Okay let me preface this by saying I am not nikon fan boy and I think canon makes great stuff and all that. But I just visited the dpreview forums to see what folks were saying about the D600. The nikon guys on the nikon pro forum are basically giving golf claps for the D600..looks great, fine camera, well specced, good price, etc.There is prediciatbly a few canon dudes trolling the forum as well. But the canon pro body forum..oh man, they are dying over there! They are all at each others throats. Folks are saying that the D600 is basically the 5dmk3 at 60% of the cost..accompanied by much much fist waiving and teeth gnashing. It is quite amusing..one guy said "There is one feature that the D600 totally whiffed on though..an EOS mount". LOL. One guy said "Let's wait on Canon's response" and a cohort replied "Yeah, let's wait..and wait and wait and wait". Folks are writing 3000 word essays on the subject. Oh how fun!

I just saw that the D600 will have the Wu-1b wireless adapter...
That is.. oh, so nice!!!

Originally Posted by babowc I just saw that the D600 will have the Wu-1b wireless adapter... That is.. oh, so nice!!!

There's a lot to like about this introduction. I'm very anxious to see what the professional tests and reviews discover, and then how users actually use the D600.

We are living in very interesting times, photographically speaking, and it just keeps getting better and better.

Originally Posted by Qarik Okay let me preface this by saying I am not nikon fan boy and I think canon makes great stuff and all that. But I just visited the dpreview forums to see what folks were saying about the D600. The nikon guys on the nikon pro forum are basically giving golf claps for the D600..looks great, fine camera, well specced, good price, etc.There is prediciatbly a few canon dudes trolling the forum as well. But the canon pro body forum..oh man, they are dying over there! They are all at each others throats. Folks are saying that the D600 is basically the 5dmk3 at 60% of the cost..accompanied by much much fist waiving and teeth gnashing. It is quite amusing..one guy said "There is one feature that the D600 totally whiffed on though..an EOS mount". LOL. One guy said "Let's wait on Canon's response" and a cohort replied "Yeah, let's wait..and wait and wait and wait". Folks are writing 3000 word essays on the subject. Oh how fun!

To be honest, because of the setbacks in the D600 for portraiture and action, (regarding the shutter speed and flash etc) ...I didn't even really consider the D600 as a 5D mk3 killer. I guess that's just because I spend 90% of my time in the wedding photography world, where if your camera doesn't have a PC sync port then you might as well throw it out. Slight exaggeration, but I certainly wouldn't BUY a D600 for what I do, even as a backup.

However, from the standpoint of adventure, outdoor, nature, landscape, fine art, architecture, and many other types of photography that de-emphasize fast shooting and flash use, and emphasize little more than resolution and dynamic range, ...well then I guess the $2100 D600 does kinda put a damper on the $3500 5D mk3. Especially with the terrible dynamic range in the 5D mk3 shadows; no offense.

Still, Canon has been on top with image quality before, and they will be on top again sometime. And their affordable full-frame body will probably school the D600. So I'm gonna say that the frenzy is un-warranted, and probably mostly fueled by armchair debaters...


=Matt=

Although it is really more of a Nikon commercial than anything else, they do claim that all of this video was shot on the new D600:

chasing-the-light-with-the-new-nikon-d600

Pretty impressive stuff if in fact it was filmed on the D600

That was actually shot with the Nokia Pure View technology! oh wait......

Originally Posted by ZBlack That was actually shot with the Nokia Pure View technology! oh wait......

I was quite surprised when my friend told me about it and the the announcement followed the day after and based on it's feature set I really can't see anyone with a D700 who would be interested in it even with the higher MP count. I'm quite happy with mine and would consider a second used D700 before even considering the 600. Perhaps as mentioned, a serious hobbyist who is willing to step up to FF and the array of glass available for the extra money.
I can't see why anyone would want to use DX lenses with a FF sensor either but that's just me. It will be interesting to see the success of this body as time passes.

Originally Posted by Matthew Saville To be honest, because of the setbacks in the D600 for portraiture and action, (regarding the shutter speed and flash etc) ...I didn't even really consider the D600 as a 5D mk3 killer. I guess that's just because I spend 90% of my time in the wedding photography world, where if your camera doesn't have a PC sync port then you might as well throw it out. Slight exaggeration, but I certainly wouldn't BUY a D600 for what I do, even as a backup. However, from the standpoint of adventure, outdoor, nature, landscape, fine art, architecture, and many other types of photography that de-emphasize fast shooting and flash use, and emphasize little more than resolution and dynamic range, ...well then I guess the $2100 D600 does kinda put a damper on the $3500 5D mk3. Especially with the terrible dynamic range in the 5D mk3 shadows; no offense. Still, Canon has been on top with image quality before, and they will be on top again sometime. And their affordable full-frame body will probably school the D600. So I'm gonna say that the frenzy is un-warranted, and probably mostly fueled by armchair debaters... =Matt=

Interesting
A few of my friends in the biz are calling the 5DM3 a souped up 7D and though I have yet to see the dynamic range in real life shooting I have shot with friends who own the 7D and I've noticed how poorly shadows are handled with that body.
Is the D600 a 5DM3 killer?
I don't think it will be but I suppose it will find it's niche among landscape shooters.

http://www.techradar.com/us/reviews/...articleContent
Here's an image quality test. The next page of that article has signal to noise and dynamic range comparisons to other cameras, the d600 runs pretty close to the d800 in those tests.

Here's a D700/D600 ISO comparison: http://fotospekter.si/primerjava-med...so-vrednostih/

Pretty interesting results.

DXO rates the D600's sensor third... only behind the pair of D800's. Image quality is on par with the $6000 D4... and it smokes any Canon. Looks like a lot of people underestimated the D600 before it was even tested. So glad I bought one the other day.

Originally Posted by reyvee61 I was quite surprised when my friend told me about it and the the announcement followed the day after and based on it's feature set I really can't see anyone with a D700 who would be interested in it even with the higher MP count. I'm quite happy with mine and would consider a second used D700 before even considering...

How about anyone who wants higher image quality, better ISO performance, and twice the resolution?? There will be many many people selling thier D700 to get one. It is a clear upgrade!

Originally Posted by ImageX Photography How about anyone who wants higher image quality, better ISO performance, and twice the resolution?? There will be many many people selling thier D700 to get one. It is a clear upgrade!

It simply depends on how many things you need your camera to do within what period of time. If you shoot fewer variations of subject matter, and have more time to do it, I'm betting the D600's drawbacks will be far outweighed by it's advantages. However, as a wedding photographer / photojournalist, I would be at a huge loss to try and cram all necessary moments and changing light conditions into the controls and features of a D600.

That's what it comes down to for me. I wish I were a full-time landscape photographer, or I wish I had a high-paying day job that gave me tons of free time and money for a landscape hobby. I'd love a D600. But to pay my bills, for now, I must keep on using a D700.

The D600 is, as I said, only an "upgrade" if you value image quality alone and are willing to make numerous / severe cutbacks in overall camera versatility / functionality in order to gain that image quality. For me, 12 megapixels is still just fine and the ISO etc. is still getting the job done. I'd take a second D700 over a D600, and if someone asked me to trade up my D700 for a D800, I'd probably try and sell the D800 and buy, once again, two used D700's...



=Matt=

Matt,
Can you educate me a bit more about what the D700 has in ways of controls/specs versus the D600? I have heard your concerns over the cable sync, flash sync speed, and upper shutter speed.
What else am I missing with the D600 versus a D700 or D300?

Originally Posted by Matthew Saville It simply depends on how many things you need your camera to do within what period of time. If you shoot fewer variations of subject matter, and have more time to do it, I'm betting the D600's drawbacks will be far outweighed by it's advantages. However, as a wedding photographer / photojournalist, I would be at a huge loss to try and cram all necessary moments and changing light conditions into the controls and features of a D600. That's what it comes down to for me. I wish I were a full-time landscape photographer, or I wish I had a high-paying day job that gave me tons of free time and money for a landscape hobby. I'd love a D600. But to pay my bills, for now, I must keep on using a D700. The D600 is, as I said, only an "upgrade" if you value image quality alone and are willing to make numerous / severe cutbacks in overall camera versatility / functionality in order to gain that image quality. For me, 12 megapixels is still just fine and the ISO etc. is still getting the job done. I'd take a second D700 over a D600, and if someone asked me to trade up my D700 for a D800, I'd probably try and sell the D800 and buy, once again, two used D700's... =Matt=

I agree that the D600 doesn't handle as good as your D700(or my D300S) and that might be a factor in fast changing conditions like a wedding. Honestly though, if you know a D600 or D800 inside and out.... what missing functionalities would be a big enough issue to sacrifice so much quality for? Other than the obvious AF stuff.

Originally Posted by MomaZunk Matt, Can you educate me a bit more about what the D700 has in ways of controls/specs versus the D600? I have heard your concerns over the cable sync, flash sync speed, and upper shutter speed. What else am I missing with the D600 versus a D700 or D300?

The list is pretty long, mostly related to specific controls that are either not present at all on the D600, or simply morved / more difficult to access. One of the biggest functionalities that I cannot live without is the one-click zooming during image playback / review. On all the flagship / semi-pro Nikon bodies, you can program the joypad's center button to medium magnification, even corresponding to an off-center focus point. So, no more "zoom, zoom, zoom zoom, scroll, scroll, scroll, scroll, ....okay my subject's face is in focus." On my D700, I snap the shot and can confirm focus within a split second, especially if I'm using the correct off-center focus point. This sounds like a minor issue, but it is something I have simply come to "NEED" as a pro shooting in fast-paced environments. The D800 has this feature, but not the D600 / D7000. The D600 also lacks things like a dedicated metering switch and dual AF-ON / AE-L buttons. Also, with the relocated controls for WB, QUAL and ISO, I run the risk of not being able to change those settings quickly if my LCD is still on, OR accidentally bumping my image quality. In general, the camera requires the use of my left hand moreso than the D700, which I already don't like compared to the Canon control layout which allows me to change ISO and WB with my right hand only. (Although I am VERY happy that Nikon continues to give me menu-less Kelvin adjustments, even on the D600.)

Those things, combined with the lack of a PC sync port and the restricted shutter speed situation, just kill it for me. It would simply require more attention to settings, and overall time, to shoot professionally with a D600.

=Matt=

Originally Posted by ImageX Photography I agree that the D600 doesn't handle as good as your D700(or my D300S) and that might be a factor in fast changing conditions like a wedding. Honestly though, if you know a D600 or D800 inside and out.... what missing functionalities would be a big enough issue to sacrifice so much quality for? Other than the obvious AF stuff.

"So much quality"? There is certainly "so much quality" in the D600, compared to for example a 5D mk2, mk3, or a 6D probably even. However in case you haven't recently seen comparisons, my D700 already creams the Canons, with incredible dynamic range and ISO performance. So as I said before- It gets the job done, most of the time with cushion to spare, so I simply feel more of a need for camera control versatility than I do for sheer image quality or resolution. That's what it comes down to. I could know the D600 inside and out, and would still find it limiting in certain conditions.

The D800, on the other hand, does include much of what the D700 has in terms of customizability and functionality, however I'm still not happy with certain button additions / changes, especially regarding the accommodation of video, not to mention the reduced frame rate. I could get used to many of the changes, but others would always be difficult to live with. Will I get a D800 some day? Sure. I'd love one for my hobby of landscape photography.

My point is simply that while the D600 / D800 combo will satisfy a significant portion of the market, there is still no true substitution for what the D700 is capable of doing at the price it is available for. We have no "affordable D4" in the true sense of the D4's intended function; all we have is a D3X / 5D mk3 killer / competitor.

I am confident that such an "affordable D4" will eventually surface. Or maybe a D800h/s, with some sort of mRAW image size that allows me to shoot at ~16 megapixels RAW full-frame instead of DX crop, at 5-8 FPS full-frame instead of 3-6 DX...

=Matt=

So for us who would be using this purely in the studio what are the PC-sync port issues? I might even have the old Nikon hot shoe adapter but IIRC the manual warned something about the level of power you can run through it (I might be completely mistaken since this was over 6 years ago). Would that solution work pretty much with all monolights or am I going to have to look into the specs of mine?

Again I might be mistaken especially since I can't seem to google one but aren't there tiny strobes which go on the hot shoe and put out enough light to trigger the monolights but not enough to really be picked up by the sensor?

Originally Posted by Matthew Saville The list is pretty long, mostly related to specific controls that are either not present at all on the D600, or simply morved / more difficult to access. One of the biggest functionalities that I cannot live without is the one-click zooming during image playback / review. On all the flagship / semi-pro Nikon bodies, you can program the joypad's center button to medium magnification, even corresponding to an off-center focus point. So, no more "zoom, zoom, zoom zoom, scroll, scroll, scroll, scroll, ....okay my subject's face is in focus." On my D700, I snap the shot and can confirm focus within a split second, especially if I'm using the correct off-center focus point. This sounds like a minor issue, but it is something I have simply come to "NEED" as a pro shooting in fast-paced environments. The D800 has this feature, but not the D600 / D7000. The D600 also lacks things like a dedicated metering switch and dual AF-ON / AE-L buttons. Also, with the relocated controls for WB, QUAL and ISO, I run the risk of not being able to change those settings quickly if my LCD is still on, OR accidentally bumping my image quality. In general, the camera requires the use of my left hand moreso than the D700, which I already don't like compared to the Canon control layout which allows me to change ISO and WB with my right hand only. (Although I am VERY happy that Nikon continues to give me menu-less Kelvin adjustments, even on the D600.) Those things, combined with the lack of a PC sync port and the restricted shutter speed situation, just kill it for me. It would simply require more attention to settings, and overall time, to shoot professionally with a D600. =Matt=

I think with your skill and a little time... you could manage to be very fast with most of those things. You can program the Fn and other buttons as your separate AE/AF buttons. The WB,QUAL, and ISO are all fast as well. They do require two hands as you mentioned. I'm betting you could still get pretty fast with it all but I understand it would be tough for awhile when you know and can use a particular camera like an extension of the body. I understand the lack of one-click zooming in your environment as well. Nikon has to save that stuff for higher end bodies so they can still sell them. Crazy that the D600 is nearly matching the D4 in output though. An extra $4k is a lot for a faster handling body but it's probably what you would need if you wanted a more modern sensor. I know where you're coming from though and Weddings are about the only single thing that makes your needs as important as they are. I wish my D600 was identical to my D300S handling too... but with the killer output.