Nikon D610 now in stock

Right on time with the DxOmark test report release, the Nikon D610 is currently in stock at B&H and Amazon. I already mentioned that the D610 does qualify for the latest Nikon instant rebates (follow the "Buy Together & Save" link on the product listing page). In addition, B&H currently offers free SanDisk 16GB memory card, Watson EN-EL15 Lithium-Ion battery and Ruggard Commando 36 DSLR shoulder bag with 4% in rewards and free shipping with every camera body purchase.

This entry was posted in Nikon D610. Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • MostInterestingManInTheWorld

    I expect this weekend a lot of new D610 owners will be taking pictures of blue skies and white walls.

    • Aldo

      “he owns the d700 replacement” ” “he shot with the d800 before the tsunami” “his d600 is spotless” “he has a d400 as a peep hole” “he is… themostinterestingmanintheworld”

      • MostInterestingManInTheWorld

        I don’t always shoot DSLR’s, but when I do, I prefer Efe Equis (FX). Stay thirsty my friend.

  • I’m rebadging my d600. From this day forward it will be called the 610.

    • Ken Elliott

      I wonder if the Nikon parts department will sell replacement D610 emblems in bulk. I’d be selling them on eBay in no time.

      Just joking, but someone will sell fakes as an upgrade kit.

  • MyrddinWilt

    So now we know why Nikon can’t release a D400.

    There is no space for a $1700 D400 DX camera when there is a $1600 D600 FX camera on sale. There can’t be a replacement for the D300s till the D600 inventory has been sold.

    • MW

      7D Mark II release (if ever) = D400 release (if ever). But let’s move on.

      • koenshaku

        Well with the fancy Expeed 4 processor I don’t see the D400 too far down the line.

        • Andrew

          Or is it time to merge the D400 and D7200 into one camera called the D7400 with the Expeed 4, larger buffer, higher frame rate, etc.

          • Northerntrumpeter

            My theory is that the D400 will be the D7200. See my long winded theory below…

        • J. Dennis Thomas

          Why would Expeed 4 be a sign that the D400 is coming? Expeed 3 came and went without a D400.

          • Northerntrumpeter

            I don’t see it as a sign of the ‘D400’. However, Expeed 4 is in the D5300, which is early. I reckon the D7200 will also be early, and in my books the D7200 is the D400 by a different name.

        • MW

          Can we just stop talking about the imaginary D400 altogether until there’s some kind of substantial rumor? Show of hands!

          • Jeff Hunter

            …then at least half the postings would go away 😉

            • Douglas Pavani

              omg, you people have been talking about the d400 since the d300 was 6 months old, ffs continue with your normal lives people.

            • 103David

              Sorry, Douglas. It’s kind of like Dorothy realizing this really is Kansas…
              This is their normal lives…

          • Northerntrumpeter

            You’re right. We should be expecting the D7200…

        • Northerntrumpeter

          Or a D7200. That seems the most likely announcement in the next few months.

    • Northerntrumpeter

      The D7200 will be the D400. When the D7200 comes along there will be very little to complain about. There may be a few ‘missing’ buttons and only a semi pro body, but the specs will be all blow the D300 out of the water. Infact, the D5300 already beats the D300 in most areas, the the D7200 will be awesome. Oh, and it will be more expensive than the D7100 was on release, as it will have everything built in.

  • R!

    Nikon just goes nutts!!!!610 , 5300, 7100, 7800, 58mm 1.4 instead of 1.2!!!!some firing on top in product conception team is needed fast!!!!

    • mikeswitz

      Time to troll on ver to Canon Rumors.

    • Jeff Hunter

      Oh good grief! The difference between 1.4 and 1.2 is between 1/3 and 1/2 stop. You can easily make up the difference in post-production in Lightroom Room with a slight move to the right of the exposure slider.

      One of the many advantages of digital RAW files is that exposures don’t have to be perfect like when shooting transparency film. So stop whining you digital crybabies. Us old timers from the film days think you’re all photo sissies 😉

      • mikeswitz

        R! is not a photo sissy he’s just a troll.

        • Jeff Hunter

          Pretty much the same thing in my book!

      • Aldo

        Film gives you just as much if not MORE leeway when it comes to exposure. And to this day, no sensor is able to handle whites like film. I was a film shooter myself so I know from first hand.

        • Spy Black

          Have you compared film to modern cameras lately? Unless you have access to a photomultiplier tube scanner, and possibly even then, game over.

          • Aldo

   you can read up on this guy…. pretty much what I meant.

          • Aldo

            the admin cut my reply… but basically if you look up what kenrockwell has to say… I agree with some of the points he makes film vs raw

            • Spy Black

              Dude, that’s all over. Really. One key point to notice: “Shoot the right film correctly..”
              I’ve clamped film. NEGATIVE film. Film isn’t limitless.

              “Bit Depth”

              Computationally speaking, negative stock has the dynamic range of about 10 bits. In the digital world, it’s teamwork between sensors and processors. Some are better, some are worse. For the most part in this day and age, that digital dynamic duo match or beat that.

              “Digital raw files offer the ability to open the files in various color spaces. This is good, and is usually at least Adobe RGB or broader. Film knows no such limits.”

              Clearly he has no idea of what a colorspace model is, and how it applies to FILM.

              “Real Raw needs no noise reduction.”
              You know, since about 12 megapixels or so, digital surpassed film resolution. Even DX. By16 megs, it’s a no-brainer. Where are we at now? Noise reduction? That gives us shots at 6400 ISO with noise similar to ISO 400 film and, depending on the sensor, still more resolution than you’ll get off film. Dynamic range will be in the same ballpark or better.

              “Film never needs sharpening because it’s always sharp.”

              I can go on, but I think you get the idea. There are no more analog workflows. I worked in photo-optical prepress for over 15 years. My specialty was duplication and photo-composition with Ektachrome Duplication Stock. I printed subtractive. I printed additive. I interacted with Cibachrome and Dye Tranfers. It was great era, but it’s over. Film is dead. I hope it survives as a fine art medium. I occasionally still shoot with my Nikon FTN and F2SB, because I do love the medium. Positive and negative. But my digital cameras out-perform my film cameras in noise, resolution, and dynamic range.

              Film is dead. Long live film…

            • Aldo

              I agreed with “some” of what he said… but basically you can’t really compute the spectrum of film because the best scanners weren’t designed for that… they were designed to print not to digitize. I”m assuming you are speaking about 35mm… because if we are talking medium format or larger that’s 40+ mp. There’s some stuff in which he is clearly talking out of his a… but my initial point was simply that the range of what you can bring back from either an underexposed or overexposed photo is the same or better than that of a raw file. I wasn’t talking about IQ, noise, DN, resolution, color spaces, etc. I also commented about the whites and that’s it. As for the rest, there is a reason I no longer shoot film =]

            • Spy Black

              Maybe so, it’s a bit of a gray area right now really. However there are no more analog workflows. Well, there are, but not for the masses anymore. You need to have access to darkrooms and photochemical processes to try and extract the potential dynamic range advantage that film MAY still have.

              But for the most part there are no more of the resources you need to do so. Even some of the mediums are gone. There is no more Ektachrome. There may no longer be any Ilfochrome (what Cibachrome became). Dye Transfers, arguably the greatest medium for optimizing print color imagery, died a fast death at the dawn of the digital era back in the late 80s.

              And print color indeed (we’ll put B&W to the side for the moment). Even the best dye transfers couldn’t match the color gamut of transparency film, and digital images have similar color dynamics to transparency film. Only Ilfochrome ever came close to that kind of color in a print, and it was a positive film-based print medium, so there goes your negative dynamic range.

              These kind of high quality print mediums in particular would be necessary to extract the kind of information that MAY be in, as Ken hinted, a properly exposed negative or positive positive film. You’re only practical option is to scan the film. At best, film scanned with a photomultiplier-based drum scanner, who themselves are mostly no longer around. If manufacturers had continued development of scanners, today we may have had (for instance) a back-illuminated CMOS-based scanner that may have given the average schmoe a shot at all that possible negative dynamic range glory.

              To take a cue from Ken (a potentially dangerous proposition, I know), a properly exposed digital image, from a modern-day DSLR, will give you great dynamic range. This has been important for me in night photography, where it’s quite the balancing act between point light sources and the depths of shadows. I would be interested indeed to see if film did still have an advantage of some sort, but even if it did, it’s pretty moot at this point, don’t you think? For instance, if you could extract the detail in the shadows of a properly exposed neg and hold back the highlights in a night shot, the grain in the shadows, and possibly even midtones, would be tremendous. Compare that to a properly exposed and post-processed digital image from a modern-day camera. You may get some noise, depending on how hard you push it, but overall the image will be far cleaner AND detailed.

              All that said, I hope film does survive as a fine art medium. It is, after all, a different medium. Getting rid of it would be like saying we don’t need watercolors because Dali kicked áss with oils. Like many here, I grew up with it and know it well. I love it for what it is and how it made you learn to see.

            • I have not cut your reply, let me check the spam folder.

            • Aldo

              Admin there is one more comment being hidden… thanks.

            • Approved that one as well – not sure why the spam filter did not like you 🙂

            • Aldo

              spam filter isn’t the only one lol…

            • Forget Ken Rockwell, he is nuts and doesn’t know what he’s talking about. His website is basically a marketing and SEO machine, his photography is mediocre at best.

              Digital raw surpassed colour film in terms of dynamic range long time ago. Black and white film may still have more dynamic range, but needs very careful processing in the darkroom (messy and costly business), not to mention printing.

            • Aldo

              Yeah I also did some dodging and burning which is the equivalent to pulling out the shadows and turning down the highlights. Black and white has a lot of dynamic range if you take that into account .Im not sure how nuts Ken Rockwell is but I think he has some good points. Convenience as you say is the number one reason film died not so much the quality counterpart.

        • Jeff Hunter

          Negative film has a dynamic range of about 7 stops. Transparency film has a dynamic range of about 5 stops. My Nikon D800 has a dynamic range of 14.3 stops which can be greatly increase via HDR procedures if desired.
          The ability to adjust color and contrast channels with digital RAW files has no comparable method in the film world. Old fashion burning and dodging doesn’t come close.
          Any film special effect look in the printing process can be duplicated in post-processing digital RAW files. Therefore, high grade digital imagery has everything film imagery had and dozens more image enhancing features never dreamed of in the film days.
          You can get any kind of white you want from a RAW digital file. The weak link in digital photography is that computer and HDTV screens have less resolution than cameras like my D800. Papers for printing can’t come close to rendering all the nuances of color on a high def computer screen. This includes photo reproduction in magazines.
          High grade digital photography surpasses film photography in every way!

          • Aldo

            I don’t know what brand of film you used. I shot a lot of fuji reala 100 iso… and similar quality for medium format. The margin of error was huge… d800 doesnt have 14 stops dn in practice… don’t believe everything you read, especially from DxOmark.

            • Jeff Hunter

              Ha! I’ve shot films you’ve probably never even heard of! So many, I can’t remember them all. Pushed and pulled processed B&W and color films and printed the results.

              The D800 does have 14 stops of dynamic range. Testing is easily demonstrable. All you have to do is photograph a graduated gray-scale card to get the results. There’s no magic involved. Anyone can do it.

              You must not have read my post very closely. I said that there is no margin of error when shooting transparency film also known as slide film or positive film. Everyone knows there’s wide exposure latitude in negative film, both in color and even more in B&W.

              I’ve been in the game since 1968, and had experience in B&W and color labs. Were you even born then?

            • Aldo

              Yeah I confused the “transparency film” for a negative. I knew them as slides but never shot that. In 1968 I was still a sperm.

            • Jeff Hunter

              Enjoy your youth young man. It doesn’t last as long as you think it will 😉

    • robert

      not everything is bad. the d610 is to improve on their crap QC. and the 58 1.4 is a ripoff lens any way you look at it. posts on forums and asking friend photogs all commented the same 3x more for 50 1.4G

      that SB300 is a joke as well. for $170 id easily buy a yongnuo 568 for $170 shipped.

      • Aldo

        there is a lot of fast aperture junkies out there… pair that with modern elements and nano coating and nikon has them in their bag.

        • robert

          I agree that for nano coating there should be a price increase. say $150. and for the 8mm..ok, another $100. but crap, WTF is up with these clowns. $1700?

          thats crazy. you definitely are not getting your moneys worth here.

          • Neopulse

            The quality of the glass is very different from before. Especially the new lens elements that are used in it’s formula bump up the price. But it is fotm pricing. It will be available later on for a slightly reduced priced and chances are ebay might sell it for $200 less and with FX kits even more.

      • Spy Black

        Considering we haven’t really seen the 58mm f/1.4 put through it’s paces and no one has any real-world idea what it can or can’t do, I suggest calling your doc, telling him your back hurts, get a script for Oxycodone, and dose it with Captain Morgan & Diet…

        • robert

          See I dont know those medication like you do. so you go ahead and stick with them.

          and youre right we will wait and see. but from the reactions from forums I frequent, people are laughing at this. people are not stupid. they see what nikon is doing.

          lets wait and see. NOCT-pff haha. those sample pics can be done with a 50 1.4G

          • mikeswitz

            “I know you are but what am I” You are a body builder and your diet is impeccable? So clearly Your “opinions” on how “those clowns” should price their lenses must be impeccable as well. Maybe you should start drinking again, it could make you a lot less angry. Then again, no…

            • robert

              I dont know what theyre prices should be exactly. im sure they need to calculate how much money they put into making each lens,check what the market is willing to pay for it and then decide.

              im merely noting what I think makes sense. and the same reason why others are questioning the price tag. its just a 50mm 1.4 the way me and most who were shocked by the price tag see it.

              imo nikons prices are just way overpriced. lenses are not in proportion to the economy. I bought my gear in the f5 era. sb28’s were $270. a 28-70 costed me $1300 an afs 80-200 costed the same. and as was the 17-35 AFS. why are they charging $500 more for a lens thats old technology. $1000 more for the new 80-400, $800 more over the 70-200VR1. I would never buy a new lens from a store and give money to nikon. they went crazy with their pricing and this new lens is just proof they are ripping people off.

              not buying a flash from nikon anymore. some great choices out there today. I think the yongnuo 568II should be out soon and the phottix mitros is half price and 2 yr warranty. grips can be had for peanuts. just overpriced stuff. hence so many buy 3rd party and nikons stock dropped 14% last quarter. I saw it dropping again this coming one.

              im just happy sigma tamron and tokina are doing there part to put pressure on nikon. they have some really amazing lenses. quality, performance, build and price are all there. nikon is running on greed.

  • J. Dennis Thomas

    Mine has arrived at the camera shop. I haven’t felt like fighting Friday traffic to go pick it up.

    • Hexagon Jr.

      Which city?

      • J. Dennis Thomas

        Austin TX

  • FXisbetterthanDX

    Too bad the “buy together & save” only includes DX lenses, cause we all love mounting cropped lenses on full frame bodies!?!?!

    • This must be a glitch, full frame lenses should be included as well.

      • johnparker

        Any idea when Nikon will offer rebates again on the higher end lenses? I missed out on the rebates last month.

      • NFan

        Do you mean Nikon will include high end FX glass in the buy together offer soon?

  • NFan

    Any info when Nikon will offer rebates again on the higher end lenses? I could not buy any last time. But have some cash now.

  • Eugene Chan

    I ordered a D610 from Adorama on Oct 8 and it hasn’t shipped. Meanwhile B&H has them listed in stock? Gurghh,

  • StarF

    Another Full-Frame DSLR without circle viewfinder….what a pity…

  • Neopulse

    Would wait till Black Friday to make any purchase since it’s not that far away.

  • shooin

    I ordered this from Amazon with a 28-300 lens bundle.. that did not ship yet.. anyone else here get a d610 bundle from Amazon?

  • Back to top