Nikon is pleased to announce the release of the Nikon D600.

Despite having the smallest and lightest body among Nikon FX-format cameras, the D600 offers advanced basic camera performance, and is equipped with a new FX-format CMOS image sensor with an effective pixel count of 24.3-million pixels and the same EXPEED 3 image-processing engine built into high-end Nikon D-SLRs (D4, D800, D800E) for superior definition and image quality.

The camera is expected to be available on September 19 2012 for $2,099
Pre-order from B&H Photo.

Nikon D600 Main Features:

• 24.3MP FX-Format CMOS Sensor
  
• EXPEED 3 Processor
  
• 3.2" LCD Monitor
  
• 1080p HD Video Capture
  
• 100-6400 ISO - Expandable to 50-25600
  
• 5.5 fps Continuous Shooting
  
• 39 Wide-Area AF Focus Points
  
• Stereo Mic & Headphone Inputs
  
• i-TTL Flash

would it cut in the sale of D800/e??

Seems like it may be boosting the sales of D800 since a lot of people were wanting some features of the D700 that it doesn't have.

More likely to cut sales of the 5D MK III.

I switched to Canon recently but as a long time D700 user, I would prefer this over the D800 (which I have also used). I didn't benefit from the extra resolution of the D800, file processing times were painful (and that's on a brand-new 2.7 Ghz Retina MacBook Pro), and I really noticed the D800's slower frame rate. The D600 would have been a good fit.

SoundHound wrote:
More likely to cut sales of the 5D MK III.



+1 I think that is exactly what it will do.

it can do iso 50, smaller and lighter than the d800, has many features, should be a big winner. I am interested in the IQ and dr it can do, tests should be arriving soon

The price point is a break for the rest of us

Joe

fhammond wrote:
I switched to Canon recently but as a long time D700 user, I would prefer this over the D800 (which I have also used). I didn't benefit from the extra resolution of the D800, file processing times were painful (and that's on a brand-new 2.7 Ghz Retina MacBook Pro), and I really noticed the D800's slower frame rate. The D600 would have been a good fit.
8 or 16 RAM ??

Hi,

In the specs there is a 5.5 fps shooting rate. I cannot find if this gets a bump with the grip or not. Anyone know?

No bump.

brad

fhammond wrote:
I switched to Canon recently but as a long time D700 user, I would prefer this over the D800 (which I have also used). I didn't benefit from the extra resolution of the D800, file processing times were painful (and that's on a brand-new 2.7 Ghz Retina MacBook Pro), and I really noticed the D800's slower frame rate. The D600 would have been a good fit.

+100 exactly my opinion.

SteveF wrote:
Hi,

In the specs there is a 5.5 fps shooting rate. I cannot find if this gets a bump with the grip or not. Anyone know?

Nikon says same.

Thanks Ralph and Brad. Bummer - I was hoping for a few more fps.

I found the D800 files quite a pleasure to deal with on my desktop. Mildly overclocked i7 2600K with 16gb of ram.
Not so great on my HP laptop with i5 2410 and 4gb of ram. But still manageable unless doing mass culling while scrolling through your entire library at a fast rate.

There is a slow down compared to 12mp files, and 5d II files, but it isn't night and day.

For a difference of 900 new, I think the D800 is still a better buy for those needing a pro body with all the features.

vchowdhary wrote:

......

For a difference of 900 new, I think the D800 is still a better buy for those needing a pro body with all the features.

I agree if you need those features. If not, the D600 is a great camera.

I find some of the criticism in other threads ludicrous.

Barring some major disasters in manufacturing/firmware, this should be an absolutely stunning camera. For $2100 new. Beats the crap out of the $1700+ people were paying for D700 bodies with 25k+ shutter cycles.

Now, if this drives the D700 down to $1100...

miloz wrote:
I find some of the criticism in other threads ludicrous.

Barring some major disasters in manufacturing/firmware, this should be an absolutely stunning camera. For $2100 new. Beats the crap out of the $1700+ people were paying for D700 bodies with 25k+ shutter cycles.

Now, if this drives the D700 down to $1100...

I expect the D600 to have superior imaging ability, but the D700 is a different class of body, which has picture-taking relevance beyond just the computer inside.

Frank_Maiello wrote:
miloz wrote:
I find some of the criticism in other threads ludicrous.

Barring some major disasters in manufacturing/firmware, this should be an absolutely stunning camera. For $2100 new. Beats the crap out of the $1700+ people were paying for D700 bodies with 25k+ shutter cycles.

Now, if this drives the D700 down to $1100...

I expect the D600 to have superior imaging ability, but the D700 is a different class of body, which has picture-taking relevance beyond just the computer inside.
What do you mean by that last paragraph?

Frank_Maiello wrote:
I expect the D600 to have superior imaging ability, but the D700 is a different class of body, which has picture-taking relevance beyond just the computer inside.

Wolfr wrote:
What do you mean by that last paragraph?

I’m talking about camera features that won’t directly affect the quality of a picture. For example, the D600 doesn’t appear to have an eyepiece shutter or sync terminal. There are ways around those shortcomings—it’s not the end of the world—but I wouldn’t choose to work around something that was already well executed in the past. Still, we can probably count on the D600 beating the D700 in imaging specs. Better DR, lower noise, etc...

Depending on what you shoot, this may be a deal breaker - under the additional features and functions:

A durable shutter unit that has passed testing for approximately 150,000 cycles, and supports a maximum shutter speed of 1/4000 s and flash sync speed of 1/200 s. The shutter is equipped with a monitor function that automatically checks for, and detects, errors between the specified shutter speed and actual shutter speed.

No thanks