Is adding a D800 to my D600 the right thing to do?

[BackdoorArts]

The D7000 was and still is the replacement for the D90. That's been Nikon's official position since the launch 2 years ago. What you're really waiting for is the D300 replacement.

The D7100 is "outfitted much better than the D600"?! I have the D600 and would disagree 100%, if only because it's completely apples and oranges. The D7100 is essentially a DX version of the D600, but with a smaller buffer. Outside of the removal of the anti-aliasing filter there's nothing I would consider as even a potential improvement over the D600 technology. Perhaps you mean D300?

This is the thread where I present specific information regarding the small buffer on the D7100. It's plain as day on the Nikon website, and the fact that it's nowhere to be found on the Nikon USA site is truly bothersome to me. Couple that with the marketing speak from Nikon USA about being the "Flagship" DX model which has since been disputed by Nikon Europe and I'm left feeling that the model is being way overhyped, and I have to wonder why? Would love to find out that the buffer information is wrong, but I would have expected that to have been disputed by now.

 

[stmv]

If I owned a D600, I don't think there would be enough difference with a D800, maybe a D800e, but I think I would wait for the D900e, unless you were going to the one camera mode, the D800 just does not make a lot of sense versus your current D600/7000 combo.

On the 7100 reference, yes, so sad that so much progress has been made to the 7100, and then Nikon cheaps out on the buffer depth, Memory is SO SO cheap on silicon, so, I just don't understand this lack of progress on buffer depth, by now the burst depths should be close to 100 with the migration to newer/more dense silicon. This is so artificial, would not want to impact the super expensive D4 sales (as if 7100 users would even be in that realm).

As a mininum,, there should be a mode, where a user, could say reduce the RAW image size down to say 16 Meg pictures,, and have extended burst of AT LEAST 25 SHOTS.

My D800 can go around 14-15 before it goes to crawl mode.

 

[BackdoorArts]

My D800 can go around 14-15 before it goes to crawl mode.

Which is probably close to 25 shots in 1.5 crop mode since it does, in fact, reduce your RAW image size to 16MP's. Which would make it a great single camera to have for both the things FX cameras are good for, and for what DX cameras are good for. Nothing says I couldn't sell the D600 down the road if I decide to go this way, right?

 

[Dave_W]

I hate to put a negative spin on this but I really do not see a D400 ish in Nikons future. The D7100 has the works and is outfitted much better than the D600 imo. Now I am still waiting for the D90 replacement... you know the one that is not the D7000. Also interested where you heard the buffer was that small. That is crazy to make a camera shoot 6 fps and then have it lag to 1 shot per second, specially as it has the expeed 3 processor.

Here's a side-by-side comparison of the D7100 vs. D600 and yes, the buffer is that small. Frankly, I don't know what they were thinking when they designed the D7100

Nikon D7100 vs D600

 

[BackdoorArts]

Just to close this out, I've spent a huge chunk of my free time these last 4 days deciding what it is I either want to do now or plan to do moving forward. The D7100 made a ton of sense had it not been for the buffer, so now I was stuck between waiting for a D300 replacement which may or may not ever materialize, make the move to a D800 knowing that it's got a lot of what the D7x00 gives me built in (16MP's at DX 1.5 crop) and then some, or just stick with what I have.

Interestingly enough, my answer came when I reread this article, which I'd posted in another thread where where we were discussing sensor sizes. I knew all about the impact of crop factor on "equivalent focal length". What I'd forgotten, or perhaps never fully realized, was that a 24MP DX sensor is not the same as a 24MP FX sensor. That since a DX sensor is less than 1/2 the size of an FX sensor they have to decrease the pixel size significantly to get the same number crammed into a smaller space. That a smaller pixel size means more noise and less dynamic range. Essentially, the guts of why an FX sensor is that much more expensive than a DX sensor, and delivers such phenomenal Image Quality - something I experinced firsthand when I added my D600 to my D7000.

If I look only at the birding exercise that so convinced me the D7100 may be my next camera, while I may not be grabbing that awesome bump in focal length when I stick a 500mm on a D7100 in 1.3x mode (16MP per image), a D800 with the same lens shooting in DX mode theoretically gives me the same 16MP resolution with higher IQ, and the 8 or 9 fps the D7100 was giving me is now likely 25+ allowing me to fire away for 6 or 7 seconds if I want. So on these numbers alone, the D800 wins out in almost every consideration except frame rate for the first second and a half (after that, it's a moot point). And, on top of that, it's still a D800 and has everything that goes with it. Given that I'm not a sports guy and fps by itself is not the deciding factor but reasonable fps for a reasonabe amount of time, 4 fps will be more than enough 95% of the time that I use it, which is probably only 5% of the time, and everything else is gravy.

So, after experiencing the IQ I get from my D600 it was an easy decision to say that the next camera will be another FX. Given the current instant rebate situation and an influx of cash from a music-related sale, I bit the bullet and ordered. If it's everything I hope then I may just use this to replace the D600, though I suspect that they will co-exist for a long time. My D90 needs to get photographed and sold, and my D7000 will get used when appropriate, either by me or the Mrs. Thanks to my proximity to B&H, it'll be here tomorrow. This will also allow me the opportunity to ship off the D600 to Nikon for dust removal and a check-up.

It was an occasionally painful, but extremely rewarding exercise. I learned and relearned a lot, and really assessed my needs and wants, both now and moving forward. I appreciate all the insight - particularly the things that pushed me in a different direction. I am absolutely clear that I am not buying a birding camera - I am buying a camera that will deliver great results for all my photo needs, and likely outperform my D7000 as a birder. I will certainly do some side-by-side IQ comparisons between the two, if only to see what's what, and I'll put a blog together with the results once I get comfortable with the new camera.

 

[TedG954]

Soooooo, you're getting the D800?

 

[Sambr]

Congratulations I am sure you will be amazed at what the D800 can do!

 

[BackdoorArts]

Soooooo, you're getting the D800?

I guess I wasn't clear. LOL

Yes.

 

[TedG954]

Good for you! You'll love it. Enjoy!

 

[RockyNH_RIP]

Jake, its been a pleasure and educational experience following along on your "Adventure". Congrats on settling on the destination and wishes for all that you want from your choices!

Pat in NH

 

[Marcel]

Well, to say the least, you've done your homework Jake. And I'm certain that you will be very happy with your decision. Congrats!

Now the bigger question:

​When is it getting on your doorsteps? LOL!

 

[Rick M]

Great decision, nice to see others struggle with such things

 

[Geoffc]

Jake, I think we are forming an unholy alliance. We both bought the 600 a couple of months ago. Mine is now sold and replaced with an 800 and yours is on it's way.

My reason was I really wanted something built and functioning like my D300s and the 600 had a few shortcomings in that respect. That said, the images from the 600 are stunning and I can't say the 800 is doing anything better in my hands, except it has more detail.

I suspect on a bright day with low iso the 800 won't do crops that are much better than the 7000 as the output will be the same size. I'm sure your tests will reveal all.

Enjoy it when it arrives, it's a great camera

 

[BackdoorArts]

I would have hoped it would have shipped yesterday, Marcel, which would have put it on my doorstep today. Alas, because I had the D7100 order placed, the easiest thing to do in terms of applying the B&H dollars I had used on that order to the D800 was just to update the order content and I believe that may have delayed triggering the shipping of it. Current status says it's been sent to the warehouse, so hopefully it goes out today for doorstep delivery tomorrow. Either way, I'll have it for the weekend.

Geoff, I believe the D600 will stick around as well, if only for its low light performance. Not that I'm not expecting great things from the D800, but the pixel density math makes sense to me and with my intent to do a lot of star trail and night photography I believe it will be a great fit. Add to it that I've become used to shooting with two cameras and it makes even more sense.

 

[crycocyon]

Interesting thread and I just caught up with it. I'll just point out that the D800 when shot using DX mode can achieve, with the right batteries, up to 6fps. So with the crop factor and extra speed, it should serve you quite well.

 

[BackdoorArts]

So far it is, but I just haven't had enough time to play with it between bad weather and too much work.

 

[Johnathan Aulabaugh]

Seems almost wrong to shoot the D800 in DX mode lol. Anyways will all the discussions you have started pertaining to the D7100/D600/D800 I am now at a cross roads myself. D600 OR D800. I have an oportunity to do some trading of some of my old gear to get into a FF. $2400 for D600 with 24-85 or $2700 for D800 alone.

 

[BackdoorArts]

There are some real advantages to doing that, which we've touched on today in another thread. For instance, with an eagle flying straight at you that gives you 6-7 seconds at 4fps before your buffer fills up. Chances are you weren't getting a full frame on that anyway. And you're getting FX IQ with the about the same number of MP's that you get from the D7000.

 

[gqtuazon]

Seems almost wrong to shoot the D800 in DX mode lol.

This is one of the features that I frequently use in both still photograpy and video. In most cases, when shooting a smaller subject such as birds, DX works well to get a tighter frame shot and it makes it more manageable on storage space and memory card space.

DX and 1.2x crop mode also works with video. Whenever I use the Nikon 24-70mm f2.8, since that lens doesn't have a longer reach, the DX mode helps out. You can't do that in video editing (as far as I know).

 

[Johnathan Aulabaugh]

There are some real advantages to doing that, which we've touched on today in another thread. For instance, with an eagle flying straight at you that gives you 6-7 seconds at 4fps before your buffer fills up. Chances are you weren't getting a full frame on that anyway. And you're getting FX IQ with the about the same number of MP's that you get from the D7000.

This is one of the features that I frequently use in both still photograpy and video. In most cases, when shooting a smaller subject such as birds, DX works well to get a tighter frame shot and it makes it more manageable on storage space and memory card space.

DX and 1.2x crop mode also works with video. Whenever I use the Nikon 24-70mm f2.8, since that lens doesn't have a longer reach, the DX mode helps out. You can't do that in video editing (as far as I know).

I can see the advantages but I am just one of those guys that was taught to fill the frame before the shutter goes click... This is one of those things that I will have to play with it and find my groove. I have never been one to think of FX or DX so much as the frame itself. FX just happens to have some qualities that I have been lacking. heck just the ability to bracket more than 3 frames at once would be really nice, not to mention the better ISO capabilities. the fact the a D800 will drop down to a useable 15mp does appeal to me... Dang it guys, and here I was leaning toward the D600...