D600 or D800 ?

Here's a link to Scott Kelby's view about this question. There seems to be no winner but his analysis is interesting.

OK that settles it...I want a D700...LOL

Storage space is no longer an issue anymore (for me) since HDD are much cheaper now especially for a 2tb.

If someone is still confused or undecided, get both!

Eye-level said:

OK that settles it...I want a D700...LOL

Click to expand...

One has served me well for the last 2½ years!

He really did not address weather sealing, which could be a significant factor for some photographers. I think if and when I get the itch to upgrade from a D700, I will probably go with an excellent condition D3X. Since the introduction of the D600 and D800, the prices for the D3X are coming down pretty rapidly.

gqtuazon said:

Storage space is no longer an issue anymore (for me) since HDD are much cheaper now especially for a 2tb.

If someone is still confused or undecided, get both!

Click to expand...

I disagree. Storage space can absolutely be an issue depending on the situation. While 2TB drives are small and extremely portable, it's definitely not always possible or practical to have one with you, so you're limited by the space you've got left on your laptop. And know this, my MacBook Pro started screaming at me when I attempted a 20 image stitch from D800 RAW files and eventually barfed as it ran out of physical space (this was my first warning that my hard drive was full ... but I had 60GB of available hard disk space when I started the process).

So it definitely is a consideration, particularly with factors other than pure image storage.

Jake - I think your issue stems from a lack of memory rather than disc space. If you increase your scratch disc space you'll probably solve this problem.

I don't know. I've got 16GB of memory and the message I got refered to physical storage. There was a lot of swapping going on.

That said, I'm still a Mac novice and need to learn how to better manage my space there - starting with getting rid of a lot of photos from 2011 & 2012 that I'm never going to use. Then work on moving my LR catalog onto a network storage solution and just keep active files on my laptop.

BackdoorHippie said:

I don't know. I've got 16GB of memory and the message I got refered to physical storage. There was a lot of swapping going on.

That said, I'm still a Mac novice and need to learn how to better manage my space there - starting with getting rid of a lot of photos from 2011 & 2012 that I'm never going to use. Then work on moving my LR catalog onto a network storage solution and just keep active files on my laptop.

Click to expand...

What % memory do you have Photoshop set on? And how much scratch space have you set it at? Also, when was the last time you cleared your cache?

I've got it set at 70% as recommended. I could go higher, but I've usually got Lightroom running as well. Scratch space is set to use available space on the main HD, the only disk I've got usually. I've never cleared cache, but shouldn't that clear when I shut the program down? This was the first thing I did with PS during that particular session.

One factor for me, albeit small, was the CF and SDHC slots on the D800. I kinda scratched my head on that one. I don't mind one or the other but why both?

CF is a pro standard, SD is the standard among the consumer market. What's wrong with choices?

Yeah, I get the CF vs. SD thing. And choices are good. I guess since the D800 isn't quite a D3X or a D600 that they decided to make their card slots to accommodate either.

PapaST said:

One factor for me, albeit small, was the CF and SDHC slots on the D800. I kinda scratched my head on that one. I don't mind one or the other but why both?

Click to expand...

It can be argued that cf is slightly faster when uploading pics to ur computer. When taking pics, there really is no difference - it comes down to your cameras buffer anyhow. Im not sure why anyone would want to pay the price for cf though. Cf being for pros and sd for consumers is nonsense. If that were the case, why bother with an sd slot in pro cameras? The d70s took only cf and it was an entry level camera. Canons eos 300d, 350d and 400d which spanned from 2003 to 2008, all took cf cards only and they were all entry level cameras - so did 40d,30d,20d and 10d, all mid range camers. Not pro cameras . That being said, it does not really have anything to do with one being for pros and one being for consumers. Pros use sd and consumers use cf, though not as much as they once did.

I don't think it has anything to do with what the D800 "isn't", and much more a move towards making it a tool that accommodates what a user of that camera would want to use. Positioned as a Pro camera, not having a CF card slot would make the average pro wonder loudly how it could possibly be considered professional without one. That said, SD cards are pervasive in the digital community, so making it an option is smart, particularly if you're writing the HUGE RAW files to the faster CF card and jpegs to the SD. I really don't see it as a compromise as much as I see it as beyond practical.

The Canon 5D has both as well. Are they confused too?

PapaST said:

One factor for me, albeit small, was the CF and SDHC slots on the D800. I kinda scratched my head on that one. I don't mind one or the other but why both?

Click to expand...

The story Nikon gave for this was a "legacy" thing. Because the D700 was all CF they felt it would be a disservice to D700 owners to go all SDHC. That way former D700 owners wouldn't have to ditch all their CF cards just to upgrade to the D800.

Well if nothing else, it makes them more versatile. Having one type has its advantages and having two types does as well.

I am considering returning my second D600 at buying a D800, but the main issue is the huge file sizes that I really don't need.

VectorZ said:

I am considering returning my second D600 at buying a D800, but the main issue is the huge file sizes that I really don't need.

Click to expand...

I hear you on that one. File sizes + more than double the number of cards I have right now. If anything, I'll stick it out until they release something like a D600x, with a full magnesium body & no AA filter. Obviously pure speculation on my part, but it would be nice. Or the mythical D400, which some have prophesized as being full frame. All I know is that the D800 would not be for me.

NVSteve said:

I hear you on that one. File sizes + more than double the number of cards I have right now. If anything, I'll stick it out until they release something like a D600x, with a full magnesium body & no AA filter. Obviously pure speculation on my part, but it would be nice. Or the mythical D400, which some have prophesized as being full frame. All I know is that the D800 would not be for me.

Click to expand...

I'm kinda thinking the same thing, there may be something down the road between the D600 and D800, perhaps a D600E. When that comes out, I'll swap out my D600 for the newer upgrade.