I think Nikon just put the same focus module from the D7000 into the D600 to save costs without adopting the focus angle of view to the larger FX sensor size. Hence, the D7000 module "sees" less of the frame. In other words, the D600 focus area is smaller than it is in either the D7000 (because you have the smaller DX size sensor) or than the focus area is in the D800 (because it is using a focus sensor designed for FX size in the first place). This is one of those compromises to save money by reusing as many parts as possible. As of now I really hate it but we will see if it is a problem in the long run. As msmoto noticed, I expect I may have a problem finding a focus sensor over the near side eye when taking portraits. Then I will have to focus and recompose which is extra steps, wasted time and many times a missed shot. No doubt changing that focus module to the same one in the D800 will be one of the upgrades when the D600s (in two years)or whatever comes out in four years to replace the D600. I have also noticed a lot of dust on my sensor, much more than in any other Nikon I have purchased in the last 10 years, even used ones. The auto sensor cleaner just seems to move it around to new spots! Wonder if the factory is clean enough?
D600 Discussion and Questions
(204 posts) (44 voices)-
Posted 8 months ago #
-
Donald, have you shot with the D300/s? I'm curious to hear from someone's experience with the D300/s and D800 and how that compares to the D7K and D600.
Posted 8 months ago # -
Sorry, I have not used a D300 or D300s and don't plan to buy one used for experimentation because the sensor technology is just too old. I hardly need the robust build just to play with a camera so for me it is wasted. The D300 series was the DX version of the D700 with FX pro body ergonomics. The D600 is the FX version of the D7000 ergonomics. I think you would want to pair a D7k or D7200 DX with a D600 FX and a D300s or D400 DX with a D800 or D4 FX to have similar ergonomics in the two bodies so switching between them is easier.
I have a 5 speed manual shift Mazda Miata and a 6 speed manual shift Porsche 911. I love them both but the shift patterns are very different, especially where reverse is located. I am constantly amazed that I don't screw up badly when switching back and forth between the two cars. Somehow my brain remembers which car I am in and where that next gear is compared to the last gear I used so I move the lever to the right place as I upshift. Yet, it must be dangerous to keep switching between two different gear patterns, especially as I age (65 now). I think I should swap my Miata for a 6 speed with the same shift pattern as my 911 or for an automatic with paddle shifters. I feel the same about switching between two camera bodies with very different ergonomics. Keep both bodies as much the same as possible and it will be easier to quickly make changes. I find myself all too often saying: "Now where do I find that function on this body?" It should flow easier and faster because I have only one style of body functions to memorize.
So far I am liking the D600 very much but I am just getting started using it and have not even set my U1 and U2 functions yet. The light weight is great and I do not find it "cramps my hands" as some have felt. I am currently searching for a good lightweight mild zoom range lens to use with it. I don't think you have to spend $600 for the current "kit" lens and can use old AF lenses designed for 35mm film as I have been demonstrating in that thread I started. I ahve a battery grip on order to make the D600 larger and give me a vertical shutter release. In my opinion one D7200 and one D600 are more than enough camera for someone who is going to shoot less than 50,000 exposures a year. About the time you reach the end of your shutter life replacement models will be out and you will want to get them for their technical advancements in image quality. The D4 is for the professional who shoots for a living and uses his gear at the extreme and in adverse conditions. I see D3x bodies selling for about half price now on ebay but why carry that weight when you can get better image quality (especially at high ISO) from a D600 or a D800? The D800 is a studio camera or landscape camera for people who used to work in medium format. Anyway, that is how I am seeing them at this time. I have not bought or played with a D4: just too expensive and I have no need for it's increased abilities.
Posted 8 months ago # -
The FX focusing area covers a smaller part of the frame than the DX focusing area, that is nothing new. The same issues take place between the D300 and the D700. That has something to do with the mirror-box, and the size of the AF sensor, which is the same size on DX and FX bodies. For DX crop mode to work, the AF sensors have to fit into the DX crop area, so that is an additional reason for the spread.
You also have to keep in mind that the magnification of the DX finders is higher, which might have something to do with it as well.
Posted 8 months ago # -
Sorry, I should have been more specific with my question but I was actually asking about the AF area on the cameras.
What I wanted to get to (and have been trying to say for a while) is what PB PM just confirmed; the issue of smaller AF area is not specific to the D600 or the fact that it uses the D7K's AF sensor.
I'm starting to see this same complaint pop-up on different discussion groups all over the net. Not many are complaining about it but surly enough are making it known. However, the one thing I find in common between all who complain about this issue is that none have shot with D300/s and D700/D800/D4 and therefore are either comparing the D600 to their DX cameras (D7K or D300/s) only or are comparing it to their pro grade FX cameras only. IMO, both comparisons on their own are completely unfair.
First of all, the D600 was never meant to outdo or even be on par with the D700/D800/D4 in AF so it really puzzles me when I see others making this comparison. The second point is when I see the D600 compared to the D7K or sometimes even the D300/s and then people are surprised that their DX AF covers bigger area than their FX AF. I think this second comparison is expected to happen. However, making that comparison on its own without comparing other AF systems that transitioned from DX to FX makes it biased towards the photographer's already established experience with DX cameras.
If you want to make a true and meaningful comparison then, IMO, you should first compare the D300/s and D700/D800/D4 and then compare D7K and D600. This way you'll be able to grasp the actual difference between the FX and DX AF modules first instead of blaming that difference on the D600 having a smaller AF area.
Posted 8 months ago # -
iris chrome: I don't think so. I think it is a real issue, not a DX vs FX module and format difference. I have a D800 and its focus area is wider than on my D600. I have a D7000 and its focus area also is wider than on my D600. The focus area and the focus rectangles are both smaller on my D600 than on my D7000 or D800. I think in order to save money Nikon used a DX focus module which covered a sufficient area in DX format on a FX sensor where it does not cover a sufficient area. When you compose according to the rule of thirds and try to focus on your subject with the D600 you discover you don't have a focus sensor in that location. When you try the same thing with a D7000 or a D800 you do have a focus sensor in that area. Basically, the area covered by the outermost row of focus sensors on the D7000 and the D800 is not covered by any focus sensors on the D600. It will cause problems in certain situations, such as portraiture or rule of thirds composition. Even my D3100 does better. I think my D40 with its three focus sensors also covered a wider area. There is no excuse for a D40 and D3100 being able to focus wider (correctly on a rule of thirds composition) than a D600. It is a "screw up." I expect to see more complaints about this as people review the D600.
I don't have a D300 or D300s to compare but when I look at the focus pattern of the D300s on dpreview it looks wider to me and sufficient to cover areas not covered by the D600 sensor.
Posted 8 months ago # -
donaldejose said:
It will cause problems in certain situations, such as portraiture or rule of thirds composition.Pick the nearest focus point in single area AF mode and re-compose slightly. Problem: solved.
Heck I can do this with a D40.
I do it all the time with my F100, and the focus selector d-pad is broken. Focus with the center, re-compose.
I think this small AF area thing would be more of a problem with sports shooters who need wide frame coverage for continuous AF tracking. You know, the guys who also need high frame rates, durable bodies and a dedicated AF-ON button. (in other words, the people NOT looking at the D600)
Posted 8 months ago # -
As I said in my post at the top of this page: "I expect I may have a problem finding a focus sensor over the near side eye when taking portraits. Then I will have to focus and recompose which is extra steps, wasted time and many times a missed shot." Sure it works and always did even back in manual focus lens days but it involves the added step of making sure you keep the shutter release half way down or press the focus lock button while re-composition which takes time during which expressions change. It would be better to have a larger auto focus area in the D600. I have not yet used my D600 for portraits but when I do that smaller area covered by the AF sensor may prove to be too narrow both horizontally and vertically. You should be able to compose your image and then select a single AF sensor which falls over the near eye. My D7000 allows me to work that way, my D800 allows me to work that way, my D600 should also but I fear it will not. We will see how much of an issue it is when I do portrait work with it. And I agree it may create problems for people who use continuous AF tracking.
Posted 8 months ago # -
I held one today in BB. Was Ok. Seemed substantial enough. I am in the wait mode. It would save me money, but I cant take it with me. ;->
Posted 8 months ago # -
I have the Nikon D600 but the screen back lcd turns off every time I hit the shutter button. How can I make the screen stay on like it did on my Canon cameras. I don't want to keep hitting info to see my settings on the back
Posted 8 months ago # -
Donalde and Iris:
RE: Focusing area. The D600 has the smaller 39 point AF area, it covers less area than the D700, D3s or, D4 or D800 with the 51 point system.
FX cameras are limited in terms of layout by the size of the AF sensor itself, there is only so much room on the mirror box. As for the D600, you buy a consumer grade product, you get consumer grade parts.
Posted 8 months ago # -
@dswatosn83 I've had the same problem as you when I moved from a Canon 450D (XSi) to the D7000. I don't believe there is a way to keep the back LCD on while pressing the shutter button, however, almost all of the information on the back LCD can be accessed easily on the top LCD which you can set to stay on even while pressing the shutter or turn it back on easily with the on/off switch which is what I do.
Posted 8 months ago # -
donaldejose said:
I don't have a D300 or D300s to compare but when I look at the focus pattern of the D300s on dpreview it looks wider to me and sufficient to cover areas not covered by the D600 sensor.*FACEPALM*
When I asked you to compare the D300, I meant in relationship to the D700 or D800 not the D600!
Donald, again, why would you expect the D600 to have an AF area as good as the D800?
Ok, let's do this another way, go to the D600 vs. D800 GIF I made (middle GIF on page 4 of this thread). Now, place your mouse cursor on the edge of the bottom rightmost AF box of the D600. Wait for the picture to change and what do you see? The D800 has only one row to the bottom and one column to the right more than the D600. Now do the same thing for the top of the middle group of AF boxes and what do you see now? The D800 has only half a row more than the D600 here.
Are the AF points bigger on D800? Yes, they are. Are they more wide spread? Again, yes they are. But this is also true of the D7K and D300. If I make a D7K vs. D300 GIF, it will show the SAME EXACT differences as D600 vs. D800.
Posted 8 months ago # -
iris chrome said:
What I wanted to get to (and have been trying to say for a while) is what PB PM just confirmed; the issue of smaller AF area is not specific to the D600 or the fact that it uses the D7K's AF sensor.
[...] none have shot with D300/s and D700/D800/D4 and therefore are either comparing the D600 to their DX cameras (D7K or D300/s) only or are comparing it to their pro grade FX cameras only. IMO, both comparisons on their own are completely unfair.okay, then let's compare the D600 to the D800, which at least in Europe is in the same price range
(image taken from one of your own earlier posts):
.
.
iris chrome said:
First of all, the D600 was never meant to outdo or even be on par with the D700/D800/D4 in AF...why shouldn't the AF be on par with the (again: similarly priced) D800??
and I'm not saying it should have the same amount of focus points, the same accuracy or the same focus speed, but c'mon! the coverage might have been a bit better!!.
.
R8R said:
Pick the nearest focus point in single area AF mode and re-compose slightly. Problem: solved.Heck I can do this with a D40.
that is all fine when the situation is there to do that, but let's move to an area where you apparently never have shot in: theatre or live concerts. in this area things are happening very quickly and the lighting can be VERY selective.
in a situation like this you will already have to shoot in spot metering mode, or else your sensor will pick up on the massive amount of dark space around your subject and harshly over expose your photo. so even when set to spot metering you are waiting for that one deciding moment where the musician tears his heart out (or bites the head off that bat), then you don't have time to do all of that.
when I'm shooting in situations like that I already have set my AF-L/AE-L button to AF-ON, because I will already need to have focus on the person's face, and not have to wait until the camera decides that it can auto focus at such a low light situation.so the only reason that I need that focus point still, is for my exposure, but going by at least the very simple rule of thirds (a rule that I seem to go wider than in a lot of my music compositions), I cannot lock the exposure on my subject. if I lock the exposure, then recompose, I will have lost the moment and possibly also the lighting.
the lighting at concerts changes so rapidly that once you've locked your exposure on the person's face and recompose to shoot, the lights will have flashed to something completely different and your shot will be either under or over exposed.
Posted 8 months ago # -
"why shouldn't the AF be on par with the (again: similarly priced) D800??"
Again, you're doing the SAME thing you quoted me saying should not be done. But I'll humor you for now.
According to DPreview:
D800 UK MSRP: £2599.99
D600 UK MSRP: £1955.99Definitely NOT similarly priced. There is almost a £650 difference there. This translates to over a $1000 difference with current exchange rates which is more than the $900 difference we have in the US.
What you're doing is comparing current D800 prices with D600 launch prices. Again, an inaccurate and unfair comparison. Wait a while and prices will, without a doubt, fall and normalize at some point just as D800 prices fell down from their MSRP. Actually prices are already falling and, if I remember correctly, the D600 was even priced as low as £1600 at some point.
Guys, honestly, I'm sorry to say this but you're harping on the same tune over and over and over again. Even after I asked you to review the D300 AF and compare it to the D7K to truly get an actual grasp of the difference between DX AF and FX AF, you're still comparing the D600 to either the D800 by itself or the D600 to the D7k by itself. Many reviews and reports all over the web are indicating great improvements in the D600's AF system and many are reporting it being even as good as the D800's AF as far as responsiveness and speed. If this does not make you make you feel confident about the new AF module then I think nothing will.
Posted 8 months ago # -
iris chrome: The issue is about the coverage of the AF module, not its speed or accuracy. It should cover a larger area of the FX sensor. I don't know if the DX D300/D300s has this same coverage issue. My review of D300 reviews suggested it dose not. My DX D7000 does not have this issue. Yes, it is only a row missing; no big deal, unless you routinely use that row as I and others do in many compositions. Maybe you don't. In fact, I would like to see AF coverage that is even larger. Independent reviewers are noticing the same issue. So far only Ken Rockwell has a fairly detailed review. dpreview has only a preview review. Here is what KR says about this point.
"AF sensors crowded together in the center
Nikon claims a "new" AF sensor, but the D600's "new" CAM4800 AF array has the same size and sensor layout as the CAM4800DX array in the small-format (DX) D7000.
In English, this means that Nikon is only using a smaller DX AF sensor array in an FX camera, so all the sensors are crowded together in the center of the FX image.
Sure, they are reasonably placed if you're going to use the D600 in DX cropped mode, but that's silly, since you ought to use a D7000, which is simply a DX version of the D600 for half the price, if you're only shooting in DX.
In FX mode, which is the whole point of the D600, all the AF sensors are congested towards the center of the frame. Nikon could have used only three sensors for about the same level of usefulness."
and
"The biggest downside to the D600 compared to the others is that the size of the region seen by the sea of AF sensors is smaller in the D600. Nikon is using essentially the same DX-sized AF detector in the FX D600 as the DX D7000, so in the D600, all the sensors really only cover a much smaller area in the center of the frame. Personally, I always seem to need to focus on something just outside the area covered by AF sensors with my existing cameras, so the D600 will bug me more. So what? Half the time all I use is the center sensor anyway."
We are not crazy. This is a real issue. As I said originally I think it is one of the compromises Nikon made to keep the price down. How much it will bother anyone depends upon how they shoot and the subjects they shoot. I noticed it, as have many people when they shot with a D600 for even a short while, and I found it irritating but don't know yet how I will feel about it after 6 months of using the D600. Perhaps I will adjust and it won't seem important then.
When you get a chance go to a camera store, pick up a D600, compare the AF senor coverage to your D300, see if you notice a difference and if you think that difference will bother you. That is all we are saying and warning people about.
Posted 8 months ago # -
@iris:
you're acting as if the focus system is the only thing that is different between the D600 and the D800, justifying the difference in price, but what about body size, build, 36mp sensor, etc, etc.I wouldn't expect a AF system that is as accurate or fast as the D800's, just one that is sized for a FX sensor, not for a DX sensor...
Posted 8 months ago # -
Ok, so let me see...
Nikon makes a new FX line and gives it a semi-pro build and semi-pro controls. They load it up with an incredible sensor that rivals their best FX sensor in everything except MP. They make it at shoot 5.5 FPS when their D800 only does 4.5 FPS and the 5DIII does 6 FPS. They put in an AF sensor that puts the 5DII (a one generation old pro-grade camera) to shame both in terms of size and performance AND that's only slightly smaller than their D800 and D4 while performing and responding just as fast. Then they turn around and price it much lower than their lowest FX line ($900 difference less in US, £650 less in UK).
Yeah, I think I'm starting to get the picture now (>_<)
EDIT: Those Nikon bastards! D'OH!
Posted 8 months ago # -
Yes, Nikon did a great (not perfect) job on the D600. I like mine very much after just a few days of shooting with it. It is just missing something I use frequently, those outer row of focus sensors which are available to me in my D7000 and my D800. As I said in earlier posts on the issue, I expect Nikon will enlarge the coverage of the focus sensor when the next version of the D600 is out in 2 to 4 years.
Is there some reason why we cannot both laud a camera for its great accomplishments and also point out a weakness it has?
Posted 8 months ago # -
donaldejose said:
We are not crazy.No you're not and I apologize if I implied that you were.
donaldejose said:
When you get a chance go to a camera store, pick up a D600, compare the AF senor coverage to your D300, see if you notice a difference and if you think that difference will bother you. That is all we are saying and warning people about.donaldejose said:
Is there some reason why we cannot both laud a camera for its great accomplishments and also point out a weakness it has?I understand what you're trying to say and I do think we should point out the D600's weaknesses. I also agree with you that I don't think the D600 covers as much area in the viewfinder as the D800 or the D7K but what I disagree with you and Eric about is that those differences are, IMO, a result of moving from DX to FX and not because of any inherent limitation of D600's AF system or because Nikon intentionally decided to cripple it. At any rate, I'll agree to disagree for the time being. We both tried to explain our POV and we both seem to be set in our views. You're right in that I haven't tried the D600 yet and so maybe I'm not the best qualified to make this call on it. As soon as I get the chance to, I will try to pick it up.
Posted 8 months ago # -
I think Nikon just put a sensor designed for DX, which provided adequate coverage in DX, into an FX body, where it arguably does not provide adequate coverage. That's all. We will see what reviewers and users say about it.
Posted 8 months ago # -
Here are examples of two photos which illustrate what I have been talking about. I want to compose these subjects, select a single focal point over the closest eye in that composition and then wait to capture an expression I like. Dogs (and children) don't hold still. They will always be moving their head around as they respond to noises they hear. I don't want to have to refocus and recompose every time they move. I don't want a focus lock because with a very shallow depth of field that lock will will be off every time the dog moves. I want a focus senor right on the closest eye (or very near it) so I can simply let up on the shutter release and press down again when the dog moves its head slightly all the while keeping my composition intact. The wider focus sensor pattern (DX focus pattern on DX sensor) of the D7000 gives me this. The wider focus sensor pattern (FX focus pattern on FX sensor) of the D800 gives me this. The narrower focus sensor pattern (DX focus pattern on FX sensor) of the D600 does not. My compositions end up leaving too much space at the top because I am moving the camera up slightly to get an eye into the top row of the focus zone.
I don't think these compositions are abnormal and I think a focus sensor should exist one row (or half a row) higher so it falls over the eyes of such subjects with less room at the top of the image. Perhaps as time goes on we will see larger focus sensors in all DSLRs.
Posted 8 months ago # -
that is all fine when the situation is there to do that, but let's move to an area where you apparently never have shot in: theatre or live concerts. in this area things are happening very quickly and the lighting can be VERY selective.
in a situation like this you will already have to shoot in spot metering mode, or else your sensor will pick up on the massive amount of dark space around your subject and harshly over expose your photo. so even when set to spot metering you are waiting for that one deciding moment where the musician tears his heart out (or bites the head off that bat), then you don't have time to do all of that.
when I'm shooting in situations like that I already have set my AF-L/AE-L button to AF-ON, because I will already need to have focus on the person's face, and not have to wait until the camera decides that it can auto focus at such a low light situation.so the only reason that I need that focus point still, is for my exposure, but going by at least the very simple rule of thirds (a rule that I seem to go wider than in a lot of my music compositions), I cannot lock the exposure on my subject. if I lock the exposure, then recompose, I will have lost the moment and possibly also the lighting.
the lighting at concerts changes so rapidly that once you've locked your exposure on the person's face and recompose to shoot, the lights will have flashed to something completely different and your shot will be either under or over exposed.
Hi, I play in a band and have so for over 25 years. I've toured every state in the USA, Europe, and Asia. I've shot pictures from the front of the stage and side stage with everything from crappy point and shoots to film SLR's and DSLR's. For 4 years I was a professional stage and lighting project manager for corporate and special events. I've spent more time on, around, under, in, above and below stages than ANYBODY on this forum - I can say that with 1000% certainty. (unless you happen to be Willy Nelson)
Describing what a live stage environment is like to me, that's like describing snow to an Eskimo.
Posted 8 months ago # -
I think I understand what Donaldejose is saying. You put a 6-foot, 200 pound guy in a single bed, he's going to look huge. Put the same guy in a king sized bed and he's going to look smaller. Just as the AF focal point array is the same in the D7000 and D600 (apparently), it looks different depending on what size sensor you put it up against. Seems like simple math to me. When you consider that the D600 is essentially 30% cheaper than the D800 (at least in the U.S.), you figure they've got to create cost savings somewhere. This appears to be one, along with whatever it takes to create a 1/250 flash synch (vs 1/200), a shutter capable of going 1/8000, software that allows for more than 3 bracketed shots, etc.
Posted 8 months ago # -
I also noticed a lot of dust on my camera sensor causing a number of dust spots in my photos with light backgrounds. I assume the dust was already on the sensor when it left the factory since I only had the camera for five days and only changed lenses four times. The amount of dust was significantly worse than my six year old D80. Since this is unacceptable for a new camera I requested a return and replacement with Amazon.com. I hope my new D600 doesn't have the same problem. Has anyone else noticed this problem?
Posted 8 months ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.
