Nikon D600
- Thread starter DonH50
- Start date
No as I can't switch over given all the glass I own. But maybe that puts pressure on Canon to be more reasonable with their prices....
Yah... After much review and internal debate I had decided to go Canon, but the price of the 5D and light bleed issue put me off a bit, leaving me vacillating about the D800 again, then Life intervened so I couldn't afford either. Be interesting to see when and how Canon responds.
Image Resource guy seems to like it. I know we have Nikon buffs on board, anxious to hear what they think!
Image Resource guy seems to like it. I know we have Nikon buffs on board, anxious to hear what they think!
I'm sticking with my D700.
From what I heard, the very high megapixel sensors on the D800 have lower useable ISOs than my D700, which I like for handheld night shots (and I finally know how almost all of it works
) which is more important to me than all the megapixels and video abilities of the newer "replacements".
From what I heard, the very high megapixel sensors on the D800 have lower useable ISOs than my D700, which I like for handheld night shots (and I finally know how almost all of it works
) which is more important to me than all the megapixels and video abilities of the newer "replacements".
Wow, that's annoying! The reviews on the comparable Canon 6D have not been nearly as good so I am still waffling. I like the 5D, but the ~$1000 price differential over the D800 is tough to swallow, and I do use the on-camera flash for fill for a lot of family quickies (portraits). But, I also need low-light since many shots are taken at school concerts without flash, and we have graduations coming up (HS and college). Thre are some rebates running now, pretty good on the Canon 7D ($500 with lens) but not so much on the 5D ($200), especially given the upcharge from the Nikon D800. I am thinking that, while low-light is not as good on the Nikon, I need a good lens and the savings would go a long way toward that.
Just shot a bunch of commercials with the D800 and some longform work before that -- am very happy with it. I already had significant investment in Nikon glass, so there was some headwind against the 5DmkIII to begin with, but was open to it if there was a significant qualitative difference. Having used both now for video and stills, don't see it. Low light performance on the D800 is extremely good btw, shot some ISO3200 and got great results.
We'll see how the D600 sensor issue plays out -- is it just a few noisy people or a legit problem? Don't know, hope they didn't rush it out the door and have QC problems. If so, hope they deal with it forthrightly which Nikon (and some of the other Japanese camera makers) aren't always wont to do. Am considering one as a b-cam, check out this review if you haven't:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikon-d600/23
it's a complete rave.
Don, I gather your heart is with Canon (as mine is w/Nikon), but as noted above, I just don't see the justification for the price premium that you could make, say, between the 5DmkII and D700 (primarily video).
We'll see how the D600 sensor issue plays out -- is it just a few noisy people or a legit problem? Don't know, hope they didn't rush it out the door and have QC problems. If so, hope they deal with it forthrightly which Nikon (and some of the other Japanese camera makers) aren't always wont to do. Am considering one as a b-cam, check out this review if you haven't:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikon-d600/23
it's a complete rave.
Don, I gather your heart is with Canon (as mine is w/Nikon), but as noted above, I just don't see the justification for the price premium that you could make, say, between the 5DmkII and D700 (primarily video).
Actually, where I learned about this dust problem was from dpreview! Here are some quotes:
"Sensor residue
An issue that has been reported widely on the web concerns the unusual frequency with which the D600 attracts dust and/or residue on its sensor, particularly in the upper left area of an image, which of course corresponds to the bottom right portion of the actual sensor. And sure enough, shortly after we received our review sample and began our studio testing we found we had to conduct a rudimentary non-invasive sensor cleaning.
In the first image below, debris is visible in the upper left corner even at this reduced thumbnail size. Click through to see a full resolution version which we've enhanced with an extreme contrast adjustment to make the debris more visible. We've paired the 'dirty' image with one taken using the same sensor immediately after being cleaned by a professional lens rental shop near our Seattle office*. As you can see, the difference before and after the cleaning is striking. Bear in mind that our D600 arrived new and at the time when we got its sensor professionally cleaned, we'd been shooting with the camera for only about four weeks, under conditions no different than our typical review process.
We can only speculate at this point as to the cause of the issue. What we can say is that simply blowing air did not remove all of the debris; a wet clean was required, suggesting that some contaminant may have found its way onto the sensor. We are of course, pursuing this issue with Nikon directly, and will update this review as more information comes to light."
What I post then was their follow up:
"Canadian photographer Kyle Clemens just bought a Nikon D600, but rather than get straight out and start shooting with it, he decided to investigate the widely-reported claims of a 'dust problem'. Clements set his D600 up with a fixed 50mm F1.8 lens, pointed it at a white wall, and shot 1000 images. Then he created a timelapse video which shows the slow accumulation of debris on the camera's sensor. Although the exposure of the individual frames isn't uniform, Clements' video clearly shows a steady buildup of debris over the course of shooting the 1000 frames.
When we reviewed the D600 we expressed concern about the propensity of its sensor to gather specks of debris, and Clements reinforces the troubling possibility that whatever it is that's ending up on the D600's sensor could be coming from inside the camera.
During our own testing, we got our D600's sensor professionally cleaned by a local rental house, who had to resort to a full, 'wet' clean to remove all of the debris that had accumulated during less than a month of shooting. We have repeatedly asked Nikon for a statement on our findings and we will continue to report on this issue."
I would love to be part of an audit team for both Canon and Nikon QA teams to see why they miss such things. It is unlike them or maybe it has always been this way and in the days of film we couldn't tell....
I think part of it is that we're in the days of the Internet with info getting disseminated so quickly and broadly. Problems or claims of go viral so fast.
As for film, I think about my old Aaton Super16 film camera -- I did a couple of fixes in the field -- the joy of something mechanical, something you could actually see how it worked. Less complex than the electronic stuff now so perhaps less to go wrong in production.
Not the sensor anyway
. Left side focus marks were not calibrated properly on some of the earlier production runs -- Nikon acknowledged the prob and has apparently fixed it. I'm really curious too how Nikon and Canon both seem have had problems with initial releases of some of their top end cams. How is this not discovered in field testing?
Poor QA and final test on their high-end cameras seems unacceptable, or least highly dissappointing... The low-light noise of the D800 seems a little higher, but an extra $1000 would go a long way toward a better zoom that would help keep the ISO down. Thinking...
Both boys graduate this coming spring (one HS, one college) and I would really like to upgrade before then.
Both boys graduate this coming spring (one HS, one college) and I would really like to upgrade before then.
Agreed, poor QA is unacceptable at this level.
All I can tell you is that subjectively, I've been very happy with the low light performance of the D800 real world.
And better glass at these levels of cams pays off. My 'walkaround' is the Nikon 24-120 f4 VR. Though the 24-70 is f2.8 and slightly sharper at the edges, I want the VR (picks up a couple of stops) and like having the extended range. The 70-200 f2.8 VR is a great lens and the teleconverters work we'll with it. The new 70-200 f4 VR is likely excellent and much less money than the 2.8 -- probably perfect for graduations. Also have the 14- 24 zoom (awesome lens) and a bunch of primes. I like the Tokina AT-X lenses as a less expensive alternative. They tend to be very sharp and flayt edge to edge, particularly on the WAs. I wouldn't buy variable aperture lenses with these cameras, but my needs aren't everybody's.
Anyway, get your hands on them before you decide if you haven't already.
All I can tell you is that subjectively, I've been very happy with the low light performance of the D800 real world.
And better glass at these levels of cams pays off. My 'walkaround' is the Nikon 24-120 f4 VR. Though the 24-70 is f2.8 and slightly sharper at the edges, I want the VR (picks up a couple of stops) and like having the extended range. The 70-200 f2.8 VR is a great lens and the teleconverters work we'll with it. The new 70-200 f4 VR is likely excellent and much less money than the 2.8 -- probably perfect for graduations
. Also have the 14- 24 zoom (awesome lens) and a bunch of primes. I like the Tokina AT-X lenses as a less expensive alternative. They tend to be very sharp and flayt edge to edge, particularly on the WAs. I wouldn't buy variable aperture lenses with these cameras, but my needs aren't everybody's. Anyway, get your hands on them before you decide if you haven't already.
Thanks very much for the information, Bob. I agree 100% in great glass making the camera. I wish I could afford a stable of primes, but I can't (partly because we have one more to go through college, costs are rising at 10%/year while my salary is more like 2%/year, not too mention our taxes are likely to increase significantly no matter who wins the present battle). I was thinking about one of the Tokina super-wide-range "travel zooms" but they are not for full-frame cameras, but the AT-X is a line I have been pondering. Reviews have been good. I was leaning toward the D800 with a Tokina variable for general use and splurging on that 70-200/f4. The f2.8 would be great but pricey and heavy to drag around.
It seems like lens reviews for Nikon (and Canon, for that matter) have been somewhat mixed the past year or two, but looking back I am not sure if it is just because the bar has been raised so high rather than any real-world shortcomings in the lenses. Certainly the kit lens seem impressive for the price, again looking more at the smaller sensors.
Also dissappointing is how there seem to be large price breaks on the top consumer cameras, but much less on the full-frame models. Guess they figure the only ones gettng those are pros who can afford it?
Too many variables! And too few shops; all the good camera stores in my general area have gone under in the past couple of years, making it much harder to even see them for a quick look, and some of the chains that carry products do not always stock the higher-end lenses to try out. A new store, Mike's Camera, recently opened so I need to check them out. I have used B&H a lot but for something like this prefer local in exchange for the opportunity to actually see and touch stuff. The 'net (and economy) is killing our opportunities to hands-on shop, but that's another story...
It seems like lens reviews for Nikon (and Canon, for that matter) have been somewhat mixed the past year or two, but looking back I am not sure if it is just because the bar has been raised so high rather than any real-world shortcomings in the lenses. Certainly the kit lens seem impressive for the price, again looking more at the smaller sensors.
Also dissappointing is how there seem to be large price breaks on the top consumer cameras, but much less on the full-frame models. Guess they figure the only ones gettng those are pros who can afford it?
Too many variables! And too few shops; all the good camera stores in my general area have gone under in the past couple of years, making it much harder to even see them for a quick look, and some of the chains that carry products do not always stock the higher-end lenses to try out. A new store, Mike's Camera, recently opened so I need to check them out. I have used B&H a lot but for something like this prefer local in exchange for the opportunity to actually see and touch stuff. The 'net (and economy) is killing our opportunities to hands-on shop, but that's another story...
Fact is, I hardly use my primes anymore anyway. They've accumulated over 20 years from my original Nikon FE2, but zooms have gotten so much sharper and faster, and cameras more sensitive, that there's little gain. Mostly to cut depth of field for a portrait -- shoot at 1.4 or 2 w/an 85 -- not other way to get that look. To wit, Arriflex calls their zoom 'variable primes'.
Anyway, yeah, they know the buyers for the upper echelon stuff will pay and the camera companies work to protect those margins. The 600 and likely Canon's fullframe are breaking new price/performance ground, but they're being very careful about cannabilizing the top end stuff.
If you're ever in NYC, you must go to the B&H store. No place like it to get hands on, and it's a marvel physical product distribution (bins that run on underground and overhead tracks) as well.
Anyway, yeah, they know the buyers for the upper echelon stuff will pay and the camera companies work to protect those margins. The 600 and likely Canon's fullframe are breaking new price/performance ground, but they're being very careful about cannabilizing the top end stuff.
If you're ever in NYC, you must go to the B&H store. No place like it to get hands on, and it's a marvel physical product distribution (bins that run on underground and overhead tracks) as well.
HI...saw this. We use a Nikon D7200 and have two lenses we really like (all second-hand from Nikon distributor):Agreed, poor QA is unacceptable at this level.
All I can tell you is that subjectively, I've been very happy with the low light performance of the D800 real world.
And better glass at these levels of cams pays off. My 'walkaround' is the Nikon 24-120 f4 VR. Though the 24-70 is f2.8 and slightly sharper at the edges, I want the VR (picks up a couple of stops) and like having the extended range. The 70-200 f2.8 VR is a great lens and the teleconverters work we'll with it. The new 70-200 f4 VR is likely excellent and much less money than the 2.8 -- probably perfect for graduations
Anyway, get your hands on them before you decide if you haven't already.
- Nikon 70-200mm f2.8 VRI
- Nikon 17-55 f2.8
- Nikon Teleconverter 1.4x for effective 420mm without sacrificing image quality
We just ordered a Tokina ATX Pro 11-20mm f2.8 in order to really focus on landscapes,, sky and certain wide-angle shots...any thoughts on this lens?
Last edited:
Similar threads
 | Steve Williams Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator |  | Ron Resnick Site Co-Owner | Administrator |  | Julian (The Fixer) Website Build | Marketing Managersing |