Nikon D600 announced

nianys

Veteran
Sep 10, 2012
43
I was all over this thing when it first got rumored (D700 was my favorite cam), but after shooting mirrorless for a few months I don't want to go back to the bulk, even if it's pretty small.
NEX FF is just around the corner, and in the meantime the 5N sensor is pretty amazing.
Full time exposure simulation and focus peaking are two features I never want to live without again ;)
 

wt21

Hall of Famer
Aug 15, 2010
123
The price is a bit higher and the size is actually larger than I expected. I suppose I'll continue the wait to return to FF. It's still relatively big and heavy. I was hoping for more D5100 size/weight.

Still, I'm glad it's out, and I hope it sells well.

D700: 147 X 123 X 77, 1074g
5DII: 152 X 114 X 75, 850g
D600: 141 X 113 X 82, 760g
D7000: 132 X 105 X 77, 780g
650D: 133 X 100 X 79, 575g
D5100: 128 X 97 X 79, 560g
EM5: 122 X 89 X 43, 425g

Also, the RAW files (if they'll be D800 sized) are like 35-75MB (compressed vs. uncompressed). That will be a pain to work with, and I don't think Nikon has the best OOC jpgs to go the jpg route.
 

Pelao

All-Pro
Jul 11, 2010
123
Ontario, Canada
Stephen
The price is a bit higher and the size is actually larger than I expected. I suppose I'll continue the wait to return to FF. It's still relatively big and heavy. I was hoping for more D5100 size/weight.

Still, I'm glad it's out, and I hope it sells well.

D700: 147 X 123 X 77, 1074g
5DII: 152 X 114 X 75, 850g
D600: 141 X 113 X 82, 760g
D7000: 132 X 105 X 77, 780g
650D: 133 X 100 X 79, 575g
D5100: 128 X 97 X 79, 560g
EM5: 122 X 89 X 43, 425g

Also, the RAW files (if they'll be D800 sized) are like 35-75MB (compressed vs. uncompressed). That will be a pain to work with, and I don't think Nikon has the best OOC jpgs to go the jpg route.
I am also considering my DSLR / FF options. I like the specs of the new Nikon very much. For what it is, it's light yet sealed, with what appears to be the latest Sony sensor. I'm in no rush though, and will wait to see what also comes up. Still, for me there is not a lot to dislike about this camera.

I'll just have to keep shooting with my gorgeous Fuji.
 

pictor

All-Pro
Jul 14, 2010
124
Also, the RAW files (if they'll be D800 sized) are like 35-75MB (compressed vs. uncompressed). That will be a pain to work with, and I don't think Nikon has the best OOC jpgs to go the jpg route.
The raw files will be big, but significantly smaller than those of the D800. Once upon a time I had a Nikon... Nikon produces excellent JPEGs, such that also JPEG shooters can be happy. The default JPEGs are very neutral and therefore good for being processed afterwards, but the JPEG engine can be configured rather flexibly to meet ones personal taste.
 

wt21

Hall of Famer
Aug 15, 2010
123
I've been reding about Nikons, and it seems something changed after the D50(?) where jpg shooters were saying the jpgs went really flat, but there were others saying you can really customize the jpgs. I've not shot Nikon, so it scared me a bit. Maybe I'll need to rent one of these too, before buying.
 

pictor

All-Pro
Jul 14, 2010
124
I've not shot Nikon, so it scared me a bit.
I have shot Nikon and I have shot JPEGs. However, that was at the beginning of my career in digital photography, but I dare to tell you that Nikon's JPEGs should not scare you. By the way, Bob Krist shoots JPEGs and Karl Grobl shoots JPEGs, too. Just look at their photographs and maybe you'll forget your concerns.
 

wt21

Hall of Famer
Aug 15, 2010
123
D600 could also drop the cost of the d700 and 5d i and ii on the used market.

I just checked used d700 on fredmiranda. Asking is $1800 used. Im thinking that has to go down a bit.
 

pictor

All-Pro
Jul 14, 2010
124
I want one. Beats the Sony x-1 for me.
The D600 and the RX1 are so completely different cameras designed for completely different purposes, such that I cannot imagine, that you (or any other who writes that) know what you really want or need.
 

Gubrz

O.* Gonzo's & Bentley's Dad
Jun 5, 2012
103
Austin, TX
Eliot
I've been reding about Nikons, and it seems something changed after the D50(?) where jpg shooters were saying the jpgs went really flat, but there were others saying you can really customize the jpgs. I've not shot Nikon, so it scared me a bit. Maybe I'll need to rent one of these too, before buying.
isnt it the more flat a photo feels, the more room you have to improve it... if it were already contrasty n punchy, you couldnt do much more to it to make it contrastier and punchier... right?
so that seems about right. :)
 

macjim

Regular
Jun 20, 2011
28
The D600 and the RX1 are so completely different cameras designed for completely different purposes, such that I cannot imagine, that you (or any other who writes that) know what you really want or need.
Ahem… yes, I know they're completely different cameras and will fit different styles of camera users. My comments were made because it wouldn't fit my needs. To clarify: the Sony Rex-1 is a lovely idea and it's obviously aimed at the M9 and Leica users. The D600 ticks my boxes because it is much smaller than the professional FF DSLR. It has the ability to take many sizes of lenses and those could include Zeiss lenses on a parr with the RX-1's. But the biggest problem with the Sony is the lack of a built-in viewfinder, followed by the cost of the evf and the addition of a lens hood neither of which comes as standard. So, im not saying the Sony RX-1 is a duffer, just that it's too compromised for my uses and for the price too. I feel Sony has tried to make the smallest FF camera over the best camera with a FF sensor – in that, they have succeeded.


Cheers, Macjim.
 

wt21

Hall of Famer
Aug 15, 2010
123
isnt it the more flat a photo feels, the more room you have to improve it... if it were already contrasty n punchy, you couldnt do much more to it to make it contrastier and punchier... right?
so that seems about right. :)
True, but for me personally, I need a break from pp, so I am looking for OOC jpgs that can cut down my workflow, but if the jpg engine is very customizable, that could help.
 

Luckypenguin

Hall of Famer
Dec 24, 2010
123
Brisbane, Australia
Nic
In recent times I've loosely followed some discussion over at POTN about what a "budget" full-frame DSLR Canon might make to counter the D600, and the wishlists read very similarly to the specs of the 5DIII. The ~$3500 5D III...

Interesting times ahead for the company that invented the "affordable" full-frame DSLR concept.
 

Chris2500dk

Top Veteran
Dec 22, 2011
104
Copenhagen, Denmark
Real question: Is the head banging because you expected it cheaper, because the UK price is higher than the US price, or it's just right and now you're tempted to buy it?
Because of the increased UK price. The US price is a bit higher than I had hoped, but at the UK price I don't consider it a good deal at all.
 

retow

All-Pro
Jul 24, 2010
123
Because of the increased UK price. The US price is a bit higher than I had hoped, but at the UK price I don't consider it a good deal at all.
USD 2100 +10% US sales tax=approx USD 2300. You import it into the UK USD 2300 + 20% UK import tax= approx USD 2750. And whoops, the difference is not so impressive anymore. Add the usually much better warranty in Europe versus the very limited one in the US and there goes your difference. Apples with apples, as the saying goes.
 

Latest posts

Latest threads

Top Bottom