D600 dust - fixed??

If  you look around on the forums you will see a lot of different opinions. I dont think you are ever going to see "the final true story with solution" on this site or anywhere else for that matter. apparently it is lubricant, not dust. go to amazon and read the most updated verified reviewers take on this matter. I would like a second body to go with my d800 and think the d600 is a good technical camera but I dont want to wet clean the sensor every week. If you dont mind the cleaning you cant bid on one online and get a deal. I would suggest avoiding any seller who says "no returns".

let your children grow without making photos of them, miss best photos from your vacation with your wife/gf, miss your friends party, don't make possibly the last video of your (grand-)parents.

Wait.

This will save you another $50 on a wet cleaning kit, which you will have to use with a probability of 1%.

Don't buy the camera unless that stupid Nikon will solve their QC issues!!!

It absolutely does not affect all bodies, or even most of them I suspect. I have two without issues, one purchased on release day, one purchased in January. Several colleagues have dust/oil D600's as well.

My personal belief is that Nikon has not issued a service advisory because they have not seen a large enough percentage of "affected" cameras yet. Nikon has a long history of issuing service advisories, so they are not afraid to do it. That is just my opinion however, as that is how it works in most other industries. If the problem is with a few, they deal with it case-by-case. If the problem affects a large percentage, or if there is a safety issue, they do a voluntary service advisory.

Just buy one. Chances are it will be fine, and if not, take 60 seconds out of your day to clean the sensor. There seems to be a very select few who have a legitimate issue where they need to clean the sensor every couple hundred shots, the rest are whining because they can see a speck of dust when they take an F57 macro shot of white paper with the exposure pumped in Photoshop.

Also, ignore the tin-foil-hat wearing folk on here that absolutely insist "every D600 has an issue", even when every imaginable test proves otherwise.

Trust me on this one. Every D600 has dust/oil issue.

it's amazing how you keep defending this camera as if it is your child. I went to three big retailers with one of my own SD cards and asked if I can take some shots with the camera (D600). They had no problem with my sampling the cameras as they naturally would, given I could be a potential buyer. Went home to check the images and every single camera showed signs of what looked to be oil/dust predominantly in the left corner!  This camera is a dud (when the sensor is clean image output is great) because it was put together cheaply using less then stellar fit and finish.

Well luckily this is not the only camera being sold. Nor the brand has anything so unique.

Just spend more cache on A99 or 5d mk3...there ought to be a reaosn for the low price ...QC is what they saved on in Nikon.

I'm sorry you had such bad luck, but what about the countless cameras without problems? Hardly a dud. Also, if you used their demo models, I would say your experiment is of little value. You should see how those cameras get treated (at least in every camera store I've ever been to).

God forbid some of us post positive experiences regarding the D600 among the 100 re-posts every single day about "safe" serial numbers, petitions, dust/oil, etc. There so much garbage to sift through on this forum, and moderators do not merge or delete duplicate threads. It has degraded so much from what it used to be.

I used to work at a very high volume camera store, and not one single D600 was returned due to dust/oil. My own two D600's don't have the issue, nor do the ones being used by my colleagues. All duds though, right?

I understand some have the problem, I have never denied that. Everyone seems to overlook the fact that there are many happy users out there. Do we really need 100 new threads every day talking about EXACTLY the same thing?  People ask questions here as if some magical Nikon fairy will reply to them with the exact range of "safe" serial numbers, or tell them the problem has officially been resolved.  If anyone used the search function, we could cut new posts down by probably 90%.

Listen, a disproportionately high number of these cameras exhibit this problem. Nothing you say will change that. If you believe it's internet noise then the noise should be the same for the Canon 6D, 5D3, or the D800 regarding dirty sensors, but it is NOT. Now someone may conclude that the D600 users are new to full frame whereas the 5D3 or D800 or not, and don't look for those things. And to a certain degree I'll give you or those who think that the benefit of the doubt, but the 6D users are the same breed as the D600 users and you DON'T hear any internet noise with those users about dirty sensors or any other stuff for that matter! Please tell me why if you believe it's only the complainers who make it seem bigger then it is??? Now the key words here are "disproportionately high number" and that my friend is unacceptable.

I would say to ignore what my past posts are and not to listen to people that say they do or they dont have the issue (even me). Also ignore lensrentals that has 60 of these that they rent out and have a warning issued just for the D600 (which they have no such warning for other cameras in its class).

Go to amazon. Read the latest ONLY VERIFIED purchases. This should let you know if the issue is resolved or not and if it is real or not. The verified purchases let you know that the person actually bought the camera and not a random review. This is the only method that I know of where you are not counting on these forums agendas (including mine).

Not sure still? Buy one from a place that has no shutter limit on the return policy (make sure you can return it after 2000 shots) and try the camera. Put the camera in CL mode/jpeg/shutter speed 2000/5fps and shoot off 200-2000 shots and after that take a shot of a wall or clear sky f16-f22 and report back what you find.

means, and you can try to spin it any way you like, but it won't work.

http://www.amazon.com/Nikon-D600-FX-Format-Digital-Camera/product-reviews/B0099XGZXA/ref=dp_top_cm_cr_acr_txt?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=1

http://www.amazon.com/Canon-20-2-Digital-Camera-3-0-Inch/product-reviews/B009B0MZ8U/ref=dp_top_cm_cr_acr_txt?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=1

I know what you are going to say. The rhetoric you have been spewing for a while now...not a big enough sample, only complainers post online blah blah. WHERE ARE THE 6D COMPLAINERS??

Actually it is. So bad, in fact, Canon has issued service advisories and there is no permanent fix even after 4 years:

http://cpn.canon-europe.com/content/news/EOS_oil_spots.do

The only reason I know how to wet clean a sensor is from my Canon bodies. So far so good with D300 and D600.

I would be willing to bet that anyone, from any camera brand, will see a "disproportionately high number" of imperfections on the sensor shooting white paper at F22 and then applying curves in PP. People who use their cameras like normal people probably do not notice it, or do not care about the 1-2 small spots only visible in some shots, or they put on their big boy pants and do a 60 second wet clean.  The actual problem is with cameras that throw unusually large amounts of oil every 100-200 shots.

I think you are misunderstanding me. The problem is simply the perceived severity of the problem, which applies to everything, not just cameras. Most people will take the time to complain, where almost nobody will take the time out of their day to say how happy they are with something (again, this applies to pretty well any product/service). What you get is a grossly disproportionate number of negative to positive posts, and any casual user browsing the forums will have a distorted idea of the problem severity.

The only evidence anyone has, whatsoever, that the problem is disproportionate, is forum responses, which unfortunately is the least reliable method possible for collecting accurate statistical data. The fact that you, or anyone else, has had problem cameras is no more credible than myself having many perfect cameras. So what to make of that? The fact of the matter is nobody has any way of knowing exactly how many D600's have a legitimate problem where the sensor needs cleaning every 100 shots or whatever. I do not put these people in the same category as those shooting F22 white paper shots and thinking the world is going to end because they see 1 tiny spec.

Now, what I find much easier to believe, is looking at how most companies, Nikon included, normally deal with issues and have in the past. Whenever a company determines there is a problem that affects enough product (I'm sure they have their own internal numbers), they will issue a service advisory. Nikon has done this countless times in the past. The second scenario is if there is a safety issue (i.e. Batteries, automotive industry related issues, etc.). I am far more willing to believe both history and common sense than I am forum posters who, being human, are many times more likely to write about problems than they are perfectly functioning products.

Again, I have never once denied some cameras have the issue, what I keep saying is that people who use these forums as a gauge as to how many D600's may be affected are not doing themselves any favors. Add to that the fact that whenever someone posts that they are happy with their D600, people reply with things like "nope, you're wrong, every single D600 has the problem and that's that".

Anyways, my apologies if anything came across offensive in anyway to you. I think you just misunderstood what I was getting at.

Go get every 6D user to shoot white paper at F22, apply a curve in PP, and I absolutely 100% guarantee you that all their sensors aren't all perfect under those circumstances. Only the Nikon camp is doing that because of the ridiculous hysteria around here. I haven't seen a single Canon thread where someone tried that, but I see new ones every day on here. If you need to create special circumstances to expose an issue, it doesn't mean that the people who don't check are free of the "issue".

Anyways, were beating a dead horse here. Obviously we disagree, just leave it at that. I'm sorry you had bad luck with your D600 tests, but all of mine are working wonderfully.

Cause as painfull as it may sound, these apertures often do not make the dirt disappear at all.

lock

Here: http://www.lensrentals.com/rent/nikon/cameras/nikon-d600

"PLEASE NOTE: We are seeing a lot of dust issues with D600 sensors We will clean the sensor right before the camera leaves, but since the cause appears to be shutter movement, dust may reoccur during the first shot. If you shoot stopped down (f/8 or smaller aperture) this may not be the best camera choice."

I know that you can get it down to f5.6 I was trying to be fair to people that say no problems at all with the d600.

Yes I know but I was saying to ignore this since people will also deny this too.

I have to agree with Nikonfan99 one hundred percent.  My test was... I went to Costco... took photos of ceiling with Nikon d600 (if they left the battery in)... zoomed in. Searched the left / top of the photo. Yep... dust/oil spots. Took photos of other sections of the ceiling... dust/oil spots still remained in same spot. Don't believe us. Visit Costco... test it yourself. And yes... I did buy/return my D600. Twice... Oct / Dec.

I once made the mistake of using a 60mm Micro at f/45 to shoot a dust test shot of a clear patch of sky. For good measure I had focus set at closest point. I had a number of spots that would not clean off. Turned out, it was very fine dust on the lens. Now I use f/16.

--
Robin Casady
http://www.robincasady.com/Photo/index.html

Even if the dust does not show up at f/5.6 it is affecting the image. The shadow the dust creates is just spread out to where you cannot see it distinctly, but it will affect contrast. That is why we clean lenses. If dust on lenses had no impact on the image, there wouldn't be much reason to clean them.

--
Robin Casady
http://www.robincasady.com/Photo/index.html