Nikon D600 is coming soon, no news on the D300s and D7000 replacements

Another realistic (photoshopped) D600 image from Outdoormac

The Nikon D600 full frame DSLR camera is coming soon. I have already posted the D600 detailed specs and we already know how the camera will look, we are just missing the announcement date. There is some talk about a scheduled Nikon announcement on or around September 13th, but nothing is confirmed at that point. Maybe Nikon will wait until they sell all of their 24MP D3x camera which will be very difficult with the current discounted price of $6,899.

I have no reliable intel on the potential Nikon D7000 and D300s replacements. Since Photokina is less then a month away, I doubt that we will see any new DX cameras at the show.

This entry was posted in Nikon D400, Nikon D600, Nikon D7100 and tagged . Bookmark the permalink. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.
  • Nikonnut

    As mentioned above:

    i hope this comes true. Nikon did a good job of the hybrid autofocus in the Nikon 1 series. Canon’s version is quite slow in comparison (eos m and 650d)

    otherwise im still hoping we get the 51-point af system. If either comes true im sold!

    • rhlpetrus

      This is the 1M question: will Nikon use the new Sony sensor (rumored for the A99) or has it developed a new sensor. There was talk that Aptina (that developed the one in the 1 system) is developing an FF sensor for Nikon. The Aptina tech is good, but possibly not at the same level as Sony’s present tech, we’ll have to wait and see. PDAF for LV is likely a common fixture of all coming models, I had hoped it would be already used in the D3200.

  • EK

    I used to be a manager of a camera retailer. Just before the D7000 was released I was told by a nikon rep that the successor to the d300s (i.e. same body style) had been postponed indefinitely. He said the d90 replacement (d7000) would combine some of the features from the d300 like user custom programmable modes but would be similar in body style to the d90. He said the strategy was to see how unit sales went with that as the top end option with a dx format sensor. I have since left the business so I have no idea what strategy nikon is moving toward but I wouldn’t hold my breath for a d400 unfortunately. With the (I hope soon) arrival of the d600 at a low price point it may not leave room in the line up for a d400 dx camera. I would love all the options we can have but it may just not be viable.

    • Nikonnut

      I am a very satisfied D7000 user but i do believe the future for nikon dslrs is full frame.

      Besides the “mass market all in one lenses” nikon hasnt released an enthuisast level and above DX lens for a while now and on the other hand been releasing more affordable FX lenses.

      Seems the way forward is quite clear.

      But we can still use our dx cameras for years to come just as long as we dont need to have the latest greatest features and such.

      on another note,

      D600 has 50% less pixels compared to D800. Does that mean 50% better high iso seeing that the pixel sizes are much larger per photo site? hehe im just prodding here but no harm in wishing!

      • MB

        D600 will have 33% less pixels than D800 and about 18% less resolution, not very much really.
        As for DX yes Nikon does not believe in DX for professionals anymore, so no pro camera and no pro DX lenses, though I really see no point in making zillion similar consumer mid range zooms either.

        Something not entirely related I remember back in the days we had perfect couple D300 and D700, perfect for me at least. Real flexible system, interchangeable lenses and accessories, cameras complementing each other.
        Today Nikon is discontinuing D700, D300 line is more or less dead …
        On the other hand Nikon is launching D600 that may be a couple for D7000 but the problem is these are consumer cameras and I am not so sure how many consumers will need two bodies.

        • D300 and D700

          I’m with you on this one. I still have and very much enjoy D300 and D700, both are great, solid, reliable in every way, and as you said, they compliment each other nicely. If I travel, I travel with both: teles on the D300, wide and normal lenses on D700. I also occasionally use D7000, I find niche applications for it, and it is good for those, but if it got lost or crushed under a rock, I’m not sure I would rush to replace it, — no love affair there. I’m sure D800 is a great body too, I just feel it is not for me, I don’t have the shooting habits required to take full advantage of 36Mp, so it would just be a burden for me to deal with the huge files. Also, based on the samples from D800 I’ve seen, I think it renders tones and colors similarly to D7000. I expect the same rendering from D600, I think it is Nikon’s new palette. And I hate to admit, but I do like the colors coming from the older Nikon bodies better. (No offense to anyone). So, when my D300 and D700 finally die, I think I’ll find good used ones at a decent price, and will be set up for another five years. And then perhaps Nikon will come with something new that will be really appealing to me.

          • Vertigo

            I agree on the color change from D300 to D7000. I love the colors from my good old D300, but the D7000 tends to produce weird yellowish-orange cast in highlight zones. Not in all pictures, but in some at least.
            I hope that if there is a D400 someday, it will have a Nikon sensor, not Sony.

            • Dr Motmot

              oh good, I’m glad I’m not the only one experiencing weird ‘beige’ colours with my D7000 – really don’t like the skin tones. Now have D700 and am really pleased with the colours. Will sell D7000 to make space for D600 (depending on skin tones).

            • rhlpetrus

              That’s just WB at work, adjust it a little and you’ll see big differences. Also, use Portrait mode profile, available for CNX2, ACR or LR, it is much better for portraits.

              Re D400, it’s looking more and more that Nikon will improve D7000 a little (possibly PDAF off-sensor + 51AF points) and let it replace D300s.

            • bert

              The weird colours seem to be a result of the extreme D-range. The D800 suffers from this too. You can turn it down by adding more contrast with an S-curve.

        • Hmm….

          What if the D600 and the D7000 replacement were the same pixel count and shared common accessories like battery grip model and batteries?
          Another natural combination?

        • Ronan

          17-55 2.8 is all the pro glass you need + 70-200 2.8

          Shot with those for years.

          • rhlpetrus

            You need a pro-level UWA and WA primes as well, and those are not there for DX. A 24mm is alreay 36mm in DX, not reall WA these days. Nikon has really forgotten DX as a pro alternative. Maybe they are right, the world will move ML for most lower level gear and FF for the advanced and pro markets. But the 7D is selling very well, if Canon puts the new 61pt AF on the 7D2 it’ll be a killer camera.

            • DxUWA

              The nikkor 12-24 F4 is the pro DX UWA the 10-24 3.5-5.6 is normal. Build quality isn’t quite the same, mine still works perfectly despite breaking the UV filter from a trip to the floor.

          • Brent

            Yes, it is very hard to beat those two lenses. Excellent choices! In fact, the best choices.

      • Rob

        The D600 has 33% fewer pixels (36-24=12 12/36 = .33) than the D800. The high ISO noise should be less PER PIXEL, but we don’t know what that will translate into for equivalent sized prints.

        And once again, the future is not full frame. It will always be several times more expensive to make a full frame sensor than a crop sensor. It will always be more expensive to make a full frame lens than a crop lens. Perhaps companies will discontinue high end crop bodies, but entry-level will always use crop sensors. Imagine Nikon trying to compete with the T3 with a full frame body – the cost of the full frame sensor alone would be about what it costs Canon to make their whole camera.

        • umesh

          In case of technology one should never use the word NEVER.

          • Rob

            I didn’t.

            • Anonymous Coward

              Always = never

        • wublili

          My 25 years old full frame lens doesn’t cost any more than 1 year old… in fact, a lot less… so what’s the problem ?

      • Sahaja

        I too think Nikon’s current “strategy” is to push all pro and as many serious enthusiast users as they can to FX. As others have pointed out, their lens releases seem to point to that.

        A D7000 level camera will be their top DX offering and then the D600.

        Who knows, maybe they plan to introduce a DX mirrorless (nearly everyone else has) with an F-mount adapter and slowly fade out DX SLRs altogether.

    • Think for a moment what that “strategy” implies. Two to three years earlier (depending exactly on when you had that conversation) Nikon made a huge marketing push with the D300, going so far as to launch it with the D3 and inviting most of the world photographic press to Tokyo for the announcement. They were quite successful at this, selling out D300 cameras for quite some time. Yet, they decide they don’t want to update it and not offer an update for all those users? Oh, right, just upgrade to FX. That would imply that they doubly missed the point, and did so ignoring evidence right in front of their eyes.

      Short version: you don’t follow up successful products by discontinuing them and pointing customers to lesser products or products that are 2x the price and don’t solve the same problem. Because if you do, every time you have a successful product, you kill it.

      • EK

        I hope that they release a d400 he did just say postponed and that was a long time ago (pre d7000 release I don’t remember more exact time sorry) possible we are just still seeing delay from damage to the factories?

      • Zeke

        The only reason to put a cropped-frame sensor in a DSLR with an F-mount is to reduce cost. If the FX sensor were the same price, you’d always use that instead. The mirror box doesn’t get any bigger.

        FX sensors cost a lot more, of course, silicon area being what it is. But at some price point, it becomes such a small percentage of the camera MSRP that the demand may just not be there.

        Right now, the D800 sets the absolute upper limit – there is no justification for a DX camera that exceeds the price of a D800, because you could have had a D800 instead and turned on DX crop mode.

        Of course, a D800 is over $3K. But what if the D600 comes in under $2K? Suddenly a D400 makes less and less sense.

        • Rob

          I’m pretty sure the sensor, mirror box, and pentaprism are all bigger on full frame Nikon DSLRs. You don’t own both DX and FX bodies do you?

          • Zeke

            Nikon mirror box dimensions are fixed by the width and flange-to-focus distance of the F-mount. Without redesigning the mount there is no opportunity to miniaturize the box.

            A Nikon FG is a full-frame camera and it’s as small as the smallest DX DSLR.

            • Rob

              Only the flange-to-sensor and mirror-to-focusing-screen distances are fixed. FX mirror box assemblies extend farther down below the midpoint of the mirror (probably to incorporate the larger mirror), and extend further above the focusing screen (to incorporate the larger pentaprism and viewfinder). The assembly takes up more space on the sides of the mirror too. This allows DX cameras to be less tall and less wide than FX cameras. The depth cannot really be reduced because of the mount.

              Comparing an SLR to a DSLR is silly because the sensor/film size isn’t the only factor in determining the size – the lcd, electronics, and other internals are different between film and digital. If you made a DX SLR (not digital) with the same magnification and viewfinder coverage as the FG, it could be made smaller than the FG. The FG is also wider than many Nikon DSLRs (but this is a moot point because it has nothing to do with sensor/film size).

          • Kevin

            For wildlife photography you do. My uncle who shoots for nat geo owns all three sized sensors for canon mounts. It gives optimal cropping options in post and utilization of a 400L/500L/600L/800L

        • don

          “The only reason to put a cropped-frame sensor in a DSLR with an F-mount is to reduce cost. If the FX sensor were the same price, you’d always use that instead.”

          I may be misunderstanding your point, but you seem to imply that if cost wasn’t an issue then there would be no market for crop sensor/DX cameras. If that’s your point, then I would say you are wrong. There are many (sports, nature) shooters who prefer a crop sensor to a full frame camera.

          • PHB

            DX cameras are just a tool, there are advantages and disadvantages to the crop sensor format just as there are pros and cons of DSLR vs EVIL design.

            Most people who blather on here don’t get the fact that a camera is simply a tool and owning an expensive one does not make you a better or a cleverer person. It is not even as if even Nikons top of the line lenses and bodies are expensive compared to what people spend on a car.

            The D600 might mean the end for the DX pro body in that a 24MP FX sensor is also a 10MP DX sensor. So a 12MP Pro DX body like the D300s won’t cut it any more but a 24MP Pro DX body would.

            What we don’t know from the D600 specs is what sort of handling features it will support. The D600 moniker suggests its a full pro feature set but that is not a guarantee.

            Since I have a D300, a smaller lighter D600 would suit me quite well.

        • Just a couple thoughts and I will say up front I am not a career photographer.

          There seems to be a lot of emphasis/wishing that the D600 be a ‘entry’ level camera as low of a price as possible. I get that concept, but consider that the D800 is quite a value leap ahead in more resolution and half the cost of the previous generation D3x, I dont see the need for the D600 to get to a wildly lower price. It should be a little lower price to differentiate it from the D800, but I hope they dont take too much out of it as far as using plastic parts, I hope Nikon maintains a good level of weather sealing and use of a quality frame and base construction. I would not mind paying $2000 to $2500 for a body that is at least as well built as the D7000, pro controls, current generation technology sensor and just firmware capped at ISO 6400.

          I am just ultimately saying that I would hate to see the body construction look more like a D3100 than a D7000 regardless of image/sensor capabilities.

          Lets not wish to ‘too’ cheap of a camera all around

          • Thomas

            I agree, weather sealing and at least a poly-whatever body would suit me (they do make rifles and other gear which receive abuse out of the fiberglass reinforced plastic).

            • Misericorde

              As i’ve read before “If polycarbonate is good enough for the canopy of an F16, it’s good enough for your camera”

              After lugging around an Nikon F4 the last couple weeks, a small light D600 would be nice. Also then most people who complain about the plastic bodies never watched DigitalRev’s torture test…

        • I agree with Leroy 100%. Additionally, the market for a DX camera with pro level AF is limited to bird shooters if one can buy an FX camera for roughly the same price.

        • > The only reason to put a cropped-frame sensor in a DSLR with an F-mount is to reduce cost. If the FX sensor were the same price, you’d always use that instead. The mirror box doesn’t get any bigger.

          Sorry, but that’s incorrect on both counts. Could you make the mirror box smaller? Yes. Depth would still be the same, if that’s what you mean, but you can make the mirror box smaller in height and width. In other words, you could make a smaller camera.

          As for the “only reason is cost” assertion, I really hope that Nikon themselves doesn’t think this way. Because if they do, they’ve just missed a fairly large group of shooters, ones that are interested in pixel density. Even a 36mp FX body (the D800) doesn’t have more pixel density than a 16mp DX body (the D7000). At the moment, the champ at that is the D3200 (24mp DX). Unfortunately, the body and features of the D3200 are absolutely NOT what the crowd that wants a D300 replacement wants.

          • Zeke

            Not height above the lens centerline – the distance to the focusing screen is fixed by the mount geometry as well. It’s true you can nip off a little on the edges (though Nikon doesn’t in practice) and the pentaprism ends up a little shorter but that doesn’t change the main point: camera geometry is so constrained by the F-mount that DX offers negligible opportunity for miniaturization.

            Pixel density: in an ideal world, pixel density really should be independent of sensor size, just as the grain size of a given emulsion has nothing to do with the size of the film. Medium format had more resolving power than 35mm. That’s why you went to the bother of schlepping a Hasselblad instead of a Leica.

            If, say, a 4 micron photosite is developed that meets all the performance criteria, you’d use more of them in an FX sensor and fewer of them in a DX sensor. This, in fact, is exactly how pixel processes are implemented in the mobile space. A company develops a 1.4um pixel and then launches several sensors of different sizes based on that design.

            Right now pixel density is held hostage by practical limitations of readout speed and file size, but these are limitations of implementation – not desirable features in themselves. The ideal DSLR would be equipped with a sensor capable of recording the full image circle of the large and expensive F-mount lenses you bought, with options to crop in-camera (DX mode) and bin in-camera to control effective pixel density. What advantage – other than cost – would a DX-only camera have over that?

            • Zeke

              P.S. And of course, cost _does_ matter, and Nikon is unlikely to come out with a 48MP FX sensor that can bin on-chip and support 8fps tomorrow, so I am not arguing that they shouldn’t release a 24MP D400.

            • Rob

              I like how several people have pointed out how you were completely wrong yet you keep trying to defend your incorrect statement. You were wrong; accept it and move on.

            • Zeke

              Which “incorrect statement,” Rob?

      • umesh

        I guess their sales strategy is to make people buy more things(fx) instead of work with current(dx) and make them buy more expensive fx lenses if they are serious. If lower end there are 3200 and 5100 in dx and 600 in fx. For serious pgs they have 800 and D4. As it is you need good glass for higher mp be it fx or dx. In long run for serious photography fx works out better . Atleast thats what I told myself when I got my 800e recently upgrading from D200.

      • bd

        So are you suggsting there will be a D300 replacement or that Nikon will be stupid?

      • One More Thought

        Sometimes you do end a successful product line voluntarily…that’s what Apple has did with the iPod mini when it introduced the nano.

        Nikon is changing with the times; they are realizing the ever shifting space in what the buying public wants, along with the competition, along with the evolving technology.

        There’s not as much of a need for a D300 successor; you have the D7000 series; you will have the D600, you will even have the D800, all in the same market space of prosumer/high end hobbyist/pro gear with much lower price tag than the top of the line D4.. Remember when the D300 came out there was no D700, and it was the only pro style Nikon body for less than the D3. Things have changed since then. Look at the fact that the d300s didn’t sell so well.

        • Nikonnut


          • > Sometimes you do end a successful product line voluntarily

            True. But not without first making sure that you’re serving your customers correctly. Also, you can get away with a lot more with low cost consumer products (iPods, Coolpix) than you can with things that people buy into as a long-term investment including accessories (Macs, DSLRs).

            Essentially, Nikon discontinuing the D300 line is a bit like discontinuing, oh, the MacBook Pro 17″. While Apple did just that, they also introduced something even higher end in a number of respects (MacBook Pro Retina 15″). While that doesn’t perfectly solve the 17″ users needs on the face, it actually does when you analyze it carefully.

            So the question here is would discontinuing the D300 and introducing a low cost D600 FX do the same thing? No, it wouldn’t. The folk that are still shooting with D300’s and want a replacement are not served by either the D7000 or the D600. Not even close. Thus, you’re saying sayonara to some of your customers. Customers you spent lots of money acquiring.

            As I noted in an article this week on my site, I see a lack of clear strategy on Nikon’s part. Clear strategy would be a line of tightly focused common consumer (iPod, Coolpix), performance consumer (iPad/Air, Nikon 1), prosumer (MacBook, DX DSLRs), and pro (MacBook Pro, FX DSLRs).

            Could you clearly serve all camera buyers with 6 Coolpix, 3 Nikon 1, 3 DX, and 3 FX DSLRs? I believe you could. Nikon unfortunately have got themselves into thinking more SKUs = more sales. Ironically, they then seem to get THAT wrong by not introducing certain SKUs that are wanted by customers.

            • Timo

              Unfortunately the strategy might be clearer than you think: judging by the latest moves, likeliness is high, that they sat themselves specialists into the nest, one being in charge for just one segment each. Consequently the race of plain number begins: if we can sell x of D7000 and y of the D600 but only z of a D400, then the D400 has to go. What I suggest is a plain body count not even considering the future market chances for lenses and accessories. I think most of us would agree, that typical mass-product customers buy less Nikon lenses and accessories than an average pro customer would.
              I like seeing the cameras as tools, each one for their particular purpose. And doing so, there is no replacement for the D300s neither the D7000 is nor will the D600 be. Basically the same counts for the D700. Small size may sure be an advantage to some. A robust pro body will be indispensable to others. To provide makes the difference of a plain money-oriented maker to a customer-oriented maker. As Apple was drawn several time for comparison: I only hope that Nikon does not go the route of customer education towards their goal and arbitrary like Apple does.

            • D300 and D700


              I agree with you but not entirely. I don’t think Nikon will lose its D300 customers, at least not in the long run. I have a lot of good glass, some fairly old, some fairly new, that I really love for quality and workmanship. It is a big investment, and it just doesn’t make sense to me to sell it all and go shopping for Canon or Sony. So, I may skip their current generation of products, but I’m not gonna forsake the Nikon brand because of all the good stuff they had made in the past. I’m sure there are many other folks like me. Their last generation of products was golden, and not everyone needs the latest and greatest. Sometimes latest and greatest simply reflects a strategy of planned obsolescence. But no one is forced to participate in this game unless they choose to.

      • The Runes Say

        It’s not about bodies, it’s about lenses.

        Nikon is fed up with DX users buying, say, 300mm for the reach when they could/should be paying a premium for the same field of view on FX.

        Hi end DX is a liability now as far as Nikon marketing is concerned.

        • bossa

          This is exactly the reason why I still have a Pentax K-5 and an FA*300 telephoto as I get that ‘reach’ and VR via the K-5 shake reduction at a fraction of the cost of a Nikon telephoto. That camera and lens cost just a tad more then the Nikkor 300/4 alone and I still wouldn’t have VR with that lens on my D800E. Not to mention the Pentax is actually sharper. I’m so used to that angle of view with a 300mm now that on FF I wouldn’t really be happy unless I got a 400/2.8 and they cost over 10 grand where I live.

      • philippe

        Full agree with you Thom.

        I now have a D300 (which I am very pleased).
        I am ready to accept that “pro-Dx” is discontinued by Nikon and move to FF.
        But on the other, I would expect from Nikon a clear and acceptable upgrade path.

        As far as I am concerned, this path does not exist at this moment :
        – however good the D800 is, I consider it as specialized (and expensive) tool, mainly because of its huge resolution, which I do not need (nor want)
        – having enjoyed for several years a D300 like body, I do not want to downgrade to a D7000 like body (probable D600 body)

      • Sahaja

        Does anyone understand the thinking of Nikon? Sometimes they are more difficult to fathom than the mind of a woman.

        • Just a question: do you have your flak suit on? ;~)

          • BartyL

            I don’t know that he has much to worry about – this site’s a bit of a ‘sausage-fest’.

      • rhlpetrus

        Agree, I think Nikon is missing a large part of the market, lots of pros use DX for their daily work, like school’s PJ and sports shooters, local newspaper reprotiers, etc. I rarely see thse people with FFs and large bodies, most use D300 and 7D.

    • Andrew

      As far as Im concerned,I would loev to have a D400 DX for my zoom kit,and a D600 or D800 FX for my primes and standard zoom

  • Why buy a D3x when you can buy a higher resolution D800 for so much cheaper??? LOL

    • shadowfoto

      because D800 isn’t up to par in terms of ruggedness and control layout?

      • Hendog

        I agree, who in their right mind would buy a D3x now? That is just crazy! I’d much rather have a D800 when it comes down to image quality. Hell, you could get 2 D800s for that price! Lol @ ruggedness and control layout by the way haha

    • CreativeAngle

      Because D3X can focus and D800 can’t 🙂

  • Remedy

    I soooooooooooooo hope it’s not gonna be some kind of small, retarded in handling body. I really do hope it’s gonna be D800 size despite all previous rumors. Somehow I’m not in the need for uncomfortable, retarded, dwarfed camera body. Anybody who thinks different please hold D300 and then D7000, after that feel free to agree with me or gtfo to lunatic asylum.

    • Aldo

      Sorry to disagree, but I’m looking forward to the d600 having a small body so that I can carry it around everywhere with some sort of pancake lens. I can’t carry my d800 everywhere for personal use, too bulky (my 24-70 2.8 just adds to the bulk). It would also make a great back up camera (even a great primary camera minus the size impact factor). I can see myself shooting with this at a wedding reception, after I have shot the main pictures throughout the day with my d800 and I just wanna relax taking candid shots here and there. I can see how you would want a bigger body if you don’t own a d800, but not me.

      • Remedy

        Sorry but I don’t buy it. D7000 is nowhere near being pocketable . P&S is small, light and You can put it in Your pocket. You can’t do that with D7000 so what You get is still big camera that needs a case or dedicated bag but it’s waaaaay less comfortable than D300 for instance. And trust me the lack of hand/finger space is far more fatiguing than some few extra grams. Ever wondered why D3/4 or Canon 1D looks the way it looks? Because THIS is the very best type of camera body to work with. It’s designed for whole day shooting and it needs to be comfortable. Small body is not comfortable, nobody here is 10 years old. I really can’t get that “too big/too heavy” rant raging across the net since few years now. Too many metrosexuals maybe????

        • Aldo

          LOL “too many metrosexuals” . I’m with you when you say you don’t get the people who complain about size/weight when it comes to shooting professionally. I personally feel my middle finger is gonna fall off after a day of handheld shooting with the d800 (when I didn’t use the vertical grip). I jumped from the 1ds mark 2 to the D800. You don’t have to tell me the ease of work a “full body” configuration brings. But I’m referring to the personal use and the relaxation factor that shooting with something “small” adds to the art of photography. I can’t explain it to you. It has to do with forgetting about the camera, being relatively worry free about size/price of what you use to take the occasional pictures when you go about personal activities.

          • Remedy

            Is it weird that I would still pick D700/D800/D300 over D7000/D90 (D90 owner here)? I always thought that a very comfortable gear lets You forget about it and focus on pictures. For me NEX line (havent tried NEX7 yet so I can’t tell) is a pure and utter frustration when I have to use it. Zero controls, retarded menus, ridiculously uncomfortable body. Shooting with “small things” doesn’t get me, shooting with good things does because it lets me forget about the gear, it simply does not get into my way.
            I get relaxed when I get to shoot with D3 or D300. But that’s just me. To each their own as they say.

            • NikoNex

              It’s funny that you mention 2 cameras I actually own. The D90 which I actually use for doing real estate photography with a lots of speedlights. I was looking at all the mirrorless cameras for something I could bring around when I’m not working and not have to worry about hurting my bad back carrying a big bag. I landed on the Nex7. the Tri-Navi control scheme is really awesome. manual focus super easy when u want to use other lenses. I only wish Nikon had done that instead of the 1 series. I’d think that the 1 series would be the bring everywhere camera. But the controls just drove me nuts in within a few minutes. I do look forward to the D600 as an FX upgrade from the D90

          • Petia

            I believe it has more to do with your subject’s relaxation than with your personal one. Just stop shooting, put away your camera and enjoy that wine with your friends. How are you pleased now if a stranger points a bazooka at you to “take a candid”?

            If you want to take pictures that convey the relaxed atmosphere of e.g. a wedding evening, you need a small, unobtrusive camera that nobody will notice. Most DX DSLRs are already too big. FX are useless.

        • kotozafy

          Agree with Remedy. It may look strange but I switched from D300s to D7000. I kept the D7000 only one month. My hand got quickly tired with its unconfortable handling (I’m 1,60m tall and dont’t have so big hands). Now I’m shooting with D700+MBD10+ENEL4, far more heavy but really confortable, I can handle it all day without my fingers feeling tired ! So a D7000-body like D600 wouldn’t be so welcomed as for my personnal opinion. (Similarly, I hated the early microscopic gsm phones)

    • Howie

      I totally agree, but i can see both sides. You get the little guys that are say 5′ 4″ – 5′ 9″-ish and my D90 [?][all i have to reference] might feel like holding an 8×10 field camera. but on the other hand [no pun intended] you get us bigger guys that are say 5’10” – 6′ +, and holding a tiny little camera body leaves you looking/feeling like you have rheumatoid arthritis after shooting 30 mins +.
      I really like the way my D90 feels and im hoping to step up to this D600 when available but yeh, i have the same worries they are trying to shrink it down to a minimum size and its gonna feel all wonky in my hands.

      • Zeke

        I’m taller than 99.9% of the earth’s population and there are no gloves made that are big enough for me – and I’d _love_ to have a super-small FX camera.

        My D3 is comfortable to hold but not comfortable to schlep, and in plenty of situations one spends a lot more time schlepping than shooting.

        If the macho talk is true one way (suck it up and lug the big cameras around) then it’s true the other (suck it up and deal with your ring finger and pinkie sticking off the end of the grip).

        • I agree. I don’t know where I fit against the world. I’m 185cm tall – a height that leaves me looking at people’s bald spots in most places other than, say, the Netherlands.

          That aside, moving to Nikon digital cameras has been a pain as I came from FM2 (now FE). That camera is smaller than my Wife’s D5000 and easier to hold. No grip.

          Early professional F-cameras, too, had no grips. They were all about beautiful viewfinders, robust bodies, good focusing mechanisms. Somehow, somewhere, a disconnect occurred.

          Cameras got massive. People forgot how nice a good viewfinder could be, EVEN with autofocus lenses.

          Now, the same blokes who 30 years ago may have enjoyed an F3 or F2, suddenly feel awkward holding an even larger camera, the D800. It doesn’t make sense to me. At all.

          Either men have become more macho, or penis wagging is a bigger sport than ever.

          I hate big cameras. I’m with the big brother above me: I want something small, light, and though I know it’s not possible, but I’d love something with the same basic size/shape as an FE, focus being on the bright viewfinder and slim body size. I want FF sensor, 600grams> and these controls:

          Shutter speed
          Obviously for electronic lenses, we need in-body aperture control, but the way it is now is an unlabelled button without clicks, or memory. All the info in the viewfinder means the viewfinder gets small.

          So, maybe I’m stupid to wait for Nikon to make a camera that is focused on actually seeing through the lens. They want us to rely 100% on their technology doing everything for us, while their cameras get bigger and bigger.

          Maybe a dodgy company like Cosina will make what I need. They have made reflex F cameras before that work fine.

          • Rob

            Olympus E-420 is a bit smaller than the FM2.

            • Unfortunately, it doesn’t have a beautiful viewfinder nor as well labelled controls. Again, pretty sure I’m looking for a Cosina F mount digital camera as Nikon won’t pander to shooters who value bright viewfinders and clean, simple designs.

            • Rob

              You are a small, insignificant market. Nikon will never cater to you.

          • Remedy

            To paraphrase Your words “somehow, somewhere a design and ergonomics were discovered”. If You trying to prove that a brick (coz that’s what 99,99999% of all 50’s to early 80’s cameras looked like) is more comfortable to hold and operate than a modern D3/D4 etc. then You need professional help. It’s utter bollox. You may want small camera for whatever reason but don’t try to prove ridiculous and absurd claim about comfort and ergonomics.

            • That is exactly what I’m saying. Pick up an fm2 or F and you can take a picture without even searching for the on button. There are controls for shutter speed, aperture preview, timer, iso, and film advance and rewind. No menus or unlabelled buttons or dials. No need to move eye from the viewfinder and nothing to get in the way.

              It also happens (in the case of the fm2) to weigh less than half and have no peeling rubber issues. I am saying without a doubt that the F is easier to use than the D4.

            • Zeke

              Portability is ergonomics.

            • Remedy

              Portability has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with ergonomics. You can have and ergonomic sofa, where do You see portability in sofa?

            • Zeke

              Your sofa example is ridiculous. Portability has EVERYTHING to do with the ergonomics of tools that are intended to be CARRIED.

          • Sahaja

            “I hate big cameras”

            I don’t exactly hate big cameras, but I don’t like them personally. Big cameras are fine for some people – and they probably work great with great big lenses (which I never use).

            However I would love a small (aprox. FM3a size) full frame camera. There is a considerable market for such a camera – one day some manufacturer will realize this, and produce one. I hope it is Nikon.

            • Leica did it. M9 series. Ridiculously priced, but I’d love an M9 Monochrome…

          • kotozafy

            Yes, I’m certain everybody on earth without exception want light-weight cameras (even me). But not everybody likes tiny, difficut to hold camera. The FE, and my old Olympus OM-2 wera easy to hold because they had no side grip and were light. The D7000 has a side grip that leaves no place between it and the lens mount. And this grip is not tall enough to give any comfort. The leaked photos of the D600 show the same issue. That’s why the D700 or D300 +Additional power grip MBD10 is so nice to hold. It’s painy to put around the neck but I use an excellent shoulder strap instead.

            • shigzeo

              I agree. The FM series is very easy to hold. I don’t find the 7000 series but some do. I’m merely calling poo poo on a large percentage of overly-macho people who:

              1. Argue that professional means big and heavy
              2. Swear they have the biggest hands in the world (more macho points)
              3. Sweat their poor little pinky fingers hurt after an entire day of using a D7000.

              I argue this because those opinions are selfish. A super macho penis wagging testicle herder can buy a grip. A person with smaller hands cannot even use one of the cameras. My wife can barely lift the D200 when she is tired.

              I find it a pain.

              I’m probably taller than 90% of te people on this forum and may have larger hands. It has nothing to do with hands and everything to do with perspective.

              Making a camera big to serve the penis cadets that want to prove their manliness means that the majority of customers has to go through pain. Nikon have primarily been stroking that customer base. It must change.

              Penis cadets can add a grip – that will prop up their manly bits – and both they and the other group can get along.

              Again, I’m still waiting for a digital FE series with the bare minimum of controls. I have next to no need for the menu. I access only: iso (sometimes), and exposure. All other functions are operated by the lens.

              I know that Nikon will not make this camera. I am a minority I know that. So I’m prepared to compromise. I’ll give up ergonomics, a good viewfinder, and straight forward controls for the mess that Nikon have made of ergonomics as long as the Viagrow lot can get a grip or really man it up and buy five D4’s and a cok ring to keep things civil.

            • Zeke

              In the old days we just turned the camera 90 degrees with our right hand – the left hand stayed put under the lens. Cupping the bottom of the lens is _harder_ when there’s a grip in the way.

              Vertical grips were historically a way to make lemonade out of the space required for a strap-on motor drive and a bunch of batteries – but not something you’d ever haul around if you didn’t need the fps.

            • Remedy

              shigzeo: go and solve your dad issues with your shrink. I don’t remember when I read so much utter idiotic bollox on the internet last time. If your wife can’t pick D200 you should go to the doctor with her as soon as possible because this has to be some kind of very serious muscle condition or something in that manner.

              What’s more comfortable a full sized pc keyboard or a phone with slider keyboard? Go figure.

              Anyone else with retarded arguments why small camera is better?

          • Thank you. You said it all, right down to the reference to compensation for inadequate anatomical features. Bravo!

            • Sheesh. I was trying to reply to Shigzeo’s original post. Sorry.

            • Remedy

              Glad You failed.

  • Be Prepared

    Any word on what the D600 QC issues will be?

    • metsatsu

      I think it’s too early to speculate on that. Fear of getting similar issue like the D800?

      • Andrew

        Fear of what, if you get a defective product, then return it – case closed! Approximately 5% of all manufactured products are defective. It is like saying you should be afraid of buying a new Canon camera because of the “Light Leak” issue with the 5D Mark III. “Be Prepared” is making a senseless speculation.

        • Sahaja

          Thom Hogan estimated the number of D800 cameras that actually have the left AF problem is greater than 10% and less than 50%. Anywhere in that range is far more than 5% – and that’s not counting any other faults or manufacturing defects that some cameras may have.

          Canon publicly acknowledged the 5DMk3 “light leak” problem and fixed it quickly.

          • Andrew

            Yeah, and I estimate that the number of D800 left AF problem is no more than 5%. It is impossible to get any accurate number from Thom Hogan or any other blogger. One person can get multiple email accounts and make false claims. Any claim that it is 10% to 50% is total rubbish, this is the equivalent to saying “I am guessing”. Nikon is a precision company and their calibration cannot be off by more than 3%.

            Yea sure, Canon used a “Black Tape” to fix the “Light Leak” problem – that is why Canon is never looked at if you want to buy a weather sealed professional camera, and that is why Canon cameras are not taken to “Space” by the astronautics nor the “North Pole” by explorers (except you take it out of your cabin on warm days). When it rains or is humid, you are advised to put your “Mark Whatever” in your camera until things clears up.

            • Andrew

              Note: “Nikon is a precision company and their calibration cannot be off by more than 3%” – by this I meant to say that a left focus calibration issue is likely not to affect more than 3% of D800 cameras. That is why most likely Nikon has treated this as a minor issue seeing that 3% is well within manufacturing constraints for defects. So what do you do if for your D800, a few of its 51 focus points need re-calibrating? You contact Nikon or get a new replacement, problem solved!

              It amazes me that most of the report and talk about “left focus” problems are most likely coming from Canon trolls. The Canon trolls seem to be experiencing left focus problems with a camera they have never handled in person. This is the Internet where false claims never gets verified. Here is a new survey – D800 owners experiencing left focus problem: 3%. Canon trolls experiencing left focus problem: 100%.

            • Andrew

              Correction: When it rains or is humid, you are advised to put your “Mark Whatever” in your camera bag until things clears up.

    • Andrew

      Any idea whether it will rain tomorrow?

      Nikon has been around for maybe 100 years or more for a reason. Why do you think people are excited about their products, it is because they are solidly built and perform exceptionally, and professionals find them dependable. That is why Nikon cameras are the ones taken into space by the American astronauts and to the North Pole. In the Internet age, people exaggerate problems by making false claims. I think the advice is, don’t be put off by people saying “Be Prepared”, if something does not work, return it – just make sure you purchase your product from a reputable retailer. If anything, I think more people are already “prepared”, expecting fanboys to make new false claims about problems they are experiencing with a certain brand of camera product they do not own. The more such claims they make, the more they will be ignored.

  • ernie

    Hmmmpphh – its the “D400” I want. Does Canon have an equivalent of the “D400” i.e crop sensor in a “pro” sealed body? I am tired of waiting so long and I have pictures I want to take, as they have the MPE also Canon might just be right for a field macro tog.

    • enesunkie

      Get a 7D.

    • Sahaja

      If you want a weather sealed DX body you can also buy a Pentax.

  • `/1nc3nt

    Let’s talk practically, not arguing around technicality e.g. Noise, MP …

    For those who are not used with full frame will be surprised with their lens collection. Suddenly their 50mm cannot be used to take portraits, their 20mm becomes too wide etc.

    It’s a good thing actually, but a lot of adaptation is needed in taking shots. Having FX is coming back to “normality of 35mm photography”, but you have to re-consider all of your lens collections.

    • David K

      Or, just use the lenses that you already have and crop the high megapixel images a little on your computer when you want a slightly tighter shot. I know it isn’t ideal in theory, but just go and shoot. IMO most photographers would benefit more from better lighting, tripods, knowledge and experience than having a massive lens collection that allows perfectly cropped images right out of the camera. It is better to shoot a little wider to keep one’s options open for later crops.

  • Anonymous Maximus

    I hate the premature plasticky D7000 type body design, I want my D300 & D700 feel & layout back !

    Yes, D800 is the only option at the moment for FX, but I don’t see why we may not see a solid D400 soon.

  • EnPassant

    I think marketing is the reason we may only see the D600 at Photokina.
    Any other camera like replacements for D7000 and D300s would be in the mediashadow 0f D600, the first Non (Semi-) Pro FX-camera for enthusiast photographers.

    D7000 was expected to get a replacement, or at least a facelift this year but is still doing quite well and may get a year extended life. It was after all quite a big upgrade from D90.

    As reported here Nikon is rumored to release five cameras this year. So which will be the fifth camera?

    A D5200 with 24MP should normally be expected in first half next year. But maybe it will be released half year in advance? Possible, but I doubt it. I think Nikon want to keep selling D3200 as the only entry level 24MP during his year.

    A D300s replacement later this year, Oct-Dec, is definitely a camera that would fit well into the release schedule. That is if Nikon have decided still producing a Semi-Pro DX-body. Otherwise we may see a D7100 instead.

    And next year? With 3 FX-cameras released this year 2013 should be a DX-year. First D5200 and in autumn D7100, that is if non of them are released already this year.
    In the end of 2013 we may see the surprise FX camera, a D4x with 54MP resolution. And beginning of 2014 the real D700 replacement as some would think, the D800H with 24MP and more fps may be presented. But it could also be a D800s with same sensor but faster processor enabling more fps. Photokina 2014 will see the D3300 with some new “killer” features.

    This is of course only my speculation, so don’t hate me if I’m wrong!
    But if I am more or less right I will for sure remind everybody here and say: I TOLD YOU SO! 😀

    • Andrew

      It may make sense for Nikon to merge the D5200 and D7100 into one camera, thus eliminating one of the two models and pricing it at $1,000. Then all they will need to do is introduce the D400 to meet the needs of professionals clamoring for this camera since besides some high end features, they want a DX sensor in a bigger camera body. I see Nikon coming out with a baby D4 with a 16 MP full frame sensor, this will allow them to sell more of these sensors which will help in reducing the manufacturing cost. Now since the D600 will have a 24 MP full frame sensor in a D7000 size body, it will be interesting if they will put the same 24 MP full frame sensor in a more professional (or bigger) sized body like the D800 body size.

    • gallon

      Sounds exciting. We’ll wait.

  • KID

    From the photos it looks like a full frame version of the D7000, which is a fantastic camera in all respects. Its too early to tell for sure. If so, it’s NOT pro quality like the D700/D800 and will not withstand the daily grind a professional would put it through. I literally wore my D7000 out in just over two months. I put 19,000 plus clicks on it and it blew the shutter. Nikon had it for over a month. Nonetheless, I sold it once repaired. If this is the case, then there will be a gap in the line up forcing those who need the speed and durability of a pro camera to buy a D4. As wonderful as the D800 is, it’s just too slow for sports and news photography. Especially when the competition has a D4. Nikon really needs a mini D4, built like the D800, 16 MP, with say 8fps and of course a few less features. The D4 is simply out of reach especially with all the news publications cutting back every quarter.

    • Rob

      I would love a D800H with an extra EXPEED 3 and 8FPS.

    • Nikon really needs a mini D4, built like the D800, 16 MP, with say 8fps and of course a few less features.

      This would be my dream camera. I’m not really liking this “entry level FX” positioning of the D600.

      In fact what we need is a true successor for the D700, something even Nikon told the d800 isn’t and from the rumored specs we aren’t getting one with the D600.

  • Landscape Photo


    24mp sensor from D3x, D700 form factor but 100% vf. $2000-2500

    Simplicity, purity, image quality. The rest is trivial.

  • JonMcG

    Is it too far out of the realm of possability that the D600 wouldn’t be both the D300s replacement and at the same time be the new low end FX entry camera?

    If the build quality is descent, if you want DX all you have to do is put a DX lens on that 24MP full frame sensor and you have yourself all the DX love you need at what, 16MP?

    I realize build quality is not expected to be “pro” however what about the possability of Nikon launching two D600 cams side by side.. The cheapy D7000 like $1500 body and a $2200 D700 like “pro” body…

    • Mike M

      Try 10 megapixels, based on the D3X. Also the D600 isn’t likely to have a high FPS or powerful AF system as you’d find if they made another pro-sumer D400 camera. How good it’s DX crop mode will work as far as VF blanking etc is also dubious since it will be a high end consumer body rather than a pro or pro-sumer model from what we’ve seen. I think at this point all of us waiting for a D400 are stuck with prayers and the hope that maybe Canon will release a 7D MK II in which case Nikon would be all but obliged to respond. Otherwise Nikon better get on the ball with some really excellent long focal length consumer glass and cheaper FX bodies with high FPS.

      • Andrew

        Once Nikon releases the D600 at $1500, it is definitely conceivable that they will release a 24 MP full frame camera (maybe with the same D600 sensor) in a pro body selling at around $2,200. This camera will be in a D800 body and share most of the D800’s specs. But in addition, it will have a higher frame rate (maybe 9 fps) for sports photographers. They may release two models – one of which will have a stronger anti-aliasing filter to better control Moiré patterns for videographers.

        • How are you so sure about that?

          • Andrew

            The success of the D800 and D800E shows that professionals need equipment that are more finely tuned to their individual needs. Nikon needs a strong full frame DSLR camera to compete in this segment of the market. The D800 takes exceptional videos, and the sharpest images (both picture and videos) of any DSLR currently available in the under $6,000 price point. The D800’s low light performance is impressive for a camera with such a high megapixel (i.e. 36 MP) sensor. But because of its weaker anti-aliasing filter in order to attain extremely sharp images, in some situations, repeating patterns may introduce Moiré. In addition, a lower pixel count (i.e. 24 MP) would enable better low light performance for certain movie scenes. For these considerations, it makes perfect sense for Nikon to introduce a full frame camera with a stronger anti-aliasing filter at the 24 MP level. Such a camera will be very popular with Indie buffs.

            • Then you think that the video on D600 won’t be as good or better than the video on D800?

            • Andrew

              The video on the D600 should be excellent – see below for details.

          • Andrew

            The video on the D600 should be incredible. But because of the difference in sensor pixel density, the D800 will take slightly sharper video than the D600 if you compare them side by side. But most people will not notice the difference when viewed independently. But lining up the shots side by side, the finer details in the D800 will become immediately evident. The bottom line is that the D600 should be capable of producing professional quality video that is usable in producing commercials and movies. So if the D600 is introduced at $1,500, then with its full frame sensor and high megapixel (24 MP), you will be getting an incredible video camera.

  • Bill Clinton

    I just think it’s funny that people take the time of their day to argue about canon and nikon.
    I am pretty damn sure the ones arguing over these cameras are not working professionals cause they don’t have the time for that.

    They know what camera works best for them and are satisfied. They don’t go on blogs talking about how nikon out performs canon.

    What also baffles me is that some people actually buy the D800 to take pictures of Tommy running around in the yard.


    Would you look stupid if you had a H4d taking pictures of your dog eating a bone ?

    These cameras are getting cheaper and more accessible.
    I fear for wedding photographers.

    Couples might as well just ask their grand dad who bought a 36mp camera to shoot their wedding for free.

    • yes, but camera doesnt make a photographer.
      My clients dont pay me because I have a good camera, but because I know how to use it.

    • asdf

      God forbid people take photos of a “dog eating a bone” with a H4D.

      Y.O.U. M.A.D.? Zey haz moar $$$$$ zan ju.


  • Roberto

    D600 is coming!…..Me too!

  • Betsey Ross

    Canon 7D seems to be the best replacement for the Nikon 300. Or wait to see what canon introduces at Photokina. Not holding out much hope for a replacement from Nikon.

    • Pro Camera

      I agree with you. It is very unlikely that there will be a D400 any time soon.

  • Toonie

    x1.3 crop sensor for D600 may be ? 😀 just my wish

  • This Camera is So Ripe….can’t wait to get it….!!!

  • Phil

    If it does 9AEB, I’ll get it. If it only does 3AEB, I’ll sit with the D7000.

  • FDF

    The biggest question for me is if this camera will have a mode-dial lock. The only annoyance on my D90 is that flimsy mode dial that gets accidentally turned away from M so many bloody times.

  • Coolpix

    ADMIN: Any update on another Coolpix announcement for a larger advanced compact camera in the next week or two?

  • Pro Camera

    Why do the new cameras have to be so small? That is really annoying. It is very difficult to hold the D7000, and apparently, also so will be the new D600.

    My options I think will be D800 or D700.

    • Andrew

      Why do the new cameras have to be so small? Answer: Because most people are small. And yes, I have heard the argument that you need a bigger camera body to properly balance an FX lens. But many people will not buy this argument. The professional segment of the camera market has had only one choice until now: big camera body! It is about time that Nikon caters to the needs of all of its customers. But please don’t despair, your turn will come again – in the form of a $2,200+ higher end camera quite likely with the same 24 MP full frame sensor as the D600.

    • bekafi

      Why so small? Because there are people like me who, at the moment, own an even smaller DSLR (in my case an old D40x) and now want to upgrade and decide to get a full-frame body (because I guess the futur of DSLRs is full frame) but don’t want to carry a camera the size of a D800, you see? 😉

  • Ken Oddwell

    It will take forever to sell the remaining D3x.

    • Kon_head

      Simply because D3X is s0000 yester-century (in DLSR time)

  • Eric

    Hope they’re correct in photoshopping in that Ai-s tab!

  • Josh

    What’s the point of posting fake PS images when you have real images of the actual camera on the blog already?

    • adminpr

      drawing attention and increasing the number of hits?

    • Dimitrii1130

      maybe it was not the final cam.. who knows..
      ->but i hope it was the final- i want the wheel in the front.

  • David K

    I don’t see why Nikon needs so many DSLR options. What if they simply made the D3200 @ $700, the D600 @ $1500 (or so), the D800/e @$3,000 (3,300 for e) and the D4 @ $6,000?

    • Rob

      What would happen? They’d lose half their customers to Canon.

    • Andrew

      Because Nikon needs:
      (1) A D5100 (DX/24MP) replacement ($900) – swivel LCD monitor.
      (2) A D7000 (DX/24MP) replacement ($1,200) – magnesium alloy body and built-in focusing motor.
      (3) A D300 (DX/24MP) replacement ($1,700) – pro body and pro features.
      (4) A D700 (FX/24MP) replacement ($2,200) – full frame sensor and pro body.
      (5) And a baby D4 (FX/16MP) replacement ($2,700) – pro body, full frame sensor, awesome low light performance (i.e. high ISO), and high frame rate (for sports photography.

      Conclusion: So in other words, Nikon needs to release five more “new” cameras… and that is after they release the D600 camera.

  • Morg

    bring out the D400 so I can choose between that and the D600 now! I want something new instead of my old D200 dont make me wait any longer Nikon!

    • chimchim


  • Marcus Newel

    I can’t imagine that the D600 should be a entry-level camera, because there is no D700 replacement for 4 years. If I can handle the 36mp sensor of the d800, do you think i should wait for the d600 because its cheaper or buying the d800?

    • I think you should wait and see what the D600 will bring. If you are not a landscape and / or studio photographer then I don’t think you need so much pixels. At least that’s what everyone’s been saying in various reviews.

      I almost decided to buy D800… but then I heard about D600 and now I’m waiting. 🙂

    • Andrew

      I agree with Oliver – if you can wait, then wait! If you are not sure, then wait. And besides features, the D600 is a smaller sized camera, so you would have to decide if size matters.

  • R.W.

    I think Nikon is in the process of streamlining their DX00 and DX000 lines to distinguish each line more clearly from the other: Going foreward, all D-X00 will be FX-DSLRs, and all D-X000 will be DX-DSRLs.

    If my theory is correct, there will be no D400 as a replacement of the D300s but instead, we would have to expect a D7100 (or perhaps D8000) as an update of the upper end of the DX-line. (By introducing the D3200, Nikon already updated the entry level of this line.) By the same token, adding the D600 at the entry level of the FX-line will complete the update this line since the D800 has already been introduced at the higher end. All recent postings on Nikon Rumors appear to be consistent with the above.

    • Nikonnut

      I agree. NR admin once said that there will be 3 more dslr camera announcements this year after the D800. So far we have the 3200 so that leaves 2 more. The D600 entry level FX seems to be very likely the next.

      Im guessing the last one will be a highend DX to replace both the D300s and the D7000.

      something like 24mpx, 6-8fps, 51 point AF, big buffer, either d7000 or d300 size or something inbetween.

      i think that would complete the lineup nicely. They will be selling the d7000 for years to come just as they are still doing with the d90.

      And then they will just keep updating the 3 dx cameras D3xxx, D5xxx and the soon to be announced flagship DX whilst extending their FX range.

      Personally id much rather have a FX dslr camera if im gonna carry one around, because DX in a large dslr body just seems more and more “old tech” now that packetable DX sensor based cameras exists.

      • Nikonnut

        i mean pocketable

      • KnightPhoto

        @NikonNut, I agree for general photography with your point about rather using an FX camera:
        “Personally id much rather have a FX dslr camera if im gonna carry one around, because DX in a large dslr body just seems more and more “old tech” now that packetable DX sensor based cameras exists.”

        Except for the following cases:
        – high end Sport and Wildlife (we need it all – 51pt f/8 AF, monster buffer like on the D4, 8-10fps, weatherproofing, and ruggedness);
        – people who like DX for weight, size, or cost but still want it all (described above).

        I concede a D400 will sell into a smaller niche than the D300 did, times have moved on and FX is great for many reasons. I don’t concede Nikon will ignore the D400 market 🙂

  • Torwag

    I would really like to know if the D600 would allow metering with Ai and Ai-s lens.
    However, I fear to make a distinction to the D800 it might not.
    That would be a real drawback.
    Lets hope I am wrong

    As for the discussion of FX vs. DX… seeing all the hype about bridge cameras and the decreasing price of FX models, maybe Nikon judged already to leave the DSLR market to FX and focus to bridge cameras for “normal” consumers with a higher need of what a point and shoot can give you. If they sell now the D600 for <$2000, the price difference to a Nikon 1 is already just a factor of 2-2.5x and to the lowest entry model DX its about the same. Finally, the same argument about a more pricey FX sensor compared to DX is true for in favor for bridge cameras.
    So Nikon can create cheaper bridge cameras for the consumers in a highly competitive environment and focus on pro and semi-pro with DSLRs. All this sounds to me like DX will go in the not so fare future.

    • ashwins

      If the D7000 does it then why wouldn’t the D600 do it?

      Actually, I am much more concerned about the D600’s AF system (rumored to be the same as the one in D7000) that doesn’t work well with fast lenses (I have this very same problem with my D7000).

      In general, I think, what Nikon should improve is the AF system. Canon’s latest 2 FF cameras have a new AF system that with their STM lenses was found to be even more accurate than the LiveView (somebody at LensRentals made a research on this). That’s something I would like to have on D600, too!

  • My D700 gets really heavy after about 40-50 miles. I welcome a full frame with a size and weight of a smaller camera. Especially if there is any climbing involved in the trek.

    That extra 3/4 lbs is food I didn’t get to take, a lens I left at home, or a few more miles a day without feeling as tired.

    • gallon

      Try armadillo, they’re easier to catch.

      • haha, reminds me of a fellow I met out on the AT: he carried two plastic wiffle bats with him, of which when I asked why he replied “I like to each chipmunks.”

        I though about asking more questions, but then I decided that answer, true or not, was as good as it was going to get. I think he said he’d been on the trail and out of civilization for about 3 months.

  • MrGABE

    i think i have a solution that helps pretty much everyone..

    Nikon should take this route.
    D3xxx – entry level DX
    D5xxx – D7000-type body, articulating LCD
    D7xxx – D800-type body, high FPS, high buffer, professional DX (reason for Nikon to develop pro DX lenses 17-55, 55-150ish,)

    D6xx – D7000-type body, articulating LCD, FX,
    D8xx – they release an S version with specs to fully replace D700
    D4 – flagship FX

    • Alex

      I think high-end DX is gone. In fact, I think APS-C will eventually move completely to the mirrorless system. I also expect when that happens, a lower-price FX below the D600 series. I would also expect to see a D4x to replace the D3x.

      • Brent

        I agree with your comments. We will soon be back to an era of 35mm cameras and one other choice below it, not two or three. FX and mirrorless is the future.

  • Marcus Newel


    Sounds interesting, but if there would be a D800s version, i hope so, we cant expect this before the end of 2012…damn, if the d600 is too entry for me i can wait for another year, i just want a 5dmark3 pendant or a really d700 replacement! The 4fps of the d800 are also sad, like the oversized pics for my needs.

  • hardbonemac

    bla..bla..bla..bla…and qack..

    if you read all this stuff…i just think to drive back in past..ore somewhere to
    stonage. One crys about the price…
    blurrs about waht ever…
    If NIKON would kill it`s lines and only a d600 is left?

    bad? its like this exhaust fondling of cars… for what?

    could you all imagine this huge pile of cameras produced 2011…
    up to mars?
    how long will they hold till trash?
    right…longer and as good anyone goes out and mike films fotos and what ever.

    and 2013 we get a d999
    and so on…


    and do not buy all dy lo9ng every shit..then evollotion goes faster…

  • Bjørn Erik

    My guess is that Nikon will be using a Sony-sensor for their midrange stuff, or at least some of them. If that’ll be the D7000 replacement, D300s replacement, or the D700 replacement – who knows. I really don’t care to much either, because the product will be just as good. Its all about price vs. quality. In that respect the D7000 and the D800 were equally impressive.
    What I do care about tho, is the fps of the D600. If its supposed to replace the D700, it ought to have more frames pr second, or at least the same. The d700 is useless for sports without the battery-grip, which boosts fps by a lot. If the D600 commes with a simular setup, I’ll concider getting one. If it does’nt, I wont. 5 fps is less then the D7000, and only a slight improvement off the d800, which I allready got. I’m almost certain the quality of the D600 will be good enough, so the only question for me is FPS. I’ll still keep my D800, which is good for everything except that which requires higher FPS. Looking forward to seeing some releasenotes about this…

  • VJ

    Hmm, I was waiting for a high end DX since the D200… just some pro DX body with good AF that can record full HD video. I kept postponing to update as my D100 manages, and for my use it was not necessary to upgrade. Still, now I start to get the feeling I may have lucked out.

    Still waiting for a D400, but I’m sick of waiting… I guess I would have to compromise: D300s (no full hd video) or D7000 (less pro, worse AF)…

  • VNA

    Nikon needs to learn their lessons
    D700 no video capability thus under the shadown of 5dmark2
    D800 with 36MP which is too much for most users -> not good ISO performance, file size too large, slow shooting rate. Therefore 5dmark3 is better.
    D7000 and D800 need to improve on the white balance, auto exposer, and color rendering as well as the jpeg processing engine.
    I hope/wish D600 will have 18MP but with really good native ISO performance of 25000 usable. Pricing should be under $2000

    • 24×36

      D800 -> not good ISO performance?! LOL D800 ISO performance is better than D700/D3, with three times the pixels; is better than 5DIII as well, with 14 MORE megapixels. Frame rate is the ONLY legitimate “concern” of all those you raised about D800 vs. 5DIII, which isn’t that big an issue given the image quality difference (in BOTH resolution AND high ISO performance). Perhaps you’re fooled by heavy-handed noise reduction in the 5DIII, but don’t spread misinformation.

      Nikon completely outflanked Canon with the D800. They lulled Canon into the belief that they were settling into a “we have enough pixels” mode, then left them in the dust with a 36MP FF dSLR that outdoes Canon’s 5DIII significantly in resolution while also outperforming it in high ISO image quality, at a BETTER price point, while simultaneously underscoring the relevance of DX as nothing more than a cost issue (i.e., they now offer a FF with more than enough pixels for high image quality in DX crop size, revealing the “myth” of additional “reach” for what it is, an issue of pixel density and NOTHING ELSE). 6fps vs. 4fps doesn’t make the 5DIII a world beater given how short it comes up on the resolution and high ISO fronts. The fps limit of the D800 gives Nikon an upgrade to sell you in the next round; it certainly isn’t missing anything else.

  • siotg

    D7000 also has a problem of not be able to change aperature while shooting video. D600 should have this problem fixed.

  • Hello!

    Great blog and post! Can’t wait to see if all the Nikon rumors are true at Photokina. 🙂 I just wanted to leave a quick comment to let you know about our awesome gadget for photographers of every level and that we’re going to Photokina. For those going please come find our booth for free giveaways! The Hufa Holder lens cap clip was designed by photographers after they had, like many other photographers do, lost a TON of lens caps. The nifty little device just clips right on your strap and keeps your cap in place while you’re shooting! Turns out, we lose a whole lot less lens caps this way! 🙂 This also works no matter what camera you are using. Here is a video for you to check it out Thanks again for sharing the Nikon D600 information! Hope you’ll check out our gadget when you get a chance.

    Have a great day,

    • Trever

      I put my lens cap in my front pants pocket, problem solved.

  • jen

    I HATE the wheel on the top. I have the D4 and D700 . I briefly had the D7000 and it too had the wheel. I do a lot of concert photography and the wheel was constantly getting bumped into and knocked out of place 🙁

  • Nikonhead

    I would much rather see a D700s with 16-24mp, video and dual card slots. I don’t know why Nikon would choose to make a full frame camera in a consumer body. Most people who just shoot as a hobby don’t know the difference between DX and FX. Keep the DX format and less expensive lenses and put the FX sensors in pro bodies with better focus systems and charge afew hundred dollars more.

  • I’m attending a Nikon product launch event on September 13th in Dubai. It’s going to be a worldwide reveal and I’m guessing its the D600.

  • JR

    For a company that’s been in business for nearly a cerntury, Nikon has a *VERY* poor marketing strategy. Calling it embarrassing is not an overstatement.

    I agree with Thom Hogan on all accounts. Nikon has completely botched the DX/D300/D400 continuum. The marketing strategy couldn’t be any simpler. For DSLRs Nikon needs TWO product lines, each with an entry, mid and pro level body.

    – DX line: DEntryLevelOne, DEntryLevelTwo, DMidLevel, DProLevel
    – FX line: DEntryLevel, DMidLevel, DProLevel

    That would translate to:

    – DX line: EVERY sensor is 24MP(approaching, if not reaching the max limit of DX)
    – DEntryLevelOne: D3000 family. Smallest body possible, with most basic feature set.
    – DEntryLevelTwo: D5000 family. Small body, step up in feature set.
    – DMidLevel: D7000 family. Tougher, medium body, higher shooting speed.
    – DProLevel D300/400 family: Large, pro body, highest shooting speed.

    – FX line: EVERY sensor is 36MP(or higher, where the top DProLevel may be on the bleeding edge) but allows for variable image/file size.
    – DEntryLevel: D600 family. Allows for interchangeable grip and parts with D7000.
    – DMidLevel: D800. Tougher, larger body with pro feature set, but slower frame rate.
    – DProLevel. Toughest body with highest frame rate. Basically, the TOP OF THE HEAP!

    What’s different from that list than what Nikon offers today? Well, for starters the D300/D400 is non-existent. A bad mistake by Nikon. Even though some shooters want a heavier, pro body, not all of them want to use larger and heavier FX lenses. Is some cases, DX lenses outperform FX pro glass. For that reason alone Nikon should continue offering a pro DX body; nevermind the sports/wildlife shooters craving for longer reach without having to haul around massive glass.

    Something else that’s different about that list -vs- Nikon’s current offerings is that each body line gets ONE AND ONLY ONE sensor size. Basically, the SAME SENSOR. Why fart around with X, Y and Z sensor sizes? “Oh, because of the noise that is present with high pixel count”, you will predictably say. Nonsense!

    The technology is there to allow an FX body to have variable file size and adaptive noise handling per file size. It’s just not something that’s happened yet because Nikon hasn’t focused on perfecting it. On DX, ALL of their bodies should have THE SAME image quality and noise profile. The ONLY difference should be features and features only.

    I surely hope that in 2-3 years time sensor size will be an afterthought and photographers will only need to chat about a body’s feature set.

  • Back to top