Upload & Sell: Off
D600 is a winner, no doubt.
The possible "Synthetic Lubricant" contamination is a turn off for me so I'll pass for now.
I assume it will be quietly addressed like D800 AF module was & in time all will be spot on
Here's exactly what Thom Hogan on Nov 23rd wrote about it:
"Meanwhile, D600 "dust and oil" is a different kind of problem, and so far all the discussions I've seen of it are a little short-sighted and naive. At this point, it seems clear from examination of new bodies that some D600 bodies are coming from the factory with significant dust showing on the left side of the finished image. In examining that "dust," I actually think it's debris, not dust. It has a different size and pattern to what I associate with common dust.
A lot of people immediately have jumped to the conclusion that the D600 is a "dusty" camera, as the number of people reporting that their D600 came with dust is high enough to be clearly visible on almost any Nikon-oriented forum.
These people are concluding it will always have this dust problem. The data so far don't warrant that conclusion. If, for example, there was excessive debris that was present (perhaps from a drill or other tool in assembly that threw off small particles that weren't caught by cleaning procedures), you'd expect that the initial camera inspection would show debris, you'd clean it, then after use you probably would see some debris reappear. That's because if there is debris inside the camera, it wouldn't all just be on the sensor on delivery. Air movement in the mirrorbox area would eventually move debris from other places to the sensor. Over time, if you kept cleaning, the problem would slowly go away as the debris is either removed from the mirrorbox or ends up on the glue strip of the sensor cleaner. If, on the other hand, the D600 was just a camera that was prone to dust adhesion, the camera would just as dirty after the 100th cleaning wears off as the first.
At the moment there's no way to know which of those two cases is correct. I suspect the former (camera assembled with loose debris inside), which means that those that are diligent in cleaning should see it go away over time. But there's not enough data yet to conclude anything, so I can't rule out the thing that everyone is claiming, that the D600 is just a camera prone to dust. This is one reason why I've remained quiet on this issue: I'm in data collection mode.
I can say that my own camera seemed "normal" out of the box and I haven't seen the sorts of terrible problems some have demonstrated on the Web. But I also haven't shot with it a lot yet, and have only dragged it on one trip through my usual dirt-prone hikes. Not enough data.
As for the "oil" part: we've been dealing with this issue pretty much since the D3 appeared. Something changed in shutters and mirrors for high end cameras around that time. I note that it corresponds with when both Canon and Nikon started upping the "tested cycle" numbers for their cameras, but I have no way of knowing if that's just a correlation, or causal.
What you're seeing is not oil, per se, but a synthetic lubricant that, if applied even slightly excessively, tends to get thrown by the mirror. When some of this gets on your AA filter over the sensor, it looks a bit like a ring-shaped water droplet in images as opposed to just a blurry black dot. Unfortunately, it requires a wet cleaning to remove, and it usually requires a more detergent-based cleaner than alcohol-based to remove it easily. But this is one of those "over time" things like the D600 dust might be: I've rarely had to do oil cleanings on my high end gear more than two or three times. The tendency to throw oil comes because of excess liquid left over during manufacturing. Thus, as you remove it, it is less likely to recur (though it can recur for awhile).
When Canon users complained about oil on the sensor, Canon's response was to offer a free inspection and cleaning to anyone who had the problem. That's probably the right response, since the issue is caused by sloppy manufacturing. Nikon will usually clean an oil-stained sensor for free (after you ship it to them at your expense), but they have made no acknowledgment that such a thing can happen, let alone an apology and specific course of action a user should take, as has their competitor.
I keep getting hammered by a few Nikon fans for writing so many negative things about Nikon. The fact of the matter is that we're seeing more and more indicators that quality control really has slipped a bit at the factories, while at the same time the ability of a customer to even engage in a discussion about said problems with NikonUSA has gone down. I happen to really like most Nikon high end cameras and lenses, but it's hard to say something truly positive about Nikon overall when it's clear there have been some real, significant problems with new gear, especially when the company refuses to talk to its customers about them."