Nikon D600

[Larry C]

Well, it looks like Nikon is abandoning DX by going to FX with DX compatibility. The new D600 is smaller and lighter than their other FX, supports DX lenses and format. Full frame HD video in 3 different shutter speeds, 25,600 ISO, down to 50 ISO. Body seems to be completely redesigned, and they finally went to SD cards, with two slots. Price is $2K.

D600 Nikon Digital Camera | Digital SLR Camera from Nikon

 

[PHIL RUDIN]

Other Nikon full frame cameras have the ability to shoot in DX as well. What you need to keep in mind is that in the DX mode the camera becomes a 16 MP camera NOT a 24 MP camera same as the D800. For $900.00 more you can have a D800 with housings already released. All things being equal the only real change in price between this system and a D800 system is the $900.00 housing, ports and lenses will be about the same. While I think this will be a great backup camera for out of the water use I would much rather have the 36MP which in DX would be around 24MP.

Phil Rudin

 

[BoltSnap]

Other Nikon full frame cameras have the ability to shoot in DX as well. What you need to keep in mind is that in the DX mode the camera becomes a 16 MP camera NOT a 24 MP camera same as the D800. For $900.00 more you can have a D800 with housings already released. All things being equal the only real change in price between this system and a D800 system is the $900.00 housing, ports and lenses will be about the same. While I think this will be a great backup camera for out of the water use I would much rather have the 36MP which in DX would be around 24MP.

Phil Rudin

Is going down to 24MP from 36MP going to be that significant on pic quality?

 

[Searcaigh]

I read elsewhere that the body is plastic compared to the D800 which is metal.

Having two SD slots compared to one SD and one CF is another point. I know everything is getting smaller, but for some reason I like my CF cards and never really had a problem with one, whereas I have had some issues with SD cards in the past.

 

[Mark Derail]

Yep, same thought. When I upgrade my D90 for my landwork, if I'm going to spend 2k I might as well spend more, and get the 36MP instead of 24MP.
Plus the "extra" focus points.

The average "joe" photographer won't spend 2k$ on such a camera, they'll jump to a Canon for 4k videography instead for the same price.

I just wish burst mode was faster! Like using dual, or why not, four SD cards to "spread" the writing and increase capacity.

I do like dual SD's for jpg + raw, I think that's the feature I'll be looking forward to when upgrading. I can't do a pro-level shoot with a 32G SD that's set to JPG & Raw, and then using Lightroom to convert all those Raw's into jpgs for the customer "on the spot" is a pain.

Is going down to 24MP from 36MP going to be that significant on pic quality?

Burhan, I can think of sports photography when "rule of thirds" is out the window, things are happening too fast. Cropping a 36MP pic versus a 24MP pic...I can think of the olympics, shooting in burst, and lots & lots of time spent in photoshop.

Reminds me of a previous conversation, where when we will have mega-gigapixel cameras, most photographers will be "lazy". Bound to happen in our lifetimes.

 

[Peter_C]

I do like dual SD's for jpg + raw, I think that's the feature I'll be looking forward to when upgrading. I can't do a pro-level shoot with a 32G SD that's set to JPG & Raw, and then using Lightroom to convert all those Raw's into jpgs for the customer "on the spot" is a pain.

You can use freeware like FS Viewer to view RAW. Not much need for JPG these days. I still shoot both though.

I can remember reading an article where they talked about megapixels and do you really need "that" many. They were talking about 12mp. Now we are talking about 36mp? I suppose if you wanted to put it up on a movie screen, but how many of us are doing that? My crappy old crop frame 12mp camera suits me fine except for one thing...I so wish it was a D300s to do video.

 

[PatW]

There are limits to what you get out of 36mp. You lose resolution above F8 with 36mp or so the equations on the matter say. I don't have the D800 but I do have a D7000 which has the same F stop limit. I did a test on my D7000 with a Nikon 60 mm micro lens. I found that I did get a loss of resolution above F8. It was not that noticeable in the F12-F16 range but it was there. The D600 with 24 mp is F limited at about F12.

Also, I have read in other sources that one does not get the full resolution out of the D800 unless you use top quality lenses, use tripods and so on. Apparently, you have to take pains to achieve the resolution this camera is capable of. Besides, how often does anyone take photos that require 36mp? You would really have to blow up your photo to a pretty large size for it to be an issue.

The D600 sounds like a fine camera to me. It is a tempting option for an enthusiast who wants to get into a full frame system.

 

[nusspli]

I am considering buying the D600, and getting the housing for it later on down the road. It's ~$1000 cheaper than the D800, and there is a special right now where it comes with a 24-85mm lens, all for ~$2000. The body of the D800 alone is $2800.00. Is there a huge advantage to spending the money on the D800 for someone like me who considers this a serious hobby?

For someone that owns the D600, is there something that you hate about it, or wish you could do that the D800 can?

Thanks!
Jessica

 

[Peter_C]

No comments on the D600 as I haven't used one, but the lenses that typically come as kit lenses are not what most would call ideal lenses. IE: It is nice to have a wider lens than 24mm. I have a 12-24mm and many like the 10-17mm. 24-85mm is a big spread, but not an ideal one.

 

[bvanant]

Well one joy of the D800 is that you can crop if you need to. I am surprised to see diffraction limited resolution at f8. My calculated estimation for the D600 this should be noticeable (diffraction not any other kind of aberrations like lens issues) at around f14 or so, certainly not at f8. In any case, that is for shooting nice stable stuff in air, UW I suspect that DOF concerns will outweigh diffraction issues for most macro photos.
Bill