I am about to upgrade my cameras from two D700. Like them a lot but I believe when it comes to colors above ISO 1600 they are no longer up to the task.
D800 have way too much to digest (file size wise)
D4 sounds good, but expensive and heavy (will definitely not carry around two of these)
or D600?
I used the search function and read the previous treats about the D600. Read the valid reviews.
Those of you who have used them, what is your conclusion after a few month shooting? Any input is appreciated!
Having two D700, I'm kind of in the same boat. My conclusion is that the best "upgrade" for me is a used D3s.
D600 pro's:
-Quiet shutter makes it easier to capture natural expressions.
-SD cards- no need to remember a stupid adapter to download, no pins to bend.
-Small size- less ergonomic, but draws less attention from bored security guards.
-24mp- Some clients think "Twice as better camera than 12mp"- yes, it's silly, and we know better, but that's how some clients think, so...
-No stupid C/S/M focus switch to turn accidentally like on D200/D300/D700
D600 drawbacks:
-AF area covers less space than the D700
-1/4000 max shutter speed vs 1/8000
-1/200 max flash sync speed vs 1/250
-ISO not displayed all the time in the viewfinder.
-MB-D10 vertical grips can be had used for $125-ish, vs MB-D14's which cost $279 new.
as base ISO is 100, it might not be a bigger problem, equals 1/8000 at 200 ISO of course
I am a bit concerned about the AF in dim light, anyone can say something here?
And the robustness argument? We are not reportage/war photographers who travel far with their camera and when it brakes they are done. For one D4 one could buy 4 D600. When one brakes, have another in the car.
I don't shoot weddings (seniors, families, couples) but I've found the AF to be very snappy and reliable except with the very far left and very far right focus points. Those can tend to have a harder time in low light. I don't really use those points for the most part anyway just composition wise so that hasn't been problematic for me.
When shooting snapshots at my cousin's dark wedding reception last weekend it had no issues finding focus.
I have found the D600 to be limiting in the 1/200 max sync speed and the fact that there is no sync port on camera (the second being more of an annoyance than limitation, I guess. This means I can't rock 2 OCF triggers.)
What I have found is that I go to the D600 for getting ready/reception and D800 for portraits / E-Sessions.
I also love how D800 and D600 raw files look especially the color cast. The D700 was often too red for my taste.
The D600 offers lossy RAW compression and 12 bit (instead of lossless compression and 14 bit)
Because 24 MP is plenty, do you think it make sense to use this settings? Nikon claims lossy compression results in non visible effect on the pictures.
What do you think? Does this result in less good colors and less latitude in post?
Agree with Nikon_14. When it is time to upgrade from my D700's I will be buying used D3s. D3s still has the best signal to noise of any DSLR ever made. Image quality is my #1 priority. I am still thinking about a D600 as a vacation camera.
I recently retired one of my d700's and picked up a D600. So far I'm a little under impressed. I have only used it for two events now, and both times along side of my D700 or when there was not much activity. I think ultimately I need more time with it.
One of my dislikes is the absence of the AF-On button, as I am a back button focus-er..
I knew this going in, so I think I will just need time to adjust. Using the Ae-l Af-l button to focus places your thumb pretty close to your eye and it feels tight. Again, I'm used to the D700 so it just feels weird. I also think I need to try the body with a grip as the body feels (and is) smaller than the d700, and with a 24-70mm on it, it does not feel balanced.
The new Af-s Af-c button set up will take some getting used to as well. I suspect this will be the standard on Nikon's going forward...
Both times I have tried it in low light situations I had some focus failures. The first event was a very dark reception hall and the D700 was struggling a bit so it was hard to draw a conclusion there... The second time, I did not shoot the D700 along side with the D600 but I suspect the D700 would have performed better.
In good light though it performed perfectly..
At first glance at the files from it, I am impressed. No issues there. Not sure if I really want or need 24Mp though. I think the 16Mp sensor on the D4 would be perfect.
I went back and forth about buying the D600 but in the end it made sense. 36Mp's from the D800 is just too much for what I need it for. The D4 looks fantastic but a bit out of my price range. I did try a D3s for a short while but I found it hard to adjust the focus point when shooting vertical. I figured a smaller body with a grip was the way to go for me...
I used the d600 on a few occasions. The ergonomics and the cramped feeling it gave me throughout the photo-shoot was disconcerting. I don't think I have gargantuan hands either. With its current oil/dust issues I would give this camera a pass.
I don't know, the d800's large mp is a PITA for large quantity photographers like wedding shooters. And it is rather slow with somewhat shallow buffer.
Unless you need larger files, I'd stick with a d700 or spring for a used d3s. Or better yet, get a 5d3.
I was just coming here to post a similar question! I am in need of another camera. The d4 is what I want but for over $6gs just not sure it's the way to go. The colour cast on the d700 drives me batty especially when I'm trying to match files from the d3s to the d700. I personally struggle with it. The D800 is to MP beastly for me and the d600 without the Af-on button really isn't endearing to me.
I have been looking for a used D3s and almost thought of buying a canon mark III and shooting both Nikon and Canon! (Yes, my mind went there and still goes there!)
So I keep searching for a decent used d3s or waiting for a nice sale on a d4...
Well by nice I meant a few hundred dollars off! Lol one of the camera stores in my province had a "long weekend sale" where I think it was $500 off but I couldn't pull the trigger! I just keep thinking I could get a camera and two lenses! Or a used d3s and a lens! (But I really am curious how the live view is improved but that's another story!)
D. Diggler wrote: I go both ways. It's fine. You shouldn't rule it out.
I'm all for the "Whatever you feel works for you to please your clients, do it". But I can't help but wonder, isn't matching the slightly different colors really a pain in post-processing?
Nikon_14 wrote:
isn't matching the slightly different colors really a pain in post-processing?
And another thing when you swing both ways like I do ...
You're not always using the cameras back-to-back with each other in the same scene. Oftentimes you pick the tool that's the best for the job and just use that one so there aren't the side-by-side comparison shots for the client to look at. Work each tool to its strengths.
I made the jump and bought 2 D600, with grips and a LOT of memory cards.
So far I am impressed. Tested it quite a bit allready.
- no senosor oil at all after about 1000 images each
- AF is good, even in very low light. May not be as fast as my D700s but OK.
Great image quality, beats the D700 by far over 1600 ISO. No problem at 6400, even above usable in emergencies.
- good handling, love the low weight, AF-on at the programmed AE button works good for me (not to close to my eye)
with a 28/1.8 on one and a 50/1.4 on the other (which I can switch to 75mm in a second - yes I know is just cropped but still enough MP) is a dream set-up.
Tomorrow IŽll shoot a wedding with it, feel confident.
on a d4...