• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Nikon D600

I just read the specs on it. Seems like an interesting camera. The only thing is, why bother? What I mean to say is, why bother to make a new camera? They probably could have continued making the D700 and simply dropped it to this price or dropped it to $1500.

On the other hand this camera does do video, but outside that, there isn't much of a case to get it versus a used d700, or as DyNamiC has said, simply save the extra $1k and purchase a d800. (Yeah, I'm sure someone will make a case about the megapixels, 12 vs 24, but there is already no denying the d700 is a phenomenal camera, even when it was compared to its more advanced siblings, the D3/D3x/D3s.)

So the real question is, how many people is it going to temp to upgrade? The D7000 is $1500 (which is probably why they didn't price the D600 lower.) Will it tempt would be buyers of a $1500 camera to splurge for a $2k camera? Or in other words, will it convince others that were going to spend less to spend more on this camera because it's full frame? I suppose if it does, and/or detracts from the competition, then Nikon will have succeeded in its goal.
 
Compared to what Sony RX1 has to offer, it's still a bargain (yeah, I know... apples and oranges). In reality, though, I also think the price is a bit too high. $1800-$1900 would've been better. $1600 would create a bigger back-order than D800's.

I do not regret getting the D800 earlier this year one bit. At a cost of 5oz and $900, I get better manual controls, better AF, better build, faster shutter... it's a "small" price to pay in a great scheme of things.

I wouldn't directly compare its price to the D7000, however, because of the further cost of the glass required for the FF camera. Many DX users have invested heavily in DX glass, and a switch to a FF camera (D600, D800 or any other for that matter) is usually paired up with a complete or at least partial glass overhaul further increasing the cost of an upgrade. That said, I'm anxious to see the numbers from Nikon for the upcoming quarter.

So what's next? I think Pentax is rumored to use the same sensor in their premiere FF body scheduled for next year. If true, a direct comparison would be very interesting. When is Canon scheduled to release their entry FF body?
 
northrop said:
Compared to what Sony RX1 has to offer, it's still a bargain (yeah, I know... apples and oranges). In reality, though, I also think the price is a bit too high. $1800-$1900 would've been better. $1600 would create a bigger back-order than D800's.

I do not regret getting the D800 earlier this year one bit. At a cost of 5oz and $900, I get better manual controls, better AF, better build, faster shutter... it's a "small" price to pay in a great scheme of things.

I wouldn't directly compare its price to the D7000, however, because of the further cost of the glass required for the FF camera. Many DX users have invested heavily in DX glass, and a switch to a FF camera (D600, D800 or any other for that matter) is usually paired up with a complete or at least partial glass overhaul further increasing the cost of an upgrade. That said, I'm anxious to see the numbers from Nikon for the upcoming quarter.

So what's next? I think Pentax is rumored to use the same sensor in their premiere FF body scheduled for next year. If true, a direct comparison would be very interesting. When is Canon scheduled to release their entry FF body?
Click to expand...

Any movement on a Canon entry level full frame is just 100% rumors at this point. The Canon camp has an interesting diverging trend going on.

There is rumors regarding an entry level full frame possibly named the 6D, as well as some sort of ridiculously high MP monster (of the 44MP variety) possibly named the 3D (another popular rumor name is 1Dxs/1DSx.) Whether either of those two cameras are actually in development is up for debate.

Like this Nikon problem, I'm not sure if an entry level FF camera fits into their price structure. The 5D2 is still selling, and it is around $2k. I guess they could essentially take the 5D2, do some upgrades to the processing, iso, and auto-focus, and then do all the same tweaks that happened to the 5D3 regarding video, menus, and buttons (just for uniformity) and call it a new product.

The 44MP camera has interest in the high MP crowd. It would be interesting if they actually were developing said camera, and what kind of impact that would have on the marketplace. But as I've argued on some other forums, there isn't really a need for 44MP. I think 18MP in the 1Dx is plenty, and I think more than 24MP is overkill. Of course if it's priced right, people will buy it. People get attracted to those high MP numbers. Don't get me wrong, the D800 is an excellent camera, but it is because of all the other things it's good at (dynamic range, iso pattern noise, etc.) Not just simply because it's 36MP. And I suppose Canon could essentially make an excellent 44MP camera, but why?


(In case you're wondering, that 44MP number is based upon doubling the MP size of the 5D3. That number is significant, because it would allow exact pixel reduction down to 1080p, which is why Canon went with a 22MP sensor with the 5D3.)
 
Last edited:
Yes! I will :D

Now that I know that dpreview has it, and this somewhat confirms it, I shall be making some calls and see when can I actually pre-order this. I'll sell my entire D7000 set, and then I can finally move to a D600/16-35 f/4 combo
 
I am very interested in the D600. I have been solidering on with my D200 for quite some time now waiting for a suitable replacement. I was close to biting on the D700 but held out for a bit to see the D800. Then the rumors of the D600 started circulating so here I am.

From what I have seen, the D600 would be a great compromise of the D800 and the D700, but given I will be replacing half of my glass (I dont really have many lenses, but half sounds like more than the actual number....) I am also considering Cannon. When it is time to buy, it will be whichever produt meets my needs.

Right now that camera is the D600, but they got to get that thing on the shelves if they want anyone to buy it. I see it as pre-order on BH at $2,699 (this is body +lens), which is D800 territory. Have to wait for it to come down for it to be a good deal.

^^^^
2600 was for lens and body, 2100 is on Nikons site is for body only, my goof.
 
Last edited:
aarcam said:
Right now that camera is the D600, but they got to get that thing on the shelves if they want anyone to buy it. I see it as pre-order on BH at $2,699, which is D800 territory. Have to wait for it to come down for it to be a good deal.
Click to expand...

Woah, I was expecting the $2100 tag mentioned above. $2699 is steep by miles, and I agree, at that point, I'd rather get a D800, or even switch camps entirely and get a 5DII. I have to rid all my lenses anyway and start from scratch, so I wouldnt mind switching camps.
 
Empty_Quarter said:
Woah, I was expecting the $2100 tag mentioned above. $2699 is steep by miles, and I agree, at that point, I'd rather get a D800, or even switch camps entirely and get a 5DII. I have to rid all my lenses anyway and start from scratch, so I wouldnt mind switching camps.
Click to expand...

Empty Quarter, I goofed, the 2,100 will be body only price as listed on Nikons site. As listed on BH's site it is for body + lens (24-85mm f/3.5-4.5G ED VR Lens) at 2,600. They usually release the kits first and body only later, I just got excited to see it available, even if only pre-order. I edited my post above but wanted to clarify here as well.
 
aarcam said:
I am very interested in the D600. I have been solidering on with my D200 for quite some time now waiting for a suitable replacement. I was close to biting on the D700 but held out for a bit to see the D800. Then the rumors of the D600 started circulating so here I am.

From what I have seen, the D600 would be a great compromise of the D800 and the D700, but given I will be replacing half of my glass (I dont really have many lenses, but half sounds like more than the actual number....) I am also considering Cannon. When it is time to buy, it will be whichever produt meets my needs.

Right now that camera is the D600, but they got to get that thing on the shelves if they want anyone to buy it. I see it as pre-order on BH at $2,699, which is D800 territory. Have to wait for it to come down for it to be a good deal.
Click to expand...

I am a Canon shooter, but even I have to admit, that it's hard to justify jumping ship from Nikon to Canon if you're already invested in Nikon glass. Right now the 5D3 is just so much more expensive than a D800. That $500 difference is just rough. Granted you can now get a 5D2 for around $1500 (which is what I currently shoot on) and it creates beautiful images, and of course will continue to take beautiful images, however Nikon shooters will definitely find the AF on the 5D2 lacking.

Honestly, my mantra when selecting a system is based on the glass. I personally believe that Canon L glass is second to none. I won't bother to argue with anyone if that is in my head or not, as I think really you can go either way. But similarly if you love the glass that's on your system, why switch? Every 3 years the top end cameras rotate, and Canon and Nikon switch positions in-so-far-as "who has the best top end body" but the glass is what endures and ultimately is what you're invested in. Now if for whatever reason you now believe that Canon glass is better than what you're currently using, then I suppose I can't argue.

The D800 and D800e are both excellent cameras as is the 5D3. Honestly, from a system perspective, I don't think there is a clear winner, other than the consumer. Although I will mention one more thing. I personally feel like the best Nikon camera is actually the D3x, which now can be had for ~$3800 used. That to me is insanely good for a pro body that is built like a tank (with excellent ergonomics!) and takes amazingly great photos. The D3x still has excellent ISO (especially when compared to the 1Ds3) and in every regard it seems to be the best all-rounder of any system, Canon or Nikon.
 
Last edited:
The $2699 is for a body and a 24-85 mm lens. The body only does sell for $2100.
 
UnknownSouljer said:
The D7000 is $1500 (which is probably why they didn't price the D600 lower.)
Click to expand...

They recently marked the D7000 down to $1199 and most retailers are selling them for just under $1k. I feel like they could have priced the D600 at just under $2k and generated a ton more sales. $1899 would seem more reasonable and wouldn't have crowded the D7000 sales at all with the recent mark down.

Empty_Quarter said:
Yes! I will :D

Now that I know that dpreview has it, and this somewhat confirms it, I shall be making some calls and see when can I actually pre-order this. I'll sell my entire D7000 set, and then I can finally move to a D600/16-35 f/4 combo
Click to expand...

Amazon has them up for pre-order already!
 
My contact called me up, and im first on the list. If I pre-order today, I get the camera tuesday, which is WAYYYYYY faster than I expected. I expected a few months wait, not this quick.

I might have to hold out for a few weeks till I sell whatever I got.
 
wow, where have i been ? if i was going to upgrade, the D600 is probably top of my list. Though its not like my A580 doesnt do the job...
 
Very tempting! When I can get one for around $1800 I will probably jump on it. Just need to sell my D90 and maybe a lens or two, and that becomes a fairly reasonable trade.

I really want to move up to full-frame asap because pretty-much all my lenses except 10.5mm DX Fisheye will work better on FF anyways. Can't wait to get my 50mm/1.4 and 24mm/2.8 onto FF where they will have the correct view. It'll be like getting a whole new set of lenses! :D
 
dPreview posts real world samples.

DyNamiC. said:
They recently marked the D7000 down to $1199 and most retailers are selling them for just under $1k. I feel like they could have priced the D600 at just under $2k and generated a ton more sales. $1899 would seem more reasonable and wouldn't have crowded the D7000 sales at all with the recent mark down.
Click to expand...

Makes sense. The D7000 (and the 7D) is(/are) both getting near to the end of their cycles.
 
madFive said:
Very tempting! When I can get one for around $1800 I will probably jump on it. Just need to sell my D90 and maybe a lens or two, and that becomes a fairly reasonable trade.

I really want to move up to full-frame asap because pretty-much all my lenses except 10.5mm DX Fisheye will work better on FF anyways. Can't wait to get my 50mm/1.4 and 24mm/2.8 onto FF where they will have the correct view. It'll be like getting a whole new set of lenses! :D
Click to expand...
Is it the 50/1.4D and 24/2.8D that you've got? I hope it's the 50G instead, as the D is pretty soft on the D800. Same goes for the 24D. Really nice lens on a D700, but not so much on the D800. The two lenses may or may not be satisfactory to your standards on the D600. Approach the experience with caution.
 
Anyone have ideas on how much to sell an excellent condition D7000 body for? ~7000 actuations.

I know how much to sell the lenses for, and already have potential buyers, just wondering on the camera bit.
 
Empty_Quarter said:
Anyone have ideas on how much to sell an excellent condition D7000 body for? ~7000 actuations.

I know how much to sell the lenses for, and already have potential buyers, just wondering on the camera bit.
Click to expand...

A quick check on the FM forums shows one with similar clicks (a bit over 8k) selling for $780. There is also a brand new one being listed for $880. Unfortunately, I can't link the search, but you can check it out for yourself. It doesn't require login. FM Forums, I would say is probably the best online location to B/S/T Photo gear.
 
northrop said:
Is it the 50/1.4D and 24/2.8D that you've got? I hope it's the 50G instead, as the D is pretty soft on the D800. Same goes for the 24D. Really nice lens on a D700, but not so much on the D800. The two lenses may or may not be satisfactory to your standards on the D600. Approach the experience with caution.
Click to expand...

Hmm... good to know. Had to look this up as I wasn't familiar w/ this D/G spec. My 24mm is the f/2.8D AF. That lens is super-sharp on the D90 - I can't imagine it having problems on FF camera, but guess I'll have to wait and see if/when I move up to FF.

The 50mm is f/1.4G AF-S, so I guess it should already work correctly? That one tends to be pretty soft when wide-open - just have to get used to being really careful with focusing.
 
madFive said:
Hmm... good to know. Had to look this up as I wasn't familiar w/ this D/G spec. My 24mm is the f/2.8D AF. That lens is super-sharp on the D90 - I can't imagine it having problems on FF camera, but guess I'll have to wait and see if/when I move up to FF.

The 50mm is f/1.4G AF-S, so I guess it should already work correctly? That one tends to be pretty soft when wide-open - just have to get used to being really careful with focusing.
Click to expand...
Yeah, your 50mmG should be fine. Here's the thing though, while D600 has significantly fewer pixels than the D800, when Nikon released this guide (pdf file) with the list of optimal lenses for the camera, none of the 50mm made the cut.

I'd suggest searching for some examples from the D3x, maybe that would help?
 
northrop said:
Yeah, your 50mmG should be fine. Here's the thing though, while D600 has significantly fewer pixels than the D800, when Nikon released this guide (pdf file) with the list of optimal lenses for the camera, none of the 50mm made the cut.

I'd suggest searching for some examples from the D3x, maybe that would help?
Click to expand...

Good info - thanks! I'm thinking for my purposes in the near future, the lenses I have should work well enough. Since most of what I do is online, and only very rarely print my work, I won't be using the full-resolution potential of the D600/800 all that often, and the difference in sharpness at full crop shouldn't make too big a difference. But hey, if I do have issues with current lenses, that'll be a fine excuse to go after some new glass! ;)
 
Didn't want to start a new thread. Came home today to see the Canon 6D announced.

I didnt get a good look at the specs, but if this is aimed at competing against the D600, this might be it for me. I know there's a lot of fanboy-ism between the brands with many, but for me, since I have to start from scratch by going full-frame (i.e. sell it all, and buy new lenses), I have to be objective about it.

Right off the bat, Going canon would be cheaper than nikon, not so much on the body part, but more on the lenses.

Canon + 17-40 f/4L = cheaper than Nikon D600 + 16-35 f/4 by about ~$500-600, and since all I care about is ultra-wide, this might be route for me to go.
 
I also came over here, but didn't want to start a thread or post in this one. :D

I think the 6D will prove to be a good camera, but Canon has once again made the same fatal mistake by only have a single cross point sensor. I don't think it's a problem that it has "only" 11 points, but they should have made all of them cross type, that would have made the camera killer in the market place. Because they didn't, it's hard to recommend it over buying a used 5D Mk II, which has superior resolution, larger viewfinder coverage (by a paltry 1%, but it matters,) CF cards as opposed to SD, 1/8000th max shutter speed (vs 1/4000th,) and 1/200th flash sync (vs 1/180th.) This is not to mention the 5D2's lower used price (it's still a lower price even new, if you can still find one new.) Other things worth noting is that the 5D2 may have superior weather sealing.

The advantages of the 6D are few, and don't actually help with the process of shooting, or getting better images. Such as: GPS, and WiFi. The only thing that is nice about the 6D is the silent shutter mode, which presumably will be as good as the implementation on the 5D3. Supposedly the center focus point will be better on the 6D as well, down to -3 EV. But that of course is yet to be seen.

Like I say, I could have forgiven all of the inferior things on this camera in comparison with the 5D2, if they only had bothered to make all the AF points cross-type.
 
Last edited:
You know... as minute of a feature it is, I'm a little glad that the 6D comes with GPS, It's 2012, frankly, all cameras should have this by now. I'm can understand how it doesnt have a built-in flash as it's aimed at a market where one would buy a hot-shoe flash anyway, but.. I REALLY like the dual SD card slots in the nikons.
 
Empty_Quarter said:
Didn't want to start a new thread. Came home today to see the Canon 6D announced.

I didnt get a good look at the specs, but if this is aimed at competing against the D600, this might be it for me. I know there's a lot of fanboy-ism between the brands with many, but for me, since I have to start from scratch by going full-frame (i.e. sell it all, and buy new lenses), I have to be objective about it.

Right off the bat, Going canon would be cheaper than nikon, not so much on the body part, but more on the lenses.

Canon + 17-40 f/4L = cheaper than Nikon D600 + 16-35 f/4 by about ~$500-600, and since all I care about is ultra-wide, this might be route for me to go.
Click to expand...

I've got four numbers for you: 14-24 :D

I kid of course. There are cons and pros to each system. I still have to do a little bit of reading about the 6D, but personally, if I was in your shoes, I'd wait a few months until both cameras become available and see what the results are. I wouldn't wait too long, but come Christmas we should have a much better idea of what might actually be better in a long run.
 
The 14-24mm is indeed a killer lens. Canon has been slacking on releasing theirs (they do however have a patent on one... but we're still waiting.) The closest one can get on Canon is the Sigma 12-24 DG HSM II. I have it in my pack, and it's decent but has no where near the sharpness in the corners as would be expected in a first party lens, and it is prone to chromatic aberration (which is of course correctable.) It is wider than the 14-24, and the views put out of it are spectacular, so long as one is okay with dealing with its faults (of which there are several.)

The only other issue of course is that the Nikon 14-24 is significantly more expensive than the 17-40mm, and is an entirely different class. Don't get me wrong, I would say it's worth every penny though for sure. For a while before I settled on the Sigma, I considered buying a 14-24 and an adapter with an AF confirmation chip. In the end I decided it was too expensive for something that wouldn't have AF or electronic control over the Aperture.

Still, on the Canon side, I would say that if you can't save for the 5D3, the 5D2 seems like it's a better purchase, at least on paper. Canon could have at least put the 7D's AF system into the 6D, but didn't. Subsequently, I think for most, what you get out of the 5D2 is better, and at a far better price. If you're not on either system and you're camera agnostic, I just sort of feel like the 600D is a better camera for the money. I do still however prefer "L" glass over Nikkor, but we all have our preferences.
 
northrop said:
I've got four numbers for you: 14-24 :D

I kid of course. There are cons and pros to each system. I still have to do a little bit of reading about the 6D, but personally, if I was in your shoes, I'd wait a few months until both cameras become available and see what the results are. I wouldn't wait too long, but come Christmas we should have a much better idea of what might actually be better in a long run.
Click to expand...

Yep, Xmas is when I was planning on upgrade either way, and with the 6D being released around xmas anyway, perfect timing.

I'd love the 14-24, I fell in love with it the moment I held it in my hands, but should I go the nikon route, the 16-35 is pretty much guaranteed the lens I'd get. Aside from the fact that it's sharper and has a longer range (which would beneficial as my sole lens), it's also a crapton cheaper and can actually take filters :p.

There are definitely pros and cons over each system, canon definitely has their own style and look to their colors. After checking out some groups, like the 17-40 f/4L group on flickr, I'm not sure I'm liking how canons render colors and details. Luckily I do have time.

1 Lens sold!
 
Looks like DxOMark has their hands on a D600 and has tested the sensor performance.

http://www.dxomark.com/index.php/Publications/DxOMark-Reviews/Nikon-D600-sets-high-bar-for-sensor-image-quality

To quote the article:

And the verdict is in: the D600 is an affordable camera that places a high premium on image quality, as it ranks just behind the top performing Nikon D800 and Nikon D800E. It is also a significant improvement over the high-end professional flagship DSLRs, the Nikon D3X and the Nikon D4.
Click to expand...
 
If i was in the market for a full frame it would be a D600 or a 5DmkII. I think they are bang for the buck choices right now. Though i cant afford glass for either one, so ill stick with my crop sensor...after reading a review at dxomark, i think the D600 is my next camera :) .. .someday.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top