D600 RAW is not much better than A900

Started Sep 27, 2012 | Discussions thread
MaxLowLight
Forum MemberPosts: 79
Like?
Re: D600 RAW is way better
In reply to Dave Oddie, Sep 29, 2012

Dave Oddie wrote:

AS for A77 this comparison really show how bad the noise is from that camera it it seems to be the major concern of owners.

Only someone blind to the actual results and comments seen published in this forum on a daily basis from this camera would post the above. No it's not a major concern to owners as most of them don't routinely shoot at ISO 6400. Most people who own any aps-c camera don't either. They are all very noisy at ISO 6400. This isn't news.

I think it's a major concern to potential sony buyers, and that is what people try to say. Sony users are likely to be people who don't shoot in low light often, which is fine. The people who criticize the a77 are those who need iso6400 regularly. To say iso6400 isn't important is arrogant, not everybody wants to be limited to shooting during the brightest 1/3 of the day.

The A77 is competitive with its aps-c peers. It is pointless comparing any aps-c camera to FF at high ISO but even FF ones are not immune to noise at this ISO either. The D600 is blurring detail in jpegs at ISO 6400 due to noise reduction which I am sure blind Freddy spotted.

The D600 looks no better than my K30 at iso6400, glad I didn't spend $2100 instead of $800. http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/studio-compare#baseDir=%2Freviews_data&cameraDataSubdir=boxshot&indexFileName=boxshotindex.xml&presetsFileName=boxshotpresets.xml&showDescriptions=false&headerTitle=Studio%20scene&headerSubTitle=Standard%20studio%20scene%20comparison&masterCamera=sony_slta77&masterSample=dsc02826_2.acr&slotsCount=4&slot0Camera=sony_slta77&slot0Sample=dsc02826_2.acr&slot0DisableCameraSelection=true&slot0DisableSampleSelection=true&slot0LinkWithMaster=true&slot1Camera=nikon_d600&slot1Sample=dsc_4526.acr&slot2Camera=nikon_d7000&slot2Sample=dsc1_1896.acr&slot3Camera=pentax_k30&slot3Sample=imgp1058.acr&x=-0.7771477573358138&y=1.5270026634164768

That said I think what is interesting you will probably have to use a Nikon D600 at above ISO 800 to see a practical advantage in resolution due to its lower noise performance over an A65/77. The A65/77 are, as DPR pointed out in its review, delivering 24mp of resolution up to that ISO. If you rarely go beyond that you would be wasting your money on a FF camera unless you wanted other FF characteristics.

This is a dumb thing to say. Even though the D600 is a very low end FF, it is still better than the a77 in every iso stop, and has the same resolution. Considering Nikons above average AF system, it should handily stomp the a77 in every aspect, minus max shutter speed.

You will see this phenomena occurring more often as sensor technology improves. The little Sony RX100 draws comparison with aps-c in the same way.

Tell this to the sony users who have been praying at the a99 altar for the past 2 years.

Still, I am sure there will be some people who will never shoot a real photo at ISO 6400 on their D600 as long as they own the camera (but will shoot plenty of test shots to show it off!) but will still buy one because it is better than a different camera at that ISO!

Forget iso6400, I often need more. I know all too well the sadness of missed opportunities. The dog below was shot here at iso25k, and I capture what I can when I can for good reason. This dog belongs to my inlaws, I owned his brother. He died of an alergic reaction to vaccinations at 6mo old. You never know when family will be gone, animals or people. I don't shoot pics to brag to anonymous people how good I am, I take photos so I have memories to look at later on. I happen to show some here. I don't want a camera that limits me bc it's not sunny in my living room.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow