Thinking of Sending Back the D600

Home · Register · Search · Software · Hosting · Software · Join Upload & Sell

FM Forum Rules
Nikon SLRs, primes, and zooms lenses reviews

FM Forums \| Nikon-mount SLRs \| Join Upload & Sell
end

MarcG19
Online
• •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #1 · Thinking of Sending Back the D600

I'm going to ramble a bit. People's reactions to my ramblings are appreciated.

I "grew up", photography-wise on a Nikon D90. It's served me well, but my problem with it was two-fold: it had focus issues with my particular 300mm f/4 lens which I intended to use for birding, and it was too big - a D90+wide zoom+ consumer telezoom + flash + consumer midrange zoom + support equipment took up half a carry on suitcase. (minor issues include that I'm not fond of its ISO 1600 performance, and really not fond of its ISO 3200 performance, as well as the fact that I think the D2x I got on a whim for a good price is a much better camera, except at ISO 400+.

All that said, I decided to get an Olympus EM-5 this year and went pretty far in with lenses - the basic consumer zoom kit (14-42 and 40-150) as well as the 12mm, 60mm, 14mm, and 25mm MF Nokton (expensive but awesome). This kit takes up, at most, 10% of a carry on and quite comfortably fits into a small backpack. For "walk around"/street photography (AF-S/MF+the 14, 60 or 25mm lens) or landscapes (the two most common types of photography I do) it really is far better, IMO, than the D90 due to size and equal, perhaps superior (with the lenses) performance. The built in image stabiization is also VERY useful for "walk around"/street photography.

This still leaves my other occasional photography form, bird/animals. I would like a new camera that has AF-tune. I was going to get a D7000, but then I saw that with Nikon's recent fire sale it was effectively $1000 over the used price of a D7000 ($700 on B&S, compared to $2000 with kit lens for the D600). I figured I'd give it a shot - if I needed DX I still had IMO acceptable DX megapixels, and not only would I get the additional dynamic range and high ISO performance but also a lot of my recent animal/bird photography has been at less than 300mm 35mm equivalent, so I think it's a win-win.

Long story short, I've been doing some basic tests with the D600, and I'm less than impressed.

First, its image quality, dynamic range, high ISO performance is of course amazing coming from my perspective. It's far better than the D90 and notably better than the EM-5 (perhaps two stops better than the EM-5 - I haven't done detailed tests). That being said, for much of my output, the EM-5 has been fine (I don't often print big, and if I do it's from a shot off the tripod, and if I really need more MP I can always stich). The one remaining virtue I could think of with the D600's high ISO performance, thinking from a landscape perspective, is that you get much more DR/much less noise if you use high ISOs to stop motion of, say, grass in poor lighting, and that astrophotography is easier.

For "walk around" purposes, the D600's stellar ISO 6400 is offset by the lack of IS for fast lenses (I don't have VR f/2.8 glass and would find the only one I can think of, the 70-200, way too big and expensive IMO for nonprofessional walkaround use). The D600 is notably bulkier than the EM-5 - my walk around kit can fit into 2-3 jacket pockets. The Nikon equivalents would be much bulkier. I much prefer the EM-5 as a walk around/street camera.

And the killer, for me, has been my recent tests with the D600 and AI/AI-S glass. I've found it much more difficult to work with MF glass on the D600 than the EM-5. Maybe it's just that I'm used to the EM-5, but still, the D600 does not have magnification in the viewfinder, nor does it have the back-door focus peaking of the EM-5. I thought I could manage with the dot system in the Nikon viewfinder, but I've found it a bit hard to use. For some odd reason I find the D600's LCD more cumbersome to use than the EM-5's.

So, the D600's nice, but IMO not nice enough to warrant the extra expenditure for FX glass I'd need to make. I think I would really have to sell everything else and shoot only Nikon FX to prevent the amount of money I've sunk into camera gear from bloating up. (even though lenses more than $1000 are not on my purchasing list).

Not is it, unfortunately, is it anywhere near as small and handy as the Em-5, which I was hoping it could be with some of the smaller, older lenses (24mm AI-S or AF-D, 135mm series E, 50mm f/1.8 AF-D and some others as a light walk around/lght landscape kit. Again, MF foibles and lack of VR is a killer here, more so than the D600's size which of course will never approach the EM-5)

I am probably going to send back the D600 (I'm still within the return period and I have not done more than very light testing with it, covered by my local store's return policy). For my birding, I will probably get a used D7000 - which has the added advantage of me not having to get rid of my DX glass, which I'm quite fond of performance-wise.

Anyway, again, any thoughts about my ramblings are appreciated.

Jan 08, 2013 at 04:05 AM

snapsy
Online
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #2 · Thinking of Sending Back the D600

Sounds like a FF system wasn't the right fit for you from the get-go and perhaps you needed the camera in your hands to be certain about it.

Jan 08, 2013 at 04:12 AM

glassartist
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #3 · Thinking of Sending Back the D600

I don't find anything you've said either unreasonable or ill considered. Different tools for different jobs - there is no one camera to rule them all. I'm coming from a D90 as well and so far am quite pleased with the D600 for just the reasons you outline - DR and very good high ISO performance. I tried the m43 route and the images were more than acceptable for travel snaps and they were fun cameras to use. There is no argument about the bulk issue and often (as a casual photographer) that is a significant issue.

Sometimes I travel to take photographs, and sometimes I just take photographs while I travel. If the D7K makes sense for your existing equipment and uses, then that makes sense.

Jan 08, 2013 at 04:21 AM

DTOB
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #4 · Thinking of Sending Back the D600

If it isn't the camera for you, then it isn't the camera for you.

I will say this: MF skills take time to develop and are well worth the effort.

Edit: Also, you can make a D600 kit as bulky or as lean as you want it to be. I can leave the house for hours with only a 28 in my pocket and a 50 on the camera. I don't get bored. More lenses make things less fun for me.

Jan 08, 2013 at 04:27 AM

bmwrider75
Online
• •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #5 · Thinking of Sending Back the D600

Reasonable and considered thoughts. Everyone has different priorities. I ended up with an EM-5 kit after 5Dmkii -> D7000 (trying to save weight/bulk) -> D600/800 (seduced by FF again!!) -> EM5. My needs are influenced heavily by the small/portable nature of the EM5. The lenses are the biggest part of that. The body is small, but it's the tiny, lightweight, high quality lenses that make the difference.

I'm guess it's about 1.5 stops worse than the D600/800 on my very casual reckoning. Maybe 2 stops in the toughest conditions. Often the gap seems narrower than that, surprisingly, which probably has much to do with the phenomenally effective IS built into the Oly body. The DR on the D600/800 was better, but the EM5 output is incredibly good. I honestly didn't expect it to compete with the FF Nikons, but it's remarkable. No, it's not "as good" for sure, but you gain a big amount of portability in return. Nothing will match that pure, rich, flexible, dynamic file from a FF sensor like that found in the D600/800, but whether or not the pure IQ is your *main* priority is sometimes a difficult question to answer.

On the other hand, Dylan's point about flexibility/creativity of traveling with one or two lenses is well taken also. I found myself doing the same and enjoyed it, but ultimately I take photos mostly when I'm out camping/traveling with the family, and I wanted all my gear on hand at the same time.

I tried m4/3'rds before, a couple of years ago (a Panny GF1) and was really unimpressed with the IQ and returned the camera quite quickly. I didn't think I'd try m4/3rds again until I saw some samples from the OMD. The Oly is a completely different animal and has IQ indistinguishably as good as my D7K. I find it hard to imagine you would want or need both an EM-5 and a D7K. An EM-5 and a FF camera would be separate beasts in some respects, but IMHO, the D7K overlaps a huge amount with the EM-5's capability.

I wish I could afford to keep both m4/3 and FF systems, as they have different uses, but as a casual amateur, it doesn't make sense (for ME) to own two systems. Whichever one is right for YOU, will be right for you for your own unique reasons. It sounds, though, that you've already kinda got that figured out!

dc

Jan 08, 2013 at 05:02 AM

snapsy
Online
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #6 · Thinking of Sending Back the D600

bmwrider75 wrote:
I'm guess it's about 1.5 stops worse than the D600/800 on my very casual reckoning. Maybe 2 stops in the toughest conditions. Often the gap seems narrower than that, surprisingly, which probably has much to do with the phenomenally effective IS built into the Oly body.

In DOF-limited situations, like close shooting, a FF has to be stopped down to match the greater DOF of the OM-D, and so for those situations FF has no noise advantage over the OM-D due to equivalence and the OM-D having roughly the same efficiency as the current-generation FF technology. When you couple IBIS with MFT primes that are incredibly sharp at f/1.4 the OM-D actually has a 1-2 stop advantage over FF when shooting static subjects in the above described conditions.

Jan 08, 2013 at 05:10 AM

hijazist
Online
• • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #7 · Thinking of Sending Back the D600

It seems that it's not the camera for you as DTOB mentioned, in fact I think the whole Nikon/Canon DSLR route in not for you since the disadvantages you mentioned apply to all of those. The lack of IS is evident throughout most DSLRs and you knew about it before buying so I don't see why you jumped at the D600 knowing that you need that.

Also, the D600 is one of the lightest and smallest FF cameras in the market so I don't see that as a shortcoming of the D600. You mentioned that the D90 was bulky for you so how did you expect to find the D600 lighter? Actually, most people complain about how "plasticjy", "small" and "toyish" it is

As for manual glass, I honestly didn't find any issues with using my 105 2.5 on it, but maybe you found some problems in low light situations.

Finally, you compared the price of a used D7000 with the price of new D600 with the kit lens, I don't think that's objective. A new D600 body is getting sold here for $1550-1600, a new D7000 is $900 on Amazon, that's only a $650 difference which is IMO is much well worth it. The D600 has many shortcomings (low light focus, focus point wrap, maximum shutter, and some QC issues) but for the price it's amazing. But I respect the fact maybe it's not for you.

Jan 08, 2013 at 06:45 AM

vpik01
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #8 · Thinking of Sending Back the D600

I can see how learning MF using one of the ILC offerings with focus peeking and hi magnification LCD backs would make transitioning to a standard optical viewfinder a bit of a challenge... I agree with Dylan though that it is worth the time to put in if you are willing.

But then again, trying out equipment for yourself and deciding it isn't for you is entirely reasonable. On another vein, I just did the same with an iPad Mini I was gifted for Christmas (fantastic gift), but I have no other apple stuff and it just didn't fit for me. After a bit of struggling with the decision I returned it in lieu of an android tablet. I've felt great about that decision.

Seems like you've given it alot of thought and you won't look back. Happy shooting!

Jan 08, 2013 at 12:58 PM

Two23
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #9 · Thinking of Sending Back the D600

There is always a lot of hype about cameras on internet forums. There is always the "hot" camera. Often, it's just not a good fit for what someone does, or they blow all their cash on an expensive camera and then have to go cheap on lenses. Your post is why I often advise someone to think of camera gear as a system, and don't get wrapped up thinking about just a camera.

Kent in SD

Jan 08, 2013 at 02:45 PM

uscmatt99
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #10 · Thinking of Sending Back the D600

I mostly shoot manual focus lenses, and currently own a Ricoh GXR and D600. It's so much easier focusing on the Ricoh with a toggled zoom mode and focus peaking, my accuracy is near 100%. More so than the D700 which I previously owned, the D600 is tough to nail MF on. For f/5.6 photos I have a really good keeper rate on the standard screen, no magnifying eyepiece, using the OVF. I move my AF point to the side, and occasionally move it back to center for green dot confirmation. Unfortunately the green dot is pretty good with my ZF 100/2, but terrible with the 35/1.4. When it comes down to it, I use live-view on a tripod when I want to nail focus with larger apertures. It takes time, and only works for static subjects, but it well worth it to me in the end.

Snapsy makes a good point about which cameras work best in which situations. If you want more depth of field for handheld shooting, the smaller sensor camera with fast glass and IBIS reigns supreme. But if you have the time to slow down or control the light, the D600 will give you a better file to work with at base ISO, much much better to my eye, and much easier to manipulate in post without penalty.

Jan 08, 2013 at 03:25 PM

MarcG19
Online
• •
Upload & Sell: On

p.1 #11 · Thinking of Sending Back the D600

Thanks, all, I read all your posts, and appreciate the thoughts. To address some comments that jogged some interest:

I can leave the house for hours with only a 28 in my pocket and a 50 on the camera. I don't get bored. More lenses make things less fun for me.

Agreed. In fact, that mirrors my walk around kit very closely: 14mm (28mm equivalent, TINY lens with excellent performance), 60mm f/2.8 (120mm equivalent, stellar performance), 25 f/0.95 (50mm equivalent, stellar performance. But relatively big, and very expensive – but then f/0.95 lenses are toys for rich men and artistes, and arguably not worth the money).

I don't see why you jumped at the D600 knowing that you need [IS].

Two reasons: one, thought ISO 6400 w/o VR would be good enough, at least to my walk-around use.

Second, it was all Nikon’s plan - $2000 for a new FX camera and kit lens tempted me too much.

Also, the D600 is one of the lightest and smallest FF cameras in the market so I don't see that as a shortcoming of the D600. You mentioned that the D90 was bulky for you so how did you expect to find the D600 lighter? Actually, most people complain about how "plasticjy", "small" and "toyish" it is

I didn’t expect it to be lighter, I expected it about on par. Which , as I know feel, is too big for my preferred walk-around use. ☹ But yes, I also have a D2xs, and nothing beats the feel of a Canikon pro body. But for me, it’s just to big and bulky…..

As for manual glass, I honestly didn't find any issues with using my 105 2.5 on it, but maybe you found some problems in low light situations.

No, no problems, it’s just that I found the OM-D’s manual focusing either (pseudo-focus peaking or up to 12X magnification, in either the LCD or the electronic viewfinder.

Finally, you compared the price of a used D7000 with the price of new D600 with the kit lens, I don't think that's objective. A new D600 body is getting sold here for $1550-1600, a new D7000 is $900 on Amazon, that's only a $650 difference which is IMO is much well worth it. The D600 has many shortcomings (low light focus, focus point wrap, maximum shutter, and some QC issues) but for the price it's amazing. But I respect the fact maybe it's not for you.

Agreed it’s amazing for the price, which is why I wanted to try it.

I’d differ on fair price comparison – what I’m interested is the actual cost of a workable example of a given camera to my door, which (generally) inherently favors used and older equipment because you’ve already priced in some amount of depreciation.

Anyway, thinking about this some more.

Again, my main objective for a DSLR is for occasional use of continuous autofocus – mostly for wildlife, sometimes for general family use or sports use. For other things, since I already have the m4/3 set, the glass is substantially smaller for any given kit and offers IMO just about equally good performance for many practical purposes. The DSLR’s advantage is its AF-C capability, but I only need this on occasion. Were I to only use a DSLR, it would certainly be the D600 (or, given my needs, probably a D800, especially since refurbed bodies can be had for $$2300 from the big stores)

As an occasional use SLR, I don’t think the extra $1000 or so for the D600 was worth it. Moreover, to get good results out of the new full frame cameras, I would also inevitably upgrade glass, probably eventually to the 16-35 (or an array of primes which will be as, maybe more, expensive in the end) and 70-200 f/4, meaning doubling the amount of money put in. Instead, I’ll stick with my DX kit (Tokina 11-16, Nikkor 18-55 and 55-200, Sigma 50-150, Nikon 70-300), which I’m very used to and comfortable with.

Thanks again for all the replies. ☺

Jan 11, 2013 at 04:14 AM

agelessphotog
Offline
•
Upload & Sell: Off

p.1 #12 · Thinking of Sending Back the D600

Keep in mind alot of refurb D800's are refurbs because they have crappy left AF point issue.

Jan 11, 2013 at 04:49 PM

end
FM Forums \| Nikon-mount SLRs \| Join Upload & Sell end