D600 Discussion and Questions « Nikon Rumors Forum

Nikon Rumors Forum » Nikon DSLR

D600 Discussion and Questions

(204 posts) (44 voices)

Tags:

« Previous 1…678 9 Next »

msmoto

big gun cougar
Joined: Mar '10
Posts: 2,736
offline

nwdcrob said:
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?

Look at the first exposure taken and this will determine if the dust was on the sensor initially. Dust can be seen if the image is manipulated in post processing with contrast and exposure.

If the dust was not on the sensor on the first images, then it could have come from changing lenses after you received it. Changing lenses once can create a lot of dust on the sensor depending on the way the lens is removed, atmospheric conditions, and the condition of the lens being mounted. Rather than exchange a camera, a simple hand blower might remove the dust. Once this is done, if the dust is not removed, then it could be returned. Another thing to think about is whether the camera was in its factory packaging upon receipt. If not, it may have been opened by someone before you received it, in which case, a return would certainly seem to be justified in view of the dust issue.

And, if the packaging was not intact, check the number of exposures in the Exif data and see if it has more clicks on it than you have put on.

Posted 8 months ago #
donaldejose

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

My D600 came from Amazon also! Maybe a dirty batch? I just finished cleaning my D600 sensor for the third time. Each time I held it upside down and use a blower brush to blow it out. Saw some reduction in dust each time but not completely clean until the third blow out. Seems ok now. I just took two photos of a white sheet of paper with auto focus set to off and exposure compensation set to +1.0 and again to +2.0 (so as to get white and not 18% gray). Then I looked at the white images on my computer at 50% and again at 100% scrolling them across the screen to make any black dust spot move so I wasn't confusing a dark spot on my monitor for a dust spot on the camera sensor. Seemed like all the black dust spots were gone. I also ordered some sensor sweeps from Peter Gregg after the first two blow outs didn't remove all the dust but looks like I won't need them at this time. If I notice them again in photos and this procedure has not worked as well as I thought it did, I will let you know.

Posted 8 months ago #
R8R

preferred member
Joined: Aug '11
Posts: 352
offline

D600 studio sample shots are up at dpreview.com.

I'll say that the high ISO samples look even a tad better than the D800, at least to my eyes when looking in the shadows at ISO 6400.

In fact I think it's the second best up there aside from the D4.

Posted 8 months ago #
R8R

preferred member
Joined: Aug '11
Posts: 352
offline

I'll say it beats out the 5D Mkiii even.

Posted 8 months ago #
ericnl

member
Joined: Feb '11
Posts: 19
offline

Digital Rev has a hands on review out, and they are raving about it.

the only thing Kai complains about, well, a couple of times, is...
...yep, you guessed it: that the focus points are all cramped up in the middle!

[+] Embed the video | Video Download Get the Video Plugin

Text-Link:

HTML-Link:

BB-Code:

Embed:

Posted 8 months ago #
ericnl

member
Joined: Feb '11
Posts: 19
offline

R8R said:
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.

so then you know what I'm talking about ;-)

(I've played in bands for 25 years too, and I've been working as a sound engineer for 20 years. have toured and worked with theatre shows as well. recently designed lighting and stage set up for a play involving a lot of video projections. so I know what I'm talking about too, and for me it just is a deal breaker. different people, different preferences. in fact it's such a deal breaker that I now rather shoot on a DX D7000 than an FX D600).

Posted 8 months ago #
R8R

preferred member
Joined: Aug '11
Posts: 352
offline

ericnl said:
in fact it's such a deal breaker that I now rather shoot on a DX D7000 than an FX D600).

I'm on the fence between the D600 or a used D700 myself. The focus area is not a huge deal for me. I like the D600's grip and overall feel, but not as much as I was hoping. I don't need 24mp, and the D700 is hundreds cheaper right now.

Posted 8 months ago #
roombarobot

senior member
Joined: Mar '12
Posts: 57
offline

I too got a new D600 from Amazon. It had dust on the sensor and I only put the kit lens on in fairly controlled conditions. However, that dust seemed to blow of fairly easily. I think my sensor is clean now. There must have been 2 specs of dust from assembly/shipping. My packaging did not appear to be disturbed. I would not return it, I would just hit the sensor with a few puffs of air.

Given some of the tests quoted in this thread, I don't know why one would get the D700 over the D600. The D600 sensor seems to be much better and seems to pull away from the D700 even at mid ISOs.

Posted 8 months ago #
R8R

preferred member
Joined: Aug '11
Posts: 352
offline

roombarobot said:
Given some of the tests quoted in this thread, I don't know why one would get the D700 over the D600. The D600 sensor seems to be much better and seems to pull away from the D700 even at mid ISOs.

Well for less than the price of the D600 I can pick up a barely used D700 plus battery grip and cards. It's bigger and tougher, and with the EN-EL4a battery it'll do 8fps.

The more I think about it, I would have liked to see an upgraded version of what the D700 is, instead of the D800 or D600.

For the D700, Nikon took the D3 and crammed it into the D300 body. It was tough, fast and pro. That was why it was such a success.

They did NOT take a D4 and shove it into a compact body. Mistake.

It should have been full frame 16-20mp camera with a compact, rugged body with a battery grip option, that had the D4 autofocus and high ISO ability and high-ish frame rate, maybe 7-8fps. $2500 to $2700 tops. Wedding and event dream camera. Call it the D750. Winner.

The D600 is very nice and the image quality is great but there is something about it that makes it not seem like the $2100 camera it turned out to be.

Posted 8 months ago #
bossa

senior member
Joined: Jun '12
Posts: 63
offline

R8R said:
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.

I've been a professional musician for 37 years playing up to 5 nights a week. WTF has Willy Nelson got to do with the argument? Line em mate.. I'll cut their heads. Well, maybe a decent haircut at least. ;-)

Posted 8 months ago #
donaldejose

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

My only real issue so far is the coverage of the AF area. But I may get over that irritation. Noise is really great at high ISO. The light weight is great. I just set up the U1 and U2 modes today so switching between portrait settings for good skin tones and smoothness and landscape settings for more color punch and sharpness should be a snap. I would like a U3 setting for sports so I can have my favorite portrait, landscape and sports settings all on quick recall. I love how it is lighter than the D800. Using inexpensive old film era plastic AF lense makes it even lighter. I agree with the Digital Rev review above.

I am afraid I may discover there is no need for the D800's 36 megapixels when you have 24 in the D600. I am afraid I will discover there is no need for the extra robust build of the D800 when digital cameras don't have to last more than 2 to 4 years these days due to the rapid pace of technological change. It will be interesting to see if Nikon puts the D600 into its 2 year refresh cycle or its 4 year refresh cycle.

What improvements could Nikon add at the next refresh cycle? Perhaps a real FX sized AF sensor pattern, perhaps clean native ISO of 12,800, perhaps a faster fps rate, add a U3 mode and call it the D600s. Improved technology may make those things all possible without increasing the price in two years. I don't see much more than those few things which could be done two years from now; the camera is that good. If the D600 is on a two year refresh cycle all Nikon really needs to do is insert the latest chips and software each cycle.

Maybe Nikon will put the D4 sensor into a D800 body in a few years and call it a D720. They certainly will have the parts on hand once orders for the D4 and D800 cool down and should be able to swap them between the two bodies easily creating a whole "new" camera in the process. And then the reverse, place a D800 sensor in a D4 body and call it the D4x. With the D800, D800e, D4, and D600 Nikon has three different bodies and three great sensors all at the top of the heap in DxOMark scores. They can easily create many iterations by simply swapping parts and updating chips and software. Nikon could be at the start of some really good years for the company.

Posted 8 months ago #
Postman

preferred member
Joined: Apr '12
Posts: 117
offline

R8R said:

For the D700, Nikon took the D3 and crammed it into the D300 body. It was tough, fast and pro. That was why it was such a success.

They did NOT take a D4 and shove it into a compact body. Mistake.

I think this is possibly the reason why Nikon have not made a true D700 progression, it took away sales of the D3, end of. I think in actuality Nikon saw this as a mistake and it will have definitely been a contributing factor in deciding the spec. for the D4 and D800, in that they are very different animals.

What were the reasons to buy a D3 over a D700 + grip?

Posted 8 months ago #
ericnl

member
Joined: Feb '11
Posts: 19
offline

R8R said:
I'm on the fence between the D600 or a used D700 myself. The focus area is not a huge deal for me. I like the D600's grip and overall feel, but not as much as I was hoping. I don't need 24mp, and the D700 is hundreds cheaper right now.

[...] The more I think about it, I would have liked to see an upgraded version of what the D700 is, instead of the D800 or D600.

The D600 is very nice and the image quality is great but there is something about it that makes it not seem like the $2100 camera it turned out to be.

if you don't mind about the AF coverage, then I'd say the D600 is the way to go when you think about photography: it blows the D700, the 6D AND the 5Dmk3 out of the water in that respect. (stick a grip under it if you want to have a more pro feel to it. that seems to work).

but I'm on the same page as you: I would have paid a D800 price, for a D600 in a D700 body (including the user settings), but then with FX AF area coverage.

(DX mode? WTF? just take your photo with the DX lens if you have to, and crop it later...
I think the DX mode is why Nikon made the coverage too small: they are trying too hard to get DX to FX switchers, losing track of what the FX should be able to do).

Posted 8 months ago #
iris chrome

preferred member
Joined: Feb '11
Posts: 394
offline

Ok so I did a quick search and stumbled on this thread from when the D700 was first introduced and well...
...yup, you guessed it; even back then people thought the D700 AF was smaller and not enough compared to the D300 ;-)

http://nikonrumors.com/forum/topic.php?id=1203#post-20331

Unfortunately most of the images have been lost but you should still be able to follow from just reading the posts.

Btw there are reasons why FX focus points coverage will always be smaller than DX and it's not just so the camera can function in DX mode.

Posted 8 months ago #
TaoTeJared

preferred member
Joined: Apr '10
Posts: 2,422
offline

This talk about AF sensor coverage is really odd. Go out and use one and see if it makes a difference in normal shooting. Don't try to focus on something in the far edge just to prove your thoughts either. I'm sure you will find that it is not an issue at all. I haven't noticed a thing (even trying to shoot pigions) comming from a D300.

Posted 8 months ago #
kenadams

senior member
Joined: Dec '11
Posts: 61
offline

You know, I can't help but shake my head over advertising 39 AF points if they're all crammed up right into the middle of the image area. It's a question of logic to me, it seems kinda pointless (no pun intended).

On the other hand, speaking about coverage and amount of AF points in general: my F100 has five AF points. Yes, 5. Right in the middle. Doesn't really bother me that much.

Posted 8 months ago #
R8R

preferred member
Joined: Aug '11
Posts: 352
offline

kenadams said:

On the other hand, speaking about coverage and amount of AF points in general: my F100 has five AF points. Yes, 5. Right in the middle. Doesn't really bother me that much.

Mine too, and the d-pad is broken (won't go to the right) so I have it locked on the center. Works great.

Posted 8 months ago #
msmoto

big gun cougar
Joined: Mar '10
Posts: 2,736
offline

My usual static focus technique is to use a point, push the release halfway, then frame the shot and fire.... While it is nice to have the focus points all over, it certainly is not necessary. IMO

Posted 8 months ago #
DaveyJ

preferred member
Joined: Jun '10
Posts: 452
offline

I focus the same as msmoto describes. But a more generally spread out focus grid layout is desirable. I am sure Nikon had some technical reason to set it up that way. Obviously a compromise design. TaoTeJared's comment on focusing with his D800 being much the same as the D300 indicates I would see little difference if I buy the D800.

Posted 8 months ago #
DaveyJ

preferred member
Joined: Jun '10
Posts: 452
offline

This dust problem on the sensor that donalddejose has dealt with seems to be a test requirement and then begin cleaning the sensor. I got two Nikon D40X bodies that way and always assumed it was from Ritz camera opening up the box (which was evident) and getting dust on the sensor through lens switches at the local store. donalddejose could be right that it could happen on assembly. So much for clean room assembly. I certainly feel that few amateurs would be set up as well as Donald is.

Posted 8 months ago #
donaldejose

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

I just set my D600 to 39 point autofocus. Even when the near eye is outside the sensor pattern I am going to see if Nikon's scene evalutive AF system selects the right focus point as it scans across the near and far points covered by the 39 AF points. It may recognise the cheek under the near eye is the correct focus point to use. If so, (and if you can rely upon it 99% of the time) that will be the quickest way to compose and shoot. Perhaps no problem exists at all and one just needs to stop using an old technique and learn to rely upon the most recent technology to do the job we used to do ourselves. We generally trust the camera's matrix metering, don't we?

These new Nikons are supposed to incorporate a face recognition system. I don't know how this works and whether or not the eyes and mouth of the face need to all be within the 39 point autofocus zone. If not, if the camera can regognize a face lying partially outside the autofocus zone it may be able to select the correct focus point even though there is no sensor over the near eye. We will see.

* * *

Just did a test with a full size bust I have in the house. Shot the face with an 85mm 1.8 lens at 1.8 and shot at different angles, sides and compositions with the near side eye in the focus zone and outside of it. Then I opened the images in ViewNX2 and clicked on the menue item to show the focus point. It was the same as what my AF sensor showed me in the viewfinder. When the near side eye fell within the focus zone, the camera's AF system correctly selected that eye as the focal point no matter how I moved around. Great! Pay attention to whether or not that near side eye falls within the focus zone inscribed on the viewfinder, if so you are good to go on Auto AF. But when that near side eye fell outside the focus area the camera selected the lower cheek or under the nose as the focus point. This made the near side eye fall out of focus at f1.8. Autofocus won't magically create a focus point on an eye (or other object) which lies outside the focus zone covered by the AF module. Work-arounds can include not using such a shallow depth of field so it won't matter or focus lock on the eye with the very old fashioned system of focus, recompose and shoot (of course if your subject moves slightly in that instant you will no longer be in the focus you had wanted and have to do it all over again and again and again until your subject is still)..

Posted 8 months ago #
TaoTeJared

preferred member
Joined: Apr '10
Posts: 2,422
offline

I do like how the new AF system does seem to grab eyes and track them in AF-C. It is really cool. Tested on my parents OCD light chasing dog and for 3 minutes it tracked her eyes and even bounced between the two.

I shoot like MsMoto and DavyJ. I use single point and AF-C with 3d tracking on for moving objects - Lock the focus subject and reframe. I almost never use the "auto" select focus unless I'm doing landscapes - same with matrix metering actually.

I think all of this crammed AF points, diffraction, old lenses don't work, etc. is more of people trying to convence themselvs their current set-up is good enough and not to spend a couple thousand dollars for a new camera.

Posted 8 months ago #
donaldejose

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

Tao: Diffraction limitations on a high mp sensor is another subject I have read many comments about and was trying to test. Rumor has it the D800 starts to lose sharpness due to diffraction at about f8. Of course, that could cause a big problem for macro photography where you want to use f22 and higher numbers to get as much depth of field as you can. I shot some macro images at f16 because I was afraid diffraction would cause a loss of sharpness on the D800. Now that I have had more experience with the D800 I think that fear was foolihs. I have tried shooting my D800 on the same scene at f4, f5.6, f8, f11, and f16 and then examined the files at 50% and at 100% to see if I can detect this dreaded loss of sharpness due to diffraction. I just don't see it as any significant issue. I have not posted a thread on this topic or posted images because none I produce seemed significant enough to show anything dramatic. Have you noticed any lack of sharpness with your D800 such that you don't want to use f11 or f16 or f22?

I am starting to think the D800 (and D600) (maybe also the 24mp D3100 and ?mp D400?) share one great asset from their super size magapixel sensors: everything we look at is so greatly reduced from the original image that the reduction process tends to hide noise or diffraction effects seen when you look at the single pixel level. This is an aspect, if correct, that I do not see discussed.

While some of these minor negative aspects may be true; they are minor and more than offset by really great images produced by the recent generation of Nikon bodies. No one should hesitate to by the latest generation of Nikons.

Posted 8 months ago #
R8R

preferred member
Joined: Aug '11
Posts: 352
offline

donaldejose said:Work-arounds can include not using such a shallow depth of field so it won't matter or focus lock on the eye with the very old fashioned system of focus, recompose and shoot (of course if your subject moves slightly in that instant you will no longer be in the focus you had wanted and have to do it all over again and again and again until your subject is still)..

Focus with the central point on the eye in AF-C with 3D mode and it will track that eye to the edge of the focus area once you re-compose.

And what is so "very old fashioned" about recomposing a shot after achieving focus? It's one of the most basic skills in photography.

Posted 8 months ago #
donaldejose

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

R8R: I will try that technique but it still involves an extra step as you still have to focus and then move the camera. Focusing on a center spot and recomposing goes back to the film days when the only focus aid we had was one split image spot in the center of the viewfinder. If that is not "old fashioned" and still "state of the art" we would today have only one AF focus sensor in the center of the veiwfinder. With autofocus sensors all over now we should no longer have to focus and recompose. We should be able to compose and then focus by pressing the shutter release half way down. As I mentioned, auto AF does quite well as long as the focus point you want to use (the near eye in my example and test) remains inside the area coverd by the autofocus sensor and it doesn't require a two step process. With your two step process that remains true. If your chosen near eye (or other focus point) that you pre-selected moves outside of the focus area it is no longer tracked. Hence, we are back to the issue of the smaller auto focus area coverage of the DX auto focus sensor applied to FX format in the D600. Your AF-C with 3D mode won't solve the issue of a chosen focus point falling outside of that smaller focus area in the D600.

Posted 8 months ago #