mshi wrote:
how many of you believe D700 has become obsolete?
CERTAINLY not I. I still think the D700/D3 is one of Nikon's proudest moments in camera bodies. To this day one of the very best image-makers I reckon, and that's saying something for a 4-5 year old body.
The D600 interests me, I have to admit. I think I would jump on it if the price is where they say it is to be a lightweight backup / 2nd body to the D3S. Mate that to a nice light prime like the 85 and sling the D3S with a 24-70, 70-200 or 300VR and that's a pretty nice combo for sports or weddings right there. And to replace my last DX bodies as a travel cam. Seems like a great option cam.
My D700 does everything I need - and I am a professional photographer.
Do I need a D800? No. Will I get one. Maybe at some point, but the proposed D600 is also of great interest. A bit more resolution wouldn't hurt - don't need 36mp though, and a bit more DR would be useful. But again, I don't need it - I have never had a client say my images weren't of high enough quality
mshi wrote:
how many of you believe D700 has become obsolete?
What? What could possibly be obsolete about the D700, other than maybe the sensor and AF?
My thoughts on this all boil down to one question: what can I not do with my current gear that new gear will equip me to do. About 1% of the people on this forum regularly print at larger than 24x36", so megapixel count is meaningless, unless you're sloppy and need to crop excessively. The only reason I have to upgrade my D700/D3 is for the extra stop of high ISO.
We shoot weddings with a pair of D700s, and don't really need anything else. The D600 looks interesting, but if one of our cameras were to break, we'd almost certainly look for another D700 first. In addition, we wouldn't hesitate to make prints several square feet in area with these cameras; the res is more than enough.
I have a D700 and I don't even print regularly. Printing is not the end all, be all of available MP's. When I zoom into a shot, you quickly see the limitations of the low MP of the D700. A lot of people will never print, but will keep all of their work online and it is pretty cool to be able to zoom far into a D800 shot and admire all of the details the shot contains. I want a lot more MP.
I would go for the D600 as that seems to be the sweet spot of MP that I wan't, but I have become accustomed to the pro body and will instead get a D800 when the time comes to switch. I still think the D600, if the specs are correct, is going to be one hell of a good camera.
I definitely considered the Sony nex7 for my new travel camera. This would definitely be IT if it's a full frame D7000 and that same size. It would also be a great backup to the D4.
Well, this thread got a little off topic, imagine that.
But since it is, I have to say after seeing the latest specs on the D600, that it's no longer on my list. I simply cannot live with a maximum of 1/4000 shutter speed.
leighton w wrote:
Well, this thread got a little off topic, imagine that.
But since it is, I have to say after seeing the latest specs on the D600, that it's no longer on my list. I simply cannot live with a maximum of 1/4000 shutter speed.
Well the D600 now seems like it's not even a replacement for the D300s at this point. It looks like I'll stick with what I got or choose between the D3 and the D700 if I want to 'upgrade' anytime soon.
This really looks like a very consumer focused FX body. Nothing wrong with this, it just doesn't have a place in my bag.
All I want is a 16-20mp 8+fps 51point focus 12800 usable iso - in a big body that feels comfortable in my meathook hands. One that balances well with long heavy glass.
All I want is a 16-20mp 8+fps 51point focus 12800 usable iso - in a big body that feels comfortable in my meathook hands. One that balances well with long heavy glass.
Hope they give us something close to this soon.
Sounds just like the D400 we ALL wanted/waited for, the last couple of years
Yesterday Amazon.de had the D800 for €2680: still too much for a warmed over D700 with six $32.63 Analog Devices AD9974 ADCs deleted from the bill of materials.
I’m hoping this D600 will trigger a flood of dodgy D800s on the used market, when everyone who suspects their D800 of faulty focusing jumps at the chance to get a camera they can trust. Not because I’d take my chances on a used D800, but because that would put some pressure on new D800 prices – something Canon isn’t doing a good job of with the expensive 5D Mark III.
Beyond that, this D600 isn’t looking very appealing to me. It’s a shame Nikon thinks buyers of $2k cameras want 19 scene modes instead of an all-alloy build. But maybe they do? Or maybe scene modes are nearly free to include, while a magnesium alloy body would cost at least – I don’t know – twenty bucks per camera?
Diavolo wrote:
No hate for it from me but it doesn't fill the D300s or D700 successors gap in either.
No "hate" from me as well. I think it will be a great way for some to get in to FF. It just doesn't fit my needs/wants. For now I'll stick to my wonderful D7000. In fact, I like it so much I may not even go FF.
