Let's see the stats: Are you buying the Nikon D600?
Are you buying the Nikon D600?
Direct poll link
I have absolutely no interest.
However as all of you crazy people throw money at Nikon because you HAVE to have full frame feel free to give your old useless DX glass to those of not jumping off that cliff :).
D600 not for me. Would rather get D800 or 5D III.
Especially when we are now seeing 5D III at price like $2749 from Adorama on ebay.
We’ll definitely see D800 at similar price
Unlikely any time soon, esp for D800E. 5DIII will soon drop price to $2500 primarily because of D800 and especially D600, but D800 is MP leader and untill Canon releases something better, it’s going to keep its price.
Well the rumors are that Canon is releasing a 6D to compete with the D600 and it will be in the $2500 range. If this is true than there is no way the 5DIII will go below $3000
5D3 is already selling for $2749 by Adorama. Sold 818 in just 1 day on ebay. This is a legit sale.
6D will be priced same as D600 $2099
Your comments are pointless…you don’t know nothing about photography…for your information ignorante,,,you can use your DX lens in this camera…ignorant…
.. and why do some people assume because someone has a DX body that they ONLY buy DX lenses?
I have a D90 and the ONLY DX lens i have for it is the DX lens that CAME with it.
Exactly. I’ve two DX Lenses. One 18-70mm Set lens (comes with the D70S) and a 10-24mm. I use it with my D200 and D300. My normal Choice as everyday Lens is the 24-70/2.8. Why not a 14-24/2.8? I’m more a light wide lens user (around 35mm) and my normal field is animal photography. No need then. Money is not the problem.
My Wish for a new Camera: Speed, fast FPS, fast AF. DX would be fine but is no must. I don’t need selector wheels on cameras. I disliked this thing on the D70s.
The D4 is fine, but a little too big and pricey (i’ve the money, but not the time to use this piece). I don’t need a porsche around my neck for a few days in the year. In this case i use my old Leica M4-2
P.S.: Sorry for the rusty english.
The D700 already does what this thing will. In a better body. I could but one tomorrow……in fact I could have done that years ago.
What benefit does FX give us? Seriously. Unless you’re a soccer mum looking to impress the coffee club with ab FX badge.
With this one, the ignorance is strong.
You must be talking about yourself. The benefits of FX over DX, especially for non pros are actually quite small and DX has its own advantages. It is not really a case of one being better than the other. They are just different. especially in the case of the D600 which judging form the raw samples I have seen so far has the same high ISO noise preformance as the D7000.
In every way but resolution, video and maybe the viewfinder the D700 is a much better body and it was selling new for just over what the D600 costs just several months ago. Why anyone would pay D700 prices for body that is essentially a lower spec D7000 just because it has, at least judging from the admittedly few initial raw samples I have seen, a mediocre FX sensor shoved in it is mind boggling.
No, Yoda is right. FX gathers more light than DX, so it therefore gives better high ISO performance (see website link). Shallower depth-of-field (creamy smooth blurred backgrounds) is also what many are after, and FX offers that.
Resolution and video are also very important upgrades. The D600 is also much quieter than the D800 according to DPReview, so I assume it will be quieter than the D700.
I thought about buying a used D3/D700, and then I came to my senses and did the right thing by pre-ordering a D600 to replace my “old” D300.
There are no pills in this world for your ignorance, Josh.
I know full well the differnce but they are subtle. Sure it give less DOF but the differnce IS small. I didn’t’ say there wasn’t any I said it wasn’t that big of a differnce especially for people who don’t need profession level images, you know the people this camera is marketed to. Of course I judge by actual pictures and not some measurement in a lab so that could be where the differnce in opinion comes from.
The biggest advantage of FX is the ISO preformance but, again judging by actual pictures instead of assumption, not on this camera.
Sorry but FX has much larger sensor capture area than DX does. No matter how you look at it that is a big deal in the physics of photography. Nothing subtle about it.
The difference is NOT small. I recently played with my friend’s brand new 5D3 with the 24-105 F4 lens, and I was amazed at how much more shallow the depth-of-field is on his camera. I knew about FX but when I actually tried a full-frame camera, I was still wowed.
FX blows away DX when the ISO is raised. You can’t beat the laws of physics.
Let me put it this way. If you had a bunch of photos some taken with FX and some with DX and mixed them all up how many people do you think could tell the differnce? The answer is none even if you showed them to other photographers.
since they say D7000 has similar high iso performance, there’s still one serious reason for FX (for pro use) – much better fast wide lenses.
Who is “they?” I don’t believe that for one second that the D7000 could possibly have anywhere near the high-ISO performance of any FX camera. You can’t break the laws of physics. FX sensors get much more light because they’re larger.
Actually 16 X 1,5 =24 so the photosites are the same size so It is exactly the same!?
Wrong, think area (2.25x).
I used to think that way too but read this. It will turn your world upside-down.
You have to think of it in terms of overall area as rhlpetrus stated.
- Pixel density of D7000: 16.2/(23.6 x 15.6) = 0.044 MP/mm2
– Pixel density of D600: 24.3/(35.9 x 24) = 0.028 MP/mm2
So, with similar sensor technology, the high ISO performance of D600’s FX sensor should be better than D7000’s DX sensor’s.
You can’t look at it like that. You MUST consider the total area of the sensor.
HERP DERP DERPITY HERP
How about straight up better image quality?
Hell, at ISO 200, the D7000 has better image quality than the D700.
The d600? Killer sensor. The body isn’t anything special.
I will buy D600 or D800 to go with a D2x (that needs service but I use it constantly). I have a very good range of quality FX glass so the D800 would be a no-brainer except for tight finances.
The dealbreaker could be the AF performance of the D600 which is the only additional info I am waiting on. Odds are no matter what the D600 reviews report I will force-find the extra $900 USD for the D800.
My only DX glass are Nikon 12-24mm and Nikon 10.5mm. Will those lenses function properly on a D800 if the D800 is used in DX mode?
you should consider “shaving” your 10.5mm to get a near-circular view on full frame. it’s sweet
The answer is yes. Your DX will work just find on any FX camera without modifying it so that you can still sell it in the future if you loose interest.
Don’t know about 10.5 but I am currently usingmy 12-24 on 800e . Using it in 1.2 crop mode to get wide angle of about 16 mm Fx eqivalent. Good quality too. No fun though to see smaller size in finder and absolutely no fun to get about 20 mp files when could get 36 mp files if use fx lens. Getting 16-35 as soon as finances permit.
No, I am not going to buy it. The new enthusiast / consumer / crippled D600 camera is very expensive. I rather buy a D7100 for $1400 with shutter speed 1/8000. Is it just to be used as a back up camera? For hiking only? Who is it really marketed at?
For a hiking/backpacking dSLR, I don’t think there is a better camera than the D7000 with the 16-85 mm DX (and maybe a Gitzo 1541T or 1542T).
The only market I see for the D600 is those who would buy a D800 but want something lighter and or have megapixel phobia or those who have a D800 and want a smaller second camera body and are unwilling to go with DX. Until the price comes down to at least $1700 the D600 is out for reach for the vast majority of enthusiast and DX upgraders who everyone seems to think this camera was made for.
I don’t want something lighter.
I don’t have a megapixel phobia.
I don’t have a D800 and want a smaller body.
If you’re gonna pay $1700 for a camera, it won’t kill you to pay $2100.
I AM a DX upgrader.
I AM willing to pay $2100 for the D600.
I AM going to tell you now that I pre-ordered the D600.
Why is 1/8000 important? The D700 had 1/8000 @ Iso 200, which is pretty much the same as the D600’s 1/4000 @ Iso 100, and nobody ever complained about the D700.
Ooh, you’re right! You bring up a very good point!!!
It all depends on how the AF functions. If it really is just the D7000 AF system thrown into a FF then count me out. Additionally I prefer shooting in portrait mode, so add on $300 dollars for NIkons overpriced battery grip.
I like the concept mostly because it’s a light full frame and I WANT a lighter full frame.
I’m considering ordering a used D3, whick are going for under $2800. 12 MP is plenty for what I do, and I’ll get a true professional camera that does 9fps, the same ISO performance as a D600, has great AF and viewfinder, and a rock solid piece of pro gear for about $400 more than a D600.
But really, if the D600 reviews come back with positive opinions of the AF, I’m buying it.
Wait for the cheap Chinese grip for $50 to come out. My ripoff grip works great on the D800E…wont spend anything above $100 for a genuine grip EVER
” I WANT a lighter full frame. …. I’m considering ordering a used D3″ – made my day.
No D600 for me. Just got myself D4 and 4 lenses couple months ago so I don’t think I will be getting another camera any time soon. And I love my A77 so I don’t feel like replacing it with D600.
Am still on the fence with this one.
Good low light performance is paramount for me, as I shoot mostly indoor dance performances and on-site hotel food photography.
I might be tempted if it offered one or two stops better high ISO performance, but from the sample images released so far, it’s no better than the bodies I already have.
What bodies do you have?
You people on this forum shall not judge a camera on its price. according to most people thinking the d600 is “cheap” and not capable of taking photos like the higher end fx such as d800, d4 etc… imo that is just wrong a statement.
Taking photographic shall not factor in the price of the camera. Your heart and soul into photography is priceless, but the value and outcome of you photographic is hidden treasure found in your “cheap” camera.
Art thou the True Brian? If so, I believe, although thy “imo” lowers thine tone a little.
I’m not too convinced to buy this camera. I really want a Fully magnesium body with a better AF than the D7000. So I would like to see what comes out to replace the D7000 or a D400 with better AF, faster shutter, and better ISO control is what I really need. I would rather pay about the same price as the D600 for a higher performance DX camera.
Do tell why you need a fully magnesium body.
You don’t know that the AF isn’t better than what’s in the D7000.
You’re not going to see much high-ISO improvement in the next DX camera.
You WILL however see a huge improvement in high-ISO performance going from DX to FX.
Faster shutter for what? What percentage of your pictures required this faster shutter?
Has anyone seen the old D3X poll from 2008? People were complaining about the $8000 price tag and how 5D Mark II was cheaper.
One angry commenter said that Nikon lost his loyalty.
Where are those D3X users now? Their $8000 camera just became worth $2100.
Quite disappointed with the D600, though it does look decent and tempting to many.
IMO smaller size form and semi-alloy body is acceptable, but shutter unit could’ve been better (1/8000 s, 1/250 s sync, 150,000+ cycles). And no fps increase with the MB-D14 is another no-no.
There should also be enough room for a PC sync terminal on the LHS socket panel but Nikon did not even try implementing it (like Canon does with the 7D, 5DII/III etc.) along with the N10 terminal.
Had these features been in available, the D600 might’ve made it to my wishlist. Slight price increase would be expected, but afterall a 35mm fullframe DSLR is serious hardware even at high-amateur grade, so that’s acceptable…
Maybe a 24MP version of the D800 in the future (in D800 body form of course) would make it to the market in the future days? But for now, no D600 for me.
Agree with your comment completely. Still, I could forgive the cheap shutter and small viewfinder if there was a significant increase in low light performance and dynamic range, but from what I’ve seen in the sample pics that doesn’t seem to be the case.
I know what you mean. The only thing this camera has going for it is the FX sensor and quite frankly in the raw samples I have seen it is quite mediocre. Especially in the noise department. I would not be surprised if it’s DR was only around 11 or 12 stops.
How often do you use a shutter speed of 1/8000?
What flash sync scenario could possibly benefit from an increase from 1/200 to 1/250?
You’re complaining about the rated life of the shutter? SERIOUSLY?!?!?!?
Who says that all grips have to make the frame rate faster? You should be glad they didn’t make it 3.5 fps and 5.5 fps with the grip!
Who on earth uses a PC sync terminal, and is it that hard to add your own if you really need it? Talk about complaining about the silliest things.
24MP D800??? Why?
Disappointed also. Waiting for the next non-nobbled iteration, or D400.
Really would like to spend the cash instead on a new lens (yet to be announced), maybe a 300mm f4 VR.
I was pretty sure I was going to be buying the D600. But having tried a D800, I was extremely disappointed with its tiny, uncomfortable grip. Years ago, I chose Nikon over Canon because of the tiny grip on the Rebel and the comfortable grip on the D50. And now Nikon has shrunk the grip on the D800 to the point where it fits a child’s hand. Although I shoot mostly with a tripod (landscapes) I want a camera that feels comfortable in my hand with or without the battery grip – for shooting events. If the D600 turns out to have a grip as ridiculously small as the D800, I will be buying a D700 or D3.
Not Nikon’s fault you’re fat.
I’ll be selling my D700 on eBay soon. In perfect condition. No, I am not buying D600 or D800… Check me out on eBay – member “chudor”
I will buy it, maybe wait for a while, but will buy it. viewed most of the comments above and felt a bit lost that all talked about equipment only, while few talk about the capability a Nikon camera can create beautiful images, no matter it’s D800 D600 or even APS-C body. It’s human who create beautiful images, not just the equipment, a deep thinking mind makes the difference, not a how fast fps makes. I mainly shot landscape in the past 25 years, and I didn’t ever use shutter faster than 1/1000 in the field, how much difference between 1/4000 and 1/8000s? and 5.5 fps and 4fps(D800) and 6fps(5D3)?? come on folks, if you are a fun of a piece of toy, I don’t common it, but if you are a PHOTOGRAPHER, it won’t apart you from that title.
Well I only ever dreamed of having full frame DSLR because compared to my old film camera and APS-C they are very expensive. Now though I find myself seriously considering the D600. Whats really making the difference is not just the price but the fact it has a focus motor and aperture indexing tab which opens the door to all the older secondhand glass here in Japan which is very good quality and priced very reasonably.
Why does no one ask about the buffer size? I don’t care if it shoots 40fps, if the buffer fills up after 3 shots, it’s doesn’t matter.
Nobody asks because the info is publicly available on Nikon’s site.
16 RAW 14-bit lossless.
Or 27 RAW @ 12-bit compressed because there’s NO REASON to shoot at anything other than that! Search the web if you don’t believe me. The D300’s number is 20 so I’m VERY PLEASED! Shoot at JPG normal and your buffer is practically unlimited (57 for JPG fine which there is no reason to use).
Not too impressed with the features.
Price doesn’t justify the crippled specs.
Not going to buy a FF just to have a FF camera.
For my use, I’m holding on to my D300, and hoping for the D400. Still keeping my hopes up.
How come you don’t want awesome high-ISO performance? What about a quieter camera? What about having a 70-200 actually start out at 70? What about shallower depth-of-field? DX will never have any of these (except for the quieter shutter).
While what you said are true benefits of a FF, but if you have been following Nikon and Canon’s line up and their marketing, you should be able to notice that the pricing of the D600 is out of whack.
To me, it seems like Nikon is making a sh!tty camera with a ridiculous price tag just to help the sale of D800. Since D800 MSRP is much higher than D700, they need something to fill the gap. IMO that is why D600 is here and why its spec is a pile of crap. At $2000, it is not even an entry level. Nikon really screwed up this time, started to act like Canon.
I have been following their lineups since the D1/D30 but I’m not sure I understand what you mean by marketing.
I’m not sure the camera is as bad as you’re describing it to be.
Most people will not need the items “crippled” in the D600.
A lot of people are claiming that it uses the same AF system as the D7000 when in fact it does not. There is an FX at the end of the name for the D600’s AF system. Besides, right now no one knows how it really behaves, so it’s all speculation.
The D600 shoots significantly faster at 5.5 fps than the D800 at 4 fps.
It’s almost a thousand dollars cheaper than the D800. I’d call that significant. This IS the least expensive FX that Nikon has produced. I don’t judge whether something is entry level or not by price. That’s just a number.
Now imagine for a second that something like a D3200 was introduced with an FX sensor. THAT, would be entry level and something I would probably not buy because it really IS crippled beyond what would be usable to me and a lot of other people.
As I ask many, what do YOU wish for that the D600 does not have?
CORRECTION: There isn’t an FX at the end of the AF system name. It’s just Nikon Multi-CAM 4800. For the D7000, it is listed as Nikon Multi-CAM 4800DX. And there might be more to the AF system than just the sensor. The computer that receives the input from the sensor can impact the end result greatly.
I would like it to come with an organ grinder monkey sporting a Nikon F2 and carries a sign that says “Nikon Shooters QQ too much”
But … well, I know that ain’t gonna happen. Maybe he will have a D600 instead of the F2 because that would make the sign much more current.
So we need to say ” this is a revolution” … But not for that price.
Hey Admin, maybe you should follow up with a second survey along the lines:
“If you’re not interested in buying the d600, what will your next camera be?
2. Nikon DX
Guess you would know the popular alternatives.
I for one would be interested in knowing what the ‘public’ are thinking.
Don’t forget the “Canon” option in that poll for all the haters to choose.
If I could down trade my D800 to D600 without losing a ton of money, I would totally get D600. Oh well, D800 is great except its weight.
there’s a lot of people here who say the D600 is too expensive, but says i’ll buy the D800 which is even more expensive … This is exactly what Mr Nikon want you to do !
Exactly, but that is an absolutely BS thing for them to do.
Wow, what a bunch of whiny nerds.
Always gotta complain about something.
Mine’s on order to resell on eBay to the “gotta have it now” folks. My D800E is amazing and I’m using that resolution. My D700 is on the shelf but is used too when I want a faster package or on gigs that I don’t need massive files.
It’s all good guys, just buy the cameras/lenses you need/want. No reason to complain so much.
Your cockyness and pretentiousness convinced me that you have no friends.
Your cockyness and pretentiousness convinced me that you have no friends and a lot of money.
I have a D700 and sadly few words have been said on how the new sensor compares to the D700 one. Apart from that, it is an interesting camera for size/video/acceptable specs, but still not convinced whether it makes sense to “downgrade”.
I am slightly disappointed that for the second time the spirit of D700 is not there: high end sensor in meaningful, more simple but professional body. Next time maybe?
Be happy guys .. the D600SX is certainly on the rails …. just to wait 5 or 6 years… and you’ll have the long awaiting gem ;(
I would have seriously considered it if I hadn’t bought the D800.
I ordered the D600. Why? I would love a D4 but just can not afford it. I saved for the D800 but decided to wait for the D600. I shoot 70% video on the D7000 anyway so now I have a D600 with clean HDMI out and saved a grand over the D800. That grand will now go toward a Ninja which will allow for Prores 442 recording. I will also now enjoy the full potential of my manual primes and FX lenses and the shallower dof with the full frame. If I need the reach then DX mode is there. So troll away douchebags!
Your reply explains exactly why a lot of PHOTOGRAPHERS are unhappy. The D600 is video centric and not photography centric, so that Nikon can go after the Canon 5DMkII market. Apart from the 24Mp sensor almost everything about the D600 is inferior to the D700 for PHOTOGRAPHERS.
Oh and finally, if you are going to start trading insults, at least a douchebag is is generally regarded in slang terms as superior to that which it is applied, and the nature of your final sentence suggests that you are.
Lol! What!?!?! Is is regarded? Thank you troll. And I shoot video and stills and if you can’t handle both I’m sorry my amateur friend. I also shoot a lot of 120 film hence why my D7000 doesnt get more still use. There wasn’t a reason for your remark. Guess your mommy didn’t tuck you in yet. Guess she was busy using her douche bag eh? Have fun in your junior college photography class! Lol! God I love this site. Can’t even leave a comment without some wanna be chiming in. And quite frankly the nature of your last paragraph makes absolutely no sense what so ever. I suppose English classes aren’t that great in junior college either.
And let’s not forget the D90 paved the way for DSLR HD video NOT the 5D MK II.
Your reply confirms what I suspected on reading your original post. You are an immature, inadequate person of poor education and intelligence whose capability of an intelligent discussion does not exceed that of an infants’ playground; where boasting of one’s accomplishments is used in place of rational discussion.
My last paragraph will make perfect sense to anyone who understand the English language at a level above elementary school.
“The D600 is video centric and not photography centric”
would you care to explain?
Not for 2150€!!!!
I sold my D90 and DX glass with the thought that I would buy the D600 when it came out, but I have to admit all the negativity is really bringing me down. I wanted the FX format so that wide lenses would be wider; I like taking pictures of architecture. Somebody tell me this camera isn’t all that bad, and will be a nice bumb from my D90.
Don’t sweat it just yet. In reality no one has really touched this body yet, so no one really knows what it is going to be like. Everyone is rating it based on the feature list, and many people are bashing it for what they think it will be like. Same actually goes for the praise.
The D800 got a LOT of criticism before it came out. People damn near burned Nikon HQ just for the impossibly large file size. The list of complaints went on and on, and still goes on about perceived unbearable flaws. The reality is many of us feel that it is the best camera we have ever owned. I was shooting a track day with a pro who had the D4. At the end of the day he wanted a D800, and I was happy to have a D800. For the D600, it will be a good camera. It will not be the perfect camera for everyone, but there is no doubt that it is a good FX option, and it will be a great upgrade to the D90. I had a D90 and it still has a special place in my heart, that is a great body, but I have no doubt that your money is better spent on the D600.
A lot of these comments are made by non-photographers/non-camera people. Don’t let their negativity affect you. I am sure the D600 will in fact be an awesome camera. To address the criticisms:
1/4000 shutter speed…who uses faster than that?
1/200 flash sync…is it really that different than 1/250?
D7000 AF system…who said it’s from the D7000? The D600 has an FX AF system similar to D3/D700 vs. D300/D300s. The FX version is superior, so I expect the same on the D600.
Plastic construction…who freakin’ cares!!! Do you bang your camera against rocks daily? NO! Quit complaining about this! Besides, there IS metal inside too you know.
Also focus on the positives. 5.5 fps is faster than the D800’s 4 fps.
Quiet mode shutter on the D600 is much quieter than on the D800/D4 (according to DPReview).
Can’t wait to get mine!
D600 — Multicam 4800
D70000– Multicam 4800 Dx
Nine word post and not worth proofreading?
No RC, D600 does NOT have an an FX AF system similar to D3/D700 vs. D300/D300s.
The AF system in D600 uses the same 39 focusing points and the same Multicam 4800 metering sensor as in D7000. And as Thom Hogan wrote the AF system of D600 is “an updated D7000 AF system”. Updated means that D600 has also the full focusing capacity at aperture f/8. Otherwise the same non-PRO system as in D7000.
Sorry. I worded it poorly. What I was trying to say was that a similar difference probably exists between the AF systems of the D7000 vs. the D600 compared to the difference between the D300 and D700.
The AF system in the D700 is better than the one in the D300 even though they are both called Multicam 3500, so I expect that the AF system in the D600 will be better than the one in the D7000.
I’m still holding out for the D300s replacement. How can they discontinue a pro level DX line? The crop factor is BIG for that extra reach for wildlife photographers. All this DX glass needs a new body!
I still use my trusty D90 and I do not intent replacing it any soon. D600 is quite impressive (with an equally impressive price, not on par with my current budget line), but there is no true reason for pushing my D90 away.
Btw, I have bought a mint Oly 35RC to have some fun with B&W film again for a while. I love digital, but sometimes I feel drowning for no apparent reason in it.
Why waste money on non improving technology courtesy of Nikon? Get a 5D Mark III and get happy.
That’s a joke. Talk about non-improving technology…*cough* SENSOR! *cough*
Hey there Canon. So it took you how long to figure out how to make a good AF system?
How come the white balance is so ugly? Why are all the colors so yucky?
John as in w/c?
Well I’d buy one.
I see a tangible reason to buy one.
I already have some great cheap full frame glass (50mm 1.4, 80-200mm 2.8)
so why not?
I have a D7000 which I enjoy immensely and I do shoot those occasional church function/events where I do need good low-light performance and reasonably high res files.
I honestly prefer the lack of a crop factor of the D600. (Having used a D800, but I thought that it was a bit too much. It’s a beast in terms of size and I’m not a professional.) And it’s light (well it’s lighter than the D800, it is supposed to weigh around the same as the D7000 which is already the most I’d be willing to take) and I’ll be doing quite a bit of travelling next year (a round the world trip) and I’m looking forward to bringing this camera around with me, and the D7000 as a backup body with maybe a wide angle zoom and those 2 lenses.
If you shoot those occasional events, need a do-everything camera, have a nice set of lenses (Nikon ones) and appreciate lighter weight. Why not?
I have a D800, this should serve as a nice backup.
I have a D7000 and that is a really good camera.
Didn’t really use anything above 1/4000 and I’m not that much of a strobist, more of a natural light kinda guy.
If it works anything as well as the D7000, but with more D800 performance, then sign me right up!
In my country it’s only about 200USD more than a used D700, which is much heavier but with better AF but then again 200USD gets you some nice video too.
Yes. I’ll buy it. Gladly. I pray there are no issues, I’m sure it’ll pick up sooner or later.
The D600 doesn’t fit between my D700 and D800
Shoot me down should you desire, but the D600 isn’t really just a D7000 with a FX sensor coz the dimensions are different. It shares a lot from the D7000 as well as the D800 so it sits kinda in the middle, voila it is priced in between them both.
The AF in not the same as the D7000 coz it’s the camXXXFX blah blah. Mansourovs web site has a calm and measured comparison b/w the D7000 and the D600 and points out the differences.
I will probably buy one as a D800 is a bit high in price, heavy, a bit big for my girly hands and for the A$3400 (D800) I can get a D600 with grip, extra battery, extra SD cards a new carry case and a 24mp FX sensor to boot. I also won’t need to get a gazillion bits of extra RAM for my computer to run the 36mp files.
Most other sites that have test shots have praised the IQ and high ISO shooting up to 6400. The 1/4000 shutter wont trouble me as I am more a low light shooter. There seems to be a lot of bitching about the specs but a lighter and smaller camera will appeal to most.
In reality, you could shoot a wedding/event/portrait with a D90 if the skills of the operator are there. Just because I have a D4 or D800 does not mean I can shoot well nor because I have a full magnesium frame does it make me cooler and betterer than the next. As previously mentioned, I have seen a many D70 still as tight as the day they were taken from their box….
If you don’t like it, don’t buy it and stop bitching or start up your own camera company and build the perfect 30mp FF camera with a full mag body with a 1/20000 shutter speed, weighing about 500g but not look too little and make sure it shares notng with any other model and price it at $1500.
Not For Me
Im waiting a Dx pro body. Hope a D400
Im not interested in Full Frame. Im a wildlife photographer and i prefer high fps and long focal lenght.
The D600 is not for me
Yeah, the better AF and 1/250s flash sync speed on the D800 pretty much kills the D600 for me.
What a shame. I’ll have to get the D800 although I really don’t need the resolution…
The AF module of
D600 — multi cam 4800
D7000 – multi cam 4800 Dx
D600 selling for AUD$2,383 at CameraPro. I know its risky to buy grey market, but seriously, Australian prices are shit.
For me, its all about the DR and if it has shadow-banding-pr0blems. My D3 is practically useless above iso 200 if I want to lift the shadows – because of the heavy shadow-banding. My D5000 performs much better or perfect in that department, it has NO shadow banding.
Then theres the issue of Dynamic Range. The d800 has 14.4 steps, and I want at least 13.8 on the D600 or else Im going for a smaller alternative, like Nex 6 or Om-D. Because if the D600 is not on par with the D800 in terms of DR and shadow-banding I´d rather go for a smaller alternative and sacrifice some of the FF image quality.
Absolutely not. The lack of live histogram and adjusting audio levels during filming is a deal breaker to me.
I’m an invested Nikon user with Nikon glass and will stick to that system. But has anyone noticed the new Sony full frame A99? I only mention it to contrast the limited (and sometimes pointless) feature set that Nikon gives us with its new cameras. Ok, the Sony costs a little more than the D600 (but not the D800), but if we’re griping about features, it probably has the same 24MP sensor as the D600, in-built image stabilisation, on-chip phase detection AF, slightly faster frame rate, max shutter speed and flash sync and an articulated screen. Those things seem pretty useful to me as a photographer, although I have no idea about its buffer, and it’s a bigger beast. It probably has superior video but I don’t care about that. Just seems like sometimes Sony (and other makers) treats their customers with a little more reverence and appreciation of their needs than Nikon. Nikon makes great cameras and lenses, but they’re not giving us the lenses, cameras or service that many of us are asking for.
I’m sure some Nikon fanboy who knows very little about actual photography will rebuke all this!
No i’m not buying one, because the body colour doesn’t match my new cadillac and i’m waiting for the rumored D600x… and here the rumour’s begin
Looked up the highest maximum shutter speed I ever used and found ou that in my library (containing some 30000 pictures) there are 24 pictures with an higher shutter speed than 1/4000 most of them where made with an high iso number where this was not needed ergo an mistake.
Flash sync 1/200 versus 1/250 is just 1/3 stop.
O and the new canon 6D specs don’t look better than that of the D600
Canon EOS 6D Specs Leaked?
I received this spec list this morning, and it seems to have also appeared at Digicame-info.
A new 20mp sensor
ISO Range 100-25600
APS-C Sized body
Built-in Wifi & GPS
11 AF Points, f/2.8 Cross-type in the center.
Full HD (1920×1080)
Available December 2012
Price: $1999 USD Body Only (Speculated price)
I agree though that the price in Europa is high in comparence to the price in the US of A so I wait until the price drops a bit
Nikon farts on its uk customers again
Adorama pre order $2,096.95
Jessops pre order £1,955.00
XE.Com $2,096.95 = £1,293.18
Oh sorry I nearly forgot we get a free 16GB SD card, wowser!!
Not buying. Waiting for D710….
I believe my new camera will come early next year if it does not, I’ll have to invest in another brand to replace my d700. superb image (not mega resolution) , true Afs,mirror silent: that is what I hope will be improved by my predecessor to continue investing in the brand nikon
Several months ago, I had an up close and personal look at the new Nikon 24-85mm G lens. It felt quite solid in my hands , and had that tell tale weather seal around the mount. I bought it thinking it would be a great mate for my D700 and should Nikon put out a 24mp full framer, that too. So now, Nikon is out with the D600 which I have ordered and lo and behold the “kit lens” is the 24-85. Rest Assured, this is no ordinary Kit lens. Solid Build, VR, Light and sharp. Combining it with the D600 is a wise move. For once, I’m ahead of the game. Cheers.
No, no D600 for me, sorry.
Price is just too steep compared to D800, where I live there’s less than 280USD diff in the pricing right now, of course the will drop the D600 pricing in a month or two making the saving more attractive – but for now, I sold my D700 to finance a second body (backup) I was sure it would be a D600 until the unplesant price surprice, so I have got myself an extra d800 which is quite nice because the handelig now is the same (which is almost true for a pair of D700 and D800).
The rumored price would have been a no brainer and a perfect replacement for D700 (at least for me).
I wonder if Nikon has done it like this on purpose to some more D800’s on the marked before dropping the D600 price – I think D800 will sell a lot less if D600 got down to 1500usd.
I have looked at every comment on this topic. For me to take time from my farming business to look at D600 and is it anything I would be interested in. The internal bickering on NR has been fairly low key for the most part. Which is one reason I respect the site. I am in one of the toughest industries on the planet and we certainly have been very astute in terms of “doing the right thing”. If though I price our work somewhat higher, despite quality and environmental consciousness, our customers back off quickly. I for one wonder about the temporary (?) dearth of DX newer bodies. Almost every serious photographer that I personally know is amazed that a D400 has not been announced. Just the wildlife speciality alone is reason for DX cameras and DX seems pretty cavalier. When I pick up a chainsaw, or start a tractor, I pick the best one for the job. The tracks on a small excavator cost more than a D600. But don’t try to tell everyone why FX is better than DX. Especially I would wonder why Nikon has not produced a D400? The LOGICAL reason is investment. To introduce a D400 in the next few weeks would seem IMPOSSIBLE from a marketing and overall resources standpoint. Also their have been almost no rumors to that possible intro.
But I would personally wish for fewer attacks on those who are waiting for a DX camera like a D400. I owned and used full frame SLRs for more years than I care to count. THE single worst investment I ever made was in medium and large format. Bigger is not I assure you better in many cases. Lastly, The D600 does have a hefty price tag.
I think all DX cameras, and now the D600, are produced in the same Thai plant. It seems likely that they can economically produce only a limited number of different camera bodies at any one time. The D400, D7100 and D5200 will probably each come out, in turn, once the initial batches of D600 cameras have been produced and they have enough stocked up to satisfy demand for a while.
Right now I think Nikon are intent on grabbing as many people “upgrading” from APS-C to full frame as they can – as well as tempting as many DX users as they can to make the switch. If someone had only just bought a D400 or D7100 they might not be quite so easily tempted to switch.
I have nothing against the people that want a D400 badly because it will suit their needs better but I just want to point out one small thing…
The reason you guys keep getting hated is because you keep whining in D600 threads about the lack of a D400. All the whining in a post about a camera that is already released and isn’t going to change is really not going to help if you’re looking to not catch heat.
If you want to discuss the D400 without getting attacked I suggest checking the D400 thread out in the NR Forums.
In the above post I meant DX trashing. There are many who do think a D400 is WAY overdue!
They are NOT wrong.
There are not even rumors about the D400, that makes even a announcement quite unrealistic.
And yes FX is better LOL, it is, really it really is…. but it comes at a price it’s more expensive, the body and the glass…
If you disregard the fact that D800 is more expensive than the D300s then I see no reason, except from a bit less fps, why you could not use a D800 for wildlife. If you use it in DX crop mode you’ll get same (limited) FOV and pseudo “reach” and yet a higher resolution (24mp) than on a D300s/D7000. With that comes a bigger and brighter OVF. Of course also in a bigger physical package.
If you have FF you also have DX, if you have a DX body you cannot chose FX. On a FX body you can still use your DX lenses. As to why Nikon have not chosen to produce a D400; well maybe the logical answer is, we don’t need it since we have both a D600 and a D800 FF. After all DX is just an in camera crop of what a pro lens can deliver, a FX body takes full advantage of the light from those lenses.
Just my opinion.
Just your opinion, based on never having used a cropped VF.
Nothing wrong with DX – and if you frequently use long lenses I think there are clear advantages for most people since your lenses don’t need to be as long, heavy or as expensive. In fact DX is probably a very sensible choice.
However I think a lot of older people (myself included) are probably attached to FX because we were brought up shooting 35mm SLRs. (Then there are a lot of younger people who are always convinced that more is better.)
I have a D7000 and frankly the IQ is just fine 99% of the time since I almost never make huge prints anymore (I once had a 6×9 medium format camera for that) – but somehow it just seems plain wrong to me that a 50mm lens effectively becomes a 75mm lens and a 20mm lens doesn’t even cover what a 28mm lens did. The bigger viewfinder also helps when your sight is getting weaker.
I know that, for my purposes, I could probably get just as good results on DX by spending the extra money an FX body will cost me on newer, faster lenses – and anyway the next round of DX bodies is sure to have more megapixels, less noise, etc which will once more narrow any gap between FX & DX.
However I have a drawer full of old AI lenses that I’m sentimentally attached to and I want to use them with their “proper” field of view again, so it looks I’ll probably end up buying a D600 very soon. The D7000 body type is ok with me as I’ve never had any problems with the D7000 at all – though it has taken me a long time to get used to bewildering array of settings and features. Anyway I still have an F2, Nikkormat FTn, FM3a, and a Hasselblad 500cm to fondle whenever I like.
I am a D700 owner, who also has a D7000 and D4. I use these cameras as tools, and dont worry about stupid stuff like dynamic range unless i grossly under or pverexpose
For those of you complaining or sitting on the fence about this camera, I wouldn’t worry about the sync speed, shutter or the AF. The AF is NOT from the d7000. Look it up.
The step up to FX is huge if you have a d7000. The D700 is on another level in terms of high ISO than the D7000. Although the D4 is better, you’d be surprised how little difference there really is. The D600 I’m guessing (once the full tests on DXO) will have a better signal to noise ratio and equal or close to equal Dynamic Range.
Tech-Radar just did a pretty good analysis. It shows the D600 is on par with the D800, and very close to the d4…with more resolution.
I’d like to have a camera that shoots at Iso 400,000 with no noise. I would also like a camera that could scratch my balls and predict winning lotto numbers. Looking at these specs and raw capabilities, my d7000 has likely seen its last days in my rotation.
The AF system in D600 uses the same 39-point CAM4800 autofocus, 9 cross sensors as in D7000.
And as Thom Hogan wrote the AF system of D600 is “an updated D7000 AF system”. Updated means that D600 has also the full focusing capacity at aperture f/8. Otherwise the same non-PRO system as in D7000.
Thom Hogan’s good article on what D600 is, particularly vs. D800:
Enter your email for daily blog updates: