Thom's review of D600
- Thread starter Marcel
- Start date
BackdoorArts
Senior Member
Interesting information regarding the designation of "consumer" vs. "professional". Hadn't considered the NPS qualification as a part of that definition.
Jeesh,, I don't know, I read the section on the oil and dust issue, and it would concern me. Needing to use detergent along with the swab to get the spots off sound terrible.
His biggest issue on the D800 is the LF focus issue upon which he seemed to suffer from and was extremely concerned during the time.
These type of issues are a major concern when a heavily read reviewer like Thom is detailing these issues.
Hopefully, with some design tweaks, Nikon can fix the D600.
His biggest issue on the D800 is the LF focus issue upon which he seemed to suffer from and was extremely concerned during the time.
These type of issues are a major concern when a heavily read reviewer like Thom is detailing these issues.
Hopefully, with some design tweaks, Nikon can fix the D600.
BackdoorArts
Senior Member
I would think that the D600 is already "fixed". It just seems that the original mechanism suffered from poor tuning. Same seemed to be the case on early D7000's, though not to this extent. It's a big black eye, but I think that the clamour will fade away just as it did with the D7000.
Not quite sure about that. By the time the clamour subsides, the 7100 will be out, perhaps hurting D600 sales. I have decided to wait and
see, though i think anyone purchasing the 600 will be satisfied with IQ, and, if they are skilled with cleaning sensors, they have little to be concerned about. Just an opinion, though i can't speak to experiencing the D600 problems myself. I have learned a bit though, about photography in general and nikon in particular, from so many of the posts in this and other forums. Thanks
see, though i think anyone purchasing the 600 will be satisfied with IQ, and, if they are skilled with cleaning sensors, they have little to be concerned about. Just an opinion, though i can't speak to experiencing the D600 problems myself. I have learned a bit though, about photography in general and nikon in particular, from so many of the posts in this and other forums. Thanks
They have it in under control apparently but all over the net in non Nikon specific forums the Canon 6D has handed Nikon's @ss to them this time because of the quality control stuff. It is like two black eyes and a broken nose...
BackdoorArts
Senior Member
The may have handed Nikon its @$$ with QC, but I don't read a lot about them kicking its @$$ in IQ. They're both important, but and problems with either can kill you. But you can fix QC.
Nikon released the D600 4 days ahead of the Canon offering...they pushed it through. Most folks say that the 6D is better made than the D600 has a faster AF and no famous Nikon "green tinge"...and no crap on the sensor!
On the other hand KR claims that the D600 is superior to the D800... LOL
On the other hand KR claims that the D600 is superior to the D800... LOL
BackdoorArts
Senior Member
I'm certainly not saying Nikon didn't push the release. Outside of the dust issue I just haven't read much about the 6D's superiority.
And for the record, after a D7000, D600 and D800 I've yet to experience this green tinge people mention.
And for the record, after a D7000, D600 and D800 I've yet to experience this green tinge people mention.
And who are these "Most folks"? I'm sure there are not more than maybe 25 persons that own both the d600 and the 6D that could from experience say that the 6D is better. So this is just talk and everyone can talk pro one side or the other.
Are you thinking of deserting Nikon to join the Canon camp Jeff? The feeling you have when you first pick-up the camera might not reflect it's true robustness. And the robustness has no direct relation with real IQ and general handling.
BackdoorArts
Senior Member
After getting the D800 I can see what many say about the feel of a camera, so for a consumer model to feel "more pro" than another can certainly have some value. But once you get past form it's function that really matters, right? And just looking at the specs there's not a lot in the Canon that screams, "You should have bought me instead!!", even assuming I wasn't already invested in Nikon glass.
Just read a new post on another forum that I frequent about a person who sent his D600 to Nikon Canada because of the monthly "spotting" issue...lol...they replaced his shutter box! His camera was one of the first in Vancouver btw
If I owned a D600 I would be sending it in to get a new shutter box if I were you all. You spent a running ton of money and if they have fixed the problem you deserve to not have to clean your sensor every few hundred snaps I'm just saying...
If I owned a D600 I would be sending it in to get a new shutter box if I were you all. You spent a running ton of money and if they have fixed the problem you deserve to not have to clean your sensor every few hundred snaps I'm just saying...
For Backdoor hippie: would you be inclined to check out the Canon 5Dmark iii if you were interested in a full frame camera
without the large file sizes of the Nikon 800? Has anyone taken a look at that camera? Is it worth the money? If you weren't
a professional or semi-pro photographer, and had no intention of selling photos or of blowing up huge sized prints, would the 36 megapixel
800 be overkill? I will never sell anything but i am intrigued by all the angst about the D600, the immense files of the D800 and the quality of the competition. My daughter just recently married and her wedding photographer - of some note I might add - suggested i avoid the 800 and look at the 700. This was before the 600 was issues, so before all the oil/dust issues. Any thoughts about how one figures out whether to upgrade from the D7000 to full frame, and whether it is worth it to explore alternatives to Nikon. I would appreciate your thoughts. I enjoy technologically sophisticated "tools," but not when they have quality control issues.
without the large file sizes of the Nikon 800? Has anyone taken a look at that camera? Is it worth the money? If you weren't
a professional or semi-pro photographer, and had no intention of selling photos or of blowing up huge sized prints, would the 36 megapixel
800 be overkill? I will never sell anything but i am intrigued by all the angst about the D600, the immense files of the D800 and the quality of the competition. My daughter just recently married and her wedding photographer - of some note I might add - suggested i avoid the 800 and look at the 700. This was before the 600 was issues, so before all the oil/dust issues. Any thoughts about how one figures out whether to upgrade from the D7000 to full frame, and whether it is worth it to explore alternatives to Nikon. I would appreciate your thoughts. I enjoy technologically sophisticated "tools," but not when they have quality control issues.
BackdoorArts
Senior Member
I have no angst over the D600, own it and the D800, and am not inclined to check out the Canon 5D for myself, though I've shot with my brother's on occasion. The shutter issue is unfortunate, and I expect mine to be back from Nikon next week with a new shutter mechanism.
My upgrade to the D600 was in an interest for better IQ and I get that in spades over my old D7000. From what I've seen of the D7100 it has superior IQ to the D7000, but I doubt it will approach the D600, and no question that it won't be able to touch it for low light noise. There's a good article on the D600 vs. D800 by Scott Kelby linked elsewhere on this forum this morning and it does a great job comparing the two, along with measuring them against the D700. His take, unless you have the need for the large images that the D800 will give you, the D600 is the better FX camera for the average non-pro, and will give you quality superior to the D700. Give it a read. I shoot a lot of wildlife and cropping birds in flight is a given, so while I'm not always looking for big images, knowing that I can still get the MP's I need for decent enlargements while also cropping is a factor.
My upgrade to the D600 was in an interest for better IQ and I get that in spades over my old D7000. From what I've seen of the D7100 it has superior IQ to the D7000, but I doubt it will approach the D600, and no question that it won't be able to touch it for low light noise. There's a good article on the D600 vs. D800 by Scott Kelby linked elsewhere on this forum this morning and it does a great job comparing the two, along with measuring them against the D700. His take, unless you have the need for the large images that the D800 will give you, the D600 is the better FX camera for the average non-pro, and will give you quality superior to the D700. Give it a read. I shoot a lot of wildlife and cropping birds in flight is a given, so while I'm not always looking for big images, knowing that I can still get the MP's I need for decent enlargements while also cropping is a factor.
BackdoorArts
Senior Member
But you're not all of us, are you? Just saying.