Nikon D600 - any good?

[JoolsW]

I want to upgrade from My good old D90. The D600 I'm looking at looks pretty good - used, but minty.
The one I'm looking at is around $A600. (Note - aussie bucks) Whaddaya think? Obviously it's about twice the res of my D90, and with a full fame sensor.
I assume I'll be able to get just better, 'finer - tighter' results. Hmmm ... will the upgrade impress me?

 

[Ysarex]

I want to upgrade from My good old D90. The D600 I'm looking at looks pretty good - used, but minty.
The one I'm looking at is around $A600. (Note - aussie bucks) Whaddaya think? Obviously it's about twice the res of my D90, and with a full fame sensor.
I assume I'll be able to get just better, 'finer - tighter' results. Hmmm ... will the upgrade impress me?

If you do any kind of lower light photos where it's necessary to raise the ISO more than a stop or two the difference will be substantial. The D600 will produce much less noisy results.

 

[cgw]

Just be aware that Nikon had serious problems with oil spattering on D600 sensors. Google "D600 problems" for a sense of how widespread the issue was and how Nikon coped with it.

 

[nerwin]

I would skip the D600 and get the D610 if you were to get one. I had a D610, very reliable camera. I know the D600 had issues which is why Nikon made the D610 to correct them.

 

[JoolsW]

Yes, interesting about the 'oil spattering thing'. Maybe that's why the one I've looked at is pretty 'good value'. But surely if the problem was that bad they would have all been fixed or junked by now?
Much of my work is studio product shots, still life, exterior composed shots. No issues really with low light conditions.

 

[nerwin]

Yes, interesting about the 'oil spattering thing'. Maybe that's why the one I've looked at is pretty 'good value'. But surely if the problem was that bad they would have all been fixed or junked by now?
Much of my work is studio product shots, still life, exterior composed shots. No issues really with low light conditions.

You can clean the sensor yourself. It's not that hard. I remember when I had my Nikon D7000, that also had the oil splatter problem, I cleaned it with a q-tip lol and it never was an issue again.

 

[DigiFilm]

You'll definitely gain DR, by a stop for most of the run and as high as two stops. Also, the D90's native ISO is 160 +/-, so you'll gain a base ISO of 100. The D610's DR chart is virtually identical to the D600, with a slight bump here or there.

 

[JoolsW]

Well I thought about that. I'm pretty handy so it probably wouldn't worry me at all.
Not shooting professionally any more so it's not a matter of life and death!
Would I notice a 'nice difference' with the D600 compared to my D90? -If not there's no point. The D600 gives me approx twice the resolution and a full frame.

 

[JoolsW]

You'll definitely gain DR, by a stop for most of the run and as high as two stops. Also, the D90's native ISO is 160 +/-, so you'll gain a base ISO of 100. The D610's DR chart is virtually identical to the D600, with a slight bump here or there.

View attachment 277260

Excellent info mate, thanks for going to the trouble. I like the dynamic range advantage of the D600, it surely would produce images with more 'room' for subtlety and nuance. (Or am I kidding myself?)
(But will the shots make me smile!!! )

 

[DigiFilm]

Excellent info mate, thanks for going to the trouble. I like the dynamic range advantage of the D600, it surely would produce images with more 'room' for subtlety and nuance. (Or am I kidding myself?)
(But will the shots make me smile!!! )

If you're a good photographer, you will produce top drawer results regardless of the camera.

Yeah, I know, that's not how it works, I'm a devoted gearhead myself and GAS wins more than not. But, it makes me sound wise...

 

[cgw]

Nikon got covered by an avalanche of bad press for the D600 before running a repair/replacement program that ended in 2020. DR-wise, have a look at the D7200 which gets cheaper by the day.

 

[wfooshee]

The D7200 has more focus points (51 vs. 39) and has the EXPEED4 processor rather than the D600's EXPEED3. Megapixels are abut the same but the D600's full frame gives it an edge in dynamic range and low light. My own preference would be the D7200, although it will probably be a little bit higher price. It's a mega camera, though!

 

[JoeW]

I had a D600. Yes, it did have a micro-oil splatter--incredibly small dots that would be visible in a blue sky or if you blew up the photo. I had a D600. Nikon would agree to first replace the shutter and then eventually found it easier to simply upgrade the camera. And CGW is correct--that program ended a couple of years ago.

If you decide to buy the D600, take a few shots against a white backdrop and a blue sky and then transfer those files to your laptop and look for what appear to be small water droplets or dust spots when you enlarge the photo. Ask them if they ever sent the camera to Nikon to have the shutter replaced.

I've gotta say--I loved my D600. It was a fine body that did a lot of stuff well. I think I'd still go with the D600 over the D7200--better in low light because it's a bigger sensor. I generated some lovely work with that body.

Last of all, I don't know the shutter count. But $600 A (or about $450 USD) is high for a D600 from what I can see. It's an older DSLR that Nikon no longer does repair on and everyone is going to mirrorless (well, not "everyone" but you get my point).

 

[cgw]

DXO thought the D7200 DR edged out the D600.
Frankly, I'd avoid a D600 like the measles. Anyone I knew who owned one got jerked around by Nikon.ca with endless shop visits before eventual replacement. It was basically a D7000 with an FX sensor. Some kvetched about the AF sensor array crammed into a small VF area.
A possibly 12 year-old camera with "issues." No thanks.

 

[480sparky]

FWIW, I have three D600s. None of them has an issue.