70-200 of course, but offers a bit more reach with decent IQ. As you do have interest in wildlife and airshows (both primarily daytime shooting) the slower maximum aperture of the 70-300 isn’t all that limiting. Your macro and 50mm primes are more lens than any camera body you decide to get so no problems there.

      I think the better method of deciding would be your shooting style.
      -By that I mean if you are accustom to properly framing and composing your shots and do not regularly have need of cropping the image, you will be very happy with the overall resolving power of the FF bodies.
      -On the other hand, if you regularly crop your images to ‘recover’ a useable shot (sorry, couldn’t help it, heh) then the higher pixel density of the DX sensors may provide more benefit.

      My suggestion would be keeping the 50mm, 100mm, 70-300mm and sell the rest to get a wide angle lens or general purpose medium zoom like the 24-70 or newly announced 24-85.. and then of course get what you can afford in the way of an FX body (D600 maybe?)

      • Be Gentle

        It’s rare that I crop an image and I try to get the framing/composition “correct” in shot.

        I’m curious as to why you think I should sell the Sigma 150-500 given that I go to air shows and shoot wildlife? Granted it may not be the best lens in the world but won’t it work with an FX if I go that route and besides which I’m just an amateur doing this for fun and on a limited budget

        Thanks for your thoughts

    • Be Gentle

      Thanks to everyone for their thoughts and advice. Having had the D90 for a fair few years I just feel it’s time for me to upgrade. I think part of my decision was also spurred by the fact that I’m based in London and managed to grab some tickets for the Olympics but obviously I assume it’s highly unlikely any of the models that I mentioned will be available in time (and maybe it’s not the best time to learn a new camera as well?)

      I’m strictly and amateur doing it for fun and on a limited budget so I’ll try and hold my horses if the D600 is released first, wait for reviews and then try to wait to see what happens with the D400/D7100 options

      Once again thanks to everyone for constructive advice

      • Pablo Ricasso

        If you are using a 500 lens and you take it from your DX camera and put it on an FX you will feel like you it became a 300. That you mention the Olympics suggests to me that having the ability to really telephoto will override your need for delicately blurred backgrounds and detailed still shots. I see that the new 24 megapixel d3200 is available everywhere and the viewfinder looks fairly nice. If you can afford to wait for a while, I think all of the cameras will get bumped up to 24mp. I don’t know if there will be three or four dx cameras when it is done, but I believe that you will want to shoot the events with the highest pixel density possible because of the distance you will be from the athletes. If they don’t introduce any more updated models between now and then I suggest you consider the 3200 or the D7000 for the higher pixel density. Unless you can get a press pass, I doubt that full frame will give you any advantage. You would probably be alright with your D90.

  • secretagentman

    Was waiting on this but went for the D800 instead. No regrets.

  • Back to top