Let's see the stats: Are you buying the Nikon D600?
Are you buying the Nikon D600?
Direct poll link
Really in doubt: could an Om-D E5 be enough for my need, or should I jump onto the D600….
D600 is the number one top selling list in amazon already !!
Sony a99 is 99 !
no way, too crippled
Too Crippled for what??
in germany it costs more then D700 and is crippled functionality-wise.
It have just more megapixels and video, otherwise it is worse in everything
Oh yeh image quality and video isn’t worth a damn.
what do you shoot that you would see a difference?
D700 to D800, ok maybe, but D600?
Feels like a very cheap camera with only two exceptions: sensor and price.
Really you’ve already held and shot it?
Or are you just pulling this opinion out of your but?
Because according to Nikon Europe website it is a consumer camera. It has nice features but it is not a professional camera:
have almost professional price.
Price is never a factor in the enthousiasts segment.
Price is always a factor.
Are you kidding me? Price is probably the most important factor in the enthusiast segment. For pros the camera is a tool to make money, it is a revenue generator. It is the pros who can worry less about price not the enthusiast who will never see financial return on their camera purchase. Maybe for the wealthy price isn’t a factor but for the vast majority it is one of , if not the biggest consideration.
well logic would support it but if you see how much moneys people waste on phones, tablets and other gadgets, it is not true. All question of priority. People are able to waste whole salary on “next cool thing” if it comes to it.
That’s where all opinions originate from. 😉
Exactly. It’s nice to have new and different options. I had a D700 and loved it, but it was just too large for m preferred style (up close, street, stealthy). I’d rebuy the D700 before getting the D600 or D800, but am leaning heavily toward the OM5.
Ole. I sold my D7000 (have a D700) and bought the OMD. Killer IQ. Outperforms my D700 at high ISO.
OMD has better IQ at high ISO than a d700?!? I was about to pull the trigger on a xpro1 or the xe1 for street, but this changes things..
as soon as my D7000 stops working.
Which I hope won’t happen before the D600 is replaced by a newer model
I already waited too long for a D800…. finally got and LOVE IT!!! Now I need to replace my older NIKKOR glass managerie with FX, AF, VR, et al alphabet soup. facebook.com/Hamlet33
At €1,400 maybe, no way if more. The price in Europe’ll crash down really fast… €2,700 with 24-85 kit len ? ahahah why no 3,000 ? crazy….
I pre-ordered at 2 stores , just to be sure I get atleast one on time
Will not buy the D600 but will buy two D400’s if they are introduced.
Not trolling, but what serious improvement would a D400 offer the DX market over the D7000? This seems like the natural progression of technology (affordable FF to fill in the “pro” level DX needs).
I don’t understand, how moving to D600 from D90 or D7000 is cheaper? Considering the cost of buying new lenses, I would rather buy D800…
I am still waiting for a high end dx camera…let it be a D7000 or D400….
Well, $900 goes a long way to buying some nice glass…
The faster FPS is a nice addition over the D800…
24 megapixels makes for nice more manageable files for most shooters…
the Size and weight make it more manageable for carrying it all day
Faster FPS!? Are you telling that D600 is a sport camera?
D600 have only 1,5 fps mora than D800, and less 50% fps at least od D4.
Oh yes… at 1/4000 <—————————— and less 1/4000 sec. from D800 too.
D600 don't worth the money that they ask for. I'm waiting 1 year for this moment, but I will wait 1 more, no problem at all.
Well, here is a quick wake up call…
When the D800 was introduced, people on this very forum complained that the D800 was too slow, and that their D700 was 6 FPS, so now the D600 is 5.5. That was my point.
The 5DMII is only 0.5 fps faster but is $1400 more…
The D600 is $2100 vs. $3000 D800
The D600 is $2100 vs. $3500 5DMIII
The D600 is $2100 vs. $2800 Sony A99
The D600 is $2100 vs. $6000 D4
The D600 is $2100 vs. $6800 1DX
So top shutter speed is 1/4000th?
That is your argument?
Amien, your arguments are poor and irrelevant.
Pretty sure there are plenty of video camera options out there. If I wanted JUST video then I’d be looking somewhere else like for a Panasonic GH2 which is more affordable. And you can get the AF-L button if you get the grip since if you look it up it DOES have it. And if you don’t wanna shell out the money for it, then wait for the 3rd party that’ll cost $40 bucks with free shipping. The rest of the stuff you’re complaining about is pointless to.
You, obviously, don’t now that all Nikon AF and D lenses can be manually set on D600? Only G lenses are affected.
I’m waiting for the proper reviews but so far it looks really good and I’m really interested.
Then I will have to sell my D90 first and save a few more hundreds. :-/
Why do you need reviews? Every camera Nikon introduces is AWESOME!
Yes; all Nikon cameras are beastly, or downright awesome, but theres always a few bugs and glitches with the starting lineup of brand new models.
Nikon D7000, had a few hot pixels, some back AF errors,
Nikon D800 had some AF and view finder alignment issues (which were resolved).
I’m just saying with the hype that comes with the release of new cameras from Nikon/ Canon, the quality control dips a little bit because the demand for cameras is so HIGH.
That the AF issues with the D800 is resolved
is unclear, also Nikon keeps quiet about this.
Latest reviews on Amazon, one has actually
to change the review sort order to ‘newest reviews’
on Amazon, speak a different language…
I think it would make good partner with my D700, but I’ll wait until the price drops to about 150,000yen before I think seriously about buying it.
BTW My D700 cost 220,000yen new in April 2010, and they want 215,000 for the D600 at the moment. So I think the D600 is a little over priced at the moment.
Would much rather go for D800.
The SD only storage option is a deal breaker for me
Why is that a deal-breaker? SD cards are up to 95 MB/s now.
Because pros have large investments in CF cards and readers, and SD is consumer crap.
Are SD cards really that much worse than CF cards? Just wanted clarification since I only know them as different camera card formats.
Large investment? a 32 gig class 10 card is $32.95 at Adorama…
A USB 3 card reader is $19.95
SD cards don’t suffer from bent pins
Besides, cards should be replaced every 2 to 3 years if your a working pro, so I don’t understand your argument.
I have a 12 year investment in CF cards. Guess how often I use the 8Mb cards I was buying in 2000?
I just bought a pack of two 16Gb SD cards for $35 in Costco this week.
Like how many of these CF cards have you ‘invested in’?
Would you like some vinyl records to go with them? How about an 8-track cassette?
I much prefer SD over CF because there are no pins to bend and I have a reader built into my MacBook.
Your snobbishness comes through as you post. Consumer crap? LoL! A CF card as an investment? Bahahahahahaha! You must be living in a time when 8GB cards were $600!
So you bitch over a few dollars when you spent 2000-3000 for a camera? Your comment makes you look like a amateur tight-wad who cares only about money and not about photography, your photography business or your photography hobby.
There are other issues to worry about than the cheap prices of SD and CD cards. If you can’t afford the memory, sell you gear and take up knitting.
edit *There are other issues to worry about than the cheap prices of SD and CF cards. If you can’t afford the memory, sell your gear and take up knitting.
If you already invested money in a few good CF cards then I can see your point.
SD only is hardly a draw back now a days. Their cheaper, just as fast now, and don’t have to worry about bent pins. My laptop, like most newer ones, has a SD reader built in so that’s one less thing to carry around.
Will (hopefully) get mine next friday.
Prices in Denmark dropped some 300 Euros one the release day – guess that’ll be THE price for a while. Keeping my D90 as backup for the moment, but IF the D400 arrives, I’ll be temptet go get one too
Got mine from Amazon as soon as it showed up. Can’t wait to get it! Also looking forward to playing with the WiFi adapter. Being able to shoot images remotely sounds fun!
Oh, and I’m “upgrading” from a D300. Been waiting too long!
LoL, thanks. I can’t wait to play with it. I just hope the FX version of the AF system is better than what I’ve heard about the DX version.
Nope… price is to high!!
But is how it the iso comperd to D700 ?
D600 vs D700 ? link ?
If the price was $1500 then it would be a no-brainer to get the d600 and a lens rather than a D800.
At $2100 I might go for the D800 after all but price isn’t a major factor for me.
Specs comparison (note: specs only. No actual testing, yet)
While you at it, he (mansurov) has the other specs comparison as well:
I want a full frame digital. I still have my D200 and I use my F5 since its 35mm and FF. I was going to get a new d700 but then the d800 got announced and then this. I’ll wait for a replacement DX so a D400? And I’ll hopefully have a good winter and can afford the D4
Price is waaay too high. For that price just get a D800. Besides I am not convinced about the body.
Magnesium alloy on the top and back is decent for this camera and price, especially for the non-professional. I still have my D90 backup camera and it working perfectly. I think the D600 will be a great camera for people looking to move from DX to FX. Although they should have made the top shutter speed 1/8000th and max sync speed 1/250th, but I can live with that.
“For that price just get a D800.”
OK, find me a D800 selling for $2100. I’ll wait…
How come there isn’t a similar poll for the D800? It would’ve been interesting to compare the results.
An possibly I would add to the D800 poll:
1. Think of buying it
2. Already have it with:
a) no problems or all bug were fixed
b) some bugs still not fixed
c) don’t know/care about bugs
Waiting for the “DRINK!”…
Not buying it. I was tempted to get it as my D800 backup before specs were announced. But now, I see no point in buying a gutted Full-Frame just to save less than $1k(or no saving if you snag a used D700).
Noob dial = lost my interest
SD only = lost my interest
1/400th = lost my interest
1/200 sync = REALLY lost my interest
Yes i know, for a lot of people that extra money is a dealbreaker, but that extra $800 really isn’t all that much when you consider all the Full-Frame lenses you will need as well if your upgrading from DX to FF. And if you already are in the FF camp, this camera is a joke as your coming from a D700, D800, D3, D4 etc etc
That was suppose to say 1/4000th
I lost interest when it said the max shutter speed is only 1/4000th.
I mean, if the d7000 can do it, why can’t the D600?
Sure,the D600 is full frame and awesome when compared to DX cameras, but in perspective, its like D3x00 or a D5x00 in the DX field when compared to other FX cameras.
Completely obvious answer: less expensive shutter helps make camera with expensive full-frame sensor “affordable.”
why are you looking for lame arguments ?
The shutter is simply BRICKED – as the video mode is (you basically have to exit live view to change your aperture)
A shutter or any electronic piece such as motherboards or processors are the less expensive parts of the camera.
The simply took a D7000 shutter and blocked the shutter speed to 1/4000th, for MARKETING reasons. Sot-hat more enthusiastic shooters will buy both D800 AND the D600 as “backup” body. simple as that !
FX sensors are twice as big as DX and take 21% longer movements during exposure. Your claim that it has a D7000 shutter is absurd.
claiming that the shutter isn’t crippled for marketing purpose is absurd.
A shutter is not an “electronic piece such as motherboards or processors”. it is in fact, a very complicated, expensive and failure-prone moving part. Who ignores this is either completely unaware of what is a reflex or a mystifier, not a very good one.
Could’ve been done to extend the shutter life. and +1 on what mikils posted.
+ price/features ratio = lost my interest
Too expensive for it. I will be buying the D800 over the next week as the price difference is only £100.
Mine is pre-ordered from B&H. Keeping my D7000 as back-up. I’ll be honest. When the news first surfaced I was skeptical, but once I saw the high ISO RAW and JPEG files, I was in love. If you’re curious, check out the comparisons here: http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM
Seriously, what’s not to love about this camera? Considering the D700 came in at $2,600 when new and considering that the D600 is already proving to match or dare I say beat the IQ of the D700, I don’t think I’ll be disappointed. The body is rugged enough for me. I don’t drop my equipment from mountain ledges and I don’t shoot in monsoons. Even if I were, I’m sure the D600 would stand up to it nearly as well as the D800. 5.5 FPS is sufficient for most of the shooting I do, and I like shooting sports and wildlife. The D800 would have been nice too, but I think it’s too much for my needs and budget. Obviously the D600 isn’t going to win too many D4 owners over except to maybe buy it as a back-up camera, but for most people like myself, I think Nikon did an excellent job with this camera for the price range. I think I’ll be very happy with it, especially when I go shooting at night. Can’t wait!
Thanks for the link! That high ISO looks very very nice indeed. Beats the D700 at ISO6400. Don’t see why so many people whine about the D600? I really want to buy this camera, but it’s a little bit too expensive for now, so I’ll wait some weeks and hope that the price will drop like with the D800.
800 and 600 are both great cameras. It’s funny…in my city of about 600k there are bout 4 photographers that really take up a lot of market and we are always on the newspaper and city rankings top 5. All of us shoot with d700’s. When my shutter count reaches 200,000 I go and buy either a new or a low shutter count d700. I’m on my 9th d700. I love it to death. I am just gonna keep buying my favorite camera ever for super cheap over and over just like my competition does until there is a true and equal replacement. I’m not saying the d800 didn’t replace the 700. I’m just saying that I want the d600 resolution or a little lower with super fast everything and better noise and focus if possible. Maybe someday it will come. Maybe not. Anyone else love their d700 like me? I have one with 297,898 shutter count and it almost works perfect still. I love NIKON always have always will!
Easy on the continuous-high-speed there, Rambo.
No – too expensive…
Yes I don’t understand what the appeal is of the D600 at $2700 when the D800 is $3000. Anyone in their right mind who got together approximately $3000 will buy the the D800.
What happened to all this wanting to bring on more people to FX by bringing out a more affordable FX camera. $300 less than the D800 is not more affordable lol !!! If I had being waiting for the D600, which Im wasn’t as I own a D800, I would be so pissed off at Nikon.
@Luke, the D600 is about $1000 less than the D800 in Canada, about the cost of a good lens. Guess it depends which country in.
I’m definitely in the queue to buy this camera, once the price drops a bit. I’m torn between the better build of a used D700 but would really love to see a side by side comparison. Used D700s are selling at about $1800 CDN in this neck of the woods so adding in video, 24 MP, and the 5 year warrantee the D600 seems a pretty good value for an extra $300. Will be interesting to see some reviews – will wait till then.
I personally see many disadvantages of the FX camera. The D400 or an improved D7000 would be a better purchase for me.
Such as? Did you shoot film back in the day?
I remember shooting with Kodachrome 25. Today when people bitch about shutter speeds being too slow I just shake my head in wonder. I was thrilled if I could get 1/250, so only going to 1/4000? So what.
The D600 looks fine, even on paper. Some of you are bashing something you haven’t even actually seen let along actually touched and shot with yet and are crying “I will buy 2 D400’s when they come out.”.
Any published here?
Seriously, you are ready to buy a rumor instead of the camera announced and in production today? I can guess that before your beloved DX came out you were crying “What a tiny sensor? That MUST be crap!” Now you hold on to it like it is the best thing in the world, guess what, it isn’t.
Now we are hearing some people say “You don’t need FX, Camera manufacturers just want you to toss your DX for FX to make more money.” Duh, what business doesn’t want to make more money? And yes they make it off of US. The Point & Shoot is about dead, cellphones are taking that segment and flushing it down the toilet. So what the hell are the camera companies gonna do? The last grasp for them in DSLR is to move all of us BACK to FF and then push the next mirror less bodies on us….Look we have an expensive passion here (photography), we know it, so get over it.
You need to move with today’s technology, stop waiting for “tomorrow’s” next (maybe) best thing. Because tomorrow came and you are bitching NOW. Just like the endless camera cycle you are endless cry babies. Go play with some electric trains, there is a technology that doesn’t change much, you should be happy there. You surely aren’t happy with photography.
@John Richardson: Well Said
@RC that rant was not directed at you!
No, I know =) You were hilarious! =D Loved it!
If this had debuted at $1700 to $1800 it would have been a runaway best seller IMO.
It’s already is a runaway best seller…
#1 in all things photographic at Amazon…
D600 may become a good choose for following people:
1. People who buying camera for the first time and do not have any dx lenses it have a very few of them..
2. People who already have expensive and big pro level camera like, D800 and D4….rather than carrying a small dx camera now pros can carry the small D600 camera as a backup….the YouTube video from Nikon also shows a comparison between D4, D800 and D600 to prove this…
For people like me who have range of dx lenses, it does not make sense to upgrade to FX with this camera….since I dont have many FX lenses, it would be expensive for me to buy FX lenses….if I decide to upgrade, I think I won’t hold back $800 just to buy this D600…I would rather buy D800
I have a few DX lenses, so I’ll probably sell the ones I don’t think I’ll use (such as 12-24 4 and 17-50 2.8). I also don’t plan on getting rid of my D300 any time soon, so the 18-200 will stay. I also have the 70-200 and look forward to it starting at 70 without the DX crop (and same with the 50 1.4 and 85 1.4 that I also own).
You can still use your DX lenses with the crop. The advantage of FX would be the extra high-ISO performance.
Right now there’s a $900 price difference between the D600 and D800. I’m telling myself that I like the D600 more because it’s quieter (according to DPR). It also has a higher frame rate (much closer to the 6 fps that I’m used to on my D300). I just hope that I can live with the AF system of the D600.
EDIT: Apparently you don’t gain high ISO performance when cropped. Click on my name to see the explanation at DPReview.
Whoops, the link didn’t post right. Here’s a link.
I would add:
3. People who have a DX camera but mostly FX lenses because they’ve been planning to someday get an FX camera. The D600 makes a good case for “someday” being now, except maybe for D300 and D300s owners.
Me, I have a D90 and plan to stick with it for a while. If I get a replacement within the next few years, I expect it to be a used D300 or D300s, or a D400. But then my only FX lens is a 50mm 1.8D
That’s exactly what my situation is….
I have D90 with 18-105, 35, 10-20 sigma and 70-300 nikkor vr…
Expect the 70-300, I dont have any other FX lenses….so for me it will be too expensive to match my dx line option with any FX camera…whats the point in buying an FX camera and use dx crop factor…its not going to improve me pictures dramatically…
For me it makes sense to buy a D400 or D7100 and retain my dx lenses a little longer…i do not make money from my photography….so spending this much is not my option….
my D700 and my D800 will serve me just fine…
…until the D700 dies… which will be not far down the road anymore. Currently counting 275.000 actuations…
BTW, using a D800 and a D600 I would not longer qualify for NPS
I thought the D7000 already qualified as a 2nd body for NPS registration? In which case a D600 certainly would…
nope, the D7000 does NOT qualify, not even as a 2nd body.
First bodies must be: D4, D3(sX), D800(E) or D700
Second: D2(HSX) or D300(S)
So, the D600 highly probably won’t qualify either…
On the Nikon website, it is listet under “consumer”
Also should note that I own at least four FX Nikkor lens, just after the 70-300VR I see nothing light enough or fast enough to use in the field. the 80-400VR Nikkor was probably most in need of a revamp. I sent a letter to Nikon USA about this and their VP of marketing replied that they have ultimate trust in the R&D Division. Yes they build some amazing camera body and lens but the failure to build lens that would compete with say a Sigma 50-500 (most who OWN
that lens tout it from 200-500, which I would guess could be made as a 200-500 and save some weight). Nikon’s 200-400 Nikkor may be useable on a D600 but it is not a combo I would want to carry in the field.
I plan on getting one and also plan on keeping my D80. One question that begs to be asked. Is it the professional camera that makes the photographer a professional or is it the professional that makes the camera a professional camera?
According to NPS, it’s the camera.
In Denmark the D600 is $2,983.64 USD and the D800 is $3,159.62 USD.
Totally and utterly ridiculous pricing.. Who in their right mind would even consider the D600 when they could pay $175,98 USD extra and get a D800 instead?!??
I don’t understand why Nikon prices this camera so randomly. In Canada, D600 is $2,099 and D800 is $2,999. That would be $900 + 13% = 1,017 CAD (Ontario). But from what you’re saying, it’s only$175.98USD in Denmark. If I was in that country, I would also buy D800 with such a small price difference.
Or maybe you’re comparing a D600 kit to D800 body only?
$1,000 is still quite a bit since I can easily get 85mm 1.4D used for that price.
I’m comparing the price of camera bodies only.
The D600 kit with the 24-85mm is $3,521.21 USD.
I was really set on buying one asap, but now that the price is only €450,- below the D800 I will wait a couple of months, because it is just too expensive now.
It does look like Nikon’s pricing is really dangerous from my viewpoint. Their press release reads….least expensive FX camera…..my reaction (and many others) is WOW! This pricing is invitation to do something else. Right now my D7000, D90, and yes, D300 and D200 will just keep on clicking. Maybe Nikon will get the message if enough stall??
I waited patiently for the d600 release and I even sold my DX glass and D300 body last week. But I couldn’t justify the $2100 price for two reasons: its autofocus and its shutter speeds (both 1/4000 and 1/200 sync are deal breakers).
What I do not understand is that my $1500 D300 had better autofocus, 4 years ago, than the latest $2100 camera. Has Nikon forgotten about its semi-pro clientele?
I guess it works for them, though, as I have too much invested in glass. Instead of buying the D600 as I had intended, I walked into my local shop yesterday and picked up a D800…
Those great big FX sensors really are an order-of-magnitude more expensive than DX sensors, despite the misinformation spread around these comment sections by people who know nothing about semiconductor manufacturing.
At roughly the same introductory price ($1800 in 2007 vs. $2100 in 2012) – but with an FX sensor onboard – something else is going to give.
You don’t even know what the FX version of the AF system will be like. The FX version of the AF system in the D700/D3 is better than the one in the D300/D300s. I’m hoping for a similar difference. You also don’t know how it will compare to the AF system in the D300. Everything now is just speculation.
1/200 vs 1/250 flash sync is insignificant. Show me a scenario where this would make any difference.
The same goes for the maximum shutter speed. Tell me what percentage of your shots were shot at 1/8000.
There are two cons of the D800 that I might classify as near-deal-breakers. The D800 is much louder, AND it is much slower in frame advance (4 vs 5.5). Those in my opinion are practical differences.
No, I will not buy it.
I passed on the D800 for the very simple reason that it has too much resolution. I don’t need 36 mp. My entire system would have to be upgraded just to handle the huge files which would clog up everything. I’d have been happy with a full frame nikon rated at 16mp. 24 is perfect. And I saved a thousand dollars in the process.
I don’t buy it. There is no such thing as too much resolution. Just shoot medium files if large is too much. I believe that you’re just trying to find reasons not to buy it. Would you say that a certain cordless drill has too much power, so you won’t buy it?
I already have a D800, and i’ll sell my D7000 for a D600 for daily and backup camera
I will keep my D7000 and get the D800 which is more camera at$3000 than the D600 for $2100. The D800 is still not quite what I need but it looks like there will be no D400
I suspect many of the nay sayers could be from Europe, who are taken back by the unreasonably high listed price (as compared to the US price).
I suggest a question: “Yes, instead of the D800” – this is certainly my case!
If I didn’t already have a D800 I might have. Nikon was smart to release the D800 six months before the D600. The D600 will certainly take some sales away from the D800, especially for the DX upgrading crowd.
The D600 makes me happy I bought the D800e.
It’s funny how our minds find ways to justify our irrational behaviors.
No. It better satisfies my needs. OH, and I have the budget.
Tell me how the introduction of a new model has any effect on a past purchase other than to justify your own reasoning. It doesn’t matter if you have an infinite supply of money. What SHOULD make you happy that you got a D800E is the D800E itself.
I’ll buy it in a year… Until all bugs is revealed and fixed (if any)….
Finally, FX comes with reasonable price (at least for my wallet) 😀
I owned D70, D50, D40, and D200 and all operational until this day…
Luckily, almost all my glass are FX, I only have 2 DX glass came kit with D50&D40.
It looks like a good enthusiast/consumer level FX camera.
I *was* looking to buy one if it was at about $1500 or so, but not at this price.
Better perhaps the D400 or D7100 as and when?
I can wait 6 months or so…
That chinese 85G blocks AF assist lamp on D90 because of it’s size – lolz at nikon being the new canon!
Ordered day one.
A lot of talk about AF and expensive FX glass.
I shoot film, and I’m thrilled this camera will meter with 35 years worth of full frame Nikon lenses. Those lenses are built like tanks and you’ll be hard pressed to pay more than $300 for an exquisite one.
A full frame sensor is hugely important and desirable to me. I’ve trained myself to think in full frame (ie, like you do on film). I’m thrilled to have a full frame digital that is (relative to the market) this reasonable.
If I ever used autofocus, maybe I’d be upset, but it seems so much more limiting than turning the focus ring myself.
And as for trashing the camera’s usefulness for professionals, how many professional photographers are actually commenting here? Aren’t most of us serious hobbyists?
I hope I love this camera. If not, I’m going to sell it and buy more film.
Im a DX user, from d70s, D80, D90, D300 and D7000. but all my lenses are for full frame, thats why I will buy this body. thinking all the time when the 35mm format will come back.
my native language is spanish, I`m sorry for my bad english.
Nope, will rather buy a used D700.
D700’s grip allows for faster FPS, which may come in handy in certain situations.
Bigger physical size.
Flash sync 1/250.
51 AF points on the D700.
1/8000 shutter speed.
Same ISO range (althought the D600 may perform better at higher settings)
And a used D700 is cheaper than a new D600.
You guys are so cute. Complaining about it not being a “professional” camera… and just how many of you here make your living 100% from photography?
And not just from photography, but from a very specific subset of photography: high-paid photojournalism. The D600 is as suitable for other professional purposes (weddings, portraits, landscapes, product) as any other small-format camera.
Here we go again … Define what makes a pro …
I *used* to be someone that was 50 to 60% of the time shooting pro for the same employer as my non-shooting work (that muddys the water a bit) but now I shoot much less but do a lot of support work now – for the same employer still!
Am I buying a 600 for myself? No. The results (considering I can borrow from work almost any lens I need and a D800 and have a 7000 and a few FX and DX lenses of my own, a 600 at that price is just not worth it.
Speculation but a D7100 at about $1300 to $1400 or so *IS* going to be worth it.
Nikon have always been ‘expensive’ but are generally ‘better’ than the rest. For me, the difference between mid/good DX and entry FX seems to be just too narrow for the difference in price.
Will buy definitely, but only after and if price drops to 1500 EUR (25%). That would be a good 50% above D7000 price which for me is an acceptable premium for FX.
+1 Thats is my point too.
Still waiting and hoping for a D800 with the sensor from the D4 to replace my D700.
No. I won’t be buying one. And I’m slightly annoyed that the Nikon line up no longer has a camera for me.
There’s the low end cameras for dads to shoot pics of the kids in auto mode. And there’s two pro models. That’s it.
Now we get an entry level FX? What the hell for? So Dad can fire off a few full frame, full auto snapshots?
What about all us advanced amateurs? (Advanced = knows how to use a camera, amateur = doesn’t earn a living off it). The only thing close is the D800……… and that’s just overpriced overkill for me. Where’s the pro bodied, pro spec’d DX?
The D600 is a no go. Does that mean I now have to shoot in 36 megapixels just to get a usable camera now? This thing is a cop out. I’ m not going to buy a Cannon, but I’m not buying a Nikon either.
And the wait continues.
My initial reaction to your post is “WHAT ARE YOU SMOKING!?!?!?” But I’d like to let you make your case since nothing in your original post was about cameras.
What exactly does the D600 not have that YOU want?
“Now we get an entry level FX? What the hell for? So Dad can fire off a few full frame, full auto snapshots?”
Dad shot full-frame 35mm for the better part of a century. Back then, 35mm was called “small format.”
Now after a few years of being made to use sensors smaller than the frame of a 126 Instamatic (because 35mm-sized sensors were too difficult and expensive to make) suddenly people think the 35mm format is big, and way too good for Dad. Nonsense.
I agree Zeke. Dad, and I, used to take family snapshots on TLR’s … until the SMALLER 35mm came out.
Totally agree. FX is great and very fun to use given the bigger viewfinder. Lens selection is also so much better at the wide end for FX it’s not even close.
And the wait continues. Amen.
Will buy it after see test at high ISO and………………… only if price drops to 1600 EUR, currently in Italy it costs 2150 EUR = 2900 US $ !!!!!!!!!! CRAZY
I’m amazed by the number of people who seem to hate this camera.
Count me in the “I preordered” column; this camera is just what I was looking for. A high-res full-frame camera in an extremely light body = a great landscaper/hiker’s camera. And cheaper than the D700’s price point. What’s not to love?
People seem to be freaking that it can’t do 1/8000, doesn’t do 500 fps, and it’s twice as heavy. Hmmmm. Well, I’ll know how to put this camera to good use!
I totally agree. It seems the non-camera and non-photography people are crippled by the specs. Either that or they’re trying to dig for reasons not to buy it. In addition, virtually no one has handled this camera yet, so a lot of the cons are just speculative. It would be interesting to see if these are the same people that were complaining about the 36 megapixel sensor before they saw its results.
Enter your email for daily blog updates: