-
Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.
Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
Newly announced D600 (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter swainsons
- Start date
Well,
The general features of this body have been "known" for some time now (see nikonrumors.com), so todays official announcement made it official but did not reveal anything new.
I am curious to see the first images (espcl. high ISO) and test reports that will give a better impression how this camera performs. Next to high ISO performance speed and accuracy of its AF are of interest, as well as its write speed from buffer to card (with 5 frames /s in FX RAW an interesting parameter). That's the time for me to consider it for my bird photography or not.
Pricewise it seems pretty much right between the D800 (~$3000) and D7000 (~$1000). Question still remains if there is a higher end DX in the Nikon pipeline that will replace D300s/D7000 ,,,,,,
Ulli
Last edited:
Helios
Well-known member
Looks like a really good camera; a 24MP full frame sensor would have cost you over 5k new a year ago! A more rounded camera than the D800 with the higher shutter speed. I would be surprised if there's much difference between 51 point and 39 point autofocus.
Not for me though. Still waiting for the mythical beast called the D400.
Not for me though. Still waiting for the mythical beast called the D400.
Helios
Well-known member
Problem is the increase in MP comes with a decrease in fps. I get 9 fps with the D3, and 8 fps with the D300s, and I would have to half that for MP that I don't need. To adjust I would need to change my photography style, spend £100's on new memory cards, and probably buy a new computer to cope with the huge files.
Back in 2007 Nikon gave photographers like myself cameras we wanted, with the excellent D3 and D300. Now if I want a rugged fast camera, the only ones they have are the 5k D4, and the D300s with the ancient sensor.
Back in 2007 Nikon gave photographers like myself cameras we wanted, with the excellent D3 and D300. Now if I want a rugged fast camera, the only ones they have are the 5k D4, and the D300s with the ancient sensor.
RJM
Don't Worry, Be Happy!
I find this "complaint" suprisingly uncomprehensible. The D4 and D600 are introduced at nearly the same prices as the D3 and D300 were yet are SIGNIFICANTLY BETTER cameras in every respect.
opticoholic
Well-known member
I agree the D600 and D4 (and the D800) are of course "better" than the old D300/D300s. For most purposes they are WAY better. But for long lens bird photography, the current newest Nikon bodies are frustrating and fall short of what we all know is possible at this point. It's not just a "price hole" in Nikon's line up. It's a set of features that is possible but not yet offered. Briefly, I'll list the most important features and I'll add price:
Of course there are other important features, but the list above encapsulates the essentials. I agree that Nikon may come closer to supporting this niche with a rumored upcoming D7100. I'm not sure the feature set above will be accommodated within the FX format using "crop modes." Maybe someday, but I don't see it yet in the $3000 D800, which is a wonderful camera and admittedly "significantly better" for bird photography than my old D300.
Fortunately, I think sports photographers desire a similar set of features, and that gives me hope that eventually Nikon will satisfy me. There are a lot more professional sports photographers than bird photographers.
I think the earthquake and tsunami in Japan probably slowed Nikon way down for a while. They've obviously doubled down in the race to full frame, and they've done a great job in that. They must be aware that sports/wildlife photographers want a pro DX body. Others have suggested a mirrorless DX body may be just around the corner, and since the "Nikon 1"/CX mirrorless format is already out there supporting the mass consumer market, hopefully a new DX mirrorless body would be targeted to more serious photographers and compete with other serious APS-C camera bodies like the Fuji X-Pro1 and new X-E1. That really makes sense and would be very interesting.
But for now, I just tell myself it's great that the camera I want doesn't exist, since I don't want to spend more money right now anyway! And the longer it takes, the better the upgrade will be!
--Dave B
- DX format sensor with resolution in the range of 20-24 megapixels and the highest possible quality
- Best possible high ISO noise reduction
- Continuous burst frame rate of 9fps or better
- Professional magnesium/sealed body that mates well with heavy professional telephoto lenses
- $1600-2000 ?
Of course there are other important features, but the list above encapsulates the essentials. I agree that Nikon may come closer to supporting this niche with a rumored upcoming D7100. I'm not sure the feature set above will be accommodated within the FX format using "crop modes." Maybe someday, but I don't see it yet in the $3000 D800, which is a wonderful camera and admittedly "significantly better" for bird photography than my old D300.
Fortunately, I think sports photographers desire a similar set of features, and that gives me hope that eventually Nikon will satisfy me. There are a lot more professional sports photographers than bird photographers.
I think the earthquake and tsunami in Japan probably slowed Nikon way down for a while. They've obviously doubled down in the race to full frame, and they've done a great job in that. They must be aware that sports/wildlife photographers want a pro DX body. Others have suggested a mirrorless DX body may be just around the corner, and since the "Nikon 1"/CX mirrorless format is already out there supporting the mass consumer market, hopefully a new DX mirrorless body would be targeted to more serious photographers and compete with other serious APS-C camera bodies like the Fuji X-Pro1 and new X-E1. That really makes sense and would be very interesting.
But for now, I just tell myself it's great that the camera I want doesn't exist, since I don't want to spend more money right now anyway! And the longer it takes, the better the upgrade will be!
--Dave B
RJM
Don't Worry, Be Happy!
Patience. I think a D7100 could deliver everything you want for US$1100 without the D400 moniker.
FWIW, I am not aware of any testing that proves the D7000 body is not "tough enough". I am for any build process that yields a lighter/smaller body that still maintains weatherproofing. The D7000 high ISO performance and IQ is already about best-in-class and the D3200 24mp sensor/EXPEEDIII combo shows the high ISO performance we can expect from a 24mp D7100. And as we see in the D4, the EXPEEDIII is more than capable of processing the frame rate you want if Nikon lets it. The D7000 39-point AF already delivers a "magic" 6fps but is crippled by the small buffer. IMO, Nikon just needs to expand the buffer and gives us the same 7fps we get from the D300s. Finally, I much prefer the simplicity of the "consumer" U1/U2 settings over those retarded, complex and less-functional softmenu A/B settings banks that the "pro" bodies use now. Frankly, I find the A/B settings banks so annoying on my D300s that I will never buy another "pro" camera that uses them. I see U1/U2 adoption on the D600 as a big step forward in usability.
FWIW, I am not aware of any testing that proves the D7000 body is not "tough enough". I am for any build process that yields a lighter/smaller body that still maintains weatherproofing. The D7000 high ISO performance and IQ is already about best-in-class and the D3200 24mp sensor/EXPEEDIII combo shows the high ISO performance we can expect from a 24mp D7100. And as we see in the D4, the EXPEEDIII is more than capable of processing the frame rate you want if Nikon lets it. The D7000 39-point AF already delivers a "magic" 6fps but is crippled by the small buffer. IMO, Nikon just needs to expand the buffer and gives us the same 7fps we get from the D300s. Finally, I much prefer the simplicity of the "consumer" U1/U2 settings over those retarded, complex and less-functional softmenu A/B settings banks that the "pro" bodies use now. Frankly, I find the A/B settings banks so annoying on my D300s that I will never buy another "pro" camera that uses them. I see U1/U2 adoption on the D600 as a big step forward in usability.
I agree, all we have now is D7000, if Nikon eventually come with a 24Mpix D7x00 then be it, but for now the D7000 is all they have. I eventually bought D7000 and must say its not bad at all.
The D600 does nothing for me, honestly, 10Mpix in crop mode, what a waste of time. Look at Nikon Rumors and Fred Miranda's polls they are running, does not seem like its gonna be such a hot seller.
What really gets my blood boiling is not so much the longer focal lengths on FX but the wide side, Wide angle FX lenses cost an absolute fortune, and I already own a 12-24f4 DX lens, do I honestly now have to upgrade that as well... And conversely, Nikons inability to give us DX shooters a wide angle prime.... Thanks Samyang for 10mmf2.8... hoooorraaayyyy
Regards
Interesting comments from around the world. Certainly more thought-out than the usual amateur knee-jerk rhetoric on other forums.
My view is that Nikon have been quite savvy here, I never thought that if the rumours were true and the D600 was over 20Mb then it would be under 2K.
What they have done is expand the product range, allowing gaps, these spaces; the mirror-less range will fill.
Makes sense, but not for us, what we want is a camera capable of F mount fitting lenses and viewfinder which doesn’t give the impression that you’re on hallucinate drugs, with at least some ergonomics design, coming in at 16Mb, all for under 1.5K.
That’s never going to happen as why buy anything more expensive in the range. That’s why I don’t think we’ll see a mid-ranged DX, because it will then compete with the mirror-less.
Both Nikon and Canon seem intent on FF sized cameras, with the smaller sensors appearing at entry and compact ranges.
Their range is pretty strong, not perfect, but no digital camera is going to fulfil the desires of the customer base.
My view is that Nikon have been quite savvy here, I never thought that if the rumours were true and the D600 was over 20Mb then it would be under 2K.
What they have done is expand the product range, allowing gaps, these spaces; the mirror-less range will fill.
Makes sense, but not for us, what we want is a camera capable of F mount fitting lenses and viewfinder which doesn’t give the impression that you’re on hallucinate drugs, with at least some ergonomics design, coming in at 16Mb, all for under 1.5K.
That’s never going to happen as why buy anything more expensive in the range. That’s why I don’t think we’ll see a mid-ranged DX, because it will then compete with the mirror-less.
Both Nikon and Canon seem intent on FF sized cameras, with the smaller sensors appearing at entry and compact ranges.
Their range is pretty strong, not perfect, but no digital camera is going to fulfil the desires of the customer base.
Jason Bugay Reyes
Well-known member
I have been thinking too, no replacement for D300s, then Nikon will concentrate on beginner DX series such as D3xxx and D5xxx, together with Nikon 1 and FX format.
No more advance advance DX after D300s. D7000 considered as a testing for higher megapixels then it was a success among those who wanted high ISO capability but lower fps against D300s.
When many were buying the Nikon D7000, then Nikon came out with D800 with biggest megapixel and D4 similar like D7000. D600 is in between D800 and D4.
It is clearly Nikon wanted those with D3xx series to upgrade to FX format. This is my thought ...
No more advance advance DX after D300s. D7000 considered as a testing for higher megapixels then it was a success among those who wanted high ISO capability but lower fps against D300s.
When many were buying the Nikon D7000, then Nikon came out with D800 with biggest megapixel and D4 similar like D7000. D600 is in between D800 and D4.
It is clearly Nikon wanted those with D3xx series to upgrade to FX format. This is my thought ...
RJM
Don't Worry, Be Happy!
Thom Hogan has this to say in his D600 Compendium,
"Overall, I like the D600. It's a "value" camera. Yes, it has some trade-offs. But it also packs a lot into something that is (currently) the low price FX champion.
The bigger question here is still "DX or FX?" Yep. Still the question most people should be asking themselves (and maybe even "mirrorless or DX or FX?"). But Nikon's being a bit tricky. Note the D800 came before the D600. Which will come before the D400/D7200 DX refresh. They want you to consider the higher priced models and jumping upwards first before they tell you what's in store for you at the lower levels. At the lowest levels (D3200/D5200), it's always been easy to predict how they distinguish those cameras. It's the D70/D80/D90/D7000 and D100/D200/D300 continuations that have been a little more difficult to predict. So Nikon gave all you enthusiasts a choice of D800 or nothing at the start of the year. Now they've added something one notch lower (the D600). Come February I suspect we'll get the next notch (e.g. D400 and/or D7200).
Frankly, this one-at-a-time approach from the top is not customer friendly. Indeed, it might be considered customer antagonistic. If Nikon isn't aware of the dissatisfaction of the D300 users right now, they're not paying attention. If they are, then they're showing disrespect to their customers. Neither of those are good. "
"Overall, I like the D600. It's a "value" camera. Yes, it has some trade-offs. But it also packs a lot into something that is (currently) the low price FX champion.
The bigger question here is still "DX or FX?" Yep. Still the question most people should be asking themselves (and maybe even "mirrorless or DX or FX?"). But Nikon's being a bit tricky. Note the D800 came before the D600. Which will come before the D400/D7200 DX refresh. They want you to consider the higher priced models and jumping upwards first before they tell you what's in store for you at the lower levels. At the lowest levels (D3200/D5200), it's always been easy to predict how they distinguish those cameras. It's the D70/D80/D90/D7000 and D100/D200/D300 continuations that have been a little more difficult to predict. So Nikon gave all you enthusiasts a choice of D800 or nothing at the start of the year. Now they've added something one notch lower (the D600). Come February I suspect we'll get the next notch (e.g. D400 and/or D7200).
Frankly, this one-at-a-time approach from the top is not customer friendly. Indeed, it might be considered customer antagonistic. If Nikon isn't aware of the dissatisfaction of the D300 users right now, they're not paying attention. If they are, then they're showing disrespect to their customers. Neither of those are good. "
ericbowles
Well-known member
It's remarkable how quickly the D600 is reaching store shelves - just 5 days after announcement. There has been huge interest in a full frame camera at a lower price point. The D600 appears to be a good compromise - lifting the body form the D7000 and adding an FX sensor and enhanced processor. I have a D600 on order and due for delivery any day. It will initially backup my D800E and shortly be converted to IR for landscape work.
There is an obvious gap in the lack of an upper end DX camera. Not everyone needs an FX camera, and a upper end DX camera can provide a higher frame rate and better build than the D7000. The challenge is producing high level performance out of the smaller DX sized pixels. Small pixels are inherently more noisy so a top end DX camera will require some innovation not yet delivered to FX.
There is an obvious gap in the lack of an upper end DX camera. Not everyone needs an FX camera, and a upper end DX camera can provide a higher frame rate and better build than the D7000. The challenge is producing high level performance out of the smaller DX sized pixels. Small pixels are inherently more noisy so a top end DX camera will require some innovation not yet delivered to FX.
JPAC
Well-known member
The Nikon D3200 has far more pixels than a D100 but much less noise, see this chart;
http://home.comcast.net/~nikond70/Charts/PDR.htm#D100,D3200
The amount of data moved in megapixels determines the frames per second, hence the D600 can go faster than the D800 etc.
In the UK now the D600 is £1955 and the D3200 is £400 so Nikon will be making far more profit from FX than DX per camera.
It took Nikon three years to answer the Canon 5D with a D700, so Nikon take their time.
I'm still hoping for a D400 but it might be a very long wait.
http://home.comcast.net/~nikond70/Charts/PDR.htm#D100,D3200
The amount of data moved in megapixels determines the frames per second, hence the D600 can go faster than the D800 etc.
In the UK now the D600 is £1955 and the D3200 is £400 so Nikon will be making far more profit from FX than DX per camera.
It took Nikon three years to answer the Canon 5D with a D700, so Nikon take their time.
I'm still hoping for a D400 but it might be a very long wait.
