where there’s smoke there’s forum fire
A smaller size as has been suggested, not that I think you can really tell, would be welcome to me for landscape/travel.
Rumoured D600 weight is 760g without battery, D7000 specified weight without battery is 690g.
This appears to be the better choice versus the rumoured D400 specs for landscapes - would the more informed on here agree with that?
Postman said:
This appears to be the better choice versus the rumoured D400 specs for landscapes - would the more informed on here agree with that?
We will have to wait and see (in the case of the D400 it might be a long weight) . In the mean time, the D800 is, with out doubt, the best Nikon camera for landscapes and I don't expect the D600 or the D400 will change that
I feel the D600 is for someone who wants a D800 or D4 but cant afford one at the moment
sevencrossing said:
We will have to wait and see (in the case of the D400 it might be a long weight) . In the mean time, the D800 is, with out doubt, the best Nikon camera for landscapes and I don't expect the D600 or the D400 will change thatI feel the D600 is for someone who wants a D800 or D4 but cant afford one at the moment
Fortunately I can wait and this indeed me, I cannot afford a D800.
I'm currently shooting DX gear with a trade in value of roughly £1200/$1800. Add that to an extra £1000/$1500 I have saved and allocated to an upgrade = £2200/$3300 to spend on FX kit. I have no existing FX lenses and I think I want the 16-35mm to start with.
If I stay DX, trade in my body and add that to my saved funds, this leaves me with £1300/$2000 approx to upgrade, which could mean a D400.
I don't really know what to do yet.
Postman said:
Fortunately I can wait and this indeed me, I cannot afford a D800.I'm currently shooting DX gear with a trade in value of roughly £1200/$1800. Add that to an extra £1000/$1500 I have saved and allocated to an upgrade = £2200/$3300 to spend on FX kit. I have no existing FX lenses and I think I want the 16-35mm to start with.
If I stay DX, trade in my body and add that to my saved funds, this leaves me with £1300/$2000 approx to upgrade, which could mean a D400.
I don't really know what to do yet.
exactly what i would buy
D600
with 16-35G and 85 1.8G
D600 from the leaked pictures looks exactly what i was expecting; all the people complaining about the body size: a D800 like body was never going to happen; now pro's will go D800 and amators/semi pro will go D600. I don't think the camera will be lesser in spec that the D7000 on any level because after all they want people to upgrade from the D7000. Unless you're a action shooter I think everyone who enjoys traveling, backpacking and landscape photography will really enjoy the body size. If the images are real the only thing i see can still go wrong: is the sensor: is it sony or not? I hope so; i don't mind having a sensor coming from any of their other FX camera's save the D800 that is; and the viewfinder; i hope they don't surprise us in that regard. The autofocus i don't mind if it's less than the D800 and also the fps because if you need those; go for the D3/D4...
So it looks real and I imagine the specs we've seen here are pretty accurate (they usually are). The big question is going to be the price point and then all the confusion for all of us planning on getting a D400. Oh what to do? It's nice of Nikon to keep my life interesting.
We're all riding the same boat right now andrewz :p #firstworldproblems
As far as body size goes, anything smaller than the D7000 and it's out for me, although I can't imagine Nikon making it smaller. Anyone know anything about the actual demensions? The weight has been posted but that doesn't tell us the whole story.
zhinsara said:
I think it's the large prism and mirror box causing it to look smaller than the d7000. It might be a little larger for all we know, but it should approximate the D7000 in size.
FX bodies do tend to have a larger space between the top of the lens mount and the bottom of the overhang of the prism box. Makes space for Perspective Control lenses and whatever extra parts might be needed or more room for light to flow correctly inside the body.
From what have seen so far I would agree that it is a few % bigger than a D7000.
I like the size of this camera. When I had the D7k the main negative point to it was the smallish viewfinder. Hopefully the D600 will have a good magnification % VF.
Going on what I believe, now I can sell my 5d2, 35L, 17-40L, and other lenses and invest heavily in Nikon. I have the D800 on preorder and plan on trying it out first. I don't think my technique is good enough for 36MP, and I am the first to admit my technique needs much work.
With Nikon's UWA options out there...as well as their medium telephotos (24-85VR,28-300,24-120) where could I possibly go wrong? I WILL buy the 70-200VRII too!!
This may be the camera I've been looking for (A d7000 with a Fx sensor) have yet to try it tho...
bjrichus said:
FX bodies do tend to have a larger space between the top of the lens mount and the bottom of the overhang of the prism box. Makes space for Perspective Control lenses and whatever extra parts might be needed or more room for light to flow correctly inside the body.From what have seen so far I would agree that it is a few % bigger than a D7000.
I had a good hard look at the D600 pics and the D7000. The viewfinder overhang appears to have gained at least half a centimeter, and the viewfinder hump looks like one of a d800. Gonna be really odd looking when it comes out. But yes, quite happy this is coming out.
I need to make a run on a bunch of FX glass before this one comes out so I can hoard them and sell after none are available. Just an FYI if you really plan on getting this camera I would buy some FX glass if you need it right after the body is announced...I can see a shortage of any sub $1000 lenses after this release.
tcole1983 said:
I need to make a run on a bunch of FX glass before this one comes out so I can hoard them and sell after none are available. Just an FYI if you really plan on getting this camera I would buy some FX glass if you need it right after the body is announced...I can see a shortage of any sub $1000 lenses after this release.
I don't know how many AF-D lenses will be unavailable on ebay and amazon after camera is announced. Maybe the NEWER 24-85VR,50/1.8, and 85/1.8 (and 28/1.8, mind you) will be in short supply. Maybe that's what you were referring to. If so, then that makes perfect sense.
I want to add some intrigue to this growing post. Have any of you present or past owners of the D7000 experience exposure or metering problems? In my experience when I had the D7k, I never could get it to meter or expose correctly. I always had to override the EV. It's been nearly a year since I sold mine, but if I remember correctly it was always overexposing images. It was really bad with the Tamron 28-75. It did much better with 50/1.8 and 35/1.8 though.
Hopefully they have this algorithm figured or solved for the D600 should it inherit some of the D7k's innards. Wait and see approach.
zhinsara said:
I think it's the large prism and mirror box causing it to look smaller than the d7000. It might be a little larger for all we know, but it should approximate the D7000 in size.
I think you're absolutely right. After I took a second look at the pictures and the D7000, it does look like the larger prism housing was causing it to look smaller. But yeah, it probably will be a bit bigger than D7000.
@birdman, my D7000 usually nails the correct exposure about 85% of the time so I don't think I have the problem you're having.
at first i thought that the leaks pics were very D7000 like but after closer inspection and comparing it with the D800 i would say it has a lot more (asside form the dial button that is) from the D800 than the D7000. I'm I the only one noticing this?
I can see the record button and metering mode button placements as well as the on-board flash design coming from the D800 but everything else seems like D7000 to me.
iris chrome said:
I can see the record button and metering mode button placements as well as the on-board flash design coming from the D800 but everything else seems like D7000 to me.
yes but the D7000 looks a lot more rectangular and when you look at the button placemunt of the record button and such D600 doesn't seem to be any smaller in width than the D800. the front does look a lot smaller if you look at the mount tough which leads me to conclude it have the thickness of the D800 and the height of the D7000 maybe a little bit bigger. It looks very rounded.
It looks close to D7000 to me. I loved my D7000, besides its tiny DX viewfinder that I could never quite grow to love.
i hope it's noticeably taller than the D7000...however with a grip it should balance quite well. I don't mind the metal/plastic body one bit. Heck, what do I really need artic-proof build quality for the type and location of shooting I do? Another thing I am hoping for is the width of the body. If it's narrow like the D5100 then what a major disaster.
I found another reason to be happy that I canceled my D800 order to wait for the D600. In looking at the photos, it looks like, as expected from the description, the D600 will support the ML-L3 remote (or at least some form of IR remote). I'm sure some pros are probably going to scoff at that remark, but using a $10 remote is sooooo much better than paying $100+ for a WIRED MC-36 or up to $200 or more for an ML-3. For my purposes, I'm not seeing much that could be missing from the D600 that I would need from the D800, but since we don't know the actual specs, I guess I'll have to wait and see. Still pretty stoked, though.
happytron said:
I found another reason to be happy that I canceled my D800 order to wait for the D600. In looking at the photos, it looks like, as expected from the description, the D600 will support the ML-L3 remote (or at least some form of IR remote). I'm sure some pros are probably going to scoff at that remark, but using a $10 remote is sooooo much better than paying $100+ for a WIRED MC-36 or up to $200 or more for an ML-3. For my purposes, I'm not seeing much that could be missing from the D600 that I would need from the D800, but since we don't know the actual specs, I guess I'll have to wait and see. Still pretty stoked, though
Me too. I don't need professional FPS, build quality, or AF. hell, coming from the 5d2 this camera will be a god-send. the only gripe I have is all of my CF are useless now. maybe down the road i'll pick up a cheap used DX camera (or FX) that takes CF,too. Thats least of my worries. And regarding the remote, yes some pro snob will get his feathers and crumpets all messy and ruffled. Too bad, this ain't "the old society" in 1812. This is the the digital age in 2012. Technology advancements are lowering prices
birdman said:
Me too. I don't need professional FPS, build quality, or AF. hell, coming from the 5d2 this camera will be a god-send. the only gripe I have is all of my CF are useless now. maybe down the road i'll pick up a cheap used DX camera (or FX) that takes CF,too. Thats least of my worries. And regarding the remote, yes some pro snob will get his feathers and crumpets all messy and ruffled. Too bad, this ain't "the old society" in 1812. This is the the digital age in 2012. Technology advancements are lowering prices
It's funny you mention CF cards. I come from a background of shooting with a D50 and D80 mainly, so I don't even have CF cards. My canceled D800 order included one. I'm sure it will have Eye-fi support, too, which is pretty nifty.
I've never understood the pro aversion to less expensive gear. I understand buying a sturdy product, but it makes more sense to me to buy based on my needs, and if there's a cheaper solution that meets them, I'll at the very least consider it. Maybe that's why I don't make most of my money from photography, though, huh? Although I do admit to showing some pro snobbery toward Instagram photographers...
Just a quick one.... The D600 will not be called that.
Nikon is (according to a reliable source) going to call it the D500, & it will be FF :-) ....no D300s replacement, but a merger between that and the D700, at a pricepoint somewhere in the middle.
JayDee said:
Just a quick one.... The D600 will not be called that.Nikon is (according to a reliable source) going to call it the D500, & it will be FF :-) ....no D300s replacement, but a merger between that and the D700, at a pricepoint somewhere in the middle.
This is such a break from Nikon's track record I am a bit reluctant to believe this. For Nikon to drop the D300s replacement and come up with something else is killing an entire line of cameras. Here is a quote from Nikon when the D300 was introduced. I find it doubtful they will kill the line.
"Nikon's D200 digital SLR camera has been a runaway success for us because it embodies everything that performance-conscious photographers demand. With the D300, we've raised the bar with remarkable new features, greater resolution and speed, and even higher image quality,"� said Edward Fasano, general manager for Marketing, SLR Systems Products, at Nikon Inc. "The D300 delivers an unmatched combination of quality, performance and value that's hard for discerning photographers to resist."�
I also doubt there's gonna be a merger between this two lines. Though I'm starting to doubt there's gonna be a pro DX camera as with the current Mpx in FX is there really a need for one like that? IMHO, it's a very niche product. For wildlife I prefer d800 due to high pixel count, and ability to use different crops - need DX, just dial DX, need 1.2crop - dial 1.2crop and still have a lot of Mpx to choose from. Though, if Nikon will launch d400 with d3 iso capabilities and 24mpx... I guess I'll get it :)
You must log in to post.
