D600 Discussion and Questions « Nikon Rumors Forum

Nikon Rumors Forum » Nikon DSLR

D600 Discussion and Questions

(204 posts) (44 voices)

Tags:

« Previous 123…9 Next »

tcole1983

preferred member
Joined: Feb '10
Posts: 1,553
offline

@jonnyapple I suppose you have a point. It would maybe be possible. If I went FX I had hoped I could keep the DX lenses I have so I could still use my D5000 with my 17-55 and the 35 F1.8. It might be possible, but I will have to wait for the price to come down and I better start saving either way ;-)

@NSXType-R there are some draws and other things I am not so excited for FX. I do lots of landscape type shots and I think FX would rock for that. I also feel like lately the ISO performance of my D5000 as I have pushed it can't really keep up with what I want. Really overall lately I have expanded more shooting in low light and doing stuff that before didn't really matter with my D5000. In great light and having plenty of time my D5000 is still excellent. When I shoot in low light or have to change settings it is getting annoying.

Now if they released another D7000 level DX body soon I would probably be all over that.

Posted 9 months ago #
DaveyJ

preferred member
Joined: Jun '10
Posts: 452
offline

I certainly agree with many of the comments here lately. I have checked prices and lens availability and conclude if I switch to the D600 as one of my bodies it will cost well over $7,000 for what I have covered in DX. I own some really GREAT FX glass. One is my 20-35 2.8 from my F5 still in mint shape. Another is my FLEET of 70-300VR and 70-300D lens. Also I have the micro 60mm which will push me towards a 105 micro when I have the funds.....making the $7,000 seem like a considerable underestimate. I know a number of pros in my area are just going to WAIT and see if a D400 is announced and then have decided to WAIT some more until they can get one.
I have seen too many FX images to think that FX gives me anything I haven't already got in DX. All this reminds me ,quite painfully I may add, of my five year HUGE investment in Large and medium format. Where just one camera system cost around $25,000. Looking back on it I feel that that was one of the biggest mistakes I ever made in my entire life. Is FX all that beyond DX???? Is bigger always better??
Guess again! I still hope that our own msmoto is right and Nikon will surprise almost the whole world shortly with a D400. But as a PhD scientist I think I can spot a trend when I see one. I also doubt that Nikon is going to send such mixed signals. So they are committed to FX. But as yet, I am not. I am going to stall and keep testing the water. Good luck to you all!!

Posted 9 months ago #
jonnyapple

Goldfingers
Joined: May '09
Posts: 3,400
offline

Davey, the lenses you mention will work on FX, but I'm assuming you're looking for lenses with the same field of view you're getting on your DX bodies. That could get pricey.

As to what you get, you're right about the image quality of DX being awesome and there's no real requirement to go to FX to get great pictures. The viewfinder of DX isn't as good as an FX viewfinder. I itch to have a viewfinder like on my OM-2 whenever I look at this image: http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=526

When you think that a couple of years ago the 24 megapixel FX option cost almost $8000, $2100 starts to look like a better deal.

tcole, I'm saving now, too. In the meantime it's probably time for me to do some lens rearrangement to prepare. ;-) BTW, the 35 1.8 vignettes on FX but may still be acceptable depending on what you use it for. Google it for some sample shots.

Posted 9 months ago #
R8R

preferred member
Joined: Aug '11
Posts: 352
offline

Ok so I'll be the first to say it - on paper, the D600 beats the new Leica M.

Specs for Leica M vs D600:

3fps vs 5.5fps
Single SD card vs dual SD cards
No headphone out
No AF
Flash sync 1/180 vs 1/200
Same max shutter - 1/4000
Native ISO 200-6400 vs 100-6400
A/M vs P/S/A/M
Leica has 1080p, 720p, 640*480 (VGA) - 30fps VGA only...(WTF???)
Available in 2013 for $6,950 vs available in a week for $2100

Posted 9 months ago #
jonnyapple

Goldfingers
Joined: May '09
Posts: 3,400
offline

Nice, R8R.

Quite a few people seem to be down on the D600 because of the max shutter speed. I don't claim to be typical, but I can't think of more than a few times I even wanted a faster shutter speed than 1/4000s, and usually it involved some high ISO test when I did. I'll check my metadata in lightroom to make sure, but am I missing something?

The flash sync is a little more understandable but 1/250 is only a third of a stop faster than 1/200.

Posted 9 months ago #
R8R

preferred member
Joined: Aug '11
Posts: 352
offline

jonnyapple said:

The flash sync is a little more understandable but 1/250 is only a third of a stop faster than 1/200.

Yeah the shutter speed is one thing, but as David Hobby at Strobist discussed, with the lower sync speed, especially in that critical range, you are losing some flash power when trying to push down ambient light and over-power the sun. Not a deal breaker for many, but if you often shoot with the intention of getting that "look", then it is limiting. For other purposes, add a flash or two (or five) and use high speed sync.

As far as my sort of ridiculous comparison above, I know the rangefinder street shooter jetset crowd would not be caught dead with an "entry level" DSLR, (full frame or not) but then again you can buy a D600 with several kick-ass lenses for the price of one Leica body.

Also - who the hell would buy a Leica when there is an M adapter for the X-Pro1??
:)

Posted 9 months ago #
R8R

preferred member
Joined: Aug '11
Posts: 352
offline

Correction - you could buy a *D800* and several nice lenses...

Posted 9 months ago #
aZuMi

junior member
Joined: Aug '12
Posts: 6
offline

Finally, more reviews for the D600!

http://youtu.be/IosQ4xCJBB0

Posted 9 months ago #
donaldejose

preferred member
Joined: Mar '11
Posts: 1,043
offline

Nice summary by Thom Hogan:

"the D600 is a D3x in a D7000 body for about 30% the price"

How can you not be impressed with that?

Posted 9 months ago #
NSXType-R

preferred member
Joined: Mar '09
Posts: 2,803
offline

donaldejose said:
Nice summary by Thom Hogan:

"the D600 is a D3x in a D7000 body for about 30% the price"

How can you not be impressed with that?

I'm impressed, but it doesn't mean I can afford it. :D

Posted 9 months ago #
iris chrome

preferred member
Joined: Feb '11
Posts: 394
offline

Ok, I think I'm officially sold on this D600! <wipes drool>

I've just finished looking at 100% crop of ISO 6400 and the image looks fantastic! Some light chroma noise in the shadows but that's it. No luma that I could see. Even ISO 25600 looks very usable. The images were JPEGs out of camera though but NR disabled.

Here is what I love about the D600 so far:
24 MP FX sensor
Appears to be very low noise
D7000 AF
100% VF
U1, U2
2 SD slots (as opposed to 1 SD, 1 CF or 1 XQD, 1 CF)

Hating:
VIDEO (everything about it but especially record button placement - hope it's programmable)
Price (but beginning to gain an appreciation for it)

Could have used some more love but not complaining (ok maybe just a little):
AF-ON button (unlike D7000 it could have easily fit next to AE-L/AF-L)
MB-D14 requires one battery in cam and one in grip (what's advantage of doing it this way?)
USB 2.0 (I thought Nikon was moving to 3.0 but I guess that's only for pro models so far)

Posted 9 months ago #
iris chrome

preferred member
Joined: Feb '11
Posts: 394
offline

For those who want to upgrade but lack FX lenses:

Why not upgrade and use whatever lenses you already have? D600 will still take your DX lenses until you can fully transition to FX glass. I have the DX 10-24mm and I have no immediate plans to replace it with an FX ultra wide even when I upgrade to the D600. I understand it's not ideal since you're not taking advantage of the full FX sensor but it's a transitionary step until you fully upgrade. After all, there must be an advantage to why Nikon mount can take both FX and DX lenses.

Tcole, if you sell your 17-55, I would imagine you'd bank at least $1000 on it if not more. You could use that towards a 24-70 which, if you buy along with the D600, can be yours for the meagerly price of $1700 (I don't work for Nikon, honest!) :-D

Posted 9 months ago #
BRUJA

new member
Joined: Jul '12
Posts: 3
offline

Pearl at pcnation just got their shipment in bodies and kits they are ready to ship out!They have extras!

Posted 9 months ago #
starralazn

preferred member
Joined: May '12
Posts: 112
offline

D600 > 6D

Discuss.

Posted 9 months ago #
R8R

preferred member
Joined: Aug '11
Posts: 352
offline

starralazn said:
D600 > 6D

Discuss.

D600 stomps the 6D into chicken feed. They are the same price but aside from the built in wifi and GPS there is zero advantage with the 6D over the D600. No discussion.

In fact, if one were switching to or starting with Canon, you would do better by buying a used 5Dmkii and a decent lens.

Posted 9 months ago #
R8R

preferred member
Joined: Aug '11
Posts: 352
offline

iris chrome said:
For those who want to upgrade but lack FX lenses:

Why not upgrade and use whatever lenses you already have? D600 will still take your DX lenses until you can fully transition to FX glass.

I would agree. It will shoot DX at 10mp. Unless you are printing for a gallery or billboard, that 10mp will work great until you build an FX glass set.

Remember not long ago people were like, "Holy !@#$!, it shoots TEN MEGAPIXELS!"

Posted 9 months ago #
jonnyapple

Goldfingers
Joined: May '09
Posts: 3,400
offline

Yeah, that was me holding my D100 and coveting my sister's D200, only with less swearing. ;-)

Iris, what do you hate about the video besides button placement? Just curious.

Posted 9 months ago #
iris chrome

preferred member
Joined: Feb '11
Posts: 394
offline

jonnyapple said:
Iris, what do you hate about the video besides button placement? Just curious.

Simple. When it comes down to it I'm just a plain purist. I believe that separation of cinema and photography should be just as sacred as separation of church and state. Furthermore, where photography aspires to emphasize on quality of quantity, cinematography delivers more quantity over quality. As it is, cinematography is the anti-thesis of all photographic endeavors!

LOL at least that's what I like to say :-D

In all seriousness though, even though most will say that adding video functionality to a DSLR is harmless and could only result in all around benefits even if you don't use the functionality (lower price, live view... etc.), I still don't believe the functionality is completely benign. There are two reasons why. First reason and most important is that it requires stronger anti-aliasing filters since video doesn't "process" higher MP images very nicely if you will (no, not entirely sure how this works but I know it does). Second reason is that it adds extra buttons and changes the lay-out in a way that may not be so beneficial or sometimes even detrimental to the pure photographer.

I think the placement of the movie record button on the D600 demonstrates my second point. In the D7000 this is the place for the metering button which here is pushed a little further to the side and doesn't seem so natural to use (this assessment, of course, is pending an actual hands-on trial of the D600). This then leads me to think those extra button placements could have been used more effectively for photographic purposes instead.

This all is just MHO of course.

Posted 9 months ago #
NSXType-R

preferred member
Joined: Mar '09
Posts: 2,803
offline

If anyone is interested there's a hands on video done by The Camera Store in Canada on Youtube.

Not going to link it because of the whole no advertising thing.

Posted 9 months ago #
iris chrome

preferred member
Joined: Feb '11
Posts: 394
offline

R8R said:
Remember not long ago people were like, "Holy !@#$!, it shoots TEN MEGAPIXELS!"

I can see myself thirty to forty years from now lecturing my grand grandson about how rough we had it in the ten megapixel days ;-)

R8R said:
...aside from the built in wifi and GPS there is zero advantage with the 6D over the D600.

There actually is one other (major) advantage which is -3 EV AF sensitivity (center point only I believe). But yeah, even the wifi and gps can be remedied with add-ons on the D600.

For the most part though, the 6D completely puzzles me and here is why:

1) 11 point AF with 1 cross sensor that can AF up to f/2.8. I'm not even sure that what means but my best guess from the specs and looking at its AF point diagram, is that the center point is a dual cross AF point with the dual part only sensitive up to f/2.8 or higher. If this is what it is then I don't know why Canon is not being clear about it. At any rate though, this immediately puts the feature out of reach of most of the 6D's intended audience (assuming most will shoot with f/4 glass or lower).

2) Where Nikon seems to be giving us FX in a mid-level/advanced camera body, Canon is placing their FX sensor in a Rebel type (think basic/mid-level) body (limited controls and features, 1 SD card slot).

3) Even though 6D body seems more "watered down" than D600, Canon is pricing it at same mark as the D600.

4) Availability isn't until later in the year (December?) which tells me it's just a retaliatory "I'm-here-too" reaction in response to D600 Same thing happened with 1Dx vs D4. Apparently Canon is getting used to this by now. Can we say losing confidence?

Posted 9 months ago #
aZuMi

junior member
Joined: Aug '12
Posts: 6
offline

Just got my D600 this evening. Few points that I wasn't clear before..

1. The body fits really well in the hands and it's very solid (you know it's not cheap material).
2. ISO performance is as expected - amazing. At 1600, it's still very usable.
3. The LCD looks great, no greenish tinge like the D800 and white balance looks the same from LCD to my laptop.
4. Using my AF-D lenses, the focus motor in the D600 is MUCH QUICKER, QUIETER and than my D90

However, my question - and I don't know if people know this yet is the software for RAW.
I currently have Lightroom 3.3 and the raw file isn't supported in it. Will Lightroom 4.1 support it?

Posted 9 months ago #
KenRC51

senior member
Joined: Jan '10
Posts: 53
offline

aZuMi said:
Just got my D600 this evening. Few points that I wasn't clear before..

1. The body fits really well in the hands and it's very solid (you know it's not cheap material).
2. ISO performance is as expected - amazing. At 1600, it's still very usable.
3. The LCD looks great, no greenish tinge like the D800 and white balance looks the same from LCD to my laptop.
4. Using my AF-D lenses, the focus motor in the D600 is MUCH QUICKER, QUIETER and than my D90

However, my question - and I don't know if people know this yet is the software for RAW.
I currently have Lightroom 3.3 and the raw file isn't supported in it. Will Lightroom 4.1 support it?

LR usually comes out for a patch that support the RAW file. Give it about a few weeks. For now shoot in RAW + JPEG.

Would you say that the D600 ISO performance is better than the D700? According to the camera store review on youtube it is.

Posted 9 months ago #
jerl

preferred member
Joined: Dec '10
Posts: 425
offline

Just got my D600 earlier this morning. So far, I've put it through some tests and the handling seems ok (I still have some menu settings to play with though). Some annoyances (since I am used to my D90): they switched the zoom-in and zoom-out, and you can't use the rear wheel to scroll through images unless you're zoomed in. I think issues like that make it difficult to use both at the same time, so I might be "forced" to get a D7000. Oh well.

Anyway, autofocus seems fine, the AF sensors do cover a small area but I haven't found it to be a big deal so far. The AF seems to work pretty well in lower light, certainly much better than my D90.

Again, haven't noticed any color casts on the LCD (it seems pretty accurate when comparing to the original source), but since the screen is supposed to be the same as the D800, it might just be something I can't see.

I'll have to look at the images to comment more on the high iso quality, and I'll need to upgrade my photoshop to work with the raw files, so I don't have any comments on IQ.

Posted 9 months ago #
jonnyapple

Goldfingers
Joined: May '09
Posts: 3,400
offline

Thanks for the updates, jerl and aZuMi.

Jerl, if I recall correctly, coming from a D90 to a D7000 I had the same issue for the image review and the command dial. I can't imagine Nikon removed the option, so here's where it is in the D7000. Maybe it's similar on the D600:

Custom Setting Menu > f (Controls) > f6 (Customize command dials) > Menus and playback > On

For some reason (and I may actually be remembering wrong), I think the default was On (image review excluded).

Happy day! Enjoy it.

Posted 9 months ago #
jerl

preferred member
Joined: Dec '10
Posts: 425
offline

Great, that does the trick, I don't think I would have found that option (although it's f5 on the 600, I wonder what command they removed?)

Now I just have to get used to the zoom buttons.

Posted 9 months ago #