Upload & Sell: Off
Was reading an article by Kevin Kubota, a wedding photographer, on the topic of D600 vs D800. http://www.kevinkubotablog.com/kubota-blog/2012/10/10/nikon-d600-vs-d800-hands-on-review-and-tips.html He also spoke to other AF issues:
"AF: Now that you have great high ISO performance you can accommodate all of those brides that want the candle lit ceremony, right? On many occasions during my real wedding test with the D600 I found the AF to really struggle in low light. While it would eventually acquire, the shot was gone. Keep in mind two things: This was a very dark room and this is an entry level camera, not a D4. I will say when light was plentiful, the D600 focused very quickly.
I did find the D800 AF to be much improved upon the D600 and rightfully so, it's nearly $1000 more and utilizes an entirely different AF system. But 37 megapixel wedding files?"
That said, he did have an interesting workaround for compressing the large files of those camera's raw files. "The latest version of Adobe’s DNG conversion software allows not only for RAW file lossy compression, but for creating a reduced resolution RAW proxy. This means I can actually reduce the resolution and compress my original 36 megapixel, 50 MB, D800 RAW files down to 15 megapixels (or any size I want, actually) and retain virtually all of the advantages of a RAW file in an incredibly manageable file size - 7.4 MB! "
What I have learned so far about the D600 and D800 is that while they both provide amazing IQ and low light performance, the resultant workflow and camera idiosyncrasies are a bit of a PITA. Conversely, the old D700 still has very good performance just not up to that of current gen cameras. However, the D700 has much easier ergo and workflow characteristics. Life's little tradeoffs...