# D600:  is anyone excited about it?



## 2WheelPhoto (Sep 14, 2012)

BHPHOTO touts "its like aD7000 with a full frame sensor.  Is that a plus?  Or am I missing something?

The main thing I liked about my D7000 was it was a crop body.  The physical body characteristics such as strength, ease of menus, viewfinder quality, etc fall short for what i expected of mine and I sold it. And the D600 costs >$2,000.

Just though I'd ask if I'm way off in my reasoning (or lack of!)


----------



## PhotoWrangler (Sep 14, 2012)

Naw. Not really.


----------



## pixmedic (Sep 14, 2012)

nope.  if the D600 was a bit cheaper MAYBE...but for the money the next upgrade will be a D7000.


----------



## jake337 (Sep 14, 2012)

Like you said.  It's like a D7000 with a FF sensor.  So if the size of the D7000 sensor is an issue for you then yes, it is an upgrade.


It's two years newer tech as well so I can only assume it should perform better in most areas.


----------



## 12sndsgood (Sep 14, 2012)

I had thought it might be something for me to make the jump from my D7000 into full frame land. but for the price doesn't seem like enough of a jump to justify it. Now if i was using a lower end camera then what I have it might have made me make the jump. If it had been out when I had my D3000 and was looking to upgrade I might have chose it over the D7000 but where I stand now I will likely look at diffrent models (if an when I can afford to upgrade, hell they may have 6 new models out or upgraded before that happens)


----------



## orb9220 (Sep 14, 2012)

Don't get the twice the price of the D7000 and entering into the D700 territory?
For $2000 I expect a beeffieerr,Robust and Pro built camera! Which I would then just buy a D700.
Am Not Impressed! 
.


----------



## jake337 (Sep 14, 2012)

I like how NOT impressed people are with something they have never used, seen or felt in their hands......


----------



## 2WheelPhoto (Sep 14, 2012)

jake337 said:


> I like how NOT impressed people are with something they have never used, seen or felt in their hands......



All we've been offered is the technical spec sheet and description?


----------



## Redwing24 (Sep 14, 2012)

i wouldbuy a d700 in a heaetbeat if it had video, it doesnt so im hppy to see the d600!!


----------



## 2WheelPhoto (Sep 14, 2012)

Redwing24 said:


> i wouldbuy a d700 in a heaetbeat if it had video, it doesnt so im hppy to see the d600!!



THAT is the type of point I overlooked.  However i don't shoot video, but i can see now why Nikon could up the price of a cheaper body to about D700 prices. Thanks for sharing


----------



## pixmedic (Sep 14, 2012)

jake337 said:


> I like how NOT impressed people are with something they have never used, seen or felt in their hands......




I think its pretty typical for people to have the ability to rule out electronic equipment based on technical specs. especially when they know what features they do and do not want/need.


----------



## 2WheelPhoto (Sep 14, 2012)

pixmedic said:


> jake337 said:
> 
> 
> > I like how NOT impressed people are with something they have never used, seen or felt in their hands......
> ...



Indeed.  Technical specs and feature list speak a lot to a technical product's performance


----------



## Majeed Badizadegan (Sep 14, 2012)

From someone who shoots Canon right now, no. 

It seems the whole idea to create an inexpensive "bridge" camera is completely lost at this price point. Seems like Nikon is taken up Canon's model "charge as much as we can get away with e.g. 5d MK III". New, the D600 is already 3x more expensive as a used classic 5d, and it's a bit silly they artificially hampered it at 1/4000 max shutter speed.


----------



## eric1971 (Sep 14, 2012)

I had planned on picking one up when I thought it was going to be a D7000 with an fx sensor for $1500.  

But instead, we get a D7000 with a nerfed shutter and an fx sensor for 2k!

I may still pick one up down the road on the used market.  I don't think I want to lug a D700 around.


----------



## Mach0 (Sep 14, 2012)

I am not. I will say that I am more than sure it can produce lovely images.... However, I would want more features. I haven't decided if I truly want one or will I get a d700. The biggest thing is the AF system and some other features that I would want in an upgrade. It's still too soon to say anything really but I am interested in its reviews. I can care less for the video although it is a plus. I guess time will tell.


----------



## pixmedic (Sep 14, 2012)

I was really expecting the D600 to have 51 focus points like the D300, but I guess you cant have everything for 2k, especially when the D300s is still around $1500 new.


----------



## jake337 (Sep 14, 2012)

2WheelPhoto said:


> jake337 said:
> 
> 
> > I like how NOT impressed people are with something they have never used, seen or felt in their hands......
> ...




Exactly, so how can we all be shooting it down so quickly.


There was a lot of negative hoopla about the d800's 36mp as well.


----------



## eric1971 (Sep 14, 2012)

jake337 said:


> 2WheelPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > jake337 said:
> ...




I think most of the negative backlash is do to the price.  An fx sensor is not worth the additional $1100 to me.


----------



## SCraig (Sep 14, 2012)

jake337 said:


> I like how NOT impressed people are with something they have never used, seen or felt in their hands......



The same can be said of those who ARE impressed by something they have never used, seen, or felt in their hands .....



2WheelPhoto said:


> BHPHOTO touts "its like aD7000 with a full frame sensor.....


And since I'm not interested in a full-frame sensor I think I'll stick with my D7000.


----------



## manaheim (Sep 14, 2012)

2WheelPhoto said:


> BHPHOTO touts "its like aD7000 with a full frame sensor.  Is that a plus?  Or am I missing something?
> 
> The main thing I liked about my D7000 was it was a crop body.  The physical body characteristics such as strength, ease of menus, viewfinder quality, etc fall short for what i expected of mine and I sold it. And the D600 costs >$2,000.
> 
> Just though I'd ask if I'm way off in my reasoning (or lack of!)



Well we don't know REALLY what it will do yet... and I don't even know if it is really literally targeted at the D90/D7000 level of camera.  If it is... err... that would be a LITTLE weird because it would be leaving the D200/300 level of camera people without a FF body.

Think of this... D90/D7000 level still has "short-cut" modes like "sports" and such.  It has more "helpful" menus.  D200/300 level does not have these things.  I would HOPE the D600 is really targeted towards the D200/D300 crowd and that they're either dropping the D400 entirely, or they are going to make the D400 $1500.  But then... neither of those things really make sense.

Again, I think Nikon is confusing the crap out of their market.  People who were waiting for the D4 were expecing more MP and better ISO handling.  (or a significant jump in one or the other)  They got kinda "meh" on both points.  People who were waiting for the D800 were looking for like an 18-24 MP D700 replacement and got this freakin' 36MP monstrosity that doesn't really do any better than the D700 on ISO handling.  People who were waiting for the D400 got... well, what?  The D7000?  Or are they still waiting?  And now this thing?

I dunno... on specs and cost it seems a really nice camera, but it's a bit early to say.

That said, the FF sensor is not to be sneezed at and I think you're missing the boat there.  The only real benefit of a DX sensor is that it gives you more zoom.  In every other possible way the FF sensor is king.  And yes, absolutely worth spending even 2x for (and that's even ignoring that it has 8MP on the D7000)


----------



## gsgary (Sep 14, 2012)

It wont take film so no not excited only digital i am looking forward to is new M10


----------



## 2WheelPhoto (Sep 14, 2012)

gsgary said:


> It wont take film so no not excited only digital i am looking forward to is new M10



Next month!?  $9,000 &#8211; $10,000 US dollars!?


----------



## SCraig (Sep 14, 2012)

manaheim said:


> ... The only real benefit of a DX sensor is that it gives you more zoom.  In every other possible way the FF sensor is king.  And yes, absolutely worth spending even 2x for (and that's even ignoring that it has 8MP on the D7000)



(Post cropped for brevity and not because it wasn't informative and useful)

That's the thing though.  Some of us WANT That effective boost in focal length, and the benefits of a full-frame camera become secondary to us.  A bird at 50 yards is still small with a 500mm lens.  It's somewhat larger on an APS-C and 750mm, and that's worth a lot to me.  I wouldn't mind having a FF camera for short-range shooting but at the same time I'm not willing to give up my APS-C for one.  Maybe some day I'll get an FF camera but right now I'm quite content with what I have.


----------



## Derrel (Sep 14, 2012)

I'm more excited about the D600 in two years' time at $800 used!!! I'm currently "set" on cameras, so I do not have a pressing need nor a burning desire for a new d-slr. As to the price of the D600--it seems based on the $2,200 price of the D600, that there will VERY likely be a D300s follow-up...the "D400" most are calling it. A D300s follow-up could slot in below the D600 and above the NOW-$999 D7000. Nikon just dropped the D7000 $200, to $999 a few weeks back. I do not think Nikon is confusing anything...they are simply trying to market cameras to "upgraders", and of course, they have been throwing all sorts of things out there, to see what the market actually responds to, wants/likes,and ultimately, is willing to purchase. Now, when the Canon 5D premiered, a cheap, $389 EOS Elan body with NINE AF points, and an AF system borrowed from the 1.6x 20D body, it hit the street at $3499. Then $3199. Then $2999. NINE AF points, no built-in flash, no remote flash commander capability, color-blind ambient and flash metering, and a weak AF module...for $3499. And people went ape-chit over it...

NOW, NIkon premiers a 24.3 MP camera with 39 AF points, 3D-color aware ambient and flash metering, built-in flash,DUAL SD-card slots, all sorts of features, and people are nonplussed about it!


----------



## bhop (Sep 14, 2012)

manaheim said:


> ...If it is... err... that would be a LITTLE weird because it would be leaving the D200/300 level of camera people without a FF body.....



Uhh.. D700/D800 = D200/D300   Same features/controls/size/all metal, etc..


----------



## joe11 (Sep 14, 2012)

To be Honest a D800 is only £300 More You Mite as well have one of them! Bad Nikon Marketing!!


----------



## KmH (Sep 14, 2012)

Yep. Nikon is going to cry all the way to the bank about the bad marketing. 

They will likely sell a boat load of the D600.

To handle all the image processing the D600 (D4, D800 too) has the EXPEED 3 image processor.


----------



## ulrichsd (Sep 14, 2012)

Rotanimod said:


> and it's a bit silly they artificially hampered it at 1/4000 max shutter speed.



I hear everyone complain about the only 1/4000 max shutter speed... my D90 is max 1/4000 and I don't ever shoot at that speed.  I'm curious to hear why people use greater than 1/4000 sec?  I'm sure there is a reason, I just can't think of why.  Wide open f/1.8 in full sunlight, would still be ok at or under 1/4000.  Adding a flash into full sunlight and shooting wide open and a filter hater?


----------



## Mach0 (Sep 14, 2012)

ulrichsd said:
			
		

> I hear everyone complain about the only 1/4000 max shutter speed... my D90 is max 1/4000 and I don't ever shoot at that speed.  I'm curious to hear why people use greater than 1/4000 sec?  I'm sure there is a reason, I just can't think of why.  Wide open f/1.8 in full sunlight, would still be ok at or under 1/4000.  Adding a flash into full sunlight and shooting wide open and a filter hater?



Depends on how sunny it is.

Does anyone know if it has fine tune AF?


----------



## KmH (Sep 14, 2012)

If it does have AF fine tune, it will be listed in the specifications.


----------



## aavivi (Sep 14, 2012)

It's a decent FF backup body.  I have a D7000 as backup, and can't really see getting the D600.  Better to save up to the $8K D4XE when it comes out...  One of tHe major pluses is that the D600 has is the two custom dial settings (the ones I wish the D800 and the D4 had).

Sent from my stone tablet using semaphores


----------



## Mach0 (Sep 14, 2012)

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/nikon-d600/nikon-d600A7.HTM


Sample images are up. I'm browsing on my iPhone but high iso seems clean.


----------



## Derrel (Sep 14, 2012)

ulrichsd said:


> Rotanimod said:
> 
> 
> > and it's a bit silly they artificially hampered it at 1/4000 max shutter speed.
> ...



Exactly....AS IF 1/4000 second is somehow even all that needed a feature....my God...I think I can count on one hand the number of shots I have made above 1/4000 second in the last five years. For me, around 1/2500 is about the fastest I even commonly use. I grew up with cameras that maxed out at 1/1000 second, and later 1/2000 second. In 1982 I think it was, the Nikon FM-2 was the world's FIRST 35mm focal plane shutter camera to hit 1/4000 second. AND it had the then-revolutionary top focal plane shutter X-synch speed of 1/200, which was later upped to 1/250 on the FM2-n or "new" model.

Again...the shutter is apparently the SAME one used in the D7000; that shutter was originally intended for an APS-C sized capture area; now, in an FX camera, since it has to traverse a MUCH bigger film plane, the shutter's not able to be pushed to the max...the absolute fastest speeds on this type of FP shutter are a "moving slit"; jacking up the speed and force needed to make it achieve 1/8000 second would VERY likely hurt life expectancy of the shutter.


----------



## tirediron (Sep 14, 2012)

No.


----------



## manaheim (Sep 14, 2012)

Maybe.


----------



## jamesbjenkins (Sep 14, 2012)

eric1971 said:
			
		

> I think most of the negative backlash is do to the price.  An fx sensor is not worth the additional $1100 to me.



This!

I'm not knocking anything about the spec sheet except the price. It's no less than $300 overpriced. 

The body is 80% plastic, it's got a gimped shutter, only 4 FPS and a whole host of button/menu logistical concerns. All of these shortfalls would be much easier to overlook if it were $1600-1700. At $2099, now EVERY little issue becomes another nail in the overpriced coffin.


----------



## manaheim (Sep 14, 2012)

5.5 fps.  D800 is 4.

And the stuff I read said it was a magnesium body.


----------



## gsgary (Sep 15, 2012)

Derrel said:
			
		

> Exactly....AS IF 1/4000 second is somehow even all that needed a feature....my God...I think I can count on one hand the number of shots I have made above 1/4000 second in the last five years. For me, around 1/2500 is about the fastest I even commonly use. I grew up with cameras that maxed out at 1/1000 second, and later 1/2000 second. In 1982 I think it was, the Nikon FM-2 was the world's FIRST 35mm focal plane shutter camera to hit 1/4000 second. AND it had the then-revolutionary top focal plane shutter X-synch speed of 1/200, which was later upped to 1/250 on the FM2-n or "new" model.
> 
> Again...the shutter is apparently the SAME one used in the D7000; that shutter was originally intended for an APS-C sized capture area; now, in an FX camera, since it has to traverse a MUCH bigger film plane, the shutter's not able to be pushed to the max...the absolute fastest speeds on this type of FP shutter are a "moving slit"; jacking up the speed and force needed to make it achieve 1/8000 second would VERY likely hurt life expectancy of the shutter.



That sounds good there was a 7000 shutter problem on here this week and one has gone at our club after not that many shots


----------



## KmH (Sep 15, 2012)

Like the D7000, the D600 has magnesium-alloy top and back plates. The front and bottom of the camera are plastic.

The main benefits from the use of metal in the body are blocking RF interference, and providing better heat dissipation.


----------



## 2WheelPhoto (Sep 15, 2012)

I'm also finding the D600 has 1/200 sec shutter x-sync speed. There is a  third of a stop difference between D600 and the D700/D800.  Not that a third of a stop here and there matters but its another skimp.


----------



## Enticingimagery (Sep 15, 2012)

joe11 said:


> To be Honest a D800 is only £300 More You Mite as well have one of them! Bad Nikon Marketing!!




TBH, I think that was part of their [Nikon] plan. Now the D800 looks much more inviting, because it's not a whole lot more [for the price level] than a D600 ... clever I think. Buying the D800 myself very soon. I would look to price drops on the 600 in future, would be a great back up body.


----------



## PhotoWrangler (Sep 15, 2012)

jake337 said:


> I like how NOT impressed people are with something they have never used, seen or felt in their hands......




I'm sure you can say that you like a Maserati, but have never driven one... right?


----------



## Derrel (Sep 15, 2012)

2WheelPhoto said:


> I'm also finding the D600 has 1/200 sec shutter x-sync speed. There is a  third of a stop difference between D600 and the D700/D800.  Not that a third of a stop here and there matters but its another skimp.



Again, the issue was covered by Thom Hogan on his web site. He has JUST posted a new "D600 Compendium" article here. D600 Comments

"Let's start with the D7000 nature of the camera. *The autofocus sensor, shutter,* meter, and most of the body form and controls are *close to direct lifts from the D7000.* That does introduce a few changes, though. Unlike the D7000, the D600 will be limited to *1/200 flash* sync and a top speed of *1/4000 (likely due to the large sensor area that's being traversed*). The shutter is still rated to 150k clicks, like the D7000."  (emphasis in bold added by Derrel)

I think what is driving people crazy is the price--it's a lot higher than people want to be able to get the camera for! If this thing had hit at $1599, it would have drawn almost universal rave reviews, I think. We saw the SAME thing with the D3x, and the Fuji S5 Pro as well--both were HIGHLY-anticipated models, but were priced wayyyyyyy higher than most people could afford. This is the lowest-cost Full-Frame d-slr on the market. The camera can be bought with the new 24-85 Nikkor zoom for $100 less than the Sony A99 body-only--and the two cameras use the same sensor. The thing is...there is a huge majority of people who have never actually owned an FX camera telling others who want an FX camera just how bad FX cameras "are"...and insisting over and over that DX is good enough, that there really is "no need" to shoot an FX sensor camera...


----------



## jamesbjenkins (Sep 15, 2012)

Derrel said:
			
		

> The thing is...there is a huge majority of people who have never actually owned an FX camera telling others who want an FX camera just how bad FX cameras "are"...and insisting over and over that DX is good enough, that there really is "no need" to shoot an FX sensor camera...



These are the same trolls who shop at Best Buy, and those who drone on ad nauseum on all aspects of photography as if they were Ansel Adams reincarnate. Anyone who says FX is bad or inferior to DX is either a damn fool, intellectually dishonest or is just trying to make themselves feel superior or better because they can't afford FX.

Moral of the story: D600 is overpriced, and therefore inferior at its current price point.


----------



## rexbobcat (Sep 15, 2012)

jamesbjenkins said:
			
		

> These are the same trolls who shop at Best Buy, and those who drone on ad nauseum on all aspects of photography as if they were Ansel Adams reincarnate. Anyone who says FX is bad or inferior to DX is either a damn fool, intellectually dishonest or is just trying to make themselves feel superior or better because they can't afford FX.
> 
> Moral of the story: D600 is overpriced, and therefore inferior at its current price point.



But...I thought Nikon had the perfect business model...


----------



## jamesbjenkins (Sep 15, 2012)

rexbobcat said:
			
		

> But...I thought Nikon had the perfect business model...



I thought they had a great business model, until they priced the D600 at $2099. Doesn't make sense, because now there's no room for the D400.

They're banking hard on the effing morons in the market who only see the 24MP FF sensor, and have gear lust sufficient to make foolish buying decisions.

No pro photog is going to buy this as their primary, and a D700 is a MUCH better choice for a backup body. The advanced amateurs and wannabe pros who don't do their homework are the primary market.


----------



## pixmedic (Sep 15, 2012)

maybe Nikons plan was to price the D600 out high for a while to snag all the "gotta have the newest NOW" people, and then in a few months drop the price to get the rest who were waiting for an affordable FF nikon. That way, they get a few months of gouging people that have to have instant gratification. 

on the other hand, I have not yet done the research...BUT... what is canons cheapest FF model and how does it compare to the D600? IS the D600 overpriced compared to its canon counterpart? or is Sony the only other FF for the same money?


----------



## manaheim (Sep 15, 2012)

jamesbjenkins said:
			
		

> I thought they had a great business model, until they priced the D600 at $2099. Doesn't make sense, because now there's no room for the D400.
> 
> They're banking hard on the effing morons in the market who only see the 24MP FF sensor, and have gear lust sufficient to make foolish buying decisions.
> 
> No pro photog is going to buy this as their primary, and a D700 is a MUCH better choice for a backup body. The advanced amateurs and wannabe pros who don't do their homework are the primary market.



How do you figure? D400 level cameras usually start at $1800.  That's 300 less.  If they 
made the d600 any cheaper there would be zero point in buying a d400.  (frankly I don't see much point at 300 ) or is that what you mean?

Also d700 is good, but dated.  On specs alone this is a better backup body by far.


----------



## PhotoWrangler (Sep 15, 2012)

manaheim said:


> How do you figure? D400 level cameras usually start at $1800.  That's 300 less.  If they
> made the d600 any cheaper there would be zero point in buying a d400.




Give it six months to a year... The price tag of the D600 will go from $2100 to $1800 once the "gotta have it" rush is over.


----------



## KmH (Sep 15, 2012)

No doubt. If someone thinks the D600 is over priced they probably won't buy it.

A business pricing rule of thumb says - "You know your price is just right when 1/3 of your customers complain that your price is to high."


----------



## Redwing24 (Sep 15, 2012)

Price it high enough where looking at the figure 2100 starts looking small and then figuring out why not drop another 1000 for a d800. The way of thinking if I'm already going to spend 2g's I might as well drop one more G for the camera that was soo far out of my price range to begin with. Kudos Nikon!


----------



## eric1971 (Sep 18, 2012)

Is the 6D the reason for the price of the D600?  Specs wise, the D600 wins easily.  Personally, I think they are both overpriced, but it would be hard not to pick the Nikon if you were cross shopping these two.  

Nikon D600 vs Canon 6D


----------



## 2WheelPhoto (Sep 18, 2012)

Redwing24 said:


> Price it high enough where looking at the figure 2100 starts looking small and then figuring out why not drop another 1000 for a d800. The way of thinking if I'm already going to spend 2g's I might as well drop one more G for the camera that was soo far out of my price range to begin with. Kudos Nikon!



Yes indeed, the D600 is definitely a marketing tool for the D800!


----------



## Markw (Sep 18, 2012)

Lol, no.  That's why it's ALREADY in stock, waiting to be ordered.

Mark


----------



## Derrel (Sep 18, 2012)

For people who need to come to grips with what the Nikon D600 REALLY REPRESENTS, please check out this collection of facts and opinions and analysis by noted Nikon author Thom Hogan. D600 Comments 

This is his so-called D600 Compendium article, entitled, "Everything I Know About The D600". This page has some exceptionally cogent analysis of what the camera represents, how it is positioned in the marketplace, and some insightful commentary and analysis on why so many people feel threatened by the camera, where it fits in Nikon's product matrix, and WHO this camera is suited to, and who it is not suited to. It also has links to Nikon's on-line "Digitutor" website, as well as to the official Nikon sample photos and specifications.

One tease, one excerpt from Thom's writings: "*Here's the thing: the D600 is a D3x in a D7000 body for about 30% the price. If you're price conscious and don't treat your camera's roughly, the D600 *_*does*_* seem to be a good value and a way to get into FX relatively inexpensively. You've got enough pixel power to produce 20" prints (at 300 dpi). You've got reasonable mid-range performance in terms of focus, fps, and more. You lose dedicated buttons for ISO, WB, QUAL, and BKT, but if you learn how to manage your camera right, those buttons are still available (plus there's always the info button for fairly direct access to almost all critical settings)."*


----------



## Markw (Sep 18, 2012)

Derrel said:


> For people who need to come to grips with what the Nikon D600 REALLY REPRESENTS, please check out this collection of facts and opinions and analysis by noted Nikon author Thom Hogan. D600 Comments
> 
> This is his so-called D600 Compendium article, entitled, "Everything I Know About The D600". This page has some exceptionally cogent analysis of what the camera represents, how it is positioned in the marketplace, and some insightful commentary and analysis on why so many people feel threatened by the camera, where it fits in Nikon's product matrix, and WHO this camera is suited to, and who it is not suited to. It also has links to Nikon's on-line "Digitutor" website, as well as to the official Nikon sample photos and specifications.
> 
> One tease, one excerpt from Thom's writings: "*Here's the thing: the D600 is a D3x in a D7000 body for about 30% the price. If you're price conscious and don't treat your camera's roughly, the D600 *_*does*_* seem to be a good value and a way to get into FX relatively inexpensively. You've got enough pixel power to produce 20" prints (at 300 dpi). You've got reasonable mid-range performance in terms of focus, fps, and more. You lose dedicated buttons for ISO, WB, QUAL, and BKT, but if you learn how to manage your camera right, those buttons are still available (plus there's always the info button for fairly direct access to almost all critical settings)."*



D3s save for any sort of a decent AF system layout.  That was a true killer for me.  The coverage is simply abysmal from what I've seen.

Mark


----------



## TheLost (Sep 19, 2012)

After watching (D600 Hands-On Field Test - YouTube) and reading some of the first hands-on reviews of the D600..... I will be buying one.  It's funny to read (and hear) multiple reviews from different people who say they 'kind of like it better then the D800' (AF, size, features... etc).

It's not a perfect camera and its not made to be one..  Its an 'enthusiasts' FF camera.  I don't need a D800... but i want a D600


----------



## Derrel (Sep 19, 2012)

Markw said:
			
		

> D3s save for any sort of a decent AF system layout.  That was a true killer for me.  The coverage is simply abysmal from what I've seen.
> 
> Mark



I think you're judging the camera on-paper, and not on how it ACTUALLY works. According to the guy in the video from TCS, the D600 actually focuses BETTER than the D800 does, over a full day of shooting. It apparently does not suffer from that occasional focus stutter that the D800 has... Here is the D600 hands-On Field test, from The Camera Store, a 9-minute overview of the camera. D600 Hands-On Field Test - YouTube

@5:37 "High ISO noise Quality, D600 definitely&#65279; better than D700"
@7:00 "D600 Focuses better than D800"



I dunno Mark...you are looking at the AF system "as diagrammed", and making a big, negative prediction based on...drawings...I think for you, the loss of aperture control while in Live View would be the only real,significant drawback of the D600.


----------



## slow231 (Sep 19, 2012)

well it's 9/19, anyone actually get their hands on one yet?  my local BB store is showing inventory.  thinking about picking one up tonight.  i'm with Markw though, the AF area coverage is my main concern.  otherwise it's just a question of do i buy it now or wait for a potential price drop.


----------



## 2WheelPhoto (Sep 19, 2012)

Derrel said:


> Markw said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Thats funny he wasn't using raw files, nor does he offer a comparison only a "suggestion" or guess aginast the D700/D800s.  Not to say it doesn't, but he comes across as the typical new camera salesman. He expects to sell this D600 over his D700s and D800s and the "used car salesman approach" makes for a good video on his part 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





I'm still on for a D800.... talk me out of it please hehe


----------



## Derrel (Sep 19, 2012)

I think one has to be very careful about "who" is enthusiastic about a new camera, and who is not. For example, D800 owners and D7000 owners and D700 owners--I have seen people in all three groups *down-talkin' *various Nikon camera models, I think at times almost subconsciously trying to mentally justify their OWN purchasing decisions or purchasing plans. On internet forums, one needs to understand "who" one is listening to, and of course, the fellow from TCS, The Camera Store, is a salesman/video presenter. He was NOT however, very pleased about the loss of f/stop control on the D600--and I thought he was going to use a pretty strong profanity there when he found out about the loss of f/stop control. As he said, THAT one feature,which the D800 DOES have, "Might be worth nine hundred dollars," for the video shooter. Good sales tactic!

But, back to Markw's second, or third mention of the D600's AF area...I went right to the source, NIKON. Here is a comparison graphic I just made. I think Markw is being a bit overly-focused (pun intended!) on the D600 versus D800 AF pattern differences.


----------



## 2WheelPhoto (Sep 19, 2012)

+1, Also the buttons. What I disliked most about the D7000 was the all menu driven stuff (or having to to custom controls).  When I went to a D700 and found WB/ISO and so much other control readily available, it was a breath of fresh air. The D600 seems highly menu driven too vs. the D800.


----------



## TheLost (Sep 19, 2012)

The d600 just scored the 2nd highest dxomark score (after the d800) 

http://nikonrumors.com/2012/09/19/nikon-d600-gets-second-best-dxomark-score-after-the-d800e.aspx/


----------



## 2WheelPhoto (Sep 19, 2012)

TheLost said:


> The d600 just scored the 2nd highest dxomark score* (after the d800)*
> 
> Nikon D600 gets second best DxOMark score after the D800/E | Nikon Rumors



Wow, and look what else:  "It is also a significant improvement over the high-end professional flagship DSLRs, the Nikon D3X *and the Nikon D4*."
​


----------



## ghache (Sep 19, 2012)

im alot more excited to get my hands on a d600 than canon shooters should be exited to get their hands on the new 6d! stop with the bad Nikon marketing....this d600 will kick some asses.

look at the result.....like i said in another thread 2 days ago. the d600 will be a sick camera, like any other product nikon dumped on the market the last year or so. the d7000 became the best dx camera, the d4 and the d800, for 2.4k the d600 will worth every penny spent on it.


----------



## ghache (Sep 19, 2012)

2WheelPhoto said:


> +1, Also the buttons. What I disliked most about the D7000 was the all menu driven stuff (or having to to custom controls).  When I went to a D700 and found WB/ISO and so much other control readily available, it was a breath of fresh air. The D600 seems highly menu driven too vs. the D800.




lol wtf, LOL. c'mon, i can change my iso settings on my d7000s from a blink of an eye! LAZY! the button is right there!! and the wheel is right there for you to turn.....! stop with the bull**** that d600 will kick the d700 up in the arse. i shot the d7000 in the rain, in the mud and in a -40 degree temperature and it never failed, got rain in or stopped working a single click....and one thing for sure, i have no problem changing shooting settings directly on the body, I RARELY go in my menu to change any settings...its only missing 2-3 switch from pro camera but its totally accessible using other back buttons. 

when the d7000, came out, seems like the d700 owners got an inferiority complex instantly when the d7000 was proven to be pretty damn close in performance than the d700 at half the price. NOW that the d600 is out, they are still getting the same fever. D600 is about the same price as used d700 was selling all year around here and it will be a WAY better camera. the D700 is a nice camera, packed with old technology that still work really good, but the new nikon camera line up is just better, new technologies, upgraded meetering and focusing systems, shoots video, better and larger screens, lighter body's , whatever.... /thread.


----------



## TheLost (Sep 19, 2012)

slow231 said:


> it's just a question of do i buy it now or wait for a potential price drop.



I will be waiting for a few months... There always seems to be some glitches (firmware.. focus)..  Let the early adopters feel the pain is my motto.  It will also let me get a few extra "fun monies" in my pocket so i can keep my D7000


----------



## Derrel (Sep 19, 2012)

ghache said:


> im alot more excited to get my hands on a d600 than canon shooters should be exited to get their hands on the new 6d! stop with the bad Nikon marketing....this d600 will kick some asses.
> 
> look at the result.....like i said in another thread 2 days ago. the d600 will be a sick camera, like any other product nikon dumped on the market the last year or so. the d7000 became the best dx camera, the d4 and the d800, for 2.4k the d600 will worth every penny spent on it.



When Nikon FIRED all those older,long-time career upper level executives, the guys who were 20 years younger had a FIRE lit under their butts along with new titles and new offices!!! Since the old guard was fired and replaced, Nikon has been hitting some home-runs. D3, D3s, D700, all were remarkable advancements! The D90,the very first d-slr with video capture capability...the D7000...the 24 megapixel D3200 at $699...the D800 and D800e...now the D600...the D600 + 24-85 AF-S zoom costs $100 LESS than JUST the Sony a99, body-only. The D600 out-spec's the new Canon 6D quite handily, and offers uncompressed video-out from the HDMI port, AND has a headphone jack for monitoring the audio.


----------



## ghache (Sep 19, 2012)

Derrel said:


> ghache said:
> 
> 
> > im alot more excited to get my hands on a d600 than canon shooters should be exited to get their hands on the new 6d! stop with the bad Nikon marketing....this d600 will kick some asses.
> ...




your right, i don't even know why people argue. nikon is NOT going to put a replacement camera on the market that is worse than its predecessor. never.


----------



## Derrel (Sep 19, 2012)

2WheelPhoto said:


> TheLost said:
> 
> 
> > The d600 just scored the 2nd highest dxomark score* (after the d800)*
> ...



Huh....SIX of the top TEN camera sensors come in NIKON d-slr bodies....the other four are medium format cameras costing from roughly $9,400 for the *Pentax 645 D*igital upwards to $39,900 and $42,450 for the two 60- and 80-megapixel *PhaseOne* models. Not a single Canon in there...huh...


----------



## 2WheelPhoto (Sep 19, 2012)

ghache said:


> 2WheelPhoto said:
> 
> 
> > +1, Also the buttons. What I disliked most about the D7000 was the all menu driven stuff (or having to to custom controls).  When I went to a D700 and found WB/ISO and so much other control readily available, it was a breath of fresh air. The D600 seems highly menu driven too vs. the D800.
> ...



Harsh!

I wouldn't agree, as soon as I got my paws around the D700, my D7000 went on the craigslist.  D700 kills it in FF depth of field, ISO*, controls*, the body material, focus speed, etc, etc no comparison


----------



## shadowlands (Sep 19, 2012)

Not excited. Already have a D90 and I want a bigger body like a D300, D700 type of build.
Bring on the D400 already!!!


----------



## slow231 (Sep 19, 2012)

i'm not sure why anyone would be surprised (or would doubt for that matter) that the d600 has better iso performance than the d700. i'm expecting at least that. 

2wheel what iso adjustments are you talking about being difficult on the d7000?  i have mine always set to the dead dial in A or S modes. no button pressing, no need to look away from the viewfinder.  in M it was only the press of a dedicated button away, again no looking away from the viewfinder. not sure how that could be any easier... WB also has a dedicated button, but i guess the issue is you'd have to look at the top LCD screen?  i shoot raw so i care nothing about my in-camera WB setting.

anyhow picked a d600 up a few hours ago. haven't played around with it too much, but a few of my initial impressions (keep in mind i'm coming from a d7000): 
- the af area doesn't bother me as much as i thought.  if anything it forces me to shoot a bit looser (most of the time i'm guilty of being too tight). i'm sure the extra resolution will also come in handy if i need to crop in post.
- AF speed and accuracy doesn't seem any better than the d7000 in my dark ass house.  I was kind of expecting this to be a weak point of the camera, but more time will tell.  
- iso looks cleaner than d7000, but i'll have to wait till processing to see. 
- grip is fatter than the d7000, but def feels exactly like it with the rest of the ergos.  not good if your'e looking for something with significantly more heft/size.

in anycase i'm loving the ability to shoot with lenses like my 100, and 70-200 in my tiny house.  the 50 has also become a whole lot more useful as well.


----------



## 2WheelPhoto (Sep 19, 2012)

slow231, there is a WB,ISO, and mode button on the top of the D700, that is the first thing I liked going from a D7000.  If you go from a D7000 to a D600, I'm sure it will be about the same as everything I read says the "bodies and controls" are about the same. And there is no doubt in my mind they are great cams, enjoy the D600.


----------



## slow231 (Sep 19, 2012)

2WheelPhoto said:


> slow231, there is a WB,ISO, and mode button on the top of the D700, that is the first thing I liked going from a D7000.  If you go from a D7000 to a D600, I'm sure it will be about the same as everything I read says the "bodies and controls" are about the same. And there is no doubt in my mind they are great cams, enjoy the D600.



ahh gotcha. I could see how that could be more intuitive.  i definitely had to memorize the iso button location.


----------



## Derrel (Sep 19, 2012)

Doesn't the D600 have a My Menu page, at the very bottom of the list of menu categories, where you can ADD THE ITEMS YOU WANT instant adjustment over???????

http://www.nikondigitutor.com/eng/d600/index.html


----------



## 2WheelPhoto (Sep 19, 2012)

Derrel said:


> Doesn't the D600 have a My Menu page, where you can ADD THE ITEMS YOU WANT instant adjustment over???????



Should, my D7000 had custom controls I programmed. Still not the same though, believe i had both bodies.


----------



## Sw1tchFX (Sep 19, 2012)

The D600 is actually a pretty slick camera.


----------



## jake337 (Sep 20, 2012)

SCraig said:


> jake337 said:
> 
> 
> > I like how NOT impressed people are with something they have never used, seen or felt in their hands......
> ...




Never said I was impressed.  I don't get impressed by tech gear.  


The **** either works well or doesn't.

Seems as though the body may work quite well.


I still won't be buying one though.....


----------



## jake337 (Sep 20, 2012)

ChristopherCoy said:


> jake337 said:
> 
> 
> > I like how NOT impressed people are with something they have never used, seen or felt in their hands......
> ...



Nope, but I can see actual dyno numbers, 0-60 times, lap times and then make a decision.


I don't like the Nissan Skyline because it looks sweet on paper.  It performs....


----------



## 2WheelPhoto (Sep 20, 2012)

jake337 said:


> ChristopherCoy said:
> 
> 
> > jake337 said:
> ...




^^^^that


----------



## Solarflare (Sep 20, 2012)

I think the D600 is, fortunately, not as great as I feared.

The AF points are chosen somewhat weirdly, as if Nikon expects you to use a lot of DX lenses with the camera. Not a very practical approach.

And the camera misses the 1/8000 sec shutter speed the D7000 has.

In short, I can resist the urge to get this camera. Which is great.


----------



## Solarflare (Sep 20, 2012)

Derrel said:


> Huh....SIX of the top TEN camera sensors come in NIKON d-slr bodies....the other four are medium format cameras costing from roughly $9,400 for the *Pentax 645 D*igital upwards to $39,900 and $42,450 for the two 60- and 80-megapixel *PhaseOne* models. Not a single Canon in there...huh...


Yes.

But weirdly, the list still doesnt have the Canon EOS 1D X on it.

Which reportedly has better ISO than the Nikon D4, so how DxOMark would rate that one would really be interesting.

DxOMark - Camera Sensor Ratings


----------



## 2WheelPhoto (Sep 20, 2012)

Solarflare said:


> I think the D600 is, fortunately, not as great as I feared.
> 
> The AF points are chosen somewhat weirdly, as if Nikon expects you to use a lot of DX lenses with the camera. Not a very practical approach.
> 
> ...



I don't understand


----------



## philipalex (Sep 20, 2012)

I use a D800E but you people saying Canon isn't even in the top 10 on DXO Mark are just silly gooses.  There is a reason Canon is the number 1 selling DSLR manufacturer in the world, outselling any of its competition 2:1.  A T2i (550D) from Canon comes in at 11.5 EV's for DR and my D800E hits 14.4.  You know what the difference between 3 stops of dynamic range is to 99.9999% of users?  Absolutely nothing.  Same with the 8% difference in color depth.  Sure, you get 2 stops better ISO with the D800E but is that worth the $2500 price difference to most people?  I don't think so.  I went Nikon because I wanted the 14-24 and the 105 VR but to think DXO Mark is a good way to judge a camera is just silly.  There is not a full stop of ISO difference between the D800 and the 5D Mark 3 and the color depth is within 5%... so you're telling me that 2 stops of dynamic range is worth 14 more points?  Sounds like a pretty ridiculous rating system to me haha.


----------



## philipalex (Sep 20, 2012)

Oh, they also score the D3200 the same as the 5D Mark 3... HAHAHA.


----------



## 2WheelPhoto (Sep 20, 2012)

philipalex said:


> Oh, they also score the D3200 the same as the 5D Mark 3... HAHAHA.



Speaks well to the new 3200 sensor, everyone and all he critics are raving about it


----------



## Mach0 (Sep 20, 2012)

Solarflare said:
			
		

> I think the D600 is, fortunately, not as great as I feared.
> 
> The AF points are chosen somewhat weirdly, as if Nikon expects you to use a lot of DX lenses with the camera. Not a very practical approach.
> 
> ...



But the ISO can drop to 50...


----------



## Reyna (Oct 1, 2012)

Some of you that think the 700 is better than the 600, you need to do some research! WOW! lol. Here is a great read to to get you started . 


Ken Rockwell's Photography Updates


----------



## Vtec44 (Oct 1, 2012)

Reyna said:


> Some of you that think the 700 is better than the 600, you need to do some research! WOW! lol. Here is a great read to to get you started .
> 
> 
> Ken Rockwell's Photography Updates



I may be a minority, but I don't really care for Ken Rockwell's personal opinion about cameras.  I use his site for lens reviews though.


----------



## KmH (Oct 1, 2012)

Reyna said:


> Some of you that think the 700 is better than the 600, you need to do some research! WOW! lol. Here is a great read to to get you started .



The D700, being a prosumer grade camera, has many, many, features the D600 lacks. It isn't all about ISO and MP.


----------



## Reyna (Oct 1, 2012)

KmH said:


> Reyna said:
> 
> 
> > Some of you that think the 700 is better than the 600, you need to do some research! WOW! lol. Here is a great read to to get you started .
> ...



Totally get that. So what is it about the 700 that is a better camera? I know the 600's max shutter speed is 1/4000 but I don't know that I've ever needed more anyway..... IMO, the pro's defiantly outweigh the cons between the two cameras.... just sayin'


----------



## Derrel (Oct 1, 2012)

KmH said:


> Reyna said:
> 
> 
> > Some of you that think the 700 is better than the 600, you need to do some research! WOW! lol. Here is a great read to to get you started .
> ...



The D600, being a much newer camera and one aimed at *a much wider audience*, has MANY features that the D700 lacks. The D600 offers UNCOMPRESSED VIDEO capture out of an HDMI port; that feature alone is worth a huge amount. It isn't all just about being stuck at 12 megapixels four years later...with no video, and so on. The D700 is obsoleted now. It was a great camera, in its era, but newer cameras have passed it by. There's basically NO WAY I would select a D700 over a D600 at this time, since both are priced identically, and the D600 has by far a better sensor, and in my mind, a slightly better viewfinder that has better eye relief, and of course, the newer camera is the current state of the art, and not an end-of-life model.


----------



## Derrel (Oct 1, 2012)

So, a quick follow-up. Here is a comparison site that offers just the HIGHLIGHTS of the differences between the D600 and the D700. NOT the more-minute differences, but the MAJOR ones, the ones that truly differentiate these two cameras. So...the D600 compared to the D700 offers the following advantages:

Nikon D600 vs D700 - Our Analysis


The D600 offers*: **Significantly better image quality*,*Lower noise at high ISO*,Shoots 1080p* video*, significantly larger LCD screen,much* higher true res*olution, *better color* depth, offers in-camera HDR, has *more dynamic range*, has a *100% viewfinder*, not an approximating 95% finder, has *TWO storage slots*,not just one, is significantly *lighter*, shoots *faster*, is *smaller*, and *costs less.*


----------



## timethief (Oct 2, 2012)

But does the strap say just "NIKON" or does it say "D600" :mrgreen:
I'm still trying to justify the price. Wondering if the price might come down a notch towards x-mas and new year.


----------



## aboudd (Oct 5, 2012)

I have one as well as a D4. The D600 has become my walkabout camera. I use it with the 45MM Pancake lens and the rendering is fantastic, the sensor clean. It is worth every penny of the $2100 as far as I am concerned. It is lighter weight construction than the D4, but it half the price, and feels like it is half the weight. Offered are a few shots I took the second day I had it. Now, after two weeks, I love it.


----------



## Solarflare (Oct 5, 2012)

timethief said:


> But does the strap say just "NIKON" or does it say "D600" :mrgreen:
> I'm still trying to justify the price. Wondering if the price might come down a notch towards x-mas and new year.


Hmm.

I would expect the price should raise around x-mas just like the price of anything else ?

But afterwards, it will probably fall.


----------



## 2WheelPhoto (Oct 5, 2012)

KmH said:


> Reyna said:
> 
> 
> > Some of you that think the 700 is better than the 600, you need to do some research! WOW! lol. Here is a great read to to get you started .
> ...




+1, get the D800.  I posted this thread, and after reading all the comments I did and haven't regretted it


----------

