D600 Upgrade « Nikon Rumors Forum

Nikon Rumors Forum » Nikon DSLR » [D600]

D600 Upgrade

(31 posts) (17 voices)

Tags:

12 Next »

aprice30

new member
Joined: Sep '12
Posts: 4
offline

I currently own a D60 along with the 18-200 and the 35mm 1.8. I have been wanting to upgrade for a while now but have so far been putting it off hoping for the D400.

Sadly as this was never released the D600 has instead tickled my interest. The big question I have is should I upgrade to it. I know people say get the lenses then the camera but I am finding my D60 just not up to the job. I only shoot as a hobby but the lack of body controls on the D60 and quality is really hampering me. I was at some motor racing and really needed the U1&U2 mode dials and missed shots because of it.

I would love to get the D600 and the 24-70 but just don't have a spare £3k straight away. I can only afford 1 or the other and buying such a good lens and putting it on a D60 seems pointless. My other route is a D7000, but I don't like the idea of spending £700 on a 2 year old camera when I want to make the move to FX eventually. I also didn't like the feel of the D7000 in my hands, the battery compartment you hold doesn't seem as deep as the D60 so my fingers get scrunched up.

What would people suggest?

1. Buy the D600, sell the 35mm 1.8 and buy the 50mm 1.8. So I will have 1 FX lens and the 18-200 would work but in DX mode. I know I would loose the megapixels but hopefully it would still be relatively good.
2. Buy the D7000, then save for the 24-70 & 70-200.

I can't really wait any longer since I have already missed so many good photos due to not having the right gear + am going to Canada in jan 2013 so want a good camera.

Posted 8 months ago #
jerl

preferred member
Joined: Dec '10
Posts: 425
offline

D60 to D600 is a pretty big jump, especially if you don't already have the lenses. Also, Dx-Fx is not so much an upgrade but a jump to something different. You gain some things (MP, iso) but lose on other things. For instance, for you motorsports, you lose a lot of reach unless you want to crop a lot (and then, what's the point).

Personally, I'd say the D7000 is a better upgrade. It's cheaper, very capable, and you don't need to change out your lens collection. Depending on what you do, you might like it better: higher frame rate, better coverage of AF sensors, and higher pixel density for longer reach.

Posted 8 months ago #
aslightdelay

preferred member
Joined: Jul '10
Posts: 327
offline

I'll second that. I've shot with all three (my wife owns a D60, and I just traded my D7000 toward a D600). I don't regret it -- I'm quite happy with the D600 -- but the D7000 is a fantastic camera, it's less expensive, and if your lenses are all DX, you're not looking at a considerable investment in new glass.

Couple of things about the 600: While it's larger and heavier "on paper," it feels identical to the D7000 (to me, anyway). So if you didn't like the ergonomics of the 7000, you're not gonna like them on the 600. Also, if you're going to be using an 18-200 in crop mode, you're cutting the resolution from 24MP to something like 10MP. Granted, that's the same number of MP as your D60 (plus, factor in a couple generations' worth of changes in sensor and processor technology). However, if you're going to be using an FX camera mostly/entirely in DX mode, it begs the question why you wouldn't just get a DX camera in the first place. Use it on the 7000 and you're getting full resolution out of the sensor. Besides, with the money you'd save, you can pick up another lens.

Posted 8 months ago #
warprints

preferred member
Joined: Mar '09
Posts: 769
offline

Pick up a lightly used or refurb D7000 or D300 and use that until the D400 (hopefully) is released later this year. I can't see putting the cart before the horse (FX body before you have any worthwhile lenses for it).

Posted 8 months ago #
donaldejose

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

Here is an option I have not heard anyone talk about: Buy the D600 and start with used older (35mm film era) Nikon AF lenses which you can obtain for less than $150. I have a D600 on order and a lot of older 35mm film era AF lenses so I am going to start testing them on a D600 when my body arrives. Such a combo should be the least expensive first step into FX using current FX body technology. Hopefully, I can find some good old AF lenses. If they were good enough for film why wouldn't they be good enough for 24mp digital? We will see.

Posted 8 months ago #
El_Pickerel

preferred member
Joined: Jul '11
Posts: 581
offline

donaldejose said:
Here is an option I have not heard anyone talk about: Buy the D600 and start with used older (35mm film era) Nikon AF lenses which you can obtain for less than $150. I have a D600 on order and a lot of older 35mm film era AF lenses so I am going to start testing them on a D600 when my body arrives. Such a combo should be the least expensive first step into FX using current FX body technology. Hopefully, I can find some good old AF lenses. If they were good enough for film why wouldn't they be good enough for 24mp digital? We will see.

This is also not a bad option... also, used and refurbished can be your friend, through a reputable seller. There are many options other than the Nikkor 24-70 that are very capable in that range - the older Nikkor AF-S 28-70mm f/2.8, the Tamron 24-70mm f/2.8 VC (not too much less, but still less and of great quality!), the very inexpensive Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8.

Not sure how you shoot, but if you are going on a trip to Canada in the winter, maybe you want wide glass for landscapes? I'm not sure how you shoot, but when I was in Iceland the effective 24mm of the 16-35mm f/4 VR on my D7000 proved adequate most of the time. If you can find that lens, it isn't terribly expensive compared to the 24-70s, but it is excellent. Plenty of other wide offerings for less, too. The AF 20mm f/2.8D is a great prime, and someone here enjoys the Tokina 17mm prime. Tokina's 16-28mm f/2.8 and 17-35mm f/4 lenses are also supposed to be excellent.

Also, a quick remark on the DX 35mm f/1.8G - it *almost* covers the full frame sensor. I tried it on my D800 to see just how bad it was, and it isn't terrible. The very corners fade to black, and the side edges and corners are very squishy. For my purposes though - low light, shooting wide open for street and close action shots, the corner performance is of no great concern. I will hang onto it for those purposes until I get a good idea of how the newly announced third party 35mm lenses perform. Even if I do get a full frame 35mm prime, I'll probably hold onto it for the same reason I hold onto the 20mm f/2.8D and 50mm f/1.8D - if I'm shooting heavier zoom lenses, I can throw it in my pack as an afterthought without weighing myself down nearly as much as an f/1.4 prime would.

Posted 8 months ago #
tcole1983

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

donaldejose said:
Here is an option I have not heard anyone talk about: Buy the D600 and start with used older (35mm film era) Nikon AF lenses which you can obtain for less than $150. I have a D600 on order and a lot of older 35mm film era AF lenses so I am going to start testing them on a D600 when my body arrives. Such a combo should be the least expensive first step into FX using current FX body technology. Hopefully, I can find some good old AF lenses. If they were good enough for film why wouldn't they be good enough for 24mp digital? We will see.

Sorry off topic. You are getting a D600 also? Do you shoot for a living? Didn't you get a D4 (or D800) also?

I think donaldejose is on to something, there are all kinds of combinations you can get to do the job. Although I have some FX glass I am in a similar situation. However I see options such as old AF glass as a compromise. Going from a 18-200 to being limited to a single prime or something. It depends on how long it would take you to save for a new lens or whatever. I would probably sell both the 35 and 18-200 and could have almost enough to get a different lens...maybe the 24-120 instead. The switch would cost you something like $2400 then and some time to sell your lenses. You could always add the 50 F1.8 later.

I don't have any good opinion though. I wish a new DX body would be released instead. The D600 isn't a great option if you have no FX glass IMO and can expensive quickly...such as the 24-70 F2.8. Then you jumped to almost $4000 for that kit. And the other option is older or cheaper glass. Gosh to me it seems asinine to buy a new expensive body and then be limited to so so variable aperture or old (I know there are a couple of gems out there) glass.

Posted 8 months ago #
sevencrossing

preferred member
Joined: Sep '10
Posts: 1,265
offline

donaldejose said:
Here is an option I have not heard anyone talk about: Buy the D600 and start with used older (35mm film era) Nikon AF lenses which you can obtain for less than $150.

This makes sence to me S/H Nikon AF lenses are unlikey to drop in value much

Posted 8 months ago #
donaldejose

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

tcole1983: I have a D40, D70, D80, D90, D3100, D3200, D7000, D800 and a D600 on order. I do not have a D4. Only the D80 and D800 (and soon D600) were bought new. The others were purchased used or reconditioned. A D4 would be nice but I don't need the fps or the robust build so it is just not a good "bang for the buck" for me. It is just too much money to play around with. Yes, you can say I have more money than good sense or talent. I enjoy photography and that includes testing out some of the things I read. For example, when Ken Rockwell praised the D40 so highly and said you don't need more than 6mp it didn't seem right to me so I bought a used D40 on e-bay for about $200 and shot with it for a while. KR is sort of right, 6mp does produce a large enough image for most of us, if we don't need the additional controls or more robust build of a more expensive model. I tired to illustrate this recently on PAD by posting a half mp image taken with a D40 and a direct link to the full 6mp image. When I read that 36mp is too much data to process but also the D800 IQ exceeds medium format phase one cameras according to DxOMark, I couldn't resist buying one to see for myself. Still testing that out. I printed a crop of about one third of a D800 image at 24 x 36 inches and it was very sharp. My tentative conclusion is that processing is slower and very few people need 36mp. Most of the mp are just wasted as we downsize the image to print or view it. Now comes the D600 at 24mp. I ordered one because I think it will be "just right;" faster processing than 36mp and still more than enough resolution to crop significantly and still print at 24x36 inches. Plus, I think the U1 and U2 controls are the way to go, if the grip size is not too small for your hands (my D7000 is not too small for my hands but I can say the D800 with battery grip and 28-70 f2.8 is too heavy and too bulky to carry around all day). Finally, I think the "plastic" build on the D600 can be addressed by adding the metal battery grip to the bottom so you have a metal top, back, bottom and lens mount. That should be robust enough. So I am thinking a D600 with battery grip is the most FX almost anyone really needs. I have not purchased a 24mp D3200 because I would rather test out a 24mp DX sensor in a D7200 or a D400 body so I am waiting for those to arrive in 2013. My current project is to pull out a lot of Nikon 35mm AF lenses I bought on e-bay and keh ranging from a Nikon plastic $35.00 28-80 f3.3-5.6 G up to a metal $125.00 Nikon 28-85 f3.5-4.5 and a metal 35-135mm f3.5-4.5 I purchased for the same price. These are very inexpensive "normal" zooms which give the D600 user wide angle for landscapes and moderate telephoto for portraits (if I can find one that is sharp on the D600). A person could match one of these older AF zooms with a 50mm 1.6 AF-D prime I bought for $85.00 for low light. Sure, the latest and greatest lenses will be better but that additional ability won't show on PAD or 8x10 prints. Anyway, that is my suspicion and we will see if it is true. If I had more money I would love to play around with a D4 but I just don't so for less than the cost of one D4 with one "holy trinity" lens I can experiment with a large number of Nikon bodies and last generation FX lenses.

Posted 8 months ago #
aprice30

new member
Joined: Sep '12
Posts: 4
offline

I am starting to side with the D7000 route now and then save the money saved to buy an FX lens. It does seem the best idea since the lens will be good for a long time whereas the D600 will just drop in price further.

Just wish a D7100 or a D400 had been announced either would have been perfect. But with no news what so ever on either front I am wondering if one will come.

Posted 8 months ago #
donaldejose

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

Yes, they both will come. But it may be in 2013, If you want them, just wait.

Posted 8 months ago #
aprice30

new member
Joined: Sep '12
Posts: 4
offline

I'v been waiting since the start of 2012 because they may come. Should have gone for the D7000 long ago :( oh well.

Posted 8 months ago #
donaldejose

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

Look at a D5100 if you want to save some money for a later purchase of a D7200 or D400. It has the same 16mp sensor as the D7000.

Posted 8 months ago #
JohnSebs

member
Joined: May '10
Posts: 43
offline

I wouldnt buy a camera or lens just to get me through. I don't have the money to buy multiple cameras so when I buy I want to buy what I like. So if you can afford the D600 which is what you want then buy it and use your lenses on your trip and save for the lens. Or otherwise, buy better glass which should last ages and should help your images even with the D60 as long as your D60 is still in good working order and save up to buy the camera you like.

Its just my opinion...my funds are limited so I only buy what I really like and what I can afford...

Posted 8 months ago #
Funduro

preferred member
Joined: Sep '10
Posts: 121
offline

donalddejose wrote: I have a D40, D70, D80, D90, D3100, D3200, D7000, D800 and a D600 on order. LOL I thought that having aD300s AND a D700 made me feel like I have OCD. Thanks for curing my phobia ! ;-) ( my post is meant to be funny)

OP you do have great suggestions being posted so your decision will be very well thought out and reasonable. Don't forget the D type Nikon lenses, they are a great value.

Posted 8 months ago #
DaveyJ

preferred member
Joined: Jun '10
Posts: 452
offline

Funduro has a good point about Nikon D lens. Great value. But if you buy any lens used from private sellers outside companies like B&H you'd better make sure you don't get them with dust, fungus, etc. There are used lens buying tutorials. EBay can be a problem here.

The two brothers time lapse video on the Nikon USA site clearly shows how long the D600 test mule cameras (Nikon preproduction cameras) have been out there working. Those stills and videos were taken last winter mostly. The D400 test cameras are out there getting stills and video that we will be seeing in 2013. Check that out and look at the Nikkor lens in use for much of it. Big glass, big bucks, and supersize that for the travel to those locations.....Alaska, Monument Valley, Arizona Navaho colored rock shots, etc.

Posted 7 months ago #
msmoto

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

@ donaldejose ...so when are you ordering your D4?

Posted 7 months ago #
Mihai CH

member
Joined: Nov '12
Posts: 34
offline

Hi guys.

I would really want to upgrade also and D600 sounds very tempting. However, I do not make any money out of photography, I'm just a passionate amateur and on a budget
Currently I own: Nikon D80, Tokina 11-16, Tamron 17-50 (without VC), Nikon 70-300 VRII and the primes: Nikon 35 1.8G, Nikon 50 1.8D and Tokina 100 macro.

In case I go FF, the only compatible lens are the last 2 primes and the 70-300 although quality wise this tele is not great. Also, I heard that the 11-16 should be ok @16 on FF.
I shoot landscape, urban, portraits and very little macro and studio. However, lately I've also started shooting dogs agility (running, jumping obstacles etc) and the D80 is totally overwhelmed.

Whatever I choose for body I would like to get it new, for warranty and peace of mind. Lenses I'm pretty ok to buy SH. The options I see are: D600 but also a 24-70 2.8 (keeping the primes, maybe the Tokina and the 70-300) or wait & buy the future D7100, get some good FF lenses (the trinity?) then move to FF - this would mean a few years probably.

Last but not least - tried the D7000, maybe I had bad luck but I got 3 bodies all with problems. And don't ask about budget, I need to negotiate with wifey after I make up my mind what I want to do :))

Posted 6 months ago #
TaoTeJared

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

With the quality of what DX seems to achieve now, I would stick with DX. You don't need $6,000 of glass and a $2,000 camera to make great images. What you have now is quite good. DX will allow you to get more for your money and give you more glass options than having to switch to FX. I still see the D600 as a good pro back-up and a marketing gimmick to get amateurs to spend a ton of $$ on new glass. Good camera if you have the money, but if you are stretching it, I would focus on glass and move to FX when you have the glass bought first.

Just a note, the 35mm 1.8g does work on FX but has heavy vignetting. I like it, not technically correct, but I usually had a lot of vignetting to my photos anyway.

Posted 6 months ago #
golf007sd

preferred member
Joined: Nov '10
Posts: 585
offline

@mihaich: The D600, much like the D4 & D800, will work with all DX lenses...that is why it has a DX mode on/of in the camera setup menus. So your lenses will work on it as if it was a DX body. But, as you know, you will not be taking advantage of the FF sensor.

Given that you are not a novice, you have plenty of tools at your disposal to make the right choice for which lens kit to you...after all this is not your first "rodeo." If there is a lens you have specific question on, let us know and we will each tell you our thoughts about it, with respect to how each of us has used it. FYI. TTJ, Eric, msmoto are "glass professors" they have immense knowledge on them. I'm just playing catchup.

Lastly, if you do buy new body, there are some very nice specials offered that reduce the price of a pro-glass (those with a gold ring in the front) when purchase with a D600.

Good luck...specially with the wife :P

Posted 6 months ago #
Mihai CH

member
Joined: Nov '12
Posts: 34
offline

Thank you guys for your answers. While I've been reading the NR website for years now, I am just discovering the great community hidden inside the "Forum" button -- so nice to have found it.

@TaoTeJared, although I do have the hots for a change and D600 has superb quality, when I manage to think objectively I end the same result as you - at the current price D600 is for at least semi-pros or people who make some money out of photography. And in case I go FF at some point the 35mm will leave me, I know it vignettes.

@golf007sd - yes, no point in buying FF to use with DX lenses, I think it somehow defeats the purpose. I'll try to settle down for a few more months hoping the D7000 successor comes along as the body is my biggest drawback now, not necessarily the lenses. By the way, here in Romania Nikon gives up to 7% discount when buying a FF body + a gold ring lens (in case there is a promo offer however this does not apply any longer).

Posted 6 months ago #
donaldejose

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

msmoto: I would love to have a D4 but for $6,000 I can have more fun with more bodies (D800 + D600 is only about $5,000 which leaves a $1,000 left for a D7200). If I shot sports professionally or speeding cars (like you do) I would get a D4 instead of the others because I would need the speed. But I don't. Shooting both a D800 and a D600 has convinced me that I don't need a D800's 36 megapixels. The 24mp on the D600 is good enough for my use and I expect the same will be true of a high end 24mp DX sensor. I think a D600 FX matched with a D7200 DX will do all I need or want to do and will be lighter to carry around.

Posted 6 months ago #
kanuck

preferred member
Joined: Apr '09
Posts: 1,405
offline

Good topic and one that I have thought about a lot over the years although obviously regarding different bodies. The D600 should continue to drop in price and used bodies will even start popping up so if I were you I would grab the excellent 24-70mm lens first. I still believe it is Nikon best lens in its current lineup with the exception of the extreme telezooms of course. I see that you need it for January 2013? Possible Christmas sales might help? Ebay? The big lens should always come before the big body purchase, but I do feel your pain believe me..

Posted 6 months ago #
Mihai CH

member
Joined: Nov '12
Posts: 34
offline

Well guys, I have to share this with you because my excitement level is through the roof. I took your advice (partly) and understood I need at least one top quality lens with a FF body, so this Black Friday I was one of the few who managed to get Nikon D600 at 1550euros and the gorgeous Nikkor 24-70 2.8 for another 1100euros. Also got 2xSandisk 8Gb extreme 30 Mbps for 35euros.

I have already picked them up from the shop and I'm biting my hands here at work to try them, but I'll get home only late in the night :(

Will come back with some impressions after this weekend.

Posted 6 months ago #
msmoto

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

@ Mihai CH.... congratulations..... we will be waiting for the results on PAD

Posted 6 months ago #