Nikon D600 may not be so "budget" after all

[clay stewart]

It had my attention at 1500.00 as a possible move back to Nikon, with the lure of a small full frame, but for a body that seems to be even lower specked than the D90, for over 2 grand, I think I will pass. It is exciting watching all this new stuff come out though.

 

[Jorgen Udvang]

I'm surprised about all the hairsplitting over specs and price here. As far as I can see, Nikon has delivered exactly what the rumours said, a medium level, 35mm, 24MP DSLR for around $2,000. While our wishes and hopes may differ (I wouldn't mind a D5100 body with the D4 sensor for under $1,200, but that's probably a few years into the future), the D600 is a big step forward with regards to size, specs and price.

The only thing that surprised me a bit was the fact that it doesn't share the vertical grip with the D7000. Maybe that indicates that there'll be a D400 after all, a sports/telephoto camera with a DX sensor and 30-36MP/8fps (my guess) in a similar body to the D600.

 

[mark1958]

I was just in Japan and I was amazed how weak the dollar was. It is almost half of what it was worth during my first visit to Japan about 10 years ago or so. Of interest, I went into a discount electronics and camera store. They had a good selection of Nikon, Canon, Panasonic, Olympus (even Zeiss). Interestingly, the camera gear from the Japanese companies were about 20 or 25% higher than what you can buy them in the USA. Zeiss lenses were just a tad higher than USA prices.

 

[Magic]

Hello,

IMHO the entry price for the D600 is quite keen and I can see the market price may be around US$ 1800 soon if I ask my glas ball. If we also don't look through our "Nikon specs", there is a main competitor named Canon out there which still has the 5D MkII in its portfolio and probably a 7D MkII to come. If we just stick to Nikon, there is still the D700.....just my thoughts.

Greetings, Jurgen

 

[Bryan Stephens]

Jorgen

While I would love for there to be a D400 with the specs you mentioned (I shoot a lot of sports), I dont think it would happen as Nikon has their sports camera out there in the D4, and I'm not sure they want to bastardize the sales of their flagship.

I currently have the D3s and was hoping that there would be another alternative than the D4, but it appears that at least for now, this is it. I tried to use the D800 but the frame rate is way too slow for my taste (5fps compared to 10fps in the D3s)

 

[emr]

My plan was to wait for the release of the then rumored D800 and D600 and after that buy a cheaper D700. I believe Nikon even told around the D800 releasing time that D700 will remain in production as long as there's buyers. Well, what do you know, it did not seem to go that way. Suddenly D700 is almost nowhere available and the price is not going down. And now that D600 was announced with a slower flash sync, fewer AF points and a lesser build quality, I think the remaining D700s will never get cheaper. But I guess D600 would really suit me just fine as I want to give FF a try having bound myself to a brand which has not released one (despite all the rumors that tend to move the expected release date 6 months further every 6 months...).

 

[ustein]

>I'm surprised about all the hairsplitting over specs and price here. As far as I can see, Nikon has delivered exactly what the rumours said, a medium level, 35mm, 24MP DSLR for around $2,000. While our wishes and hopes may differ (I wouldn't mind a D5100 body with the D4 sensor for under $1,200, but that's probably a few years into the future), the D600 is a big step forward with regards to size, specs and price.

My take too. If the quality is there this is a great deal.

 

[ptomsu]

I cannot understand all the price discussion around the D600

It is a great FF camera for a very low price (actually the cheapest as per to date) and incorporates latest state of the art technology. And gives 24MP, which was considered impossible some few years ago.

Just buy it and shoot it ...

 

[glenerrolrd]

This entire thread is skewed from a D800 or better view point. The d600 is a very compelling upgrade coming from a D7000 or D300S (remember the D700 was more $$$ than this most of it life ). My wife Carolyn shoots events and maintains galleries and web pages for two large organizations . She produces probably 6-8 books for groups each year. The D7000 with a good flash and diffuser is all thats necessary . Better technique and use of balanced artifical and strobe are all thats required . She needs AF,AE,Auto ISO and the 24-85zoom.

This is the market for the D600(the next step up) ..not as a alternative to the D800 ..and certainly not at a price point of $2000 . Consider that a 32GB 1000X Lexar card runs over $200 and a lot more outside the USA.

Likewise I would like a mini D4 for half the cost ...and a 24MP that splits the difference between the d800 and the d4 would be ideal ....but it should be built on a solid chassis (pro build) and have the benefits of a smaller (D800 size) form and better ISO . Ok lower volume and its the same $3k as the D800. Price in this range is not relevant if it does the job. Its the capabilities of the camera thats disappointing but logical from a business standpoint .

Great camera for a different set of users at a price that blows away the competition ..at least until next week.

 

[Jorgen Udvang]

Jorgen

While I would love for there to be a D400 with the specs you mentioned (I shoot a lot of sports), I dont think it would happen as Nikon has their sports camera out there in the D4, and I'm not sure they want to bastardize the sales of their flagship.

I currently have the D3s and was hoping that there would be another alternative than the D4, but it appears that at least for now, this is it. I tried to use the D800 but the frame rate is way too slow for my taste (5fps compared to 10fps in the D3s)

I don't think they worry too much about the D4 sales. Most of those who needed it urgently have already bought, the D4 has high ISO and burst capabilities that a D400 won't match and it's full frame. Nikon still has a big following of sports shooters who want a DX format camera, many as an addition to a D3 or 4 and many because they want or need the extra reach. Remember the D3/D300 combo? That was highly successful. A $2,000 D400 will probably sell umpteen times as many as the D4, generating much more profit for Nikon. Many freelance sports photographers simply can't afford a D4, not to speak about the expensive glass needed to get enough reach with full frame.

 

[woodworth]

So far I haven't seen anything I don't like about the D600. It will make an excellent companion to my D800 and will be a great tool for wedding photography.

In some ways I can see myself using it more often than the D800 simply because of the weight advantage and also many of my clients simply don't need 36mp.

Historically, I've avoided "pro-spec" cameras such as the F3 (in days of yore) preferring a FE2 or more recently a D800 instead of a D4 simply because I don't like heavy camera bags and like to work with smaller cameras (despite having huge hands!). So the D600 seems pretty good to me.

 

[Guy Mancuso]

Seems great as a companion to my D800E as well. Now price wise I could buy a used D800 for 2600 so really only a 500 difference . But I might be after a smaller size anyway . I woul feel better at 1900.00 instead of 2100.00 but hey no one gives a rats arch about my feelings anyway. LOL

I'll get one after its out a couple weeks

 

[D&A]

Likewise I would like a mini D4 for half the cost ...and a 24MP that splits the difference between the d800 and the d4 would be ideal ....but it should be built on a solid chassis (pro build) and have the benefits of a smaller (D800 size) form and better ISO . Ok lower volume and its the same $3k as the D800. Price in this range is not relevant if it does the job. Its the capabilities of the camera thats disappointing but logical from a business standpoint .

Great camera for a different set of users at a price that blows away the competition ..at least until next week.

This mini D4 camera that splits the difference between the D4 and D800 is the camera I described in my posts above (and one in which many others have alluded to as desirable). Not in place of the entry level full frame D600 but in addition to it. I feel it's like the missing link and that's been expressed elsewheres. Both cameras have their place in the market, in my opinion.

Dave (D&A)

 

[Guy Mancuso]

I agree a little 18mpx small race horse would be nice. A D4 mini

 

[Guy Mancuso]

This is cool. I like the idea you can see from your iPhone the view in your cam and shoot. Wonder how much the range really is.

The D600 can be operated*remotely*with the new WU-1b wireless mobile adapter*($59.95)*exactly like the D3200 -*see this demo. The Android app is already available, the iPhone app just got released and can now be downloaded from iTunes:

The Wireless Mobile Adapter Utility is used to establish two-way wireless connections between Nikon digital SLR cameras and iPhone, iPad, and iPod touch devices. Pictures taken with the digital SLR camera can be downloaded to the iOS device, and the camera can be controlled remotely, with the iOS device displaying the view through the camera lens. The file sharing feature makes it easy to upload pictures to social networking sites or attach them to e-mail messages.

Features:

When a wireless mobile adapter is connected to a compatible digital SLR camera, connections can easily be established with the iOS device.
The camera clock can be synchronized with the iOS device.
Pictures taken with digital SLR cameras can be downloaded to the iOS device camera roll.
The iOS device can be used to view the pictures on the camera memory card and add them to the iOS device camera roll.
The file-sharing features on the iOS device can be used to pass downloaded pictures to other apps for easy sharing.
The view through the camera lens can be previewed on, and the shutter released from, the iOS device.
Pictures taken remotely will automatically be downloaded from the digital SLR camera to the iOS device.
Here are some screenshots of the new Nikon iPhone app:



Read more on NikonRumors.com: Nikon Rumors

 

[kuau]

I wonder if it could be used in LV mode.
This would be a great focusing aide, especially on the newipod touch

 

[ausemmao]

I was expecting to be a buyer, but at the current UK pricing, the D800 makes more sense (£150 difference). A shame, because I'd have quite liked the smaller body.

 

[glenerrolrd]

This mini D4 camera that splits the difference between the D4 and D800 is the camera I described in my posts above (and one in which many others have alluded to as desirable). Not in place of the entry level full frame D600 but in addition to it. I feel it's like the missing link and that's been expressed elsewheres. Both cameras have their place in the market, in my opinion.

Dave (D&A)

Maybe a comparison that references the D4 would be useful as not many have a D4 and a D800/E.

Since I enjoy shooting sports ..I went with a D4 (to compliment my D800Es) ...and its a much better camera for sports than a a D800 . (you don t have to do sports to appreciate the capabilities of a PRO body set up for higher ISO and maximum responsiveness). The build,handling and execution of all most every feature is better . Unnecessary for most applications but it sets the standard as it should at $6K . Its tuned for higher ISO with an 18MP sensor (and as we debated in the past ...at least a few EV better ISO performance ). After more testing this week ..I am tending to agree (with Dave) in some situations it can be 2+ EV .

Speaking of high ISO performance is about more than just noise ..its also about DR and color saturation. I am finding that I enjoy the D800E a lot up to ISO 800 and that ISO1600 can be nearly as good (but avoid it if I can manage ) . Sports and action is the land of ISO800-6400 .

So what are our expectations of a mini D4 ....whats required . Here are few of my tests of illumination requirements from NYC. Grand Central Terminal at rush hour .....you need ISO 3200 to maintain adequate DOF and stopping action . Same for Times Square . The D800E will not handle beyond ISO1600..consistently ....not saying that you can do great at ISO1600 ...but you will miss good opportunities .. So if your photography involves people and moments you need more .

But with a D4 you give some quality at the lower ISO range ... the sharpness and color saturation can be brutal in bright light . Shot at ISO200 and you need softer light or to handle it in post . Its more than the pixel size ..the camera seems optimal at ISO400 and loses very little at ISO800.

So what the heck could the D600 even hope to be? You can t give up the low end in a camera with mass appeal . So if base ISO is 200 ..then I would expect good performance up to 1600 ...and maybe 3200 would be OK ? (unlikely) . It has the AF system 39pts of the D7000 adequate but not if you are complaining about the D800 or think you might want to be focusing at f1.4. Quality control sufficient to use manual lenses ...is this a serious consideration ? A screen you can actually focus with in low light ?

Nikon did a lot of this with the D700 ...same sensor as the D3 and near PRO standards in everything in a robust smaller form . But the entry price was $2800 when the D3 was $4995.

The D600 is a D7000 body with the FF sensor ..which should be a great product but not a mini D4 at $2000. (sorry for rambling but not many have the D4 to compare with the D800 as a point of reference).

 

[clay stewart]

Maybe a comparison that references the D4 would be useful as not many have a D4 and a D800/E.

Since I enjoy shooting sports ..I went with a D4 (to compliment my D800Es) ...and its a much better camera for sports than a a D800 . (you don t have to do sports to appreciate the capabilities of a PRO body set up for higher ISO and maximum responsiveness). The build,handling and execution of all most every feature is better . Unnecessary for most applications but it sets the standard as it should at $6K . Its tuned for higher ISO with an 18MP sensor (and as we debated in the past ...at least a few EV better ISO performance ). After more testing this week ..I am tending to agree (with Dave) in some situations it can be 2+ EV .

Speaking of high ISO performance is about more than just noise ..its also about DR and color saturation. I am finding that I enjoy the D800E a lot up to ISO 800 and that ISO1600 can be nearly as good (but avoid it if I can manage ) . Sports and action is the land of ISO800-6400 .

So what are our expectations of a mini D4 ....whats required . Here are few of my tests of illumination requirements from NYC. Grand Central Terminal at rush hour .....you need ISO 3200 to maintain adequate DOF and stopping action . Same for Times Square . The D800E will not handle beyond ISO1600..consistently ....not saying that you can do great at ISO1600 ...but you will miss good opportunities .. So if your photography involves people and moments you need more .

But with a D4 you give some quality at the lower ISO range ... the sharpness and color saturation can be brutal in bright light . Shot at ISO200 and you need softer light or to handle it in post . Its more than the pixel size ..the camera seems optimal at ISO400 and loses very little at ISO800.

So what the heck could the D600 even hope to be? You can t give up the low end in a camera with mass appeal . So if base ISO is 200 ..then I would expect good performance up to 1600 ...and maybe 3200 would be OK ? (unlikely) . It has the AF system 39pts of the D7000 adequate but not if you are complaining about the D800 or think you might want to be focusing at f1.4. Quality control sufficient to use manual lenses ...is this a serious consideration ? A screen you can actually focus with in low light ?

Nikon did a lot of this with the D700 ...same sensor as the D3 and near PRO standards in everything in a robust smaller form . But the entry price was $2800 when the D3 was $4995.

The D600 is a D7000 body with the FF sensor ..which should be a great product but not a mini D4 at $2000. (sorry for rambling but not many have the D4 to compare with the D800 as a point of reference).

I thought I remembered paying 2350.00 new for my D700, it's been over a year ago, so maybe I forgot. I don't think the D7000 is a good comparison to the D600. I think you need to go down a model or two, to the D5100 or something like that. The way I see it, is if the D600 had a crop sensor, it would probably be in the 500-600 dollar range, so is the full frame sensor worth twice as much, which would be around 1000.00?. Or, is it worth three times as much, which would be 1500.00? Or, would it be worth four times as much at 2000.00$ Nikon is asking 2200.00$, which is more than four times as much. I guess another way to look at it, is if a D300 was 1400.00, would you pay 1200.00 for a entry level camera, if you could get the pro for a couple hundred more?

Don't get me wrong, I've been an advocate for a smaller, lighter full frame, from the beginning (think digital FM2), but I think Nikon is sort of giving us a sucker punch with this deal. Just my opinion.

 

[glenerrolrd]

Clay

In the context of the thread ....really about understanding the capabilities of the D600 and where it might fit in as a 2nd body to a D800...

My wife shoots with a D7000 and I have used it on occasion. Found it to be a fantastic camera with the Zeiss lenses and capable of very strong IQ . At the pixel level this sensor is first rate . A good value at $1000. The D600 specification maps right into this camera except its a full frame sensor . Debating whether the camera should cost $1800 or $2100 seems of limited further flagging . Relevant in some context not so much in others .

But as you move into the D800 and up range of equipment ..things like AF accuracy, viewfinder brightness, battery life , etc etc start to matter . This is where the D600 will have limitations as a PRO solution . Look at a D7000 and assume it FF and you have the closest match .

The D700 is closer to what many hoped for ...that was the FM2 digital . Now give me a 24MP sensor with high ISO performance in a D700 like body and thats not far off the mini D4 analogy (except maybe the viewfinder ). I think this would cost too much for the target audience and Nikon took the correct approach.