D600 for youth sports

I know the 700 would be better, but does anyone that owns a 600 use it for youth sports.

All except one lens is FX, so lenses are not an issue for me.

Just trying to get a feel for if the 600 will work.

800 is out for me at this time, but if I need to hold off and get the 800 because it would be better than I will.

I have the 600... and it pretty much does everything. Amazing low light, amazing outdoors/portraits... Take your pick, and it does it. I don't own the 800, so can't say much about it, but I love the 600. I know a few people here have both, (BackDoorHippie) I'm pretty sure, and I know he's said that each has it's own purpose for certain situations.

As long as the continuous shooting is fast enough for you it should work great! I've never had a situation where mine didn't do everything I wanted it to.

Unless you need continuous shooting like that of a D4 at 3000fps, the 600 should be a great choice. If your blowing up pictures enormous sizes... might need the MP of the 800. Or the 44mp of that new Nokia? camera phone. haha.

Nope, I try to make my shots count, therefore I stay away from the spray and pray approach. I really want to jump to FX so i just wanted to make sure no one had anything negative about the speed or lack of.

Thanks everyone and I welcome more views if anyone wants to chime in.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

Krs_2007 said:

Nope, I try to make my shots count, therefore I stay away from the spray and pray approach. I really want to jump to FX so i just wanted to make sure no one had anything negative about the speed or lack of.

Thanks everyone and I welcome more views if anyone wants to chime in.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

Click to expand...

​Just be prepared to clean the sensor

Yep been reading and following lots of post about it, kind of a pain but everyone says the camera is awesome.

As has been said, as long as you don't feel the need for a higher frame rate than 5 fps (they say 5.5 in CH, but call it 5). The D800 will only give you 7 and that's with the grip, so it's effectively only 1 fps higher. When I had oil issues with the D600 it was exacerbated by the use of Continuous High shutter mode, but I have to say that is no longer the case since Nikon replaced the shutter in May.

If you want to shoot FX I believe it's a great choice, provided you can live with 5 fps, as it gives you more pixel density than the D700 so you can effectively crop down more without losing resolution. The D800 gives you even more, and it's my go-to camera in situations where my lens reach isn't quite what I want it to be, which for me is usually birding and nature photography, but I'd imagine sports would qualify as well.

Which has me looking at Nikon refurb thinking it will be fixed. Starting search for one, but need to decide, new or refurb.

I do wonder how much of a difference the low light performance is between the 600 and the 7000. Is it one stop or two

7000 or 700? There's absolutely no comparison between the D7000 and the D600 in terms of high ISO performance. The D7000 works well, but the D600 is so much better that it's almost apples and oranges. I wouldn't think about running the D7000 above ISO 1600 without worrying about noise, and even there it would be bothersome if the subject matter wasn't the full frame (wildlife, birds in flight). With the D600 I can go to ISO 6400 before I get the same level of nuisance noise. It's an amazing camera.

That's what I wanted to know, thanks and yes I was referring to the 7000 and not the 700.



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD