Updated specifications for the Nikon D600


The release probability of the Nikon D600 for Photokina is now at 99%. Here is an updated list of the specifications (new additions in bold):

  • Very small and lightweight body
  • 16 bit image processing
  • Expeed 3 processor
  • Maximum video recording: 30 minutes
  • Built-in mic
  • 19 scene modes
  • Magnesium alloy only on top and back only
  • Maximum shutter speed of 1/4000
  • Shutter life: 150,000 cycles (the D800 is rated for 200,000 cycles)

Previously reported Nikon D600 specs:

  • 24.7MP full frame sensor
  • Weight: 760g (850g with battery and memory cards), the D800 weights 900g
  • 3.2" LCD with 921K dot with ambient sensor control
  • HDMI output
  • Video compression: H264/MPEG-4
  • Full HD with 30p, 25p, 24p, HD with 60p, 50p, 30p, 25p
  • Viewfinder coverage: 100%
  • The Nikon D600 will have built-in AF motor
  • The body most probably will be weather sealed
  • The D600 will not have built-in GPS
  • ISO range: 100-6400 (with Lo-1 ISO 50 and Hi-2 ISO 25,600)
  • 39 AF points (with an option of 11 AF points), 9 cross-type AF points
  • AF face detection
  • Exposure compensation: ±5 EV (same as the D800)
  • The D600 will probably use the EN-EL15 rechargeable Li-ion battery
  • 5 fps (same as the D700, the D800 has 4fps)
  • 2 SD card slots with Eye-fi support
  • Build-in retouching images functionality
  • Built-in flash with sync speed of 1/250s
  • Two user settings: U1 and U2
  • Fn button
  • Auto DX crop mode
  • In-camera RAW editor
  • Built in time-lapse functionality
  • Build-in HDR
  • New external battery grip
  • Internal AF motor
  • The price of the D600 is rumored to be very low - maybe as low as $1500
  • Announcement before Photokina (September 2012)
This entry was posted in Nikon D600. Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • xlaburu

    Ok, so let’s Recap.:

    – 24mpx: +1 (don’t need 36 for nothing, I just hope the CMOS will be the same quality)

    – Autofocus accurecy: I see someone that doesen’t think it will be to good, specially in low light. If it’s so, it will be a real pain. May someone confirm this? if it’s so, it will be a major drawback.

    – Magnesium alloy only on the top and the back: Ok, top is one of the places were it gets hit most, but I would prefere a full alloy bodie. -1

    – Shutter speed: 1/4000 is 1 EV less, isn’t a question of life or death, though it’s bothersome, specially when you work with bright lenses, but with ISO control and a NB filter, everything should be fine, never the less I think it is a -2 rate for me.

    – FPS: 5 fps, well, on my D-700 I have 7 or 8, I don’t remember right now, if the grip gives it an extra burst, it will be great, ohterwise it is neutral for me.

    – Video: Well, attending that I am working with a D-700, it is a good +2 points.

    – FX format: I do lot’s of street photography, so, low light and wide angle lenses are two of my usuall situations and in both cases a FX sensor is better, but since the D700 has one too, I whon’t rate this.

    – 16 bit image processing: Well, on my D700 I only can get 14bit images, I am not quite sure if this means that the images will get to 16 bit, but that would be great in order to get a bit more detail in shades and lights, so if it’s so I give it an +1 rate

    – AF-S to AF-C mode: Well, now I know it is possible with a funcion button and a dial, it seems fast and easy, but probably I would have prefered the 3 position knob anyway. I do have to switch once and a while from one to an other in mid shooting, since sometimes the AF-S isn’t convinient and I decide for the AF-C mode, so I am still a bti reluctant about it and I will rate it -1

    – Weather sealed: I hope it is, otherwise this is an other key issue, If my D-700 would not be weather sealed, by now it would have been trashed, so I hope it is.

    – Flash sync.: Well, 1/250 is fine most of the times, the truth is that I hardly use my flash, but it worries me in high speed sync mode, I hope it will be capable to do so.

    – 39 AF points (or 11 points): I don’t care much about it, I work with my D-700 with the 11 points, on fast street photography, handle too many points is a problem. So it’s fine for me.

    – Price: Well, price is “cheap” but I don’t think it’s a bargain, ince there are some key issues that worry me a bit, but I will give it a +2 since the alternative is dubble the price.

    So in my overall rate, despite not having all the information I would need, I would give it a temporarly modest +2 points. we will see what happens in the future.

    • Jilian

      @ xlaburu
      “Can someone confirm this?”
      “So in my overall rate, despite not having all the information I would need, I would give it a temporarly modest +2 points. we will see what happens in the future.”

      SERIOUSLY!?! It hasn’t even been announced! And who the hell are you to give “your rating”??? Get off of your high horse and get back to shooting!

      • Are you kidding me? Everyone has a “rating” system. We all look at them every day. You’re on this site for a reason too. Get off YOUR high horse.


      • First of all, I would like a bit of polightness.

        Second of all, I am not trying to impose my impressions to anyone, just expressing them as every one else here. And specially trying to find out if this camera is worthed for some kind of professional work for not and if I have to spend a pile of money on the damn expensive D4, or a great amount on a D800, camera with what I wouldn’t exploit half of it’s price and capabilities.

        Anything written here is pure and simple speculation, so if you send me to shut up, you are sending everyone else to shut up as well. If I thought this post could be interesting is because many people say that they need a camera with lot’s of Mpx. other who whant a viewfinder with 100% coverage, or who knows what, but my oppinion is that a camera is a combination of factors and commenting on the ones I think may be important, may help others to think about those issues too.

        About high horse or go back to shooting, first of all, I think you are on a higher horse then I, thinking that you can troll around asking others tu shut up, so perhaps you should be the first one to step down, my friend. About shooting, well, I whon’t even bother to answor that, it is plain and simple nonsence since you have no idea what I do or cease to do.

      • ashwins

        Grow up, Jilian!

      • Z

        Um … seriously, Jilian … you need a chill pill … maybe 2 …

    • ikemyer

      Sounds like you want a D4 but don’t want to pay $6000. The D600 will not be a D800. It should not have all the features of the D800 since the D800 is a higher level camera.

      • xlaburu

        It is not that I whant nor a D4 nor a D800, the truth is that I would not squeeze the juice out of none of them both, I would like a reasonable alternative for my D700. The only two things I miss in my D700 are video and 6 to 8 Mpx. more. If that could be possible it would be a great solution, and I just am trying to find out if the D600 is something for the stile or if it’s way to amateur for my needs.

    • elph

      Ratings? WTH? Biggest factor for you to consider *$1500* Of course its going to be lesser in almost every area then that of your D700, or my D800!
      This whole rating system of yours according to the rumoured specs is BS, because you need a camera for what YOU do, the rumoured specs are more then adequate considering the price, no offence but holy crap.

    • Isoruku

      “Scene modes”?? No, please, not scene modes on a pro-level camera. I beg you, Nikon.

      • Pablo

        Not a Pro camera, remember that.
        Pro is a D4
        Prosumer D800
        Entry level D600

        • Toecutter

          You’re wasting your time.They want a D4 for $1500

          • Marcelobtp

            We want a D700 with 24 megapixels, with the same AF reliability, something that have been missing with the newer nikons, but let’s see. Before someone come talking bullshit… i’m nikon user D60, and now D7000, my D7000 is very problematic, i’m not a canon fan or something, this is just a statement that many nikon fans seems to disagree, but without focus realiability bye bye d600.
            And 5 fps (worse than D7000) without the 1/8000, is kind of disapointing. I will wait for a real D700 sucessor.

            • Gary


              You wrote “my D7000 is very problematic”. What problems are you encountering, please?

    • KnightPhoto

      @ xlaburu

      In my experience D7K 39pt AF is not as good as the 51pt AF models in extreme low light. I have given my D7K every opportunity in extreme low light (theatre) but it simply misses the AF a lot and I lose what would otherwise be a keeper. D300, D700, D4 all don’t have this problem for me.

      Now, a couple years have passed and maybe Nikon has corrected this ability and perhaps the problem was limited to incandescent lighting. This is one of those things that is going to not be heavily known until the D600 is out there in the wild.

      I still like my D7K for birding, but I don’t bring it into Theatre any more. From time to time I see others note the same general issue.

  • “Built-in flash with sync speed of 1/250s” WTF ?
    Where is the 1/320 of all other Nikon ?

    • all the current Nikon only sync to 1/250. Maybe you thinking about AutoFP? If that is the case then I’m sure D600 will support it as well.

      • umesh

        If it’s fp flash , it goes much higher.

      • Ignacio Gonzalez

        Nikon D700 syncs at 1/320.
        Nikon D200 syncs at 1/250.

        i know because i have a D200, and having tried a D700, i really want one (even if it’s old hat)

        • Kevin Grall

          D700 syncs at 1/250th (I have one). It syncs at higher speeds in FP mode, so yes it technically will sync up to 1/8000

        • D700 x-sync is 1/250. autoFP with built in flash is 1/320 but its not actual x-sync and the flash power will drop

    • Yep I was wrong 1/320 is for additional flash…

    • Jon

      Full frame can only sync at 1/250 because it is bigger, APC like the D300 can sync faster at 1/320. The mechanical shutter can only move so fast.

  • D1000

    @Admin (and everyone out there)

    Just an off-topic question: anyone knows if the focus issue sffects in the same way (%) the d800 and d800e models? Thanks

    • umesh

      D R I N K!
      Btw D 1000 is a canon so………………….

      • D1000

        Hahaha! The opposite of reality! I’m interested in buying the D800 and was wondering if the issue occurs in a lower number of cameras.
        BTW 1000D is canon not D1000 so………

        • dwd

          You’re not buying any D800 and you know it.

          • jorg


          • D1000

            The only reason I’m not going to buy a D800 is money! If I could buy the body then I would have only a few bucks for the lenses and the D800 requires top of the line lenses! Maybe I’m going for the D600 + 16-35 f4 and 85 1.8g… who knows only photokina will tell…

            But let me say you guys have serious problems: you see trolls and canonist everywhere! Maybe you have been molested in your childhood by some canonguys… get a life

            • dwd

              So you have no camera and you have no lenses. You have no money for them either. Photokina isn’t going to tell you anything. There is nothing being released there that you’ll be able to afford or buy. You’re not getting a D800, you’re not getting D600, you’re not buying a Nikon and you’re not buying a Canon either. You are just wishing you could have some camera and end up with only manufactured pro and cons lists in your head about brands and bodies you never have and never will use.

              Here’s something for you to do while the rest of us ‘get a life’: Wish in one hand and sh*t in the other, then let me know which one fills up first.

    • I think so, but I am not sure

  • Brent

    Still rumored to be around $1600?

    • gugyguy

      nope, still $1500

  • ai-s

    if it work with my “old” ai-s lenses i’ll buy one.

    • Felipe

      This is a biggie for me also…half of my lenses are AI.

    • ashwins

      If a DX like D7000 has that capability, why wouldn’t then a more expensive FX model have it? Sounds very logical to me that D600 would have that capability.

  • Axel

    To all people waiting for a “true” D700 replacement … Forget it guys …

    We all know that you want a D3S (sensor/AF…) in a D800 body at the price tag of a D600 with the video and ergonomy enhancements of the D4 … I do too …

    But let’s face it won’t happen. They did that mistake with the D700 and killed so much D3 sales that they are not ready to do it again …

    So stop whining … Go buy a used D3S, or maybe have a look at the 3200-6400 ISO pics from the D600 in a couple of months … But stop waiting and trolling please…

    • xlaburu

      I suppose you are right, in fact what I would be looking for is a D3X, but a bit smaller and lighter and with more ISO range. So I think I don’t have any cure for this illness… :S

      • Axel

        mhhh … The D800 +GRIP fits your description pretty well, no ?

        • xlaburu

          There is a big problem with the D-800 Axel, and it is the excesive size of the file. when you work and have to file in 30 min a full job, managing huge raw files becomes an important issue. No need to say that it will occupy much more space in my hard disks, up to now I have about 8 Tb full to the top of images using a camera that gives me 24Mb raws, I can’t imagine how many more I will need with a camera that delivers tree times that file weight. When you have to buy your self a camera of these characteristics you have to think about all the computering expences you’ll have to do too, and for managing all those images with the deadlines I have I need a pritty better labtop and desk computer. Not to think about the buffering of the camera, could I shoot in continuous mode 15 shots, and if I can, how long will that take to load on the memory card before I can shoot a single image more. It is not that easy, the D800 is a product for a certain target that is not mine, and the D4 is faster then what I need, bigger then what I would like, no need to say that it’s dubble the price of the D800. So, if I pay for one or the other, part of that money I’ll be paying whon’t serve me for nothing, at least that’s the feeleng I have.

  • Morebravo

    Lets get this over and done with now. We all know that the D800 has focus issues. Can we try and keep the D800 slander out of this thread for a change.

    Im very interested in the D600, it seems to be a great entry into the FX format. I will be keenly awaiting all the reviews from the pros (not Canon Trolls)

    • Analyst

      It’s not slander if it’s true. In this case, mentioning the D800 focus issues is just off-topic.

      The D800 has a different AF system than the D7000 and rumored D600. It is unlikely that the D800 problems will show up in the D600. Rather, the D7000 AF problems will show up in the D600. Haha!

    • Ric


  • D400

    This should seriously bring down the price of the 11-16 and the 8mm fish 😀 😀 😀 😀 😀

    • Brent

      Why would a body release bring down the price of a lens?

      • Collins

        More people selling their DX cameras for FX

        Lower demand for the Tokina 11-16 DX lens so used prices should drop due to supply.

        (i happen to be one of the people who sold their 11-16)

        Not a definite Price drop but i can see his logic if hes talking about used lenses

        • But you can use Tokina 11-16 on a D600 cause the automatic DX switch 😉

          • PeterO

            As I recall, (aside from the automatic DX crop) you can use the Tokina 11-16 on FX because at 16mm it covers the full FX frame. I’m not selling mine.

            • D400

              Yeah, and I have also heard that the toki @ 16mm on full frame isn’t real good.
              I am hoping for a nice used toki 11-16 under $400 😀

  • Luke

    Hmm, I don’t know what to think…this camera has some features I like, but also some I don’t like :/

  • pewter

    so what is 16 bit good for?

    • umesh

      Speaking in most general terms , you get atleast one stop added dynamic range to 14bit image (In colour and brightness.) Meaning more correction possibility in post and better detail in shadows and highlights. Almost all digital bachs have 16 bit .

      • pewter

        but i thought DR depends mainly on the sensor performance?

        and if the sensor only delivers 12 stops.. what is 16 bit worth?

        or do i get something wrong here??

      • dwd

        What is not said is where the 16bit takes place. Nikon has had 16bit per pixel sensors and 16bit DSPs for years in Expeed, it get’s output to 14 or 12bit later in the chain. So this “feature” could possibly be just a statement that is regurgitating the Expeed3 spec, especially since it’s labeled “16-bit Image Processing”.

      • Pdf Ninja

        No it doesn’t add any dynamic range at all. Dynamic range is determined by how many photos each photosite can collect. The number of bits determines how many individual shades of color you get. In other words, more bits means more shadow detail (less posterization) if you are doing a really extreme exposure adjustment in post processing.

        Every Nikon DSLR has 16-bit processing for a long time now (since EXPEED at least). So there’s nothing new here. The analog to digital conversion is still 12 or 14 bits. Only the processing is 16 bits.

  • supfreak

    hope the AF is not like the D7000, it was crap.
    Backfocus and hard to focus in low light.. I exchanged it for a D300s and was waaay better.

    Why newer models have Focus problem Nikon ??

    • Craig

      Your point about hard to focus on the D7K are right on. I use my D7K for low light bird photography. I am sooooooo disappointed in the low light AF that I commonly use my D90.

      • Guy C

        I agree Craig. I loved everything about the 7K save the autofocus. I have owned a bunch of Nikon SLRs. Film and digital and none of them gave me a higher percentage of out of focus shots than the 7000. I was hoping that the 600 would be something with image quality comparable to my D700 that would be more comfortable on a long hike (extra resolution would just be a nice bonus). I would have bought one the minute I could get my hands on one. If it focuses anything like the 7k I won’t bother.

    • Funduro

      “Why newer models have Focus problem Nikon ??”

      Interesting question. Could it be the HW and SW have reached the point that manufacturing and build have topped out? In other words maybe the next big leap was off a cliff ? Could be the marketing gurus asked engineering and manufacturing for the impossible. Could it be that FPS and other hyped specs got in the way of stable and reliable performance? Could it be that the SW code has a bug that is not easily corrected without major changes accuring which would bring new criticism?

      • Neil

        Or could it be that things have reached a point where the person behind the camera is responsible for most focus issues?

      • umesh

        Your points give an impression that it is not a production fault but a design fault. As if it is not possible to correct it in any possible way and it is present in all D800 and D 800e cams. That’s how it comes across.

      • FFS!!!!

        My D7000 had focus issue, it would focus inches to feet in front of my intended focal point, I sent it back to Nikon and they sorted it, it is now perfect, going from 1 in a 100 being in focus to 90 in a 100 in focus.

        It was just a quality control issue, they are sending them out without the focus being set up right, there is nothing actually wrong with the system.

    • Nathan

      They should just put a ground glass in the viewfinder with a split image rangefinder/microprism in the center and suddenly you have perfect focus all the time. It’s not autofocus but it’ll be more accurate at times.

      • Mark

        Hear hear!!!!!

        I keep asking around, did focusing screens go away because they weren’t compatible with the pop-up flash, by any chance?

        If so, it is a lousy tradeoff.

        • Nathan

          I think they went away because they needed the ultra-bright screen for the AF sensor. For me that was a lousy tradeoff. 😉

  • freelancer

    not entirely sure what the buzz about 16 bit PROCESSING is, i thought the processing is 16 bit already but the data is only 14 bit? (two bits are always zero).

    does this mean it´s 16 bit from the sensor, through AD, to the prozessor?

    • LeadWrist

      Exactly, 16 bit processing is pointless when the NEF only stores 12 or 14 bit image data. The key to DR is A/D converter. All the current cameras have 14-bit A/D converter, now if it had a 16-bit A/D converter along with the 16-bit image processing and finally if NEF would store 16-bit data as well that would be some nice pictures…

      My gripe is on the 1/4000, I really really really hope this is wrong. Though this is only really important for F/2.8/ISO 100 in broad daylight. I think my concern is more that I have it today on my D7k, taking something away that I really probably never used isn’t the point.

  • Pro Camera

    Well, I think it makes sense:

    – Half the D800 price
    – Half the D800 quality

    It is a D7000 on steroids.

    • :)

      nice! 🙂

  • Booyah

    It has 19 scene modes! Sweet! Nothing like a full size Coolpix. I hope it has pet portrait mode so that I can take better photos of my cat.

    • Glenn

      Great post! Couldn’t have said it better myself…

    • only 19 modes! its got to be 20 scenemodes or i am moving to canon!

      Seriously what the feck is a full frame 24mp camera doing with scene modes?

      • Collins

        If i had to guess

        To catch the rich person with money, and still allow them to shoot in an area of familiarity.

        useful – probably not
        necessary for their marketing – yes

      • Nathan

        I’m still waiting for the Ansel Adams and Herman Newton modes.

      • Josh

        This camera IS NOT A PRO CAMERA! It is in the same class as the D7000. Having an FX sensor doesn’t chage that. This is a new paradigm. Full frame is no longer being reserved for the expensive pro models.

        • LeadWrist

          I would happily take a D7000 with an FX sensor. Unfortunately, if the specs above are accurate, the D600 will have less features compared to D7k. Take 1/4000 for instance, or 1/320 auto fp, etc.

          Also i’m wondering what the DX crop mode will be like. If it’s around 12mp that’s not bad, just like the D90 then.

    • Ric

      3 will be for food.


    • Isoruku

      Exactly my point! I’d almost be embarrassed to carry it.

  • NathanDrake

    “Small and lightweight” IE: “Cheap piece of junk!” Not a robust, professionally built camera like the D700, RIP! But a full frame D7000. A camera that only lasted me two months of professional work. Thanks Nikon for forcing us to either spend $6K on a D4 or use a D800 made for commercial work, but not journalism because the files are two big and the framerate is from the dark ages. Guess I’ll switch BRANDS since that is what YOU are forcing me and professionals like me! And where is the D400!???

    • philip

      Thank god someone with a bit of sense, Im seriously looking at the mark 3 canon, There is a market there for a 600 but not for what some people need. I hope they announce this camera very very soon so we can start to think of a d700x or d400. I was thinking of a d800 with a good DX lens too, anything over 12 mp should be decent enough to use

      • PHB

        You call that ‘sense’ ?

        If the poster really was a professional photographer he would either (1) make enough money to buy the more robust gear or (2) take better care of his gear or (3) both.

        I find it hard to believe that anyone can destroy an Nikon body in a couple of months without treating it so badly that they are also breaking the lenses.

        The D600 is very clearly designed for the demanding consumer rather than someone making a living from photography. The ‘professional’ market is actually rather small and most of them make their money from selling grossly overpriced school and sports photos to kids parents.

        Most of the people talking about being a ‘professional’ in the terms the OP uses are nothing of the sort. They are a jock who makes some pin money on the side taking photos at a few weddings a year.

        It is only recently that Nikon had more than one professional camera on offer. In the old days you had a choice between the F3 (pro) and FG (consumer) and that was it. The only other choice being to buy a discontinued model if it was still in stock. Having a choice between three professional cameras is unprecedented (D6, D700/D800, D300/300s), the D600 is a fourth offering.

        • Rick

          Well said!

    • Reilly Diefenbach

      Buh bye.

    • David K

      Then buy a D4 or a canon equivalent and stop complaining. $6k is nothing for a professional who will get a few years worth of use out of the camera.

      • JoeB


        Not sure what kind of street photography you are doing but there is always a cost of admission to being a professional.

        So you need the two camera bodies (about $8k: 1 pro and 1 prosumer backup) and 3-4 lenses (about $8k- you can rent the others as needed). I know you still need a computer system (about $3k), software (about $3k), printer (say $1k but you can pay a printing service as needed), lights (depends but for a fast shooting street photog, let say $1.5k) , etc.

        If you can not afford to invest $15-25k in set up costs (let’s say most of this initial investment lasts you 3 years before needing replacement), you should talk to you mechanic to understand his set up cost to gain some perspective. $10k per year is not unreasonable.

        BTW. You can always adjust the image size and quality to reduce your file sizes.

        Trolling much???

        • c

          not in raw.

        • xlaburu

          I don’t know really how things are in other parts of the world, but it gives me the impression that people overestimate what a free-lance photographer gets in exchange of their work, specially in press.

        • philip

          right we’re geting off topic now, all im saying is I think there is room for a 22 -26mp camera thats not the size of a amature camera, is brand new tec so not the 3x please and feels like a d700.

    • Thanks, JoeB, I fell exactly the same way.

    • I’m hear you Nathan (and Phillip). Unfortunately, it seems that our needs aren’t in alignment with where Nikon thinks it can be most profitable.

  • TR_T-Rex


    How would you rate your certainty about the specs including the new ones such as 1/4000 max shutter spead?

    Are you expecting new pictures of D600 taken from different angles?

    • TR_T-Rex


      Also, the specs of the AF module seems to be exactly the same as D7000. How likely do you think (in terms of percentage) D600’s AF module is same as thr D7000’s? Or do you expect any improvement in regard of AF?

    • 99%, new pictures will come probably next week

  • Mahesh

    Yess!! Where is the D’400 !!!

    still i dont feel that this d600 will come out becoz in a year 3 fx body (which is not worth) and just a single d3200 entry level body…

    whereas d300s is waiting to be replaced from 3 and half years now…. d 7000 is also 2 and half year old now….

    wakeup nikon your dx top line up is like trash box and need some cams to keep it upto mark.

  • Brilliant, will make a great second body, great entry fx option and 16 bit will make a big difference, shame about top 1/4000

  • yudhis

    FX + Cheap, that’s enough for me!

  • marcinek

    Top-left picture differs from other – it does not have front guage between shutter button and red tab on the grip. But it exists on other pictures. I wonder which one is true…

  • jake

    are you sure this camera will get only 1/4000 max shutter speed?
    if you are right on this , it is not my camera and I am disappointed.
    thanks for the info , though.

    • krr

      Which good photo was ever taken with 1/8000? ^^

      • Rhys

        Loads of them. In bright sunlight at 1.4 I’m usually well over a stop over exposed on my D700. The only thing that saves the day is how good the D700 is at recovering highlights.

        For me this is a real let down. In a fast paced wedding, the last thing I want to do is have to piss around with ND filters.

        • Adapt

          Or you could, stop down a little…use lower iso…..buy a d800e…

        • Mikael

          Or you could do something CRAZY like ND filter???
          If you dont mind a polarizing filter will give you about 1 stop, that stop is the 1/8000 down to 1/4000.
          If you shoot 1,4 in bright sunshine and dont use a ND filter i want to know what you are shooting.
          Trying to get Flash Gordon?

          • PHB

            A ND filter costs a heck of a lot more than whatever cost saving might be found with a 1/4000 shutter speed.

            And I have quite a lot of lenses, with different filter sizes to deal with, so its not just one.

            I suspect the spec if wrong, it would make no sense for Nikon to go mess with the shutter module to make it slower. There are much cheaper ways to hobble the D600 so as not to poach D800 sales.

        • Abraham Collins

          Or learn how to use neutral density filters… The only time I’ve ever needed 1/8000 was for a photo of a football kicker.

        • @All,
          There are huge advantages to 1/8000 vs 1/4000 and those who think a ND filter is completely acceptable as a means to compensate just don’t get it. Follow your bride from outside to inside, or conversely, and you will understand why a ND filter isn’t ideal. Although auto ISO will help, shooting wide open in bright daylight with f1.4 at a white wedding dress quite often needs more reduction than 1 stop! Subject isolation and great bokeh is the name of the game and in bright light that one extra stop of reduction is HUGE!

  • rob

    Everyone will find something to nitpick. No one will be happy with everything — EXCEPT ME!
    Can’t wait for this camera. Nevertheless, my purchase will still depend on price. If its closer to $2000, its too much for me. If its under $1700, I’ll probably jump. (At least I have one old 50 1.4 that’ll work on FF.)

    • +1

    • Chase

      I’m excited, too. Would I like faster continuous shooting and a full alloy body? Sure. But I canceled a D800 order when this was first becoming a solid rumor, and if it does come in at half the price, it will mean I can actually buy some new glass to go with it. I don’t do so much pro work these days, so a solid, high-end consumer model sounds great to me. I was just holding out for an FX sensor, and we’ve basically got a full frame D7000 here.

      I might even be able to pick up a secondary mirrorless body to go with it, if it’s truly under $1600. If it ends up being more, or not worth it, I’ll pick up a D800. By that time, they should have any issues with the firmware or focusing worked out.

  • Christobella

    It’s the AF system that bothers me, I can live with all the other short cuts. I just hope it’s up to the job, or for me the camera is next to useless.

    As an avid Nikon user with lots of lovely Nikkor glass, it frustrates me to see Canon produce the 5D III, which ticks all the boxes as far as I, and I suspect many others, are concerned. I have my fingers crossed that Nikon gets this one right.

  • Brent

    If it’s over $2000 (even $1800) I don’t get why someone would choose this over a refurb’d D700, which Nikon sells for ($1996.00)

    • yuppup

      excatly, thats why its $1500

      • PHB

        I think that this is really the D400 upgrade and that the specs are tailored to the needs of a person with a bag full of DX lenses.

        I don’t mind going to full frame but given that I was buying primes rather then zooms in the film era, most of the lenses I use today are DX with a few really good FX primes. So the cost of an FX camera is not just the cost of the body, its the body plus whatever zooms are required to make it useful.

        I can’t see any point to swapping my 18-200 zoom for the FX equivalent either. If I move to an FX setup it has to be a lot better than what I can do with my D300.

        The clever part here is that the D600 is actually a 10MP camera and a 24MP FX camera. So I can use it for practically everything I use my D300 for and also use my FX primes at the field of view they are designed for (the 85 f/1.4 AFS is still an amazing lens on DX only its a not very useful 135mm equiv).

        So a D600 plus a 14-24mm f/2.8 zoom for a bit over $3000 looks like a good deal to me. If I had to spend a lot more than that I might have to think twice.

        If people can afford to buy a complete magic trio (14-24,24-70,70-200) in one go then the cost of the D800 is not going to phase them. But the D600 still looks like a better bet for most as it is lighter.

  • nico

    shit body and 19 scene modes, that says it all. I will have to get stuck with those D800 36MP files that I don’t need. …..

    Thanks Nikon for destroying the D700 succesor into two cameras that I don’t fit me. Not that you have to design a camera for me hahah, but really the D700 was the PERFECT camera, it seems as though you had designed it for me.

    • Adapt

      Then… Keep using the d700.

      If a camera works or you just use it.

      • Mikael

        If it is the perfect camera, why change? 🙂

  • Javier (España)

    From a manufacturer of hard drives:

    Nikon: Thanks for the D800, but when a camera with 200 Mp.

    All Yours faithfully,
    Don money

  • FFS!!!!

    I’m amazed at the amount of confused people on this and other photog forums, Nikon has provided a series of cameras that tailor for everyone’s needs, yet there are people who can’t seem to grasp the concept that if you are looking for a square peg, don’t go to the “round pegs r us” store….!!!!

    Let’s see if I can help some of you understand a very simple concept, instead of moaning and whining about what the camera you are looking at buying “does not” have compared to another model in the line up, why not look at what it “does” have compared to another camera in the line up.

    So the entry level cameras, first off, these are not professional cameras, so stop moaning that they are small and plasticy, they are for novice photographers, at the moment the D3200 has a 24mp sensor, the D5100 has a swivel screen. make up your mind which is more useful for you and buy that one.

    The D7000 and soon to come D600 are aimed at keen amateurs and semi pro shooters that need the more useful features of the pro cameras, but without the weight, size and cost of a full professional body, moaning that the D7000 or the upcoming D600 will only have 39 focus points is sad and pathetic, both these cameras have more focus points than the models below, they also have AF fine tune, they also have hyper sync, they also have commander mode, they also have bigger buffers….

    Don’t compare a camera that is obviously “not” a pro camera to a pro camera…..

    For all you people waiting for a pro DX body (D400) it will never happen, at least not if you have your head stuck in 2008, the D300 came out when Nikon did not have a full frame pro body, so the D300 was an upgrade of the D200 which was the smaller brother to the then top dog, the D2. When Nikon brought out the D3 the game changed for ever, Nikon had gone FX for their pro line up, the D700 became the smaller brother to the D3 and DX as a pro format was dead.

    However I suspect that as the D300 was so new, but already obsolete as a pro camera, Nikon upgraded it to the D300s to keep it going for a few more years, and to possibly give the wildlife shooters a pro crop body to help with reach on there long lenses. Yes people, the crop factor is a reality, though some people have a hard time understanding it…..

    So I repeat, there will never be a D300s replacement…. unless…..

    Next, the D700 is gone and will never be replaced because Nikon cocked up and made too good of an all rounder in this camera, they wont repeat that mistake, the D700 has been broken up, you will find half of it in the D4 with better ISO, faster fps rate, larger and faster buffer….

    The other half is in the D800, higher resolution in FX and DX modes….

    Nikon has created a bigger gap between there flagship models to make you buy both, if that’s what you need, and lets face it, if you are a pro and make your living from photography then spending £10,000 on a couple of cameras and accessories is nothing….

    There will never be a D700 replacement, Nikon will never give a pro a great “all rounder” again.

    Getting back the the D300s replacement, it’s called the D800, maybe Nikon should have called it the D400/800 for those slow on the uptake. The D800 is an 18mp pro body DX camera that is also a 24mp FX camera (1.2x crop mode) and of course a 36mp FX camera, so three cameras in one all for the very reasonable price of £2,500…

    The trade off is you lose 3fps but gain two FX modes up to 36mp….

    So all you people whining about the D400 that will never come, just go out and buy a D800.

    Look for what the new camera brings to the table from it’s predecessor, not what it doesn’t have, Nikon has not been around for 100 years by going backwards….!!!

    In short, Nikon has never had an FX camera at this level in their line up, so therefor everything is a bonus, and nothing is a loss as there is nothing before it to compare it to, it can not be compared to any pro body camera, DX or FX as it is “not” a pro body, so all those whining about it not being a D700 or a D300s, grow up…..

    The D600 is the big brother to the D7000, so it will do everything the D7000 will do but with a 10mp DX mode, and a 24mp FX mode, the only trade off for that that I can see at the mo is the 1/4000 max shutter speed, but that is easily fixed with an ND filter.

    So in short if you are after a mid to advanced FX camera then this is it, if you want a pro camera, then it’s not.

    Stop whining about what “it isn’t” and start celebrating what “it is”….!!!!

    Happy shooting.

    • +1

      This camera is a ‘bonus’ to the lineup, not a ‘bone us’ 🙂

      If anything makes anyone feel like they cannot use a D600, then it only justifies a D800 purchase which is more capability and half the cost of the previous gen D3X.

      Its all good…..

      • PHB

        The D800 is not a real D400 candidate, it costs far too damn much. Remember that for all the blather here, the D300/s is still the best selling Nikon professional camera. It outsold the D700 four to one. Until the D7000 came out it was still outselling all the FX models.

        The game changer here is the D600 which has the D300 price point and close to D300 resolution which is all most DX shooters actually want for their DX lenses.

        I don’t think I want to move to a D800 price body till I have a full set of D800-worthy glass and I am not going to pay that kind of money just to stick it on a D300.

        The D600 looks like the right compromise to me on pretty much every spec other than the 1/4000 which I don’t believe. Even the weight looks like a smart choice. I don’t use my cameras for hand to hand combat so I don’t need the mag alloy version.

        • umesh

          The mag alloy on the front is for holding up all those heavy fx lenses .
          Feel the D7000 + 80-200 2.8 ?

    • Lanskymob

      Great post. But after all of that, still can’t figure out if i should wait for this or just pull the trigger on a used D700

      • jorgen

        if you can not figure out, what camera you need, the answer is easy: it does not matter.
        so get a used D700 and some good glass.

        • Gimme D600


          Do any of these people take any freaking pictures? Have any of you LOOKED at what can be done with a D700? How about the lowly D80? Both are awesome in the hands of someone who throws the thing in Manual mode and has taken the time to lean their tool and can get a bloody exposure.

          • Nikonhead

            The Nikon D80 was known for it’s poor metering.

    • Szteffen

      True! Unfortunately Canon doesn`t think the same way (mk3 7d) bummer for folks like me who got too much money in nikon lenses and strobes to change brands. May I add that I make an income in photography not enough to justify a D4, hardly able to get a D800 which is overkill in terms of file storage and doesn`t suit my needs. Plus Canon ergonomics suck big time. Think we`ll se a D700s type camera in 2 years. At least I hope so..

    • komalkumar


    • Fish Guy

      Thaks for you description of the D800 as a D400 replacement – I understand now that I can stop waiting for a D400 and just get the D800 (I don’t need fps, but I do need build quality). I didn’t understand about the 1.2 crop mode – I thought it was something to do with the aspect ratio. Knowing that I can use it as a 24mp FX makes it a lot more appealing.

      • Nikonhead

        +1 Fish Guy

    • Analyst

      You got a few things wrong, FFS…

      the D300 came out when Nikon did not have a full frame pro body, so the D300 was an upgrade of the D200 which was the smaller brother to the then top dog, the D2. When Nikon brought out the D3 the game changed for ever,

      Um, no. The D300 and D3 were announced on the same day. Look it up on DPreview. The D300 for $1,800 and the D3 for $5,000. The D3 was rumored for about six months in advance as well; people knew it was coming. The D300 sold very well, mainly due to the price difference.

      However I suspect that as the D300 was so new, but already obsolete as a pro camera, Nikon upgraded it to the D300s to keep it going for a few more years, and to possibly give the wildlife shooters a pro crop body to help with reach on there long lenses.

      Nikon released the D300s because Canon was about to release the 7D, which was significantly higher-spec’d than the D300 (the D300s was announced a month before the 7d). Look it up – Nikon basically said exactly that in their press releases at the time (in marketing-speak of course, stuff like “due to the changing landscape of professional photography” and “video features are becoming more important to photographers” etc. etc.

      Getting back the the D300s replacement, it’s called the D800, maybe Nikon should have called it the D400/800 for those slow on the uptake. The D800 is an 18mp pro body DX camera that is also a 24mp FX camera (1.2x crop mode) and of course a 36mp FX camera, so three cameras in one all for the very reasonable price of £2,500…

      First off, the D800 is 15.3MP in DX mode, not 18MP. Second, no sane person is going to use the D800 in DX mode for very long and remain that way – the viewfinder crop is annoyingly tiny and causes immense eye strain in all but the most stalwart eyeballs. DX mode is a gimmick; it’s not actually that useful. It’s far easier to just shoot full-frame, 36MP and have a real viewfinder, and then crop later. Or buy a used D300 for $750.

      • Gimme D600

        +1 !!!

      • FFS!!!!

        We don’t want to get too tied down in detail, as this is a “rumor” site after all, no facts here please…. Lol.

        The general gist of what I am saying is we need to look to the future, I don’t care whether the D300 came out a second, a minute, a day, a week…. etc after or before the D3, the point is DX is dead as a pro format, so although I state we will never see another full pro DX body from Nikon ever again, I wouldn’t exactly bet my life on it…..

        There are already two pro body FX models in Nikon’s line up, and as of right now, this second, there are no FX consumer bodies, but there are a lot of people on this forum moaning that it’s not fair that Nikon isn’t making yet two more pro bodies, (D300s and D700 replacement) but instead Nikon have chosen to give us amateurs an FX body instead.

        It is to these people I say just go out and buy what Nikon have to offer, If you are a pro then get a D4 or D800.

        As for the crop mode in the D800 and other FX format cameras, you may be right, I don’t know I haven’t got one, I’m just going off the instruction books for these cameras, but if the crop mode is as bad as you say, ( I must admit I doubt it is as bad as you say, after all I read on this and other forums about how crap the D7000 is, yet I own one and think it is great) then this may indeed force the people who are waiting for the D400 to just shoot FX anyway. After all, the only two benefits I can see in the crop modes on FX cameras is for extra reach for wildlife, and to up the frame rate. So chances are most D800 would stay in FX mode 90% of the time anyway.

        Just my thoughts of course….

    • Ricardo (Argentina)


      Great explanation!

    • manoel


    • Mikael

      Win, done and done with that post!

    • xlaburu

      You’ve got a point, and the truth is that little by little I am getting to, more or less the same conclussions, I do think though that most of the people here overestimate what a pro earns. I don’t like to do self publicity, but it’s 20 years I am working in photography, I’ve done things for Newsweek, New York Times, I’ve been a free-lance correspondant for 7 years in Bloomberg, and many many many other stuff, and I can tell you, as a free-lance working in press, that it isn’t easy to get enough money to buy a D4, or not at least were I am based, so yes, I would like something comparable to a D700, I could do perfectly fine with a few more megapixels and video. And all seems to tell me that the D600 is a bit too amateur for my needs, but:

      A D4 is expensive, and I don’t need the so high shooting rate for nothing, I don’t work on sports, I can spare the extra weight too, after 20 years my back isn’t the same as it was in the beggining.

      A D800, 36Mpx will collaps my camera in long continuous bursts, I don’t need that much resolution for nothing, and edition would be an everlasting thing that would make it very difficult to file things in 20-30min unless shooting in JPG, and sorry, but I don’t whant to destroy my archives shooting in JPG, not any more, at least.

      A D600 is at a good price tagg, but it’s too amateur.

      I suppose I would have liked something a bit better even if it costed 2.000$. So, any alternative? I whon’t change for Canon, that would be economically suecidal, I have a full lens park that I don’t whant to scrap.

      So Nikon doesn’t give me much of a chance, they give the amateurs a good cameara to work outdoors. They change the D4X series for the D800 apparently, and that camera is usefull for certain sectors, but not for mine, and they leave the D4 for us, something very difficult to pay unless you are working as staff on an agency, news paper, etc. (who’m usually provides for the material), or you have your business very well mounted in some way or an other. But those thousands of free-lancers, that are the hughe amount of press photographers, specially after the massive staff fireings and retirements that have been taking place in these last years, simply don’t find a product as they need.

      Well, I think that Nikon has done wrong once more overestimating the real photojournalist market, to my understanding, and as form my needs:

      1- If I need an ohter D700 I’ll probably buy it second hand
      2- For other many photos, I think that I will go for a Fuji X-Pro1, it’s light, it has 16Mpx. It renders quite well in low light, though focus is a bit slow for my liking and it has video. And just for a slight bit more then the cost of the D800 I have the camera and the tree lenses that are in the market in our days.

      Ok, this is a personal opinion, not trying to change the opinion of no one, I am just expressing my own without, as faar as I know, attaking anyone, so please reply if you have anything interesting to say, and please, don’t feel offended.

    • @FFS,
      Well said, but….you forget that even big successful companies make mistakes. I don’t know how big the D300/S audience is, but from some of the heated discussions I have seen, a great number of them don’t like the idea of being forced to FX to get the same professional build the D300/S offers. Ignoring a large customer base is a great way to lose customers. Having owned a D300 (still in my possesion), the D3, D700, and now the D4, I can definitely relate to those NOT wanting a D7000 like camera body! For your nature shooters, the cropped sensor D300 gave you pro controls at your fingertips, with the added reach of 1.5 crop factor. If I have a support vehicle, I will take my D4, a 400mm f2.8, TC 1.7, Gitzo legs, RRS 55 ball head, and a bunch of other gear to chase wildlife with. However, if I need to backpack everything, I will leave the 400mm big gun at home and opt for the D300 along with the 300mm AF-S f4. Put the MB-D10 grip on the D300 and you get all day shooting @ 8fps. Nikon will do what it needs to maximize profits. I suspect DX is far more profitable than FX in terms of margins for both cameras and lenses alike. I personally would buy a professionally built D400 DX body, which had the same characteristics and feel of a D300/S over a neutered FX D600, at the same price point. But I’m picky when it comes to the physical interface of a camera; I bought and sold a D7000 in the same week because of feel and controls alone (or lack there of)! I suspect we will see both a D300/S (D400) and a D700 (D700S/X/H) replacement; the market is definitely there for it. The D600 sounds like the enthusiast FX body for people who want the creative control over bokeh without the $3000+ entry point to play. So that leaves us with a gap between $1500 and $3000 and another gap between $3000 and $6000 in the FX line-up. And for DX we get a gap between the D7000 and the D600 entry level FX. Thus a sports/action D700S/X/H would fit nicely at $2799, as would a sports/action/wildlife D400 fit nicely at $1399, in the current Nikon lineup. I imagine that D4 sales have very much tapered off now, thus those who were going to buy one already have; the rest have either compromised and bought the D800, or are still waiting for a true D700 replacement, or are just buying up refurbished D700s. Ask yourself this one last question, “What would I pay for a D700S/X/H with the D4 sensor inside, capable of 1 fps less than the flagship model?”. Likewise, “What would I pay for a D400 with a 18MP DX sensor, 51 AF points with f/8 cross point sensors, 8fps, and 6400 native ISO, in an all magnesium weather sealed pro body?”.

      • Ignore the post above and read the refined one below…damned Apple iPad, just when you think you lost your post and re-write it, you discover you posted twice. Ah, the frustration.

    • @FFS,
      Well said, but….you forget that even big successful companies make mistakes. I don’t know how large the D300/S audience is, but from some of the heated discussions I have seen, a great number of them don’t like the idea of being forced to FX to get the same professional build the D300/S offers. Ignoring a large customer base is a great way to lose a large customer base.

      Having owned the D300 (which is still in my posession), the D3, D700, and now the D4, I can definitely relate to those NOT wanting a D7000 like camera body! For your nature shooters, the cropped sensor D300 gave them pro controls at their fingertips, with the added reach of a 1.5 crop factor at 12MP. If I have the luxury of a support vechicle and short-to-no walking distances, I may take my D4, a 400mm f/2.8, TC1.7, Gitzo Legs, RRS BH-55 ball head, and a bunch of other gear in pursuit of wildlife. However, if I need to backpack everything, I will leave the 400mm big gun at the house and opt for my D300 along with the 300mm AF-S f/4. And if you put a MB-D10 battery grip on the D300 with the EN-EL4A battery, you get all day shooting @8FPS.

      Nikon will do what it needs in order to maximize its profits. Since I suspect DX is far more profitable than FX in terms of margins for both cameras and lenses alike, this is where Nikon will obviously concentrate its sales efforts. The D600 will be an enthusiast FX body to accomodate people who want to have creative control over bokeh using fast prime lenses, without having to pay $3000+ to enter the game. The D600 is being made to accomodate a small target audience who knows what to do with it, and most likely a larger audience who thinks they need it, but can’t explain why. I personally would buy a professionally built D400 DX body, which had the same characteristics and feel of a D300/S, over a neutered FX D600, even at the same price point! But hey, I’m picky when it comes to the physical interface of a camera; case in point, I bought a D7000 and sold it the same week because of the feel and controls alone (or lack there of)!

      I suspect we will see a D300/S and D700 replacement in the form of two models, the D400 and D700S/X/H, respectively; there is definitely a market for them. Currently, we have a $1500 price gap between a soon to be launched D600 and the D800, as well as a $3000 price gap between the D800 and the D4 in the FX lineup. And for DX, we get a $500 price gap between the D7000 and the soon to be released D600. Thus a sports/action D700S/X/H would fit nicely at $2799, as would a sports/action/wildlife D400 fit nicely at $1399, in the current Nikon DSLR lineup.

      I imagine that D4 sales have very much tapered off now, thus those who were going to buy one already have; the rest have either compromised and bought the D800, a refurbished/used D3S/D700, OR they are still waiting for the true D700 replacement. In other words, I don’t think Nikon is worried about a D700 replacement cutting into D4 sales; that audience has already been catered to. But I honestly believe a huge group of D700 owners are still out there waiting for its replacement. I for one need a second FX body to my D4, and I would prefer a smaller form factor like the D800, but without the compromise in FPS/ISO; give me a D700S at 16MP, 12,800 ISO, and 8fps, and I will be all over it like a Chicken on a June bug! Likewise, I am sure there are numerous D300/S owners lusting after a D400 with a 18MP DX sensor, 51AF points, f/8 cross point AF sensors, 8fps, and 6400 native ISO, all in a magnesium weather sealed pro body.

      If Nikon ignores their enthusiasts/professionals who want a professional DX body, that group of people can very easily unload their current DX equipment and opt for other systems. And if Nikon ignores their enthusiasts/professionals who want a professional FX sports/action body in a smaller form factor, those people will most likely purchase used FX equipment (i.e. D700/D3S) to satisfy their needs. Nikon doesn’t make money when customers switch systems or buy used equipment; they need to sell new gear to existing and new customers. That is why I think we will yet see a baby D4 and a big brother to the D7000 series. There are too many price gaps for Nikon NOT to do so.

  • So, as far as the Magnesium alloy parts go, if the back and top are Magnesium alloy, what is not Magnesium alloy on the D600 that is on the D800 and D4?

    In other words, if the top and back are Magnesium alloy and the specs include weather sealing, then in what situation would the body not being all Magnesium alloy be a durability/strength disadvantage? Is the F mount body part that lenses mount to also Magnesium alloy?

    • FFS!!!!

      If it’s the same as the D7000 then the front is plastic, so although the lens fing is metal it is secured to a plastic frame, unlike the pro bodies that are 100% metal. This has some people thinking that the D600 (like the D7000) can’t handle the weight of the pro lenses, but then this is not a pro camera, so…..

      To be honest I was using my Nikkor 70-200 on my old D50 with no problems, so on my D7000 I don’t give it a second thought and I wont give it a second thought on a D600 should I get one.

      Whether there will be any long term damage to the front plate flexing under the weight of pro glass, who knows…??

      • PHB

        I never had any problem with my D50 either and I had an early zoom on that which is far heavier than most current pro glass.

        If you have a heavy lens, you support the lens, not the body. Otherwise the shots are going to be shit anyway.

      • Thanks FFS!!!!

        I have also used my 70-200 VRII on my D7000 for about a year with and without a teleconverter and have had no problems. So if the D600 is a similar Magnesium Alloy frame in the same places I guess I will not let that bother me on a D600. Some day I will own a 200-400 f/4 but that is a ways off and when that happens I will/should probably use it on a D800 by then and not a partial Mag frame since I plan on hand holding it much of the time.

        • @Leroy, I am a big guy at 6 foot and 260 lbs, and I wouldn’t dream of hand holding the 200-400 f/4 for any extended periods of time. Tripod, yes, monopod definitely, hand holding, only now and then! It sounds to me that you are after reach, in which case I would buy the best DX camera to go with a 200-400 f/4. And BTW, it isn’t the camera which supports that lens, it is the other way around.

  • Mr Kotku

    Hows come Nikon’s D600 FX sensor is 35.9mm x 24mm and 24.7MP and the new Sony A99 is 36mm x 24mm and 24.3MP? Ain’t they using the same sensor?

  • Nikon_Boy

    I will keep my 300s as my backup and just buy the 800 as my main camera…I would be going backwards if I bought the 600.

  • Mr. Roboto

    Viewfinder coverage: 100%
    That’s good, however what would be the size and brightness compared to D800/D700?

  • jaunty

    Still very bummed that this doesn’t have built in GPS 🙁

  • Joven

    I admit that the 1/4000s kinda throws me off as well. Although it’s rare that I’m shooting at 1/4000 on my D5100, it’s even more rare that I’m walking around with a ND filter. That’s just one more thing to carry, and one more thing to get between my subject and my lens.

    It also gives the vibe that HSS isn’t going to be an option for this camera, either. Which is is funny, b/c it can be done with the D7000.

    • Rob

      The D600 iso goes down to low 50 the d700 goes to low 100 so if you have them both on the same low ISO setting the your getting the same max exposure on both cameras except the D600 will say ISO 50 at 1/4000 and the D700 will say ISO 100 at 1/8000

      • @Rob +1,
        The fact that the native ISO of the D600 is one stop lower than the native ISO of the D700, does negate the 1/8000 advantage for most situations. However, there are times when 1/8000 can give you an edge; panning large telephotos to freeze action come to mind. I don’t know why Nikon crippled the shutter on the D600, unless it is similar to cars. i.e. it is cheaper to make a car go 50MPH reliably than to make one go 100MPH reliably. I guess Nikon had to cut corners in order to make a $1500 FX entry level body.

    • DigMe

      Oh man I really hope it does have HSS. I couldn’t imagine that it wouldn’t since everything above the D5000/D5100 level has it (right?) but ya never know.

      • FFS!!!!

        This would be a deal breaker for me and force me to get the D800, I’m using my speedlights off camera more and more and find myself getting up into the 1/1000s of a second mark all the time now to control ambient light.

        I would find it very hard to believe that Nikon would leave out hyper sync on this model when it has been on every model from the D80 and up….

  • Josh

    I highly doubt the 39 point AF will be unchanged from that of the D7000. You can’t really judge the AF preformance of this camera based on one that had the very first version of this AF module. The 1/4000 shutter speed is kind of lame but wont really make a differnce for the vast majority of of shots most photographers take.

    Personally I will be happy with the camera as long as it really has a %100 coverage viewfinder and can command speedlights with its built in flash. My guess is it will be $1499 for the body only and maybe $1999 for the kit with the new 24-85. If it is more than $1599 for the body it starts to feel awful pricy for what you are getting.

    • Damien

      In europe local trusted deals are already taking preorders, its 1799eur, so my bet is it will be 1899$, no less. And yeah, thats not as cheap as many hoped.

      • Gimme D600

        Can you link these vendors that are taking pre-orders of an un-announced product please? I would like to have a look.

      • Josh

        It is a FX D7000. $1900 is ridiculous. Any reputable seller would not be jumping the gun like this. Plus $1700 eru is actually $2248.39 USD according to google which is even more absurd.

        • Ke

          We always pay more for electronic goods in the EU than Americans do.

  • JoeB

    Oops! Everything below the +1 is a reply to Nathan, not David.

  • Jonas J

    BEFORE or DURING Photokina??

  • Peter

    Of course the AF wont be as good as in the pro-bodies. The metering wont be the 91k either. The rumored price is half of D800 and a fourth of D4. It is not a columbi egg it is a compromise between quality and price. The question that will be answered when it is released is: Is it good enough?
    I hope so

    • FFS!!!!


  • kg

    Scene modes? That just screams ‘consumer’ camera. What’s the point? It’s a slightly upgraded D7000. I currently have a D300 and don’t want a consumer style body. Update the D700 to 24mp & I be first in line. More resolution is a good thing but I need the low light ability more than I need the higher res.

    • FFS!!!!

      D800 is a 24mp in 1.2x crop mode, not sure what the difference is in the final image for perspective, but that’s the compromise you have to make.

      Nikon have changed the game, it’s your choice whether you want to carry on playing, but your 5 year old camera is going to start losing it’s shine over the next couple of years, the Nikon train is leaving the station, are you on it…??

      • Mikael


      • xlaburu

        the 1:2 crop mode is only for JPG, so no 16 bit (or 14 bit) images. For me useless. On the other hand, having to pay 3000$ for using half of the CMOS I think is a loss of money. The truth is that if there were a D700 with video, I would prefere much more an ohter one then any one of the actual lineups. As easy as it would have been to release an advanced D700 with video and perhaps 18 to 20 Mpx. for a reasonable cost (2000-2500€) covering the 5D Mark III section, Nikon, as in other occasions, goest to target the big pro’s in order to get prestige that will make the general consumer whant to buy a Nikon, though that line of cameras from Nikon have nothing to do with the ones of the big pro’s.

    • Szteffen

      +1 bro

    • PHB

      I would love to have a scene mode dial.

      Provided that is, I can use it to select between my set of preferred settings. E.g. shallow DOF, strobe, HDR, etc.

      That would be very useful indeed. Having Nikon’s idea of what these should be is no use at all.

  • David

    I just don’t get Nikon’s strategy (I’m sure that Nikon is devastated that I don’t get this). Why a consumer FF camera now? There is a clear demand for a D400 camera, why not just get on with it and satisfy that demand? I wonder what demographic Nikon is targeting with the D600.

    Moving to FF is not all that easy, with my conversion to the D800 I had to get rid of all my plastic DX glass and get new (used) FF glass. Not something I would think a consumer will really want to do.

    • The market is huge

      Do you have any idea how many people dream of “going full frame” but are put off by price?

      This body will sell like crazy to people like that. There’s an awful lot of them out there.

    • Josh

      This camera is aimed at enthusiasts who either are coming from a D7000/D300 or buying their first DSLR. It is for people who already know they are serious about photography and dont’ mind investing money in it. Many of which who are on a D7000 or D300/s already have a bunch of decent FX glass anyway as the FX lenses are for the most part optically better than DX lenses. Those buying their first DSLR will already be expecting to buy glass too.

      As far as demand for the D400 goes it is not as high as you think. Most people who bought the D300/D7000 where enthusiasts who would have preferred FX but couldn’t afford it. The D600 is aimed squarely at them. What you give up from the D300 to get the price down is relatively minor and not need by most photographers, pros included, and is more than made up for with an FX sensor that will almost certainly be second only to the sensor in the D800.

      Look at the 5DII. It became the most used camera among pro portrait/wedding/event photographers even though the D700 was better than it in every way but resolution. It was the combination of price, high res (for the time) and full frame that sold all those 5DIIs to pro photographers. Now consider that D600 will outclass the 5DII in almost every way including resolution. The one exception being build quality but unless you go out of your way to treat your camera poorly or are shooting in a war zone the D600 will be more than durable enough. Heck the D600 will even out class the 5DIII except for AF and build quality. Of course the D600 will have AF that is far superior to the 5DII AF which didn’t deter most pros from buying the camera…

      Do you get it now?

  • ssrdd

    hope they don’t crop recording area in VIDEO [D800 does+biggest disappointment].

    • Vid

      Minor problem for d800 video. Though binning would be better.

  • Nam

    I’m still worried about the size…that’s the only thing that I’m on the wall about with this camera. If it’s the same size as the D7000, that’s bearable. But if it’s along the lines of the D3200 or D5100, I might just spring for a used D700 because of how good everyone says it is

  • Alex

    D600 specification in a D300/D800 kind of body would be an amazing camera, and probably the one most people would want for as a D700 successor.

  • ssrdd

    Also it wont come with H.264 again. It kills video ehnthusiastics for sure.

    • Vid

      Read harder

  • Bharath

    I guess its high time to stop talking about why and start talking about when!

    Also for amateurs and Photo Hobbyists like me this seems like a perfect upgrade from our Mid-level DX (or EF-S) cameras/lenses. Especially those who are interested in Landscape can definitely skip all those pro-level comments above.

    You cannot go wrong with it. period…

  • One More Thought

    If Nikon delivers this camera for the very low rumored price point, this too will revolutionize the market.

    Keep in mind that for many photogs a small size and weight is a feature, not a bug. Smaller and lighter is better for most consumers.

    And most people don’t care about the type of material used in the cam, as long as it lasts. Let’s face it…most entry level Nikons and Canons, hold up very very well.

    I don’t see how Canon can avoid lowering the cost of the 5d3 once this hits the market…

  • Because of the focus fiasco with the D800 and D4 (I bought and then sold a D800, bought then returned a D4, so have personal experience with both), I will stay with my D3X and D3S for a while. Will wait a year AFTER D600 is shipping before considering, so that Nikon has a chance to get all the bugs out.

  • D800_is_finally_here


    would this camera have on-sensor PDAF like the Nikon 1 / NEX 5R?

    The Aptina 24MP FF sensor rumor does seem to indicate that. and if there’s such a sensor for Nikon, I can’t see it going anywhere but the D600….


    • Analyst

      If you want innovation and cutting edge technology, buy the Sony a99. Nikon is not an innovator, and it never really has been. Nikon is all about small (even tiny) evolutionary changes over time, and, to their credit, focus on good image quality.

      In the last decade, virtually all tech innovations in photography have come from other companies: in-lens stabilization, in-body stabilization, live view, electronic viewfinders, on-sensor phase-detect autofocus, video features, manual focus check in live view, etc. etc. etc.

      Nikon is almost always late to the party on new tech, that’s just how they run their business. It’s lower-risk (they don’t over-invest in technology that turns out to be a fad), but on the other hand, it’s certainly not exciting.

      • D800_is_finally_here

        In general I agree with your statement about Nikon being very slow and conservative about bringing new tech to the market.

        That said, the first patents of in-lens VR were filed by Nikon and showed up in the old AF 80-400 VR, and the on-sensor PDAF implementation on the Nikon 1 was among the first and also among the fastest. Nano coating was another major innovation by Nikon.

        Aptina might have been the OEM for Nikon 1 sensors with PDAF. And the rumor about a Nikon FF sensor with Aptina contribution has been around for a while. The question is whether the on sensor PDAF would be carried over.

        Nikon definitely has a lot of innovation going on inside their labs. They are just slow to market.

  • Pro Camera

    Our disappointment is that the Nikon’s camera lineup has no replacement for the D700. That is all.

    If you are happy with the new D600, good for you. But some people will start looking for other options besides Nikon.

  • Nathan

    Small and light? Like Nikon FE small and light? Holy smokes, I might need to get one of those instead of a D800!

    • Ke

      Exactly what I was thinking. This & my FE will hopefully make a great duo – although I doubt the D600 will be quite that small.

  • Landscape Photo

    Nikon should rather release the D400 before D600.

  • Back to top