< ! --Digital window verification 001 -->

Nikon D600 price in Japan: ¥215,000 (around $2,700)

Pin It

The price of the Nikon D600 in Japan is rumored to be ¥215,000 (around $2,700), the price of a D600 with 24-85mm kit lens: ¥270,000 (around $3,400). The camera is expected to start shipping on September 27, s012. I have received several indications that this time Nikon is ready to start shipping this camera very soon after the announcement.

The price of the Nikon 1 18.5mm f/1.8 mirrorless lens is expected to be around ¥26,000 (around $300) and will be available on November 1st, 2012 in black, white and silver color.

The US prices of Nikon gear are usually lower, but at that point I think we can forget about a sub-$2,000 full frame Nikon camera. The D800 costs around ¥298,000 in Japan and $3000 in the US. With this ratio, I expect the D600 US price to be around $2,100.

This entry was posted in Nikon D600. Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • EdP

    At that price it is a non-starter for me

  • https://plus.google.com/b/100907347707793486370/10 Filmmaking

    $2000 is OK price but $2700 is not good.

  • Mojo

    This discution has no sens!
    Tommorow we all will know what tha price is. See you then!

    • Frosty

      +2,700

      • http://diecastairplanesandwaterlineships.com bustedcelt

        Bummer price. I recently sold a passel of gear to get cash for the 600, but even at 2500 US it ain’t gunna happen now…

    • MojoLover

      Right On!!!

  • Anonymous Maximus

    Good news regarding the right price point of D600. $1500 was too unrealistic. If it were so, then how will Nikon price the D400? Around $1000 only?

    Professional D800 FX -> $3000
    Enthusiastic D600 FX -> $ 2100
    Professional D400 DX -> $ 1800

    The above lineup sounds better tuned.

    • J

      And why would the D600 be more expensive than the D400?!?

      • Jimmy

        Errrm, because one has an FX sensor and the other a DX; hence the difference in fabrication costs.

        Duh.

        • Richard

          Actually, the suggested price points between a D400 and D600 do not make sense when factoring in the build of the body.

          It would make more sense to utilize a common body (D400 build) with only those changes necessary to accommodate the FX sensor.

          At $2,100, much less $2,700, the D600 may not meet expectations. At $2,700 I should think that the D600 would be DOA. There simply is not enough of a price difference to warrant purchasing one as compared to the D800. It would be a major marketing mistake on Nikon’s part.

          We should soon see what Nikon actually does, and Canon for that matter.

      • carlosm

        because its full frame you fool.

        • J

          Oh, really??

          Then, if a new pro body (a sucessor to the D2x, for example) would to come out, it would have to be cheaper than the D600 as well??

          What’s more expensive? The body or the sensor?

          Why was the D700 much more cheaper than the D3…?

          • J

            I meant “a new DX pro body”.

            • 103david

              Just for the record…unless you count professional pet photographers and the like…there is no such thing as a “DX format pro camera.”

          • BornOptimist

            “What’s more expensive? The body or the sensor?”
            - The sensor, by a big margin

            “Why was the D700 much more cheaper than the D3…?”
            - They had the same sensor, so the difference is mostly up to politics (same as difference between the old D2X and D200).

            The price of a product is not neccesarily a sum of each component cost. They charge as much as the customers are willing to pay. Proffessionals do accept a higher cost than non-proffessionals.

            • nokin

              “The price of a product is not neccesarily a sum of each component cost.”

              You got that part right! Just look at what they’re charging for a D7000 with a FF sensor…!

          • Elle

            The sensor.

            A full frame sensor costs much more to make than an APS-C. Medium format sensors are exponentially more expensive than full frames. It’s just how sensor chip technology works. It can cost up to 20 times more to make a full frame than an APS-C sensor.

            Also, this isn’t the US MSRP. You can expect the D600 to be less in the US. There’s no way this will be only 300 less than a D800. For example. The D800′s price tag in Japan is over 3800 USD after converting from yeh.

            If we go by the same percentage, that would put the d600 at around 2150-2200 in the U.S.

          • Rob

            Body difference: a few dollars worth of metal plus the slightly increased cost of casting it instead of plastic.

            Sensor difference: hundreds of dollars per sensor because of larger size and exponentially lower yields.

      • oldskoolarcade

        Because the number is higher! Therefore, the D7000 should be the most expensive, and the D4 should be… wait.. what?

        • galghor_sakkhar

          lol…

    • John C

      What D400? Pro DX is died with the D300s.

      • Gimme D600

        +1

        I think this is true… Nikon pushed for DX in the beginning and Canon showed that the 35mm film size debate that was had many decades ago still held true for digital. Manufacturers tried to introduce smaller film standards and fell flat on image quality, hence the long life of the compact 35mm film camera.

        Nikon lost but picked up nicely with products like the D700 and now D800. I think that FX will trickle to Semi-Pro and stay there for a while.

        • John C

          The glass proves it too. How much pro DX glass have we seen in the past three years? Where are those DX primes? But look at what we have seen recently:

          24 1.8
          85 1.8
          24-85 VR
          18-300 DX

          Sounds like Nikon is changed the options from:

          Pro (high level FX), Enthusiast/Semi Pro (high level DX), Consumer (DX)

          to:

          Pro (high level FX), Enthusiast/Semi Pro (lower level FX), Consumer (DX)

          Of course this is only temporary anyway. All DX will be dead in a few years and will be replaced by mirrorless with the same IQ as todays DX at half the size. Sony has already done it, although their lenses are just as big as DX lenses! When Olympus puts phase detect AF on the next iteration of the OM-D, it will be there, with smaller lenses. Fuji has the IQ, just needs some more lenses and better AF (and firmware).

          I am already tempted. The D7000 is my third body. I like it, but it just is not that much smaller and lighter than the D700 (low light/sports) or D800E (landscape). Seems like an OM-D would make a very portable second/backup system for landscape work and quick snaps of the family. That is all I use the D7000 for now. Could sell my D7000 and DX glass and get the OM-D with three nice and small primes with the proceeds.

          I wish there were a viable, more portable Nikon option to complement the FX systems, but the Nikon 1 sensor just does not come close to the IQ of the D7000, the other options do. The phase detect AF is good though.

          Things are changing fast and in another year or two everyone will have a four thirds or larger sensor with phase detect AF. It will come down to size, lens choices, and clean menus and controls. And no DX. FX is is here to stay for a bit, at least until we see some more advances in EVF technology. Maybe by then we will see things move on the other side too, a MF sensor in a D4 size body?

          Things are moving so fast that is is frustrating and exciting at the same time. In the end though, every great image seen today was taken with yesterday’s (or even decades old) technology, by someone that really knew how to use it. Who knows, maybe Ansel’s gear was holding him back :)

  • Niktard

    I wonder how much of a hit I would take on my nikkor glass. I’ve got pretty much all the 2.8 glass. New stuff from Nikon is just not appealing to me…

    • LeadWrist

      More then happy to take those pesky f/2.8 glass off your hands… :)

      • Tom

        So how was that troll bait?

    • Christobella

      I have a full complement of Nikkor 2.8 zooms, not to mention some 1.4 primes, and the very same question has been in my head ever since the 5DIII appeared. Having seen the price of the newest Canon 24-70 though, I gave myself a slap and said be happy with what you’ve got!

  • retox

    At that price, I (and I’m sure many others) will keep the D7000 and still be very happy with the great results I get for mostly travel photos, with some family pictures and sporting events. I don’t want $4000-$6500 (including glass) banging around on my shoulder in a foreign country (trains, boats, planes, and buses).

    Oh well, I had dreams of full frame with the 24-70 2.8 and the 70-200 2.8 but it’s just not practical for the way I use it.

    I guess I’m just happy with what I got. Is that even possible?????

    • Mike

      It is perfectly possible.

      I too am incredibly happy with my D7000 and 11-16mm f/2.8, 17-55mm f/2.8 and 50-135mm f/2.8 lenses. Relatively compact and the IQ is great.

      FX seems great but the DX compromise seems smarter. At least for amateur photography.

    • http://diecastairplanesandwaterlineships.com bustedcelt

      I love my D7000, and would have kept it even if I got the 600. I have four FX lenses, and they work very well on the 7000. However, my main reason for getting FX lenses was to eventually get a FX body, like the 600. At the quoted price, hope fades.

  • Jaap

    If that’s going to be the actual price, it will need to have some pretty special features for it to become as attractive a camera to buy as the D800 is…

  • nikonji

    if that is the price, i might as well get a d700, fuji x-e1 or sony nex 5r.

    • shy

      The dream start to vanish, I also agree a FF on the 2000 is a sweet spot for the marekt, then, get a D700 (I have one, just great!!!!) or a 5D2 (And I am not a troll it is just the ugly true).

    • Joopey

      I could not agree more!

      At this price I might as well as save up for another month or two and get the D800 or buy a used D700. Now I understand why the D700 was discontinued. If these two cameras were selling just a few hundred bucks apart no one would buy the D600.

      • Fred

        +1, you hit the nail on the head.
        If this price is true then Nikon must think everyone is stupid and will buy it.
        Oh, hang on a mo, people buy defective D800′s at $3,000 so maybe they’re right?

      • RC

        You say it as if the D700 is better than the D600.

  • Cris Lee

    All those ppl who complained, go get a D700.
    It took great pics without HD videos and it still will tomorrow.
    Are u looking for a camera or a video cam huh?
    Period.

  • josh

    Nikon can keep this thing for $2k or more. I’ll wait and get the next D7k or the D400. I would rather sacrifice FX and get better DX ISO control and hopefully get into ISO 8K or better for shooting indoor sports. a 20-24MP DX sensor with the ISO capabilities of the D3S would be phenomenal at around $2K and would really be more of what I need for most applications. Nikon really needs a knock out successor to the D300s. I really cannot see nikon selling this D600 for more than $1800 due to the fact most best buy stores will probably carry it and they usually don’t like having such high dollar items where people handle and abuse the things like crazy. the most of their display cameras are a mess after a year of abuse…..just my two cents on that…

    • http://diecastairplanesandwaterlineships.com bustedcelt

      (side comment: I once bought a Lumix from Costco and the camera had so many fingerprints on the primary that the glass was completely covered! I took it back and they had to mark it unsellable)

  • DEAD ON ARRIVAL!!

    At $2,700, the Nikon D600 is DEAD ON ARRIVAL!!! Any rational person would buy the Nikon D800 instead of $3,000!

    • http://www.rhysphotograph.me/ Rhys

      +1

      • Emanuele

        +1

        I’m waiting for the D600 but I will not pay more than $ 1600 for a D7000 Full Frame. (body only). I’m not stupid.

        • ano102

          +1

        • Dammer

          By the rumored specs it’s not even quite a D7000. We’ll have to wait and see in which ways it outperforms my trusty D7k.

    • Gimme D600

      +1

    • javaone

      The price of the D800 is $3,742 in Japan. So in Japan the D600 would be $1000 US cheaper.

    • Chase

      Yeah, if it’s anywhere close to this price, I’ll pick up something else. This would be very disappointing.

  • A poor American

    Keep in mind, the devaluing of the $ due to printing dollars like toilet paper. The yen is at a much higher value than the dollar and increasing as more $’s are printed with nothing to back them up. $16 trillion debt and growing. Don’t worry folks. It’s going to get even worse for the $ as the Fed will ramp up “Qualitative Easing” (aka printing yet more money before the election.)
    The less value the of the dollar, the more things cost. Zimbabwe prints 1 billion dollar notes that cost more to print than they are worth. Thank Washington politicians for the devalued dollar.

    • AT

      Quantitative easing..

      • RussB

        +1.

        There is a problem with the idea the dollar is devaluing though. If they rigidly price according to the value of the Yen then Nikon will price themselves out of the market and no one will buy their cameras overseas. They have to price for each country’s export market, not the market at home. Do you really think they are about to launch the D600 at $300 below the value of the D800 because the value of the Yen has strengthened against the $US since the D800 launch? No way……..

        • Dammer

          They also have to recoup their costs, ultimately for them in Yen. Both actual exchange rates and trends are factored into these prices.

          • Richard

            That is not entirely the case. A number of Nikon’s costs are in dollars, though a substantial portion of their cost is indeed in Yen. There are others who could probably give a better estimate of what percentage of Nikon’s costs are in dollars.

    • Sky

      Care to remind me national debt of Japan?

      • Fred

        Because they have to sell at low prices in the US?
        Because they have lots of USD that have dropped significantly in value?

        • Richard

          That has nothing to do with National Debt. That is a government issue.

  • Farhan

    hopes the maximum speed is 1/8000 for D600

    • RussB

      It won’t be

      • Rhys

        Which is why I’ll never buy it.

  • Kevin

    i don’t think this is the correct price. you’re basically asking just asking everyone to go with either D800 (~$3000) or just a 5Dmk2 (which is ~$2000 USD now).

  • D800 owner

    24-70 2.8? not very bad, but not very good..

  • Sam

    Higher than I hoped / expected. If it’s true, this means a huge gap between $1k and $2k.

    • Sam

      But like others said, a used D700 is an option then.

    • boing wronkwell

      “this means a huge gap between $1k and $2k.”

      Yeah … $1k.

  • Mike

    Considering how hot the D800 is selling, it totally makes sense for Nikon to launch this camera at $2100 and then slowly decrease the price after a year or two. And I am sure Canon will do the same with their 6D. Even at $2100 it will sell a lot.

    I’m sure Nikon will first release their D6000, D7100, D400, not letting the D600 cannibalize those sales.

  • Nikon USA

    If that price is true in the USA $2700, Nikon can kiss my a@@ good bye. An all plastic body, no weather sealing, and a low fps asking for $2700. Nikon must be joking.

    • Sky

      I guess it’s a present for Sony to make A99 look like an excellent option.
      On the other hand though there’s always D800… if you’re fast enough to steal one from a shop, lol.

      • Fred

        D800′s are available almost everywhere now. Sales have dropped significantly.
        Look for them at your green grocers soon or part of Mcdonald’s ‘Happy Meals’ pro-mo’s

  • http://ronscubadiver.wordpress.com Ron Scubadiver

    $2700 seems way high considering the specs and what the D800 goes for. Anyone looking for a D400 is dreaming. Only birders need a high pixel density with pro level AF and decent FPS. There aren’t enough of them around to justify a D400.

    • My D4 is sexy

      Right, because sports don’t require that at all right… Dumb ass

    • http://seancrane.com Sean Crane

      I don’t know about that Ron. There’s a huge market of wildlife and sports shooters who want the extra reach of a DX pro body. It’s not the same few people complaining about it on all these sites — and there’s a lot of complaining about it. I’m certainly hoping for it (and not buying the argument to just use a D800 in crop mode). Currently I carry both a D700 and a D300 on all my shoots. The wide lenses go on the D700, the long ones on the D300.

  • roy

    Looking at the photo it seems to be a much cheaper body.
    I really hope it’s around 1500USD (or less :).

    • Mark My Words

      My guess : plastic D600 + crapola 24-85 = $2499

  • r

    This camera is one big turn off.

    • e

      except it’s not even that big…

  • Obamanation

    Go drink some more of my Kool Aid, it will make you happy!

  • John

    Nikon USA site is down for maintenance.

  • Ghoma

    totally different design AND totally identical to the D800

    yes, they must be true!

  • Paracetamol

    Maybe you should go to a mirror site?

    http://youtu.be/0ToaPuOr99E

    • Pablo Ricasso

      No. Screw that. From now on I’m only going to mirrorless sites!

  • Mike

    At almost twice the price that everyone was predicting it to be. Wow.
    I think I’ll get a used 5D Mark II at.. half the price.

  • rhlpetrus

    Certainly someone has noticed that +700USD for a the cheap kit lens doesn’t make sense. Maybe 24-120mm? My guess: USD 2,000 +- 100. Plus USD 300 with 24-85mm.

  • Funduro

    I paid US$2,200 for a brand new D700 in June 2012. I’m glad I did buy the D700, do not need video. The D600 is WiFi friendly, heck the smart phone apps make this a techie’s wet dream.

  • VJ

    Anyone checked how much the D800 was announced for in Japan, and what the retail prices are? There usually is quite a difference between official price and street price…

    I for one am holding out for the D300s/D7000 successor, mainly because of DX glass: going to full frame would be more expensive and not add that much more for my usage.

  • Apollo

    2700$!? Seriously? It’s 2100€!! It costs almost as much as D800 here. Just 300€ difference. Seriously, no point of buying D600 with that price when you pay 300€ more and you get a better model. Just idiotic price! If the price is that high, it will be dead on arrival!

  • catfish252

    My D300s is looking better all the time, I wonder where the $1600 figure came from? Perhaps a refurbished D700 in the future, or wait and see if they ever replace the D300s in the line-up.

  • morg

    Disappointing way to much I will pay 1600$ so now I will wait to see what the D400 price is.Looks like I will keep my D200 for now.nikon not making any money off of me again!

  • El Jake

    remember the D300 and D90 era?

    those were like the D800-D600 And the Price was 2 thirs of the D90 as compared to the D300. Of course I’d love to see a 1500 FX body but actualy a $2K sounds more likely. If only the D600 had 1/8000 shuter speed to isolate a bit more ambient light with the use of nikon CLS, thing not possible with a ND filter that reduces 1 stop from the speedlights as well…. then It would fit my non-pro needs perfectly

    :) and :(

    • Anonymous Coward

      ISO 50 @ 1/4000 = ISO 100 @ 1/8000

      No need for ND to reach identical EV. Why is this so hard?

      Someone check my math ;-)

      Now, the 1/250 sync is a slightly different issue…

      • El Jake

        Still the same, and not what I’m looking for.

        As the speedlites at 1/1 have a speed of 1/11000 aprox (if i remember well) when using 1/8000 speed you Isloate 1 F stop from the ambient light but the speedligts are still faster than the shutter, then they remain the same.

        By lowering the ISO or adding a ND filter wich I agree is the same I sustract 1 f stop from the speedlites as well, that’s what I’m trying to avoid.

        I want portraits with black backgrounds even when shutting mid-day down the street. A lof of fun for “pano-portraits” with selective lighting in the background by using the speedlites.

        :)

      • El Jake

        …almost forgot.

        When Using Nikon CLS, pocket wizard TT sistems or photix odin you have a sync speed of up to 1/8000 or 1/4000, depending on you camera. So the regular sync speed of 1/250 is no problem, as long a you are using nikon CLS/FP compatible speedlites

      • El Jake

        the EV math is correct, the understanding of the use of the camera maybe not so much

      • Anonymous Coward

        El Jake,

        Your further explanation makes perfect sense ( I should have read your first post a bit more deeply) and is the best reason I’ve heard yet for the need for a faster shutter speed. The “wide-open outdoor wedding” shot notsomuch.

  • angry

    too expensive! In the 2012 a full frame camera should cost around 1400 dollars, the 24×36 format should be a standard, don’t forget that these camera are constructed in
    thailand and not in Japan this brands are speculating !!
    Nikon and Canon believes that we are cash cows!!

    • El Jake

      I feel you,

      but consider that the sensors and buffers kept imroving, now they doubled (or tripled) the pixels while rising the dynamic range and color rendition, If we had the same D3 sensor in a D600 body (Which I’d love to have, I still don’t need more than 6 Mega pixles, damn you MANUFACTURERS lol )guess it would cost something like $1200.

      unfortunately nikon’s plans don’t and won’t follow my specific needs

      Furthermore, imagine a D3s sensos in a D600 like body. That would be the real deal.

  • Dave

    I have a D800, LOVE it, spousal unit has an excellent eye and is still using a D90 = wonderful photographs. If my D50 still worked, I would still be using it as well, it was a fine camera. As you know, good glass and a good eye are the most important. One comment as I read through these threads, I would like for people to keep it clean, no need to insult each other. We are all passionate about our art. I know that sometimes my kids see these kinds of threads and we don’t need to help them perfect their usage of such words.

    • neversink

      Here’s a squeegee and some Windex…. Start cleaning up your good glass with that…

      My kids don’t learn inappropriate language from sites like this. They have television, you tube, hollywood, rap and all their teenage peers to help them.

      • neversink

        That said, people need to exhibit some propriety here and show some dignity in themselves before they open their virtual mouths…. Think before you post…..

  • I should be shooting

    Thank goodness the D600 is $2,700; I just bought a D800 ;)

    Hold your fire, they have to lower the pricing on the D600.

  • Read full story

    With this ratio, I expect the D600 US price to be around $2,100.
    With this ratio, I expect the D600 US price to be around $2,100.
    With this ratio, I expect the D600 US price to be around $2,100.
    With this ratio, I expect the D600 US price to be around $2,100.
    With this ratio, I expect the D600 US price to be around $2,100.
    around $2,100
    around $2,100
    around $2,100
    around $2,100
    around $2,100
    $2700 in Japan does NOT mean $2700 in US!!

    • People

      Prove that most people can’t read, so sad…

    • Rob

      I was gonna post the same thing, but you have to realize all the morons complaining about a US $2700 camera couldn’t even read three short paragraphs. They certainly aren’t going to read through hundreds of posts to see us telling them it won’t be $2700.

  • El Jake

    PROBLEM (wisely?) SOLVED:

    my money will go to glass and I’ll wait to get a cheap barely used D3s in a year or so.

    I hate you NAS.

  • GC

    $1500 speculation is ridiculous. I’m actually glad it’s in the $2,000 mark since it will still have price point separation between FX and DX formats.

    I can finally upgrade my D90 to this nice body.

  • neversink

    Nikon’s biggest problem:

    They make too many camera models!!!!!

  • Tonz

    If the spec rumors are true I will pay up to $2,200 and I think there are many others who will also. Of course I would prefer $1,800. If it gets above $2,200 it would have to have some features above the rumored set.

    Some of you folks sure have poor forum etiquette. Just sayin’.

  • Erica

    Let’s just wait what the real price wil be.
    I’m interested in the price in euro’s, so even if the price in US dollars is available, I still don’t know what the cost will be in euro’s.

  • Hind

    I’ve been waiting for this, I have had D90 since day one. But at that price… Sorry Nikon, no thanks. Too bad…

  • Joe Blo

    How is this supposed to be $2700 when the D800 is $2900?

    I still think this is going to be ~$2000.

  • alex

    woow. this is indeed affordable..

  • Leontin

    Nikon D600 is dead at this price!!!!!!!!!
    Real options: Nikon d800 or Sony A99 or future Canon EOS 6D or…bla-bla-bla…

    • thomas

      ok with U Leontin. My choice = Sony

  • thomas

    Bye Bye Nikon (historic DSlr for me = 12 years) I go to Sony Alpha99

  • Tonz

    The A99 sure does look nice. Anyone want to buy a bunch of great Nikon glass? :)

  • MojoLover

    Right On Mojo!!!

  • Marc

    Around $2,700??? The D800 is $2,999, so just $300 difference. I’d rather save for a D800 than this D600 tuned down FX body.

    • GC

      I suppose you didn’t read the whole post..

      >>>>>The US prices of Nikon gear are usually lower, but at that point I think we can forget about a sub-$2,000 full frame Nikon camera. The D800 costs around ¥298,000 in Japan and $3000 in the US. With this ratio, I expect the D600 US price to be around $2,100.<<<<<

      So many people freak out without knowing all the facts. Anyways, we'll all know the price soon enough.

    • javaone

      You are comparing Japan prices to US prices.
      The price of the D800 is more like $3,742 in Japan.

      The article did a bad job of presenting the numbers.

  • Back to top