I recently opted to buy a used D3x instead of a D600 or a D800. A few considerations dwarfed the economical ones (for what they are and the context they reside in, I conciser the D600 and D800 to be bargains).
Anyway, although high iso capability was not high on my priority list I was interested in the comparison that is possible to do on dpr, both cameras being 24Mpx. http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikon-d600/21
I'm not perfectly sure if one can draw too far reaching conclusions, but taking them strictly on face value, doesn't the d3x look better (more pleasant noise, sharper and higher contrast)? Could difference be down to a more aggressive in-camera noise processing in the D600?
Well, funny. To me it looks clear that the d3x is much sharper, has higher contrast and much more vivid colors. I was very surprised as I was expecting the D600 to wipe the floor with the d3x anywhere beyond iso800. I'm probably subconsciously biased.
I do agree the noise is much more apparent in the d3x though, but I do find it rather pleasant (finely grained).
I'd say the D600 is the clear winner, though I do agree that the D3X has higher contrast, is sharper and has more vivid colors. So why the D600? Because these are RAW files and so I can take that cleaner D600 image and sharpen it, increase the contrast and pump the colors and not have to first scrub the noise (which reduces contrast, smooths out details and drops saturation). In other words, the D600 gives me a better starting point for PP work.
Todd Warnke wrote:
I'd say the D600 is the clear winner, though I do agree that the D3X has higher contrast, is sharper and has more vivid colors. So why the D600? Because these are RAW files and so I can take that cleaner D600 image and sharpen it, increase the contrast and pump the colors and not have to first scrub the noise (which reduces contrast, smooths out details and drops saturation). In other words, the D600 gives me a better starting point for PP work.
Peace,
Todd
So you take the cleaner image, sharpen it, increase contrast and pump colours to end up with..what you got with the D3x from the get go? Bumping colours and contrast in post isn't really the same thing as getting them out of the RAW file is it? Neither is sharpening (to gain resolution).
I was at first thinking the exact same thing but in reverse, the D600 file looks like the d3x file with an aggressive noise-reduction filter applied.
ISO 6400 is outside of native ISO (so is 3200) for d3x so it should perform relatively horrible.
I like the first two from the D3x, and the last from the D600. But if I had to pick a camera from these images, I'd pick the D3x. I'd have to pay extra, but would be happy to do it for the big integrated body, the weathersealing, the AF, and the battery life. The D600 is an excellent camera, but I personally need something that can shoot in the rain.
