Anyone considering an upgrade?

I figured I'd start a thread so we could all talk each other into it

I was deadicated to Dx mostly for the size/weight, now I'm on the fence since this looks nice and compact, just slightly larger than the D7000.

Yep. I got D600 on the brain, right now. I'm not sure yet. If I do, do I keep my D7000 as a backup? Do I even need a backup? I'm not a cash-earning pro. Do I sell it? If I do buy the D600, do I also get the new Nikon FX lens for $599? I've got a few FX lenses, already. Right now, I'm content with the D7000, but the thought of getting a full-framed camera with higher megapixels, does sound a little appealing.

I have only the 70-300vr, so I'll need another lens for sure. I've been reading up on the 24-85 kit and I'm not really impressed. I think I would start out with the 50mm 1.8 and get a wide zoom down the road.

With 24 mp fx, I don't want to start with a kit lens that does not utilize it's full potential!

I'll sell my D5100, no need for a backup for me.

Yea, I perceive the FX 24-85 to be a $600 kit lens that they created specifically to offer new D600 buyers their first FX kit lens. I guess they assume that most people who are willing to transition to full-frame, won't have any FX lenses.

Yes, it's a nice range and inexpensive, but..., We will need to upgrade from it to get the most out of the D600. I'd rather start out with a couple primes I know are good and get the zooms down the road as cash allows.

Agreed. I'd have to go with a FX 50mm prime, as you suggested or temporarily use my DX 18-65mm when needing a wider focal length. I really hate doing the latter, but i've seen it done and the D600 does have that ability to switch over to a DX mode. The FX, walk-around, zoom lens that I want cost a pretty penny. I'd have to wait to purchase that.

I think I've finally learned to hold out a bit longer for quality. I was tempted to upgrade bodies (again) but I'm glad I held out. I think if I don't go fx, I'll continue to wonder if my work could have been better. The more I get into this "hobby" the more of a perfectionist I've become. I had convinced myself I was going to stay put in Dx, but things can change overnight!

I think I was reading a thread earlier where folks were talking about "what is the difference between a D7K and a D600"...I bet the D600 has more DR...maybe not much but I bet you it is there...DR is the great frontier for sensor technology if you ask me.

Hey Rick you said talk me into it...

Eye-level said:

I think I was reading a thread earlier where folks were talking about "what is the difference between a D7K and a D600"...I bet the D600 has more DR...maybe not much but I bet you it is there...DR is the great frontier for sensor technology if you ask me.

Hey Rick you said talk me into it...

Click to expand...

I'd agree. I'm assuming that the larger sensor and more pixels will increase the dynamic range of the D600. I saw one thread on here where it was being compared to the D800. I'm not saying it's in the same league as a D800, but it still makes sense to compare the technologies of the 2 cameras.

Eye-level said:

I think I was reading a thread earlier where folks were talking about "what is the difference between a D7K and a D600"...I bet the D600 has more DR...maybe not much but I bet you it is there...DR is the great frontier for sensor technology if you ask me.

Hey Rick you said talk me into it...

Click to expand...

You're doing a great job Jeff!

There's a video on the Nikon site, which features one of their Product Managers, by the name of Lindsay Silverman. It's a 10-minute video where he gives a quick breakdown of "D600", as he puts it. I normally say, "The Nikon D600." He refers to it in a cool way, as "D600." He subtly gives it a persona. He's good. He's a good salesman, and I don't mean that in a negative way. It's just that he was a "Natural." Plus, the camera speaks for itself.

As all of this sinks in maybe I am having second thoughts about it all. I still can't wrap my head around why Nikon is introducing a budget priced FX camera that will likely cannibalize other products from both sides of the spectrum - it eats at D800 sales and it eats at D7000 sales. Why are they doing this? What is in the future if anything? Is it just a simple matter like this is a perfect fit between the D7000 and D800 and it is priced accordingly?

Eye-level said:

As all of this sinks in maybe I am having second thoughts about it all. I still can't wrap my head around why Nikon is introducing a budget priced FX camera that will likely cannibalize other products from both sides of the spectrum - it eats at D800 sales and it eats at D7000 sales. Why are they doing this? What is in the future if anything? Is it just a simple matter like this is a perfect fit between the D7000 and D800 and it is priced accordingly?

Click to expand...

I think they identified an untapped niche and filled it. Much is still depending on upcoming user and professional reviews. The marketing has delivered. It's now up to the product. If reviews are positive, I'll think Nikon just might've hit one out of the park.

Yes the D600 looks like to be a "lion Killer" truthfully i would buy one in a heartbeat if I hadn't bought a D800 & ordered a D4.

Eye-level said:

As all of this sinks in maybe I am having second thoughts about it all. I still can't wrap my head around why Nikon is introducing a budget priced FX camera that will likely cannibalize other products from both sides of the spectrum - it eats at D800 sales and it eats at D7000 sales. Why are they doing this? What is in the future if anything? Is it just a simple matter like this is a perfect fit between the D7000 and D800 and it is priced accordingly?

Click to expand...

I doubt it. D800 and D4 are also being used in movie productions. Both of these cameras have their own group of enthusiast and pros alike.

The D600 with its lower price is marketed towards the consumers who have a limited budget which is why Nikon released the 24-85mm f3.5-4.5 lens.

gqtuazon said:

I doubt it. D800 and D4 are also being used in movie productions. Both of these cameras have their own group of enthusiast and pros alike.

The D600 with its lower price is marketed towards the consumers who have a limited budget which is why Nikon released the 24-85mm f3.5-4.5 lens.

Click to expand...

I'm really dissapointed that they didn't put a bit more in this new lens, would have been great if it was at more of a prosumer level like the fantastic 16-85, slow but really good glass inside. leaving that lens would be the hardest part of going fx to me (until I can afford the 24-70 2.8). Unfrotunately, that 24-85 is not up to the D6oo sensor, or even the D700 sensor.

cnyram said:

I'm really dissapointed that they didn't put a bit more in this new lens, would have been great if it was at more of a prosumer level like the fantastic 16-85, slow but really good glass inside. leaving that lens would be the hardest part of going fx to me (until I can afford the 24-70 2.8). Unfrotunately, that 24-85 is not up to the D6oo sensor, or even the D700 sensor.

Click to expand...

Rick - the lens that you are looking for is the Nikon 24-120mm f4 VRII with Nano coating. When mounted on a FX camera, it will give you the same field of view and range with your 16-85mm mounted on a DX.

You also get a constant aperture and it demonstrates equally sharp as the 24-70mm f2.8 on all corners when stopped down to f5.6 (compared to the 24-70mm f2.8 @ f4) based on my personal test.

In other words, the lightweight and great IQ that you are accustomed with your current line up is already available in a FX format plus more since you get less distortion at 24mm compared to 16mm.

So, did you pre-order one yet?