Oh boy. Yesterday I was really waffling about whether or not I should really think about getting this camera, then today I got a bonus check at work for slightly more than the cost of this. I think its an omen. I'm not normally a superstitious person, but if the superstions are telling me to buy new toys I can make an exception. Maybe ill be dgrin's sacrificial lamb, preorder one and give you guys some test results.
Maybe. Still waffling a little.
Being an "early adopter" of a new and untested camera has some risk. You might be better to at least wait until the formal tests and reviews, and a few real life user reviews, hit the Internet. Then balance those insights with your proposed use of the new body to see if it makes a good match.
In the mean time, remember that you may also need additional lenses, and start banking some cash for those purchases. (However the D600 does have a DX mode that shoots 10.5 MPix and may allow some time buffer for new lens purchases.)
Yea, like I said, still waffling. Might wait till around christmas time, who knows.
I only have 1 DX lens, a fisheye that doesn't see much action compared to my other lenses.
Naw, the Canon 5D series have always had 1/200th x-sync. Even the dRebels have 1/200th x-sync. Your information is just plain wrong.
BTW, Canon 20D through 60D have a 1/250th x-sync, as do the 1D/1Ds series. The latest 1D series also natively x-sync at 1/300th with some Canon flashes. (1D MKIV and 1D X)
The Canon 5D series have a 1/8000th maximum, as do the xxD and xD series bodies. It's only the dRebel series that are limited to 1/4000th maximum shutter.
The 5D MKII and 5D MKIII also have HSS/FP mode flash support, for shutter speeds above x-sync (to allow ambient light control with large apertures.)
Huh I guess it is other cameras that were stuck at 1/180, I dunno why that number was so "stuck" in my head. I guess I just remember some friend photogs "playing it safe" by staying at 1/180 instead of pushing to 1/200 with certain wireless triggers, I don't remember what though.
Either way, my point is that it's not the end of the world if you slap on a polarizer. Heck, you've got Nikon autofocus on your side, you should have no problem focusing through a -1.5 EV piece of filter glass!
Yea, like I said, still waffling. Might wait till around christmas time, who knows.
I only have 1 DX lens, a fisheye that doesn't see much action compared to my other lenses.
Bottom line- what do you shoot? Landscapes and other still / natural type things? Or people? Professionally, or as a hobby? The D700 may be a better choice, or the D600. Depends on what you shoot.
My personal favorite things to do are still lifes and abstract stuff. But I don't make any money on that really. This past year I've been shooting roller derby for a local team, indoors. So indoor sports, good performance at high iso and good AF are important.
I also occasionally do nature stuff but I live in northern new jersey and we are somewhat lacking in nature around here.
Lately I have been trying to expand my skill set by doing more studio shots of people. It's something I definitely want to focus more on.
My personal favorite things to do are still lifes and abstract stuff. But I don't make any money on that really. This past year I've been shooting roller derby for a local team, indoors. So indoor sports, good performance at high iso and good AF are important.
I also occasionally do nature stuff but I live in northern new jersey and we are somewhat lacking in nature around here.
Lately I have been trying to expand my skill set by doing more studio shots of people. It's something I definitely want to focus more on.
Okay so you do shoot low-light action, but roller derby isn't exactly the type of sport where you can use flash easily, either. So you're probably not going to miss anything if you get a D600, and the extra megapixels would help you "reach" further on long lenses compared to a D700. Plus of course, megapixels are always nice to have for anything "fine art" related.
If you're considering getting into people photography, I would say think about what types of environments are you interested in. Action-oriented situations where you may need both on-camera and off-camera flash? Because that isn't going to be easy without a PC sync port. (You'd need to adopt a piggyback system like Radio Poppers or PW "Flex"...)
Overall, it sounds like you could get a D600 and be relatively happy, as long as you're fine with the current control layout of a camera like the D7000 / D90. If you've already tasted the D200 / D300 control layout, however, you may find it tough to go back to the "advanced amateur" control layout. What do you currently shoot on?
I currently have a d7000, first dslr was a d80. seems like nearly identical controls on the d600. I also recently bought a phottix odin radio trigger for off camera flash.
I currently have a d7000, first dslr was a d80. seems like nearly identical controls on the d600. I also recently bought a phottix odin radio trigger for off camera flash.
Does this Phottix system use a PC sync port if you need to also have on-camera flash, or can it piggyback on an on-camera flash? Do you envision yourself ever needing both on-camera flash and wireless flash? Would you be willing to invest hundreds of dollars extra in order to gain such a capability, if your current system cannot provide it? (Radio Poppers aren't cheap!)
The phottix does not piggyback with an on camera flash. For off camera flash, the phottix is pretty new, I got it in early august. Prior to that I've always used either a TTL cable that goes in the hotshoe or the built in optical triggering. Do I need on camera and off at the same time? Good question, off the top of my head I can't think of a situation when I really needed that, though it would be nice to have the capability of course. But I don't think I would be willing to spend hundreds of dollars for such capability.
I think I need to clear my head of all things camera for a bit. On the way home from work I passed a pretty new looking pickup truck with a badge that said '5.6LE' and my first thought was "5.6? why would someone get a truck that slow?" then I had to remind myself that they don't measure engine displacement in F-stops.
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". . 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!!!
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.
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". . 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...
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.
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.
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.
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!
0
Matthew SavilleRegistered Users, Retired ModPosts: 3,352Major grins
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,
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?
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.
0
Matthew SavilleRegistered Users, Retired ModPosts: 3,352Major grins
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.
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...
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?
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.
"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=
I'm with you on this, I've spent years with my D700/S5 Pro which I loved as a combo as the physical controls were nearly identical. Switching with the D800 will take some practice, it's not impossible as I've shot with the D700 and my old Olympus DSLR's on occasion but expect a few mistakes right after the switch whenever you make it. And in an event that could be missing the key moment.
Comments
Being an "early adopter" of a new and untested camera has some risk. You might be better to at least wait until the formal tests and reviews, and a few real life user reviews, hit the Internet. Then balance those insights with your proposed use of the new body to see if it makes a good match.
In the mean time, remember that you may also need additional lenses, and start banking some cash for those purchases. (However the D600 does have a DX mode that shoots 10.5 MPix and may allow some time buffer for new lens purchases.)
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
I only have 1 DX lens, a fisheye that doesn't see much action compared to my other lenses.
Huh I guess it is other cameras that were stuck at 1/180, I dunno why that number was so "stuck" in my head. I guess I just remember some friend photogs "playing it safe" by staying at 1/180 instead of pushing to 1/200 with certain wireless triggers, I don't remember what though.
Either way, my point is that it's not the end of the world if you slap on a polarizer. Heck, you've got Nikon autofocus on your side, you should have no problem focusing through a -1.5 EV piece of filter glass!
=Matt=
My SmugMug Portfolio • My Astro-Landscape Photo Blog • Dgrin Weddings Forum
Bottom line- what do you shoot? Landscapes and other still / natural type things? Or people? Professionally, or as a hobby? The D700 may be a better choice, or the D600. Depends on what you shoot.
=Matt=
My SmugMug Portfolio • My Astro-Landscape Photo Blog • Dgrin Weddings Forum
I also occasionally do nature stuff but I live in northern new jersey and we are somewhat lacking in nature around here.
Lately I have been trying to expand my skill set by doing more studio shots of people. It's something I definitely want to focus more on.
Okay so you do shoot low-light action, but roller derby isn't exactly the type of sport where you can use flash easily, either. So you're probably not going to miss anything if you get a D600, and the extra megapixels would help you "reach" further on long lenses compared to a D700. Plus of course, megapixels are always nice to have for anything "fine art" related.
If you're considering getting into people photography, I would say think about what types of environments are you interested in. Action-oriented situations where you may need both on-camera and off-camera flash? Because that isn't going to be easy without a PC sync port. (You'd need to adopt a piggyback system like Radio Poppers or PW "Flex"...)
Overall, it sounds like you could get a D600 and be relatively happy, as long as you're fine with the current control layout of a camera like the D7000 / D90. If you've already tasted the D200 / D300 control layout, however, you may find it tough to go back to the "advanced amateur" control layout. What do you currently shoot on?
My SmugMug Portfolio • My Astro-Landscape Photo Blog • Dgrin Weddings Forum
Does this Phottix system use a PC sync port if you need to also have on-camera flash, or can it piggyback on an on-camera flash? Do you envision yourself ever needing both on-camera flash and wireless flash? Would you be willing to invest hundreds of dollars extra in order to gain such a capability, if your current system cannot provide it? (Radio Poppers aren't cheap!)
=Matt=
My SmugMug Portfolio • My Astro-Landscape Photo Blog • Dgrin Weddings Forum
I think I need to clear my head of all things camera for a bit. On the way home from work I passed a pretty new looking pickup truck with a badge that said '5.6LE' and my first thought was "5.6? why would someone get a truck that slow?" then I had to remind myself that they don't measure engine displacement in F-stops.
14-24 24-70 70-200mm (vr2)
85 and 50 1.4
45 PC and sb910 x2
http://www.danielkimphotography.com
That is.. oh, so nice!!!
D800
16/2.8, f1.4G primes, f2.8 trio, 105/200 macro, SB900.
It never gets easier, you just get better.
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.
Moderator of the Cameras and Accessories forums
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=
My SmugMug Portfolio • My Astro-Landscape Photo Blog • Dgrin Weddings Forum
chasing-the-light-with-the-new-nikon-d600
Pretty impressive stuff if in fact it was filmed on the D600
www.zblackwood.com
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.
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.
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.
Pretty interesting results.
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=
My SmugMug Portfolio • My Astro-Landscape Photo Blog • Dgrin Weddings Forum
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?
Website
Facebook Twitter Google+
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.
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=
My SmugMug Portfolio • My Astro-Landscape Photo Blog • Dgrin Weddings Forum
"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=
My SmugMug Portfolio • My Astro-Landscape Photo Blog • Dgrin Weddings Forum
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?
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.
I'm with you on this, I've spent years with my D700/S5 Pro which I loved as a combo as the physical controls were nearly identical. Switching with the D800 will take some practice, it's not impossible as I've shot with the D700 and my old Olympus DSLR's on occasion but expect a few mistakes right after the switch whenever you make it. And in an event that could be missing the key moment.