< ! --Digital window verification 001 -->

Updated specifications for the Nikon D600

Pin It

 
    

The release probability of the Nikon D600 for Photokina is now at 99%. Here is an updated list of the specifications (new additions in bold):

  • Very small and lightweight body
  • 16 bit image processing
  • Expeed 3 processor
  • Maximum video recording: 30 minutes
  • Built-in mic
  • 19 scene modes
  • Magnesium alloy only on top and back only
  • Maximum shutter speed of 1/4000
  • Shutter life: 150,000 cycles (the D800 is rated for 200,000 cycles)

Previously reported Nikon D600 specs:

  • 24.7MP full frame sensor
  • Weight: 760g (850g with battery and memory cards), the D800 weights 900g
  • 3.2" LCD with 921K dot with ambient sensor control
  • HDMI output
  • Video compression: H264/MPEG-4
  • Full HD with 30p, 25p, 24p, HD with 60p, 50p, 30p, 25p
  • Viewfinder coverage: 100%
  • The Nikon D600 will have built-in AF motor
  • The body most probably will be weather sealed
  • The D600 will not have built-in GPS
  • ISO range: 100-6400 (with Lo-1 ISO 50 and Hi-2 ISO 25,600)
  • 39 AF points (with an option of 11 AF points), 9 cross-type AF points
  • AF face detection
  • Exposure compensation: ±5 EV (same as the D800)
  • The D600 will probably use the EN-EL15 rechargeable Li-ion battery
  • 5 fps (same as the D700, the D800 has 4fps)
  • 2 SD card slots with Eye-fi support
  • Build-in retouching images functionality
  • Built-in flash with sync speed of 1/250s
  • Two user settings: U1 and U2
  • Fn button
  • Auto DX crop mode
  • In-camera RAW editor
  • Built in time-lapse functionality
  • Build-in HDR
  • New external battery grip
  • Internal AF motor
  • The price of the D600 is rumored to be very low - maybe as low as $1500
  • Announcement before Photokina (September 2012)
This entry was posted in Nikon D600. Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • Pablo Ricasso

    I’m switching to Polaroid!

    • Peter

      You are probably still bitter that Cyndi Lauper is no longer cool… ;)

      • http://www.ranjeetrain.com Ranjeet Rain

        Perfect response to trolls, lol!

        • Pablo Ricasso

          I’m switching to Konica!
          And don’t give me no more * or I’ll put a HEXANON on you!

          • Nikon a Fashion stmt

            Nikon has truly lost it’s touch just like Nokia and Dell.

            Nikon is now a fashion statement. No longer follows: Function over Form.

            Sad that we are witnessing a mass exodus from Nikon to Canon.

            • Jan Karlsson

              I’m a Canon 5D MkII user.
              Nikon make very good cameras .
              Canon have lost many customers to them, and I cant understand why anyone will go from Nikon to Canon today?
              Canon have done many bad things (my 5D and the new one) and have lost the sensor war to Sony and Camera war to Nikon.
              But i still hope for a real studio camera from Canon ????

            • http://www.ranjeetrain.com Ranjeet Rain

              Tell me that you were kidding. I can’t imagine anyone making such a grossly misplaced remark in any seriousness.

              Either that, or you don’t know a thing about what you are talking, possibly a jealous Canon fanboy.

          • Canon a Fashion stmt

            Canon has truly lost it’s touch just like Motorola and HP.

            Canon is now a fashion statement. No longer follows: Function over Form.

            Sad that we are witnessing a mass exodus from Canon to Nikon.

            • John_IGG

              + many

      • Symple

        Cyndi Lauper is actually pretty cool again, ‘Early In The Mornin’ with BB King from the other year sells pretty well, but not as well as this rumored camera is going to sell if/when it hits the world market.

      • Pablo Ricasso

        switching the 8 track…

    • manmeat

      I will just quietly fap here…

  • http://nicolaiecostel.blog.com saas

    Too bad you can’t afford a good nikon, troll.

    • Pablo Ricasso

      Switching to Powershot!

      • Fashion Statement

        Giving up on Nikon, switching to Rolex.

        No catchet in wearing a camera everyone knows to be duff.

        • Pablo Ricasso

          Switching to pink halter tops and leotards…

  • silky

    91k RGB or 2k RGB metering ?

  • Javier (España)

    From hard drive manufacturer:
    Thanks for the D800, but …
    for when a camera with 200 Mp

    They’re all crazy ….

  • Niktard

    I had a D800 – I torched it because I hated it so bad. Autofocus sucked ass. Color sucked ass. AWB sucked ass. Green as fuck. Serious pos Nikon failure. If you bitches could see you would agree.

    • Rocky Skillern

      Profanity is the crutch of the literary cripple..

    • Nikons

      I understand you never used a D800, hthe best camera available with the expeption of the frame rate. If you need a frame rate the there is the D4.

      Please use it before you post such nonsense!

    • BartyL

      I try not to feed trolls, but… Whilst I don’t think for a moment that you actually did what you claim, what you are claiming to have done is … spectacularly, breathtakingly, idiotic. How can you claim to have burnt a new $3000 camera and think that this wouldn’t reflect negatively on you? Are you 12 years old? Does mummy (‘mommy’ for Americans) know that you are using the computer?

      The Stupid is strong in this one.

      • Dave in the USA

        You can’t fix stupid. So, move along…. :-)

    • Sylvain Larive

      Posts like these made me wish NR had a stronger post authentication method. These trolls are so dumb they couldn’t even use temporary emails to post their crap, or they’d simply be too lazy to do it over and over again after getting banned.

      • http://StandDevelopment.com Axel

        Agreed. I want to read and write about cameras, not flame one company over another.

        This sounds like a more exciting camera for me. Reads a little like a D200 specs, but with a hi rez FF sensor. At $1200, I’m in.

      • Julian

        For every troll there seems to be two ‘non trolls’ who dignifies a response. In my books that makes us twice as bad in making this forum hard to read. Simple answer is to stop replying. Eventually most will go away.

        • BartyL

          I agree.

    • Ranjeet Rain

      I bet you a dollar you can’t afford it.

      I have an idea. Beg us and we can donate some chips so you can afford it. Till then, stop bitching.

  • Remedy

    Damn it I wanted to love that camera! Unfortunately “very small body” and shutter speed of only 1/4000th of a second is where I draw the line. Sorry Nikon, for that I have my D90. I shoot a lot at 1.4 in daylight conditions and even when I go down to ISO100 on D90 I bump the exposure wall. Plus of course this idiotic trend to go small with body. I’m already loving the balance of D600 with chunky full frame lenses!!!

    It’s either D700 if You don’t need video or D800 if You want everything and can afford it or D3200 with FF sensor oops I mean D600.

    • Claus

      Get a ND-filter.

      • Remedy

        I did but that does not solve all the issues. First of all it forces me to spend more money and if You are using lenses with big front elements it means some serious cost! Second, in some limited situations ND may add some flares and ghosts and that’s almost never a good thing.
        Don’t get me wrong I am still using ND filters but it’s not like I don’t see any disadvantages of that.

        • http://www.flickr.com/photos/jan_f_rasmussen/sets/ Jan F. Rasmussen

          Go to ISO 50 then…

          • http://www.flickr.com/photos/jan_f_rasmussen/sets/ Jan F. Rasmussen

            Or to the forest…

            • Remedy

              …or You get a brain.

            • Pablo Ricasso

              If you’re using an 85 f1.4 at full you will get the same field of view and less depth of field with a 135 f2 on a full frame. If you are using that lens on your D90 you will get the same field of view and less depth of field with a 70-200 set at 200 and f2.8 on a full frame. If you are using that lens and setting on your D90 you will get the same field of view and less depth of field with a 300 f4. And so on…
              In other words, you can close your lens down a stop on a full frame camera and still have at least as much blur as you had with your APS.
              So possibly you should use a brain before making statements like the one above.

            • Remedy

              …because depth of field is everything what photography is all about, right? Come back from this Retardville you are visiting at the moment so we could have a discussion.

            • Pablo Ricasso

              Oh, my poor Remedy…
              If depth of field were not everything, then why else would you be needing to shoot your lens wide open in broad daylight? The point of all your ranting seems to have dissipated. Almost all of my fast lenses work best at f5.6. There must be something I’m missing, being over here in Retardville.

        • Nikon Shooter

          D600 goes down to ISO 50. Stop splitting hairs and go shoot.

          • Nikon Shooter

            Jan beat me by a minute. Hate when that happens. Though the point still stands.

          • Remedy

            Do You have ANY idea what expandable ISO means? No? I thought so. For instance on a D90 it looks like utter crap. You get way less dynamic range. Give me native ISO50 or feel free to STFU.

            • Jonas

              But the D90 doesn’t use 16 bit processing. This matters when expanding ISO.

            • Remedy

              Nikon Shooter thanks for convincing me that you are one of those retards that do not differentiate something as basic as native and expanded (software tamed or enhanced) ISO. Feel free to sod of to “I love my P&S tardville.com”. If you have no clue about what is discussed better hold your mouth before you make yourself sound like an ignorant and arrogant idiot probably from US and A.

            • Pablo Ricasso

              Remedy, while I appreciate your pointing out the fact that there are many dumb Americans, I cannot help but feel that you could not be from anywhere BUT here. But I digress. Please see my reply to your whining that I posted several frames above, the one that explains how you don’t need the same aperture to get the same narrow depth of field when you are approximating the same field of view that you are accustomed to with your APS sensor when you switch to a full frame.
              I wonder why, if you have money to buy f1.4 lenses and a camera, you can’t spend a couple bucks and get a 2x filter.

            • Remedy

              First of all who said I want to switch to full frame? Second, who said I am NOT using NDs?
              Shame that You didn’t notice my post where I am talking about disadvantages of NDs etc.
              And lastly once a year You might wanna use 1/8000th.
              Heck I can live with that shutter speed, but seriously this retarded trend of making it small at a cost of ergonomics is where I draw the line.

        • Anon

          Go to the toilet :) You’ll never need above 1/4000 there !

        • Dakota

          Remedy you should change your user name to Antidote, because that is what you need for the diarrhea you are posting.
          With the feature set and the reported price, a good neutral density filter is nothing by comparison to the alternatives.
          You would have to pay $3500 to get the alternative Canon with similar feature set (slightly better), or the D800 which has greater resolution and comes in at $3000.
          I don’t mind one posting disappointment about one feature or another, that’s life…but based on your last comment, chances are you weren’t even considering purchasing full frame.
          To actually have posted what you did just shows the lack of basic comprehension you have (it’s a budget FX camera).
          Unfortunately you posted this for all the world to see, no be a good lad and let the adults continue to discuss the merits of a truly breakthrough camera, with a feature set that really squeezes the competition and at a price point that was never imaginable before.

          • Remedy

            Dude wtf are you even talking about? Do you hear yourself? “Breakthrough camera”?!?!!! Are you phucking kidding me?!! D700 is cheaper now than this D600 will be in 2 years after release and it beats it in nearly every department (obviously lower pixel count and lack of video in D700). This is a cheapo cam with cheapo features. It’s zero innovation for not that big money in a very, very crippled in terms of ergonomics body. Don’t add some dodgy theories to that.
            You can have better than that for less money – D700, because I am absolutely sure D600 won’t meter with old, manual Nikkor lenses. Truly a breakthrough camera… for douches that think sensor size is everything but they can’t afford D800.

            • Dakota

              Again talking diarrhea…
              A)D700 does not sell for less
              B)D700 is 4 year old technology
              C)According to the specs, it will be able to use screwdrive lenses
              D)Name me a camera with those specs in full frame for the speculated price of this camera, any camera even close in image quality, is at $3000 to $3500. Funny enough, you gloss over the 2 major upgrades (image quality, and Video)
              E)You have not even held the camera yet and you are babbling about the ergonomics. Idiot
              F) What happened to your whole whining about having to use an ND filter.
              G) Why are you still here, you said you couldn’t afford a full frame didn’t you? At least that is what the what you inferred when you bitched about the cost of ND filters in one post and then said you weren’t even planning on buying an FX camera in another.

              Dude, you are truly sad, and you keep showing yourself to be a greater tool to the internet world with each of your posts.

            • Remedy

              First of all you phucking imbecile read AGAIN and this time PAY ATTENTION to what I said so that you would not make an utter idiot out of yourself again like you just did above.

              A brand new D700 costs exactly 1470$ in my neighborhood. Beat that Mr D600 Is PROBABLY Gonna Cost 1500$.

              D700 is 4 year old technology? So phucking what? Did is suddenly stop taking pictures? Is it just me or this 4 years old technology still beats brand new D800 on a per pixel level not to even mention it’s competition from Canon (before you get stupid enough to even try to argue check dxo). You sound like a total idiot who thinks new is always better.

              And I love your D. The camera isn’t even out yet and you already know about it’s image quality and this leads us to E. I can judge small body ergonomics like D7000 but you phucking imbecile can’t judge image quality.

              And finally although I didn’t want to wast more time on you you phucking joke, let me clear few things for you regarding filters.

              Do you own any lens? Yes? Do you own more than 1? Yes? Do those lenses have different filter thread? Yes? Do any of those lenses is using 77mm or even bigger filters? Yes? Do you like quality filters? Yes? If you answered yes to every question and if you are not american you should already know what a total idiot you made out of yourself by starting this idiotic yapping of yours regarding filters and money etc.

              Again, less hamburgers – more brain gym. Imbecile.

            • Dakota

              Well, I truly apologize for getting you so riled up.
              Here, lets try to maintain some civility, i wont even use the word phucking ( by the way you seem to consistently misspell this word).
              I will answer your points one by one from your paragraphs.
              Paragraph 1) I thought I was paying attention to what you are saying, it just seems to be utter nonsense.

              Paragraph 2) I do not know what the D600 is going to cost, i only know what it is rumored to cost… that being said, $1470 for a brand new, never used D700 with full warranty is truly a great price. If you can afford it, I would buy one.

              Paragraph 3) Actually, you are once again talking diarrhea…DXO marks the D800 at 95 overall, color bit depth of 25.3, Dynamic range of 14.4, and ISO of 2853…D700 is rated as 80, color bit depth of 23.5, dynamic range of 12.2, and ISO of 2303. Oh BTW the D700 has a low native ISO of 200, so you will need to use ND filters on this camera as well I guess :)

              Paragraph 4) OK, you are right I dont know the image quality of this camera, but simply based on the advances in sensor technology i.e. the DXO marks for all of the more recent cameras, I assumed. but like you said i have not shot it so i dont know, just like you have not handled it so you dont know either :)

              Paragraph 5 and 6) No all of my lenses are 77mm thread size, and I own 5 Nikon lenses, and i already have an ND filter, so again this is not an issue for me. And to re-iterate, if you buy the D700 you will also need to use ND filters as the low native ISO is 200:)
              Now the second part of your statement in paragraph 6 goes to the core of your character, or lack of character. You have made derogatory comments about Americans 3 separate times; what gives? You have attacked them without letting anyone know what you are, is this cowardice? Also note that no American has come on this site bashing you or your possible nationality.

              Full disclosure, I live in the USA, am married to an American, I however am not American, I am from Spain.
              Are some American’s arrogant, sure… but weren’t the Brits arrogant when they were a world power? the same can be said about the Spanish, French so on and so on, so why do show such envy by Yank bashing? American’s are by far and large (my own personal experience) extremely selfless and giving individuals. You sir are such a little, little, man, and so angry LOL.
              Listen, you have a great life, enjoy the D700 with its older sensor technology (according to DXO), and remember, bring your ND filters, as you will need them with this camera as well.
              Oh I forgot, this conversation is mute, as you aren’t even able to afford a new FX camera with all those expensive ND filters you will have to buy, ROFL!!!!:)

            • Remedy

              Dakota, You got me inspired by the calm and reasonable post You made. I apologize but I flip out quit easily.

              First of all I was talking about PER PIXEL level of performance by D700 just to show You that this 4 year old technology still pwns! You probably are not familiar with how to read DxO score so let me help You out a bit. Switch the results to Screen mode (not Print). There You go, modern D800 and 5D MkIII are getting creamed by rusty D700.

              Second thing, I own many lenses with filter threads ranging from 52mm to 82mm. Considering the fact that a good filter like some Tiffens cost 190$ (77mm in that case) and I would have to buy separate one for every thread size, it’s not what I would call cheap. I would need at least 5 of them. Hence saying if You need lower shutter speed buy ND is somewhat stupid.

              Why would I not harass yanks? Their arrogance and ignorance is comparable only with brits. Add their belief that US and A is the center of the universe and there You go. :)

              To sum it all up, chill out man, go eat some gazpacho or spear a bull or something. ;)

            • Dakota

              No Problema, Remedy…:)
              Hope you get the camera that fits your needs.
              I will chill out, have a good one.
              Salud, or in your case cheers! :)

    • http://www.touchmyapps.com shigzeo

      You probably were not into photography prior to the digital age. Before the F5, Nikon designed even its ‘professional’ line to be much much smaller than any of the current line of massive bricks.

      This isn’t a current trend. It’s a return to photography’s core: pictures. Taking pictures with massive cameras isn’t where 35mm photography ever was except in the 90′s through till now.

      Makers realise that people have 35mm lenses and want to shoot as they did 20 to 30 years ago. A full frame camera was the norm then and it should be now. You could walk into a store and out having spent just 500$ or less on a body that is smaller than a D7000, in many cases smaller than a D3000 (grip makes it huge) for a great body with great viewfinder.

      Today’s complainers probably never used cameras prior to say, 1995.

      • Nion

        IMO,size of the body really does matter…..but in reverse way,particularly with heavier FF lenses. Small and light weight bodies gives more steadiness with heavier lenses….this is simple physics. To me fascination for large body is nothing but fashion…. if I don’t have a pair of Monster hands.

      • Fred

        Well said!
        The only reason to continue with the newer ‘large’ camera bodies is if the manufacturers are considering using valves instead of ICs ;-)

      • Cynog

        Best camera I ever owned was a Nikon F6, and that was way smaller than the F5 (or the D3). So I’m in complete agreement that large body does not necessarily equal professional.

      • Remedy

        Are you fking serious? Why do you think the F5 looked the way it looked? Because it was designed to be ERGONOMIC to hold and operate. Everything pre mid 80′s was a stone age design in terms of ergonomics and did not differ from the bricks from early 50s. For over 30 years cameras looked the same because no one cared about making comfortable to hold camera. Saying those old flat brick are comfortable is like saying that a wooden dutch shoes are better for running than some Nike;s or Puma’s. Give me and thousands of designers a fking break.
        D3/D4 look the way they look because it’s an evolution of ergonomic design. Because someone few years back realized that this is an important factor. None of the 70′s crap was comfortable, pretty or functional, nor cars, nor electronics nor any other shit.
        All of you feel free to gtfo to stone age era and play with your rocks.

        • Nion

          I don’t agree with you . ERGONOMICS consider three factors : a)Design (shape,grip,placement of buttons etc.), b)size and c)weight. Considering design, ergonomics have been tremendously developed specially by Nikon during past few decades. Considering size, the most comfortable camera size is one which could be hold in one hand with almost relaxed fingers. Considering weight, Light weight body is ergonomically more comfortable than heavy weight body which does not strain the fingers or the wrist. D3/D4 fulfils a) but not b) & c)………Oh! …I have forgotten to discuss about shoulder pain….specially for those who shoot all the day in the streets , jungles and mountains without taking the help of a “Camera boy”. So, in my opinion, if technology permits then Big giants should make good small and light weight cameras ignoring the “Pro-like” fashion.

          • Remedy

            You are missing only one tiny…. no HUGE factor. None of this cameras is designed to be operated in one hand. PERIOD.

            • Nion

              Hi Remedy, actually I have not missed “one tiny….no HUGE factor ” rather you have forgotten how to hold a modern DSLR. Most of the photographers, including myself, HOLD the camera BODY with ONE hand and the LENS with the other with some support to the body. If your practice is to HOLD the camera BODY with both of your hands then you could hold a greased brick also which is not at all a sensible PHOTOGRAPHER’S practice..!!!! : )

    • Dave in the USA

      I think the problem here is that your base assumption appears to the rest of us to be that since you shoot f/1.4 in broad daylight that everyone will shoot f/1.4 in broad daylight. Let’s face it, if you have the money for Nikon’s f/1.4 glass, then you have the money for a D800, get the D800 and quit whining. There are those of us who don’t have those kinds of requirements or budget and the D600 will suit our needs just fine.

      As for your complaint about ND filters costing you more money, well yes, but a couple hundred $$ is a lot less than the difference between the rumored price of the D600 and the cost of the D800.

      But considering your complaints, it is clear you never would have been able to take a picture using film. I have a late-1960s Minolta SRT-101 that still takes amazing pictures and has a smaller body than any DSLR out there, FX or DX. One of the big advantages of 35mm cameras was that they weren’t as big and clunky as a medium format camera. So I don’t understand the complaint people have about small camera bodies. As long as it is comfortable in your hand and takes good pictures, who cares how big it is. My SRT is 560g. That’s the same as a D5000, and the D5000 uses a larger and heavier battery.

      I hate to say this but most of the FX wannabes today are more concerned with their own image taking a picture, than the image that comes out of the camera. To listen to the way some of you talk about how even as-yet-unreleased cameras could not possibly be adequate for photography, you must believe that every decent picture taken before 2005 is simply a hoax.

      • Nathan

        Great post. It’s true. The cameras back then even had a maximum shutter speed of 1/1000 (that was blazing fast) or 1/500 if you had a leaf shutter medium format camera.

        • Pablo Ricasso

          This is all so true. My F2A and F3 are slightly larger than the lesser models that I have from that period and before and the top speed of 1/2000 is twice is one step up from what I was accustomed to. They didn’t have grips and now they look tiny compared to almost anything. I still like them better too, and I didn’t even use a motor drive! Some people considered one or the other to be the finest camera ever made. Now I’m thinking that the D800 is and this new camera is like my Nikkormat.

          Also, one of the largest people I know who has very large fingers shoots regularly with Canon rebels. How did we ever manage?

        • Remedy

          You know lemmings what else is true? That in the old film era ISO100 was considered medium high. Please be so kind and show me a digital camera that goes to ISO25, ISO10, ISO6? None? So how about a nice, hot cup of STFU next time?

      • Arkasai

        Great post Dave. People are so melodramatic these days (especially the digital era children who would never have bought a film camera if it wasn’t “hip”) have lost sight of what it takes to make a great photo. They have no idea how spoiled the digital camera has made them, that they can’t live without these novelties camera companies have convinced them they need. I’m inspired to add a caption to the quickmeme “first world problems.”

        • Remedy

          Mr Pro And Shooting Since Dinosaurs Walked The Earth Expert have you ever used a film camera which wasn’t 30$ Konica, Kodak or anything with 1 button?

          Ever heard of films like Velvia 50 (guess what that 50 means), Kodachrome 25 or Efke IR820 (rated ISO 3 – THREE!)?
          Ever heard of film cameras HAVING possibility to shoot 1/8000th?
          No? So what da phuck are you even yaping about? All I want is shooting like it was possible on film, how hard can it be to get this basic thing?!!?!?!?!

          • ericnl

            oooh, oooh, ooooh…..
            I know the the answer to this one!!!! :)

            it isn’t hard to get right, because it already exists. ;)
            it’s called an SLR (without the D).

            so be a good boy and go shoot with your beloved film camera (with extra grip for added ergonomics of course), and stop getting worked up about a digital camera that you have no intention of buying any way :P

      • Erica

        Hi Dave,
        I think you nailed it on the head.
        I’m from the analog age and my F80 is a lot smaller than today’s digital slr’s.
        I don’t have large hands and therefor I would love a FF dslr that’s not to big. My friend has a D700 and when I use that one, I always feel it’s to big for me. My own D7000 fits my hands perfect so I hope the D600 wouldn’t be much bigger than that.

        And to all those people who want a camera that huge: get a medium format :-)

      • Remedy

        Are you having serious problems with logical thinking? Is it because you are from US and A?
        Would it bother you and rest of those not thinking straight lemmings if the camera had max shutter speed of 1/8000th or even 1/16000th? Really would this be a problem or issue for you if that camera could do that? No? SO WHY DA PHUCK DO YOU DENY THE NEED FOR THIS BY OTHER PEOPLE? ARE YOU SLOW?!! You don’t need it you don’t use it, it is THAT SIMPLE. Geez wtf is wrong with those playstation generation lemmings these days!?

      • Remedy

        Two words. Use brain.

        Film ISO25, 10, 6 or 3 anyone?

      • Pro Camera

        “As long as it is comfortable in your hand …” – That is exactly the problem. The new standards of small, tiny, toylike size cameras from Nikon is not.

    • http://StandDevelopment.com Axel

      You may be my brother, separated at birth. Nobody talks much about low ISO speeds. I like to shoot with my fast lenses, wide open. I would love a camera to shoot down to ISO 25. Those that say use a ND filter: I do. But it’s a PITA.

    • Larry The Nikon Guy

      All you need is 1 or 2 stop ND filter and you can shoot wide open all day even with a direct flash to fill in the shadows in the harsh light. I have been doing this since my First Nikon FE3 that could only go to 1/1000 and I discovered the bokeh of the 50mm 1.8 AI back in 1983!!!

    • Ranjeet Rain

      No manufacturer can produce a completely idiot-proof camera. I know Nikon can’t.

  • Fred

    Filling in the bits:
    On the left side of the D600 photo there are 3 doors(rubber flaps). They look like (top to bottom):
    1) Mike in and headphones out.
    2) USB/HDMI/Ext power.
    3) ‘Accessary Terminal – ‘D’ Connector’
    So looks like a pretty ‘full house’ to me.

  • D1000

    @ dwd

    I had a d7000 then a fuji x100. I sold both to get a full frame coming. Maybe I have less money than you s***er canon boy but I didn’t require a D4 to make your sh**ty photos.
    What did you say I have to do with wish in one hand and YOU in the other?

  • Olive

    Built in time-lapse functionality + Build-in HDR -> That make me dream !!!

    But 1/4000 -> That’s not really fast… bye bye sport picture !

    • Jonas

      Not sure how 1/4000 s isn’t fast enough for sports.

      • Olive

        When you take picture of race bike sometime with my d700 i was at 1/7000 at 200 iso.

        • http://www.ranjeetrain.com Ranjeet Rain

          That has nothing to do with the genre you shoot. You need to know how to shoot manual, rather than shutter priority.

    • Peter

      You better look for the framerate. 5fps. This means byebye sport photography.

      • Joe

        I took my D800 to a sports event and took some awesome pictures. What now?

        • Sean

          I take my NEX-5N and can get some great shots even at indoor tennis matches. But I also know that my camera is not consistently good at sports photography because the AF and focusing tracking is too slow. I’ve read that this is very much an issue with the D800 as well. I am looking to upgrade from my 5N, but I’ve ruled out the D800 since I am not into landscape photography, which is idea with the D800. I wonder if the D600 will have better AF and tracking than does the D800? If not, I am down to the rumored A99 from Sony or the 5D Mark III from Canon.

      • Dave in the USA

        Really, it’s way faster than the thumb advance most of us were using back when some of the most iconic Sports Illustrated cover pics were taken. You can’t take a pic if you spend all your time changing film. I shot sports in the early ’80s. You just need to learn to anticipate.

        There was a shot in Sports Illustrated taken during the last Olympics during one of the skiing events of a skier (I don’t remember who) who’s face is obscured by the gate flag. Why? Because rather than anticipate when the skier would be clear of the gate, the photographer went to max framerate and just held down the shutter button when the skier got close to the gate, rather than anticipate when the skier would be clear of the gate.

        You have a screen on the back of the camera that provides instant feedback. There is no reason NOT to take practice shots and get your timing down.

  • http://egozarolho.blogspot.pt Crocodilo

    Comments from an amateur point of view:

    1. The D600 should make a great dynamic duo with the D7000, as did the D300/D700 combo: similar body style and control layout, same batteries.

    2. However, as a D7K owner, splurging an extra $1500 (at least) just to get shallower DOF and slightly improved technology… the D600 ISO range is about the same as the D7K, it’s gonna be a slower camera, noise and DR improvements should be marginal. Not a revolutionary upgrade, as I see it, except for the FX factor.

    3. Selling the D7K to fund the D600 would too be ridiculous, because of the loss involved with DX cheap glass, that would cost a lot to replicate on FX. Hence, a move from D7K with a versatile lens set to a D600 with a 50mm prime looks somewhat like a step back. My lovely 70-300 VR, for instance, would lose a lot of what it was acquired for: range.

    ———————

    4. A D600 with the 28/50/85 f1.8G lenses is probably the closest thing to a poor man’s Leica as anybody can get by the end of this year.

    5. Even so, we’re looking at 1500+700+200+500= 2900 ($/€). My D7K with 16-85, 35 and 50 1.8 is almost as good, more versatile, and is already paid for.

    6. All rationales aside, I whish I had more money. Might as well get off the internet and go shoot some pics!

    • Realistic

      It’s clear that D600 won’t be a significant enough upgrade for D7000 users. Everything you said plus losing the crop factor (D600 in DX mode will be 10mp, 60% less than D7000). It will be, though, a good upgrade for D300 or older DX cameras.

      • Arkasai

        No D300 owner would downgrade to a D600. As currently rumored the D600 is just above the D5100 in build quality, even the D90 or D7000 will have a superior feel. There will be a ‘D400′ type body in the future, the cheaper construction of the D600 signals to me that Nikon is conveniently leaving themselves some room to replace the D300 properly with a body built to similar tolerances. Nikon needs a camera between the D600 and D800, there’s too big a gap in price and build quality.

    • Bob

      “the D600 ISO range is about the same as the D7K, it’s gonna be a slower camera, noise and DR improvements should be marginal”

      WHAT?? You are talking about a sensor that is over two years old with a higher pixel density, for the D7000.

      Go back to school. Now.

      • http://egozarolho.blogspot.com Crocodilo

        Oh my, dear “Bob”, the niceties about posting anonimously… I said I’m an amateur, didn’t say I’m stupid. And I’m obviously not the one here in dire need of an education.

        I stand by my words. Yes, noise and dynamics better be upgraded on this new sensor, but to what extent will that be relevant for amateur use? Half a stop, one stop? It’s not like I’m loosing a large percentage of photo oportunities due to equipment limitations.

        The D7000, all things considered, does great in these departments.

        Hell, great pictures are being taken as we speak by guys holding a D200. Technology advances have huge benefits, indeed, but how essential are they?

        • Bob

          Yes, it’s obvious that you are an amateur since you clearly are assuming that an old generation of sensor, that is DX can be compared directly to a newer generation which is FX.

          Save yourself the embarrassment of a retort and go and have a quiet word with yourself.

          Cheers.

          • Ric

            don’t be a dick.

          • Spock

            Bob, use a little manners, or did your mom not teach you any?
            I wonder what you are like away from the internet? In person? …..think about it.

            • DarkBroom

              I envision people like Bob who spend half their day wondering whether to buy a cat, and the rest of the day writing blather on website blogs.

              They also wear a cap their friend gave them from Shorty’s Sport Fishing, Key Largo, Florida, khaki cargo shorts, white socks, and bad Hawaiian shirts that hide the food stains so he doesn’t have to go to the laundromat so often, after his wife left him 7 years go. Same with their beard. He doesn’t like to shave, so he sweeps over it with a trimmer every week or so, shower or bathes once a week or two, and has stains on his beard from nicotine or left over Moo Shoo Pork he ordered for delivery, so he doesn’t have to go outside.

              He also wears glasses last updated six years ago, but he can see well enough to write sludge on his computer screen, while he acts like a big shot in his small little mind.

          • Andy

            Bob, you are ridiculous!

            • bob

              Thanks Andy!

          • Michael

            It can be, because until the D3, there was NO FX sensors. So yes, you can compare DX to FX even though it is “new technology”

        • catinhat

          Very true. I recently looked over some of the better shots I took years ago with a D200 versus newer ones with D300, D700, D7000. The differences are more dependent on light, composition, etc. Some of my old D200 shots printed beautifully at 12×18. In many cases there is no easy way of telling which camera I shot. New technology opens new possibilities of course. I wouldn’t shoot D200 or D300 in a dark gym or at a concert these days. But mostly these are corner cases, for me at least, especially after D700. Would be lovely to have the D3s sensor in D700, but meaningful differences would only show above ISO 1600 or so. How often do most people shoot above ISO 1600 anyway. Nikon and other camera companies are out on a limb to catch our imagination with the next great revolutionary technological leap. The reality is though that the law of diminishing returns still holds. I’m more worried about new models messing up something really good that the old models had (e.g. AF) than not having a new feature no one knew they needed until it appeared (and became essential) :-)

        • Edgar

          “Yes, noise and dynamics better be upgraded on this new sensor, but to what extent will that be relevant for amateur use? Half a stop, one stop?”

          Mathematically, the FX advantage over DX is about 1.2 stops of light gathering power. Add to this a small improvement in technology over two years and you may end up with something like 1.5 stops advantage in high-ISO noise.

          But then again, this only matters if you shoot in very low light, high-ISO, and are uncomfortable with the noise level of your current camera. Otherwise, keep you current camera and be happy (I’m still a happy owner of a D300, which is still OK for me).

          • JED

            Exactly this^^^

    • gary ray

      Crocodilo –

      Your comments are essentially where i am at: d7k with 16-85 & 70-300 (which IS FF!) vs d600 w/the primes you listed. And, yah, it is $3k all told. But . . . i don’t think of the d600′s potential as a replacement for the d7k. It seems to me FF has taken the place of medium in the old days: its strengths encourage a more deliberative style for highest quality (often on the Gitzo), but for portable or action, get out the DX.

      MY problem with the d600 is that i already make what-are-to-others breath-taking 20x30s with my d7k. What — exactly — is the improvement in image quality going to be . . . assuming that i don’t print larger? That is why i will be watching the sensor evaluations carefully (yes, even DXO which, while not perfect, does some good measurement work IMO).

      Sadly, i have the money. I could get it. I just don’t know if it will make better images for me. And i totally lack the “Nikon Acquisition Syndrome.” So i have a decision to make.

      – gary ray

      • Niko

        D800 is a huge improvement Vs d700. I own both and know 1st hand.
        So my guess is that d600 will make d700 obsolete…. I remember how happy I was with the d700 when it was introduced (& I bought it) and thought I’ll never need another camera. With d800 I do the same but probably it’s successor will make it obsolete as well

  • Walkthru

    If you had ever even touched, let alone owned a Nikon camera, I’d be greatly surprised!

  • Rob

    What are all you guys gonna do when you realize it isn’t going to sell for $1500? Almost every post mentioning price just blindly assumes it will be $1500 even though that was just a passing rumor from the very first rumor post, and even admin said price rumors are almost always wrong.

    Although I guess it WILL give you something new to complain about…

    • nikonbuyer

      we are not going to buy and nikon is not going to make much money. simple as that.

      • Josh

        Exactly. For what this camera is it HAS to be no more than like $1700 but even that is pushing it. If the feature list is correct it’s target demographic is essentially the same as the D7000. If it is $2000+ it will be a non starter with out a pro body as it will be to low featured for anyone willing to spend that much. Especially since D700s and 5DIIs were going for $2500 new at the beginning of the year.

        • Greg

          The D7000 was $1200, and now it’s $1000. The D600 clearly has the same target demographic, so I can’t imagine it being much more than $1500. You really think Nikon is going to make a $2k camera that has scene modes and a top shutter speed of 1/4000 sec?

          • Josh

            That’s exactly what I was saying.

  • Peter

    Oh dear. They make cheap cameras. But we need fast cameras! Not all people have the money to buy a D4. I think Nikon is going into the wrong direction. Canon does a better Job with the ballance between their different models.

  • D600 So Tiny So Cool

    “Very small and lightweight body” – I wonder if the D600 will be bigger than the Pixcool.

    Way to go Nikon!!!!! [/sarcasm]

    • azerty

      Do you all have hands like this? :
      http://youtu.be/IPIccs5Tmjc?t=1m1s

    • Ranjeet Rain

      “Way to go Nikon!!!!! [/sarcasm]”

      I have no money but I want a full size, fully weather-proof camera, 20fps and world’s best AF. It should also come at the same price as of a S90, as that’s what I am using and that’s what I can afford!!!!! [/sarcasm]

  • Niko

    I’m really happy with the upgrade from the D700 to D800. D800 is a dream camera.
    Of course it needs a “driver” capable to drive it as options with it are almost endless.
    In the case one is not up to it there is the D3200……

  • siotg

    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.
    D7000 also has a problem of not be able to change aperature while shooting video. Also the auto focus in video mode is working like a cheap broken bicycle. D600 should have this problem fixed.
    Anyone who knows just a little about digital camera would says that it is much more important to have good quality pixels than to have a lot of pixels. Yet Nikon seems to still stupid enough to go on the same mistaken path of putting more megapixel in their cameras.
    I hope/wish D600 will have 18MP but with really good native ISO performance of 25000 usable. Auto focus should be fast and accurate (dont make the mistake of the 5d mark 3). White balance should be accurate and pretty too, not like the greenish and yellowish ugly false colors of the D800 and the D4.

    • D800E_finally_here

      Are you kidding me about D800 not having good ISO performance?

      Even at native 36MP size, it is on par with D700. I own both and shot both with my f/1.4G primes a whole lot. the detail captured cannot even compare.

      Once down sampled to 12MP or 9MP (4 to 1 bin) it is almost another stop better than D700.

      • azerty

        on canonrumors they are whining the nikon D800 is better than the the canon 5D mk 3. Dpreview and dxomark gives the D800 high points. The D800 has more resolution, more dynamic range, better low light capabilities than the D700 based on the reviews and the images I see around the web. The D800 is cheaper than the 5d mark 3.
        Still here they keep whining the D800 isn’t a good cam (or the files are too big pfff)

        = white trash problems.

        • krr

          when the rumored 3D with 46MP comes out they will start to love big files … thats the neverending battle ..

          • azerty

            we have to do something with are faster computers with cheaper and faster storage ;)

            • azery

              *our

          • Josh

            It is painfully obvious Canon Rumors is full of smoke on the 3D. Nikon announces the D800, Canon Rumors says “don’t worry Canon is making a 3D and it’s going be 46 megapixels! (a number that came from forum speculation based on up scaling the 18 MP APS-C senor’s pixel density to FF) Once it was obvious the D600 was real, surprise, surprise suddenly Canon Rumors says “Don’t worry Canon is making a cheap FF too!”

            It is clear they are just trying to keep people from jumping Canon’s ship and have little to no real info.

            • Pablo Ricasso

              Wow. That’s a BUMMER. I was really looking forward to taking pictures in 3d.

            • Ranjeet Rain

              Canon has completely lost the plot. A lot of hard core canon fannies I know in person have jumped the ship. And if the trend continues, more will follow.

      • Fred

        Who are you kidding?
        Nikon D800 has the same pixel noise as a D90! Noise is not even in the same league as a D700, D3(S), D4 per pixel.
        When downsampled to 8 MB then it has the same or similar noise as the ‘Pro’ grade Nikons.
        About time people faced reality. D800 is a great camera (when it’s working properly) but it is not the ‘super-camera’ some try and pretend it is.

        • Josh

          Wow that is just not true at all. If you think the D800 is not as good for noise as the D700 you have never seen high iso images taken with either camera. But I guess you know better than all the pro review sites, the people who own the cameras, and any one else who has ever looked at high iso images from both camera’s objectively.

          I am sick of people like you who are butt hurt that they can’t afford to upgrade or who have irrational megapixel phobia trying desperately to make up reasons why the D800 is not as good as the D700. Unless you really NEED more than 4 fps the D800 destroys the D700 in every way imaginable. Deal with it and stop posting nonsense.

          • ashwins

            Josh, here’s what Fred means:

            http://i.imgur.com/g7nug.jpg

            As you can see, out of the camera (RAW) D700 has much less noise at high ISOs than D800/800E (or 5D MkIII).

            • Josh

              If that’s true than both of you don’t know what you are talking about and are not qualified to make comments on the noise preformance of the camera.

              Here’s a hint. You can’t just compare the 100% view of a 12 megapixel camera to a the 100% view of a 36 megapixel camera and think the former has less noise. It doesn’t, you can just see the noise better on the larger image.

              To compare accurately you have to do it at the same size. Either up size the D700 file to 36 MP or down size the D800 image to 12 mp. Or you could downsize them both to the same size. Or even better make same size prints from both cameras then compare.

            • ashwins

              Cool off, dude. As I already told you, I was just explaining to you what Fred meant—that’s all.

          • Fred

            All you need to do is go to DXO, choose the D800, D700 and D90 in the camera comparison function. Look at the results, choose ‘screen mode’ as against ‘print’ mode and then compare:
            Thus:
            http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Cameras/Compare-Camera-Sensors/Compare-cameras-side-by-side/(appareil1)/792%7C0/(brand)/Nikon/(appareil2)/439%7C0/(brand2)/Nikon/(appareil3)/441%7C0/(brand3)/Nikon
            The results are obvious.
            The D700m has about a 4 dB advantage over the D800 at around ISO 200. the D800 is the same as the D90 under the same conditions.
            I do not a little about cameras having been using then for more than 40 years. I also know a little about electronics too.
            Expecting a smaller sensel to give the same performance as a larger one – with the same technology – is not going to happen.
            Nikon have done well in keeping the same noise levels with the smaller D800 sensel as compared to the larger D90 sensel.

    • Nion

      Nikon has one vacant post in their R&D department……I think you should apply for that….so far as I know their payment is heavier than that of the Canon’s….best of luck…!!!!

  • Fresh Bread

    Does anyone know if the d600 will have uncompressed video out?

  • Pixie

    Thinking of getting either a D7000 or the new D600, I’m mostly shooting landscapes , nature pics and such – any thoughts on which is best? Obviously the D600 will cost more but other than that?

    Thanks.

    • Shy

      Hi Pixie, short answer if you normally use medium or telephoto lenses for your landscapes (some people do) go D7000 save money (get better glass, better support, nodal head, good quality filters, training or knowledge, more trips etc) If you normally use wide angles go D600 and also get better glass, better support, nodal head, good quality filters, training or knowledge, more trips etc. :)

      • Pixie

        Thanks shy, guess I’ll go the D7000 route…

        • Pablo Ricasso

          Pixie, get whichever you want, but think for a long time about the future before you go buying any APS glass.

    • Fred

      Also remeber that you’ll need wider lenses fo DX to get the same FOV as a FF camera – and the wider the lens the more expensive.
      So, it’s a trade off.

  • EnPassant

    For DX-upgraders it would be intersting to know if D600 has a 1.2 crop just like D800. That would make several DX-lenses still very usable.

    • azerty

      1) put your DX lens on the D600
      2) take a picture
      3) crop the picture in post

      = lens still usable ;)

      • EnPassant

        Correct.
        But it is more easy to compose the photo inside a given frame.

  • bilkul

    A99
    24/2 ZA, 50/1.4 ZA, 85/1.4 ZA, 135/1.8 ZA

    • azerty

      digital pentax spotmatic
      takumar smc 50 1.4, k 35mm f2, leica r lenses and some other lovely m42 lenses

      only manual focus

  • Mr. Japan

    Hi everyone!

    Nikon is doing Business. Nikon care about overall profit, not care about pro not not pro. BMW is more famous for 7 series, but make more $ on 3 Series because of volume. Did Nikon do reseach before introduce new camere? Alot of reseach with a ton of MBA, CPA, CIA, PHD….Do you think you smart than a big corp?

    On consumer point of view, more m0dels is better b/c more choice. Pro or camera lover do not care about price. I know many pro/lover spend more $$$ on Camera than Cars. MORE amature, wanna be, convenience choices…..than pro, that’s why Nikon introduce CROSS over camera. Do you know Cross Over KILL SUV? Cross Over Music, WHY not cross over camera?

    • http:/lilisnotes.com Carlos R.

      Mr. Japan,

      I agree with everything you wrote except one thing: BMW is not more famous for their 7 series cars! Otherwise, good points, all.

  • Anonymous Maximus

    Opposite to some opinion, D600 will never obsolote D700 like D300(s) wasn’t by D7000. They will hold their value for long.

    D7000 & its FX brother will be in a different (lower) league than these legendary cameras despite of their modern attributes & higher pixel count.

    I’d either upgrade to D800 or keep using my D700, but won’t resort to D600 to save a few bucks.

  • Erland Flaten

    Audio
    Is there input for external microphone?

  • shy

    For all those DX to FX upgraders, please consider that if you have DX lenses then your short or medium term planning “must” consider upgrading optics too. If you use DX glass on FX sensor you are lowering your resolution at the end due to the crop needed. By the way if the D600 24MPix sensor is good think also that your will need good glass and not just any glass.

    • Fred

      But some of us thought ahead and only bought FX lenses for our DX cameras so the D600 doesn’t come with ‘lens comapatility issues’ and additional costs.

  • Big J

    Is there a way to just…. drop the subject about successors? I mean, just because a new number is labeled on a camera doesn’t always define the good memories it’ll bring back like the one you had before it. They will always be different no matter what. If you like a certain camera than just rebuy it or have it fixed every time it reaches the end of it’s lifetime. It also doesn’t hurt either to adapt to something more “recent” and not have to bash it for not being the one you had BEFORE it. Work with what you like best in terms of personal preference in my opinion. Although this may not apply to certain professionals who need to make a living off of photography, but to the vast people who do it for personal pleasure think about it.

  • Sharon

    I’m looking forward to this one coming out. A full frame sensor camera that doesn’t weight a ton like my D3. I’m thinking it will be great for travel and everyday stuff.

  • Niktard

    D800 is not an improvement to the D700 this is why I destroyed my D800. Files are huge. Shooting raw is just too much and I want to shoot raw. Nikon can’t give us a small raw or pixel binning for some reason and that is a major failure. The D800 burns really good though.

    • Pablo Ricasso

      I’m switching to Zenit!

      • Niktard

        Good for you. For real man, that’s better than the D800 could ever be.

    • Big J

      Then go back to the D700? Is that so hard?

      • Niktard

        I did. Now that my D800 is a giant mound of melted stuff and ashes. :)

  • Larry The Nikon Guy

    I will sell EVERYTHING I have (camera wise) to get a D600 with a 24mm 1.4g and 135 f/2 DC already have 50 1.4G. This includes ALL my film cameras (including Yashica and Mamiya medium format cameras) even my Retina and my Contax G2.
    The D600 + no more Kodak film = Death of FILM!!!
    no reason to use film anymore!!!!

    • vasa lu culu

      no death of film no!!
      INTA LU CULU!!

  • Chris

    I really enjoy rumor sites, I like to read the ones from Nikon, Sony and Canon. In fact every rumor site is the same, here on NR people are nagging about the great cams from Canon, on Canonrumors everyone is nagging about the better Nikon cams and on Sonyalpharumors everyone is nagging about every possible camerabrand.

    End of line, I still love my D300-17-55F2.8-85mmF1.8 combo , it’s doing everything I want. Sure I like to be informed about new cams and I really enjoy everyone who is crying about better camera’s, dxo-marks and large or small bodies, butt isn’t it all about taking pictures with the equipment you own? Back in the 90′s i’ve never heard anyone crying about shutterspeeds with a max of 1\1000″ or the size of a body. I simply would buy the camera that fulfils my needs. If the D600 isn’t the one you are looking for by specs, than wait for the next one and keep shooting with the stuff you own already. I don’t think your current equipment takes awfull images..

    • FFS!!!!

      +1000

  • david

    anyone any idea what resolution dx mode will be at, i really want to go fx but for some birding its great to have the dx crop

    • Maji

      Divide the FX resolution by 2.25 and you will get the DX resolution. For this case, it will be around 11 MP.

  • John

    This camera seems nice to me. It has all the requirements I need. I love the 16 bit color depth and I find 1/4000 of a second sufficient as I hardly ever used 1/8000 of a second. I have older lenses and having an internal motor is what I need as I do not wish to buy all new lenses. If I did I may have decided on a Canon even though DXO does not highly recommend them. I need a lighter body as I have physical problems. I always liked the lightness of my 35mm in relations to my medium format camera in the film age and my D200 with the power grip has become to heavy and obsolescent form me. I will wait until reviews come our as I am enticed by Fuji X-E1 also. It is much lighter but it is probably 12 bit depth and not FF. I do not wish to sell all my equipment and start afresh but is is an option and there are many options out there.
    Hopefully the reviews are good, picture quality is great and I like the size and feel, I will buy one. Decision time for me is next February or March.

  • JonMcG

    It boils down to price on this thing… $1500 and it’s gonna sell like crazy and probably become the next D90′esque populous camera…

    If its $2200 it’ll just be another camera in a fat lineup for people to debate on this vs D800….

  • tlt

    What do you think about Sony A99 (rumored) ?
    24MP 10fps
    ISO 100 up to 25.600
    102 AF
    1/8000 s

    • tlt

      24 MP FF

  • cpX

    Hey Nikon !

    What is wrong with You ?
    Never shot with F/1.2 at Day-Light without a ND-Filter ?

    1/4000 is to slow for this, i need a minimum of 1/8000 or better 1/16000 !!!

    • FFS!!!!

      Lol, true….

      Hey Nikon!!

      Why isn’t the D600 fully waterproof? I want to dive to 200 feet…..!!

  • Glenn

    Too small darn it! I was hoping for a 300/700 body type.

    • http://lilisnotes.com Carlos R.

      How big are your hands, sir?

  • http://www.revengeofthejpeg.com Gregory Urbano

    anything on pricing?

    • http://www.oliver-ruskovic.net/ Oliver

      I don’t know why but one of our stores in Slovenia has the D600 available for preorders with the price of 1800 € (which is around 2260 $).

  • KnightPhoto

    Good to see all the D600 interest here. Something I haven’t seen discussed is that we are entering a period where Nikon is going to have three well differentiated FX cameras (D600, D800, D4) each with a well differentiated sensor (24mp, 36mp, 16mp). The boys and girls in Nikon’s marketing department must be jumping up and down. Could be a business case study before we are all said and done! Anyhow good to see all the interest in the D600, at first I didn’t think there would be much, but it looks like there are lots of good reasons to own one!

    At first I though the 3-sensor thing was unique but yes we just left a period where we had D700, D3S, D3X.

  • siotg

    Why do people keep saying that the d800 ISO performance is as good as the d700 or the d3??? those are old cameras and they are good in their time back in the day but to use them as today standard would be stupid, the world would not move forward with that kind of mentality, might as well go back to stone age. It’s like saying that oh the new bmw is just as good as the one in the 90s but it’s bigger. D800 should be compared to new one and of the same class like the canon 5d3 or sony a99. I’m not saying that the d800 is a bad camera nor do i say that nikon makes bad products, just saying that they goes down the path of megapixel and thus sacrifice the ISO performance that most of us would like to gain as new sensor technology evolved. Now that canon and sony have raised the bar of ISO to 25000, anything below that seems behind. I hate to see Nikon, the king of ISO, or at least used to be, got beaten at their own game now as the table has turned.

    • KnightPhoto

      OK siotg, you keep missing the memo:

      - the D800 is BETTER than the D3/D700 at high ISO. Better, not even with, not worse.
      - So it IS the camera you are talking about, a better, more modern sensor, that beats older ones.
      - The D800 high ISO is also BETTER than the 5Diii.
      - Don’t compare sensors ISO performance at the pixel level unless the two sensors have the same mp and the same sensor size.

      Check DXOMark sensor ratings if you doubt this. Scientific , proven, results. Get the memo ;-)

      • siotg

        Ok KnightPhoto, thanks for the info, i’ll check DXOMark out. But so far Adorama, Thecamerastore.com, Cameralabs.com, DigitalRev.com and a few more popular sites all testing and showing 5d3 ISO is better when shooting in real life condition. Plus the specification of the d800 has ISO of only 6400 vs the 5d3 of 25000. It’s hard to believe that nikon understated their camera and canon overstated theirs to have the gap of 2 stops in performance. However I do believe/agree that when you reduce the d800 picture size to be equal that of the 5d3 then the noise level is very neck to neck. If i shoot poster and/or in plenty of light environment i would surely pick the d800. For indoors house party and weeding i would choose the 5d3. So they’re like mallet and hamer, they have very similar look and function but they are for two different games :-)

        • macsavageg4

          You must not be able to read so well I am assuming. Checking the tech specs and messing around with my D800 ISO 25600 is available through Hi 2. I can’t imagine getting any decent looking photos shooting at that ISO on ANY DSLR for the simple fact that major graining will become an issue specially in low light or in any light. The 5D Mark III lists the same reading in ISO specifications.

          • siotg

            I’m only talking about native iso, not the hi1 and hi2 since they’re too grainy i wouldn’t consider that useable. Unless, you’re so desperate to make a picture and willing to sacrifice the quality at great length.

            • macsavageg4

              Yeah I see what you mean after doing a bit more reading on the ISO stuffs on both cameras. From the samples I saw both of them suck at the higher ISOs. And the ultra high ISOs both the D4 and the 5D Mark III really suck as well. Thanks for clarifying the ISO stuffs read as Hi 1 and Hi 2 but upon further reading and checking a few other review sites I got what you were stating.

              Comparing the D700 to the D800, the D800 walks all over it in everything I have read so far. I honestly rarely shoot much over 800 on any of my cameras because of grain while subtle it is there.

              Regardless can’t wait to see the D600 since it looks to be a fun camera a D7000 pro if you will.

  • mok

    left top picture do not match other ones – front wheel is missing

  • Alex

    Dang it, this camera will have 1080p video. 4KTVs hit the shelves later in the year. This camera already has obsolete technology. Good thing I am buying it primarily as a still camera, but I am going to have to upgrade when they do one with 4K video.

    • krr

      In the words of John McEnroe … YOU CANNOT BE SERIOUS!!!

      • Alex

        What’s your point? Actually, I don’t really care what your point is. I want 4K video, so there! :P

        • enesunkie

          It will be a while. Maybe in the D8!

  • Flo

    Some of you are just nuts.

    You would think from the comments some people only shoot hummingbirds by moonlight with their “requirements” for a camera.

    Shooting at 1/6000 @ f1.4 in broad daylight wtf is wrong with you.

    The d600 looks to be an amazing camera from a cost/performance perspective. I have used a d800 and a d4, while these cameras are unbelievable in their capabilities I would say for 90% of photographers it is like giving a Ferrari to someone with a learners permit.

    • FFS!!!!

      +1000

      Nuff said….

    • mocking bird

      I also don’t like humming birds!
      They keep on humming to themselves no matter what one tries to do getting their attention! I’ll rather spend my time with screaming birds!

      Nevertheless, i fear that the most common accessory for the D600, is gonna be this one: http://tinyurl.com/cg7nk6l

      With luck, there will be a topogigio version available, sold in kit, together with the Nikon “mock” ring!

      It also worries me, what am I gonna see when I look through the hole!

      Regarding the maximum speed, it’s been a long time since I felt comfortable using those high speeds…

      This post is a “fake”!
      I’ve done it in photoshop!
      Any similarity with persons living, deceased or fictional is purely coincidental! or not..

  • NiCanon CaNikon

    Hey guys, I love the comments here, they’re hilarious. Its like Esqueleto and Nacho Libre fighting over “the Lord’s cheeps.”

    Okay, I need some serious BIASED advice here. I need a good DSLR camera that takes excellent stills and great VIDEO. I’ve narrowed it down to three NEWER cameras for various reasons. Let it all hang out and give me you’re thoughts on these three dastardly choices. Bash them if you want, whatever. Tell me what you think!!!

    1) Nikon D3200 – Cheaper, not a huge commitment, it looks good.
    2) Canon T4i – I like the ergonomics but the price is several hundreds more than the D3200.
    3) Or, wait for this Nikon D600 and spend the extra money for it.

    Let it rip!!!!

    • Optimus47

      First, decide whether you prefer focal lengths under DX or FX. There are still not too many wide angle choices on the DX side, at least for Nikon. Nikon FX lenses can get really expensive, really quickly. This will quickly eliminate 2 of 3 choices, if you do not like DX focal lengths. (If you prefer telephoto, DX is the way to go with the extra reach.)

      Secondly, decide how much you want to budget for your system. I had sticker shock, after I purchased a D700. System wise, you will want the better lenses.

    • Richard

      The answer to your question depends upon how important video capability is in my opinion. If you only occasionally intend to use video and it really is not all that important to you, you may find a Nikon that suits you. This may be considered blasphemy on this forum, but if video is an extremely important consideration in your decision, you may want to take a hard look at Canon’s offerings. I believe Canon to be a few generations ahead of Nikon in video capability. On the other hand, Nikon has what many people consider to be better focus accuracy and a couple of f stops better high ISO noise performance in many of the cameras.

      Image wise, Canon images tend to be a little warmer out of the camera, but post processing can resolve any such differences if you prefer. Many of us prefer Nikon glass to Canon glass, but that is not to say that Canon lenses are not capable.

      I would suggest going to the store with some memory cards and giving things a “test drive”.

      Good Luck!

    • Magic Lantern

      Search “Magic Lantern” firmware for Canon.
      And wait for the D600 to come out before moving either way.

  • Yeotan

    FYI, these are the specs I received 2 days ago from a Nikon contact in Hong Kong. They’re still ‘unoficial’ but he doesn’t really have any genuine reasons for deceiving the ‘public’.

    - Full-frame intermediate/enthusiast level 24MP FX Nikon camera with DX support
    – Partial Magnesium alloy internal body (top + back), the rest is policarbonate
    – Fully weather sealed
    – Total pixel : 24.7 MP
    – Expeed 3 processor
    – 91K 3D color Matrix Metering
    – Pentaprism optical viewfinder – 98% coverage
    – Internal AF motor
    – 39 A/F points, 11 cross-type sensors
    – Single-point AF; 9-, 21- or 39-point dynamic-area AF, 3D-tracking, auto-area AF
    – AF face detection
    – Exposure compensation 5 to +5 EV in increments of 1/3 or 1/2 EV
    – Exposure modes: Auto (auto; auto [flash off]), scene (portrait, landscape, child, sports, close up, night portrait, night landscape, party/indoor, beach/snow, sunset, dusk/dawn, pet portrait, candlelight, blossom, autumn colors, food, silhouette, high key, low key), programmed auto with flexible program (P), shutter-priority auto (S), aperture-priority auto (A), manual (M), U1, U2 (user settings)
    – Wide ISO range : 100-6400 (with Lo-1 ISO 50 and Hi-1 ISO 12,600, Hi-2 ISO 25,600)
    – Sensor size : 36.00 x 23.9 mm CMOS sensor
    – Built-in flash with sync speed of 1/250s
    – TTL: i-TTL balanced fill-flash and standard i-TTL flash for digital SLR using 2,016-pixel RGB sensor are available with built-in flash and SB-900, SB-800, SB-700, SB-600 or SB-400 (i-TTL balanced fill-flash is available when matrix or center-weighted metering is selected)
    – Auto aperture: Available with SB-900/SB-800 and CPU lens
    – Non-TTL auto: Supported flash units include SB-900, SB-800, SB-28, SB-27 and SB-22S
    – Distance-priority manual: Available with SB-900, SB-800 and SB-700
    – Exposure compensation : +/- 5 EV
    – NEF (RAW): 12 or 14 bit, lossless compressed or compressed
    – JPEG: JPEG-Baseline compliant with fine (approx. 1:4), normal (approx. 1:8) or basic (approx. 1:16) compression (Size priority); Optimal quality compression available
    – NEF (RAW) + JPEG: Single photograph recorded in both NEF (RAW) and JPEG formats
    – 5fps (DX mode with battery grip 6-7 fps)
    – LCD: 3.2″ with 921,000 pixels, contrast adjustable
    – HDMI output
    – Video: H.264/MPEG-4 Advanced Video Coding
    – Full HD with 30p,25p,24p,HD with 60p,50p,30p,25p
    – Maximum video recording : 30 minutes
    – Electronically controlled vertical travel focal plane shutter
    – 1/8,000 to 30 s in steps of 1/3 or 1/2 EV, bulb, time
    – Shutter lifespan as tested : 150,000 cycles (Lab test only)
    – Shutter lag 155 ms
    – EN-EL 15 rechargeable battery
    – 2 SD slots one with Eye-fi support, No CF slots
    – Support for DX lenses
    – Auto DX crop
    – In camera RAW editor
    – Built-in HDR
    – Dimensions ( W x H x D ) : 136 x 110 x 77 mm
    – Weight : 790g (with EN-EL-15 battery)

    - RRP on launch (week before Photokona) – US$ 1599; EUR $1500

    • xt

      – 91K 3D color Matrix Metering
      – 1/8,000 to 30 s in steps of 1/3 or 1/2 EV, bulb, time
      - RRP on launch (week before Photokona) – US$ 1599; EUR $1500

      Good!

      • ashwins

        If this is true, this is really good news!

    • FFS!!!!

      If this is true then it will use the same batteries (and hopefully grip, though I doubt it as the camera is a few mil bigger) as the D7000, so that’s a bonus for us D7000 owners…

      A little bigger than the D7000 to, and 1/8000th shutter speed.

      This is looking more and more like the perfect camera for me….

    • cpX

      – 1/8,000 to 30 s in steps of 1/3 or 1/2 EV, bulb, time

      Sounds good for Me. :-)

    • http://nikonrumors.com/ [NR] admin

      sound the same as the specs I published

  • http://www.oliver-ruskovic.net/ Oliver

    I don’t know what to belive anymore.

    I can’t wait for this camera to be finally official. :)

  • Nion

    For more detail go to following URL : http://mansurovs.com/nikon-d600-release-imminent#comments

    • Ronnie Welsh

      Same info as here…

      I don’t believe it will have 51 focus points as you mention in your post. I believe Nikon is reserving pro-level AF for their pro cameras like D4 and D800.

  • Ralph

    If the price is correct, or even $2000, it’s a game changer for FF. it opens the door to so many more potential FF users. That’s got to be a great thing for future lens development.

    It looks like a great little camera. DX has never really catered for landscape with lack of good wide angle lenses.

    If I hadn’t bought my D800e I’d be interested.

  • Millzee

    I have just found this forum to hopefully read some reasoned discussion about cameras and likely developements. Instead I find myself having to read the rantings and ravings of self important people who think it is okay to be rude and obnoxious to fellow posters.
    Please could someone moderate this forum and delete such postings – found higher up on the page (followed by this one), and leave the ones which might be useful and interesting to read.

    • ashwins

      Totally agree with you, Millzee!

      It’s simply disgusting to read all those ego-trip exposures. And I wish they were just kids, but for my great surprise there seem to be many adults practicing it. Sad!

    • enesunkie

      Millzee, welcome to Nikon Rumors. It’s sad to see how something a silly as the maximum shutter speed of a camera could promote such poor behavior. The Admin of this site tends to “clean up” the language on here and delete such posts, but it’s a holiday here in the States and he may be enjoying the day off.

  • Hermenpaca

    Am I the only one that finds unusually (and unacceptably) high a shutter lag of 155 ms??? I hope that piece of data is wrong, because THAT is a deal breaker in a DSLR (my D80 is rated at 80ms!)

    • Flo

      Hmm that is odd, d7000 is 50ms

      • ashwins

        Shutter lag with full AF and shutter lag of pre-focus are two different things. Imaging-resource.com has measured different shutter lags for many Nikon DSLRs . They do not have measurements for the D80, though, but since the pre-focus shutter lag of D90 was 67ms I would assume that 80ms of D80 must refer to pre-focus shutter lag.

        Shutter lag with full AF is considerably higher, for example for d700 197ms and D90 208ms. So, if the 155ms refers to shutter lag with full AF (which I believe) then it’s a good news. See the imaging-resource’s comparison at:

        http://i.imgur.com/m5Wp0.jpg

        • cpX

          Thank You for the Info…

        • Ronnie J.

          +1
          Many people confuse the two.

          155ms shutter lag (which is much smaller than most of the current Nikon and Canon models) is indeed a great news.

  • sam

    At Photokina, I’d like to see the Canon 6D!!!………………Mr.Canonお願いします!

  • Artiya

    And it made in Thailand

  • Back to top