Will the D600 be updated soon?

Started Jun 28, 2013 | Discussions
Art Zaczek
New MemberPosts: 7
Like?
Re: It's been fixed for some time.
In reply to Steve Bingham, Jun 29, 2013

Got any proof for this? You seem like you ‘know it all’ 100%. I can only tell you I returned 2 copies in April.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
golf1982
Contributing MemberPosts: 660
Like?
Re: Yep.
In reply to lock, Jun 29, 2013

lock wrote:

and it if they upped the low iso DR it will stirr up the competion with Nikon because it is faster and it has a very good AF. Talk about a good action Dx camera..we will see how the tests end up.

lock

"If" lets see if it can beat the d700 for high iso first!!

also there is much more to iq advantage of fx than iso

also the dx / fx choise is down to much more than IQ.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
mrjpack
Contributing MemberPosts: 575Gear list
Like?
Re: I wished they would
In reply to rhlpetrus, Jun 29, 2013

rhlpetrus wrote:

eNo wrote:

I've been thinking... with all the shutter replacements Nikon service has been making lately and the mixed-to-bad WOM the D600 has been getting because of the "oil/dust issue", do you think Nikon might release a quickie update with a fix to that issue and maybe a couple of minor tweaks to the sensor performance... or even with the 51 point AF system the D7100 just got. They would call it the D610 and revive the excitement about the FX entry camera? Hmm? Maybe? What do you think?

-- hide signature --

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
http://imagesbyeduardo.com/
Los Angeles wedding photography that seeks the heart and spirit in each image

I actually lost interest in the D600. If I were to get an FF now it'd be the D800E, but I'm saving money for a while. I wished the D600s or whatever it's called would use the better AF, drop AA filter (Sony just did it with the updated RX1R with same sensor), possibly a few updates on the video side, like aperture control, and that'd be a good camera for me.

The sooner the better, but I'm likely waiting until next year anyway.

-- hide signature --

Renato.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rhlpedrosa/
OnExposure member
http://www.onexposure.net/
Good shooting and good luck
(after Ed Murrow)

You shouldn't have. its a wonderful camera that gives awesome results. I was an early adopter & suffered from grease/oil. By 6000 frames I get occasional dust slightly faster than my D-70, D-90. But the results are phenomenal, I dreamed of the D-800 for a while, but right now with the best I mac available, i'm glad I'm only dealing with 24mp files. I shoot a lot of sports and get great results. Could not be happier at the moment, glad I didn't waste a year hemming & hawing about what purchase to make or spend months taking photos of white walls... Those who keep exchanging cameras or shutters need to be patient unless your shots are truly unusable. But exchanging because you see spots on the wall at F8 that cant be seen in real world shots is quit ridiculous.

Learn to wet clean & then try using a static brush to clean the sensor & you will be fine. I can count the times Ive had to clone out a bunny on one hand. At first I obsessed about it, but then got over it. It is by far my most favorite camera out of the D-70, 90, 300's. Now for those who have the serious repetitive problem, then I would return it, but those who keep exchanging cause the see issues on a white wall either need to relax and get out shoot more or just return the camera & get one of those canon fisher price 6D's..

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
golf1982
Contributing MemberPosts: 660
Like?
Re: I doubt it, but would buy it
In reply to Ernie Misner, Jun 29, 2013

Ernie Misner wrote:

What I can't figure out is why when Nikon has something that is trouble free and working in one model, why they have to re-invent the wheel with a troublesome feature in a new model.

Possibly cost. The d600 is a low cost fx. to achieve that they need to keep costs down.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
ne beginner
Senior MemberPosts: 2,007Gear list
Like?
Probably depends on where this model is in the line up ...
In reply to eNo, Jun 29, 2013

Nikon seems to update their "consumer grade" bodies on a different schedule vs. the "pro grade" bodies.  The D600 is a consumer grade body with a pro grade sensor.  It is used by many pros and amateurs.  So I'm not sure on what schedule they will put the D600.

The dust and oil thing is not an issue I believe that would prompt Nikon or any major manufacturer to jump their model plans.  Sounds like this issue effected a number of units, well into the first 6 months or more of manufacturing.  While we don't know how many, it was not significant enough to force a recall.

While this issue was hugh on the web on camera sites like this, it probably went unnoticed by the vast majority of buyers and potential buyers.  We tend to be a small cross section of users.

Having lived through the D800 left bank defect (2 service trips to fix mine), and with an unaffected D600 (refurbed), I believe Nikon probably addressed any QC or design issue (possibly both, which may be why many repairs seemed to have mixed success).

Like with the D800 defect, with the D600 there is a probably a ripple effect that is caused when owners read about the defect or problem, then seek to test their units.  This can result in a lot of false conclusions, or people seeing ghosts in the closet.

On the D800, for example, the defect could be seen using a fast wide angle wide open. At least 24mm, f2.8. Yet we had people reporting they had the defect based on tests using slow normal lenses and zooms.  And we had people using ultra wides concluding they had the problem because the side AF's were not as sharp as the center ... when both left and right were the same, which can be normal for many wide lenses wide open (not so sharp at the edges wide open).

On the D600, we have a consumer grade body that is not as sealed as a pro grade body. Compounded by many people using consumer grade, i.e. lightly sealed or unsealed, zoom lenses.  Like the 24-85 kits.  These lenses breath: suck in air ... and dust, moisture, etc.

So I suspect that at least some of the issue, perhaps a fair amount, comes from people shooting the sky at f22 simply because they have heard of the D600 dirty sensor issue ... people who have never realized that sensors do get dirty and need to be cleaned, and have been using dirty sensors for years.

I'd bet Nikon has addressed any real issues, will continue to clean dirty sensors for people, and will update the D600 according to whatever plans they already have in place.

In a sense, there may be a silver lining:  Nikon may relax their warranty on the D600, at least those manufactured in the first 6 months or year, and fix these these things regardless of refurb, gray market, etc.  I had a Canon 1D MkIII, bought as a refurb, that had the AF defect.  I sent that in several times for service, more than a year after warranty, and had not only no issues, but no charge.  I know someone who still has one, gray market, that has been serviced in the last year free of charge by Canon USA.

 ne beginner's gear list:ne beginner's gear list
Nikon D600 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 85mm f/1.4G Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.8G Nikon AF-S Nikkor 28mm f/1.8G Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-85mm F3.5-4.5G ED VR
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Eric Jacobs
Regular MemberPosts: 159
Like?
Re: Probably depends on where this model is in the line up ...
In reply to ne beginner, Jun 29, 2013

ne beginner wrote:

On the D600, we have a consumer grade body that is not as sealed as a pro grade body. Compounded by many people using consumer grade, i.e. lightly sealed or unsealed, zoom lenses. Like the 24-85 kits. These lenses breath: suck in air ... and dust, moisture, etc.

I've avoided posting about the D600 oil/dust issue since it seems to be a pointless exercise in trying to determine how widespread the problem is. But this statement, which attempts to explain the cause and which I've seen posted many times before, is just incorrect. I don't see how anyone can look at photos from different bodies where the majority of the debris is in the same corner of the frame and contend that it's dust that's brought into the camera from outside. It's clearly generated from within the camera. If it came from outside, it would be randomly distributed and that's not the case.

I've used a D700 for a long time. I've never had a problem with lubricant splatter, and any dust has been minimal, resolved with a rocket blower. I would have purchased a D600 as a second body, but I won't given that this issue still seems to be present in current production.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
ne beginner
Senior MemberPosts: 2,007Gear list
Like?
Re: Probably depends on where this model is in the line up ...
In reply to Eric Jacobs, Jun 29, 2013

Eric Jacobs wrote:

ne beginner wrote:

On the D600, we have a consumer grade body that is not as sealed as a pro grade body. Compounded by many people using consumer grade, i.e. lightly sealed or unsealed, zoom lenses. Like the 24-85 kits. These lenses breath: suck in air ... and dust, moisture, etc.

I've avoided posting about the D600 oil/dust issue since it seems to be a pointless exercise in trying to determine how widespread the problem is. But this statement, which attempts to explain the cause and which I've seen posted many times before, is just incorrect. I don't see how anyone can look at photos from different bodies where the majority of the debris is in the same corner of the frame and contend that it's dust that's brought into the camera from outside. It's clearly generated from within the camera. If it came from outside, it would be randomly distributed and that's not the case.

I've used a D700 for a long time. I've never had a problem with lubricant splatter, and any dust has been minimal, resolved with a rocket blower. I would have purchased a D600 as a second body, but I won't given that this issue still seems to be present in current production.

Eric, you must be a journalist, the way you so skillfully lifted one statement, placed it out of context, then tried to use that to make your point.

I have not stated the problems with the D600 is solely a result of breathing. But breathing is certainly a possible explanation for some the dust reports.  Many if not most reports are not supported by images, but rather complaints about excessive dust in general.

Some sort of air flow is needed to result in dust moving about and getting into the sensor box, right?

I have clearly stated that there are defective units.

All you can conclude by images taken from different camera bodies showing debris in the same area on the sensor is that the whatever defect, QC problem, or sealing deficiency exists, or existed, it is, or was, located in some proximity to that area of the sensor. We know Nikon has been replacing shutters, so perhaps there was a defective shutter, seal, or installation issue on many units.

I don't know how you can conclude that all dust inside the camera is generated from inside the camera. Clearly the camera itself does not generate dust? Unless of course QC is so bad that these things come with a lifetime supply of inside. Dust in introduced into all camera bodies from outside, to some, even very small, degree.  The mirror on my D600, and D800, have some occasional dust.

Like many things in life there is often no one single answer or cause when things go wrong. Clearly with the D600 we have evidence of more than one issue: some just complain of excessive dust requiring frequent cleaning; others reported, early on, an oil like substance; some reported debris on new out of the box units that would not easily come off the senor, and once removed their cameras are fine.  Some go in and come back fixed, while with others the problem is back after a few thousand clicks.

Many report no problems at all; others have had the bad luck to get successive units that have dust or oil issues.

I used a D700 for over 3 years and never cleaned the sensor. The mirror, but never the sensor.  Never cleaned my D800. I had a Canon 5D that needed frequent cleaning. I use sealed lenses, zooms and primes. I don't expect my D600 to built like my D700, D800, or like my 1D MkIII was. I expect it will be more like my daughter's D5100.

My D600 is clean. If I had oil or debris that could not be cleaned off, I'd send it in.

 ne beginner's gear list:ne beginner's gear list
Nikon D600 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 85mm f/1.4G Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.8G Nikon AF-S Nikkor 28mm f/1.8G Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-85mm F3.5-4.5G ED VR
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Steve Bingham
Forum ProPosts: 20,298Gear list
Like?
Re: It's been fixed for some time.
In reply to Art Zaczek, Jun 29, 2013

Art Zaczek wrote:

Got any proof for this? You seem like you ‘know it all’ 100%. I can only tell you I returned 2 copies in April.

Yes I do - if purchased from Nikon USA after the 1st of the year and has an appropriate serial number.

Do you have any proof that your two copies were defective? A full EXIF file from a recent image would be good for a starter. And how do we know that you are for real? Or really know what you are looking at? Or really know where your camera came from? If USA, is it from Nikon USA - or a gray market version. I would doubt this if you do indeed live in Canada.

Now about your posting history. You have only 2 posts (on this subject only) here and not enough information about yourself to come up with any credibility. Canada often gets the 1st North American shipments for some reason - and it is a mixed bag. Your source and serial number might tell the story . . . if in fact we had the slightest idea who you were and if you even have a D600.

-- hide signature --

Steve Bingham
www.dustylens.com
www.ghost-town-photography.com

 Steve Bingham's gear list:Steve Bingham's gear list
Nikon D300 Nikon D7100 Nikon D610 Nikon D5300 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-105mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR +21 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Eric Jacobs
Regular MemberPosts: 159
Like?
Re: Probably depends on where this model is in the line up ...
In reply to ne beginner, Jun 29, 2013

ne beginner wrote:

Eric Jacobs wrote:

ne beginner wrote:

On the D600, we have a consumer grade body that is not as sealed as a pro grade body. Compounded by many people using consumer grade, i.e. lightly sealed or unsealed, zoom lenses. Like the 24-85 kits. These lenses breath: suck in air ... and dust, moisture, etc.

I've avoided posting about the D600 oil/dust issue since it seems to be a pointless exercise in trying to determine how widespread the problem is. But this statement, which attempts to explain the cause and which I've seen posted many times before, is just incorrect. I don't see how anyone can look at photos from different bodies where the majority of the debris is in the same corner of the frame and contend that it's dust that's brought into the camera from outside. It's clearly generated from within the camera. If it came from outside, it would be randomly distributed and that's not the case.

I've used a D700 for a long time. I've never had a problem with lubricant splatter, and any dust has been minimal, resolved with a rocket blower. I would have purchased a D600 as a second body, but I won't given that this issue still seems to be present in current production.

Eric, you must be a journalist, the way you so skillfully lifted one statement, placed it out of context, then tried to use that to make your point.

I have not stated the problems with the D600 is solely a result of breathing. But breathing is certainly a possible explanation for some the dust reports. Many if not most reports are not supported by images, but rather complaints about excessive dust in general.

Some sort of air flow is needed to result in dust moving about and getting into the sensor box, right?

I have clearly stated that there are defective units.

All you can conclude by images taken from different camera bodies showing debris in the same area on the sensor is that the whatever defect, QC problem, or sealing deficiency exists, or existed, it is, or was, located in some proximity to that area of the sensor. We know Nikon has been replacing shutters, so perhaps there was a defective shutter, seal, or installation issue on many units.

I don't know how you can conclude that all dust inside the camera is generated from inside the camera. Clearly the camera itself does not generate dust? Unless of course QC is so bad that these things come with a lifetime supply of inside. Dust in introduced into all camera bodies from outside, to some, even very small, degree. The mirror on my D600, and D800, have some occasional dust.

Like many things in life there is often no one single answer or cause when things go wrong. Clearly with the D600 we have evidence of more than one issue: some just complain of excessive dust requiring frequent cleaning; others reported, early on, an oil like substance; some reported debris on new out of the box units that would not easily come off the senor, and once removed their cameras are fine. Some go in and come back fixed, while with others the problem is back after a few thousand clicks.

Many report no problems at all; others have had the bad luck to get successive units that have dust or oil issues.

I used a D700 for over 3 years and never cleaned the sensor. The mirror, but never the sensor. Never cleaned my D800. I had a Canon 5D that needed frequent cleaning. I use sealed lenses, zooms and primes. I don't expect my D600 to built like my D700, D800, or like my 1D MkIII was. I expect it will be more like my daughter's D5100.

My D600 is clean. If I had oil or debris that could not be cleaned off, I'd send it in.

I've left your entire response intact so you won't feel like I'm taking anything out of context! I never meant to imply that "all" dust is generated from inside the D600. Obviously, any camera will get some dust inside it from normal use. (Just hold a flashlight in a dark room and see how much stuff is floating in the air.) But the pattern of debris where there's a larger concentration in one corner of the sensor strongly suggests that, yes, the camera itself is generating dust (and sometimes lubricant splatter) from within. Even Nikon stated in its service advisory on this issue on February 22 that "These granular dust spots are reflections of internal dust generated with camera operation, or external dust particles that have found their way into the camera, either, or both of which, have adhered to the camera’s low-pass filter." https://nikoneurope-en.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/55647

Each prospective purchaser needs to evaluate whether this is a problem that is more prevalent in the D600. I've concluded that it is. I don't know exactly why this appears to be more problematic in the D600. I assume that the capable engineers at Nikon know the answer. So, for those folks who have a D600 that "is clean," as yours seems to be, that's great. In other respects, it seems to be a very good camera. But I've decided that there are enough problem reports on the dust/lubricant issue from reliable people in the field that I'm going to skip this generation of the D600. Just my personal decision.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
ne beginner
Senior MemberPosts: 2,007Gear list
Like?
Re: Probably depends on where this model is in the line up ...
In reply to Eric Jacobs, Jun 29, 2013

Eric,

In regard to this this comment you made:

"I never meant to imply that "all" dust is generated from inside the D600."

Here's what you did say:

"I don't see how anyone can look at photos from different bodies where the majority of the debris is in the same corner of the frame and contend that it's dust that's brought into the camera from outside. It's clearly generated from within the camera."

I deliberately misinterpreted your point, and then went off on a tangent.  Perhaps now you understand my point about misquoting and taking things out of context.

Regarding the rest of your last reply, you seem be perhaps trying to justify your own decision not to purchase a D600, as if someone is trying to convince you otherwise.

The discussion is about Nikon breaking sequence to replace the D600 earlier than planned in its life cycle.

 ne beginner's gear list:ne beginner's gear list
Nikon D600 Nikon AF-S Nikkor 85mm f/1.4G Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.8G Nikon AF-S Nikkor 28mm f/1.8G Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-85mm F3.5-4.5G ED VR
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Art Zaczek
New MemberPosts: 7
Like?
Re: It's been fixed for some time.
In reply to Steve Bingham, Jun 30, 2013

NO you don’t – I have read your posts too. I’m not going to ask what the magic serial number is, Nikon will not give this out so you don’t know this either.

Proof - Exif photos (1)0075 /serial #5015, (2)0285 / serial #5016. Both new, fresh stock from authorized Nikon Canada dealer.

I’m not for real? Don’t know what I’m looking at? Maybe you don’t. Never even had a D600? I had two – you need receipts, I have them too. Everyone that says the issue is still present are also not for real? Just check the Nikon, Nikonians, Nikonroumors, people buying the camera NOW have the same problem. Nikon is not able to fix this issue, just trying to patch a unit that comes in.

As for my credibility of posting history-what does that have anything to do with the issue, don’t tell me a website or hundreds of posts.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Steve Bingham
Forum ProPosts: 20,298Gear list
Like?
Re: It's been fixed for some time.
In reply to Art Zaczek, Jun 30, 2013

These are neither dust specks nor oil. They are simply long dashes produced in software such as PS CS6. What utter nonsence. I strongly suggest you spend a little more time reading in the forum and less time posting. I have been posting for 11 years and have a MS in Photography (Brooks Institute of Photography - 1982), and made a damn good living as a pro and photo instructor - now retired - mostly. You probably don't know what that is, but perhaps google can help you.

The serial numbers tell MUCH more than cronological time. And why would Nikon tell YOU anything!!!!!!!!!!!!!! You have made it to my very slim ignore list - #2. Have a nice day.

Art Zaczek wrote:

NO you don’t – I have read your posts too. I’m not going to ask what the magic serial number is, Nikon will not give this out so you don’t know this either.

Proof - Exif photos (1)0075 /serial #5015, (2)0285 / serial #5016. Both new, fresh stock from authorized Nikon Canada dealer.

I’m not for real? Don’t know what I’m looking at? Maybe you don’t. Never even had a D600? I had two – you need receipts, I have them too. Everyone that says the issue is still present are also not for real? Just check the Nikon, Nikonians, Nikonroumors, people buying the camera NOW have the same problem. Nikon is not able to fix this issue, just trying to patch a unit that comes in.

As for my credibility of posting history-what does that have anything to do with the issue, don’t tell me a website or hundreds of posts.

-- hide signature --

Steve Bingham
www.dustylens.com
www.ghost-town-photography.com

 Steve Bingham's gear list:Steve Bingham's gear list
Nikon D300 Nikon D7100 Nikon D610 Nikon D5300 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-105mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR +21 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
inasir1971
Senior MemberPosts: 3,176Gear list
Like?
Re: It's been fixed for some time.
In reply to Art Zaczek, Jun 30, 2013

Art Zaczek wrote:

NO you don’t – I have read your posts too. I’m not going to ask what the magic serial number is, Nikon will not give this out so you don’t know this either.

Proof - Exif photos (1)0075 /serial #5015, (2)0285 / serial #5016. Both new, fresh stock from authorized Nikon Canada dealer.

I’m not for real? Don’t know what I’m looking at? Maybe you don’t. Never even had a D600? I had two – you need receipts, I have them too. Everyone that says the issue is still present are also not for real? Just check the Nikon, Nikonians, Nikonroumors, people buying the camera NOW have the same problem. Nikon is not able to fix this issue, just trying to patch a unit that comes in.

As for my credibility of posting history-what does that have anything to do with the issue, don’t tell me a website or hundreds of posts.

Good grief.

What sort of crap are you posting? Do you honestly think anyone is going to be moronic enough to think that this is dirt/oil or anything other than something that you have added in post???

Get a life.

Here is what the posters fraudulent image looks like at (100% crop from second image):

Suggest everyone else follow Steve's example and assign this person to the Ignore list.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Steve Bingham
Forum ProPosts: 20,298Gear list
Like?
It has been fixed, however . . .
In reply to Eric Jacobs, Jun 30, 2013

Eric,

You are correct. Some of the early releases did have some serious problems with dust and debris. In fact, quite a few did! The dust/oil was coming in from a small shroud covering the lower part of the shutter enclosure. It was NOT to spec and allowed dust/oil to be sucked in. The easiest fix was to replace the entire shutter enclosure and clean the sensor. Nikon did this to all the units that were presented by authorized Nikon distributors - like Nikon USA. Nikon screwed up - and made it good. The problem, typically a Japanese culture thing, was a failure to own up to this publicly

Remember when Kodak had the massive problems with their 14 MP Kodal SLR/n? It literally put them out of the DSLR business! They went from best to gone! I am sure this was on Nikon's mind.

Eric Jacobs wrote:

ne beginner wrote:

Eric Jacobs wrote:

ne beginner wrote:

On the D600, we have a consumer grade body that is not as sealed as a pro grade body. Compounded by many people using consumer grade, i.e. lightly sealed or unsealed, zoom lenses. Like the 24-85 kits. These lenses breath: suck in air ... and dust, moisture, etc.

I've avoided posting about the D600 oil/dust issue since it seems to be a pointless exercise in trying to determine how widespread the problem is. But this statement, which attempts to explain the cause and which I've seen posted many times before, is just incorrect. I don't see how anyone can look at photos from different bodies where the majority of the debris is in the same corner of the frame and contend that it's dust that's brought into the camera from outside. It's clearly generated from within the camera. If it came from outside, it would be randomly distributed and that's not the case.

I've used a D700 for a long time. I've never had a problem with lubricant splatter, and any dust has been minimal, resolved with a rocket blower. I would have purchased a D600 as a second body, but I won't given that this issue still seems to be present in current production.

Eric, you must be a journalist, the way you so skillfully lifted one statement, placed it out of context, then tried to use that to make your point.

I have not stated the problems with the D600 is solely a result of breathing. But breathing is certainly a possible explanation for some the dust reports. Many if not most reports are not supported by images, but rather complaints about excessive dust in general.

Some sort of air flow is needed to result in dust moving about and getting into the sensor box, right?

I have clearly stated that there are defective units.

All you can conclude by images taken from different camera bodies showing debris in the same area on the sensor is that the whatever defect, QC problem, or sealing deficiency exists, or existed, it is, or was, located in some proximity to that area of the sensor. We know Nikon has been replacing shutters, so perhaps there was a defective shutter, seal, or installation issue on many units.

I don't know how you can conclude that all dust inside the camera is generated from inside the camera. Clearly the camera itself does not generate dust? Unless of course QC is so bad that these things come with a lifetime supply of inside. Dust in introduced into all camera bodies from outside, to some, even very small, degree. The mirror on my D600, and D800, have some occasional dust.

Like many things in life there is often no one single answer or cause when things go wrong. Clearly with the D600 we have evidence of more than one issue: some just complain of excessive dust requiring frequent cleaning; others reported, early on, an oil like substance; some reported debris on new out of the box units that would not easily come off the senor, and once removed their cameras are fine. Some go in and come back fixed, while with others the problem is back after a few thousand clicks.

Many report no problems at all; others have had the bad luck to get successive units that have dust or oil issues.

I used a D700 for over 3 years and never cleaned the sensor. The mirror, but never the sensor. Never cleaned my D800. I had a Canon 5D that needed frequent cleaning. I use sealed lenses, zooms and primes. I don't expect my D600 to built like my D700, D800, or like my 1D MkIII was. I expect it will be more like my daughter's D5100.

My D600 is clean. If I had oil or debris that could not be cleaned off, I'd send it in.

I've left your entire response intact so you won't feel like I'm taking anything out of context! I never meant to imply that "all" dust is generated from inside the D600. Obviously, any camera will get some dust inside it from normal use. (Just hold a flashlight in a dark room and see how much stuff is floating in the air.) But the pattern of debris where there's a larger concentration in one corner of the sensor strongly suggests that, yes, the camera itself is generating dust (and sometimes lubricant splatter) from within. Even Nikon stated in its service advisory on this issue on February 22 that "These granular dust spots are reflections of internal dust generated with camera operation, or external dust particles that have found their way into the camera, either, or both of which, have adhered to the camera’s low-pass filter." https://nikoneurope-en.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/55647

Each prospective purchaser needs to evaluate whether this is a problem that is more prevalent in the D600. I've concluded that it is. I don't know exactly why this appears to be more problematic in the D600. I assume that the capable engineers at Nikon know the answer. So, for those folks who have a D600 that "is clean," as yours seems to be, that's great. In other respects, it seems to be a very good camera. But I've decided that there are enough problem reports on the dust/lubricant issue from reliable people in the field that I'm going to skip this generation of the D600. Just my personal decision.

-- hide signature --

Steve Bingham
www.dustylens.com
www.ghost-town-photography.com

 Steve Bingham's gear list:Steve Bingham's gear list
Nikon D300 Nikon D7100 Nikon D610 Nikon D5300 Nikon AF-S DX Nikkor 18-105mm f/3.5-5.6G ED VR +21 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
MrPicky
Regular MemberPosts: 113
Like?
Re: Will the D600 be updated soon?
In reply to eNo, Jun 30, 2013

Sorry because I dont post a lot but just turn on sensor clean. I did since the 1st day I got mine refurbished. Most of us own a blower. If you get lots of spots on regular photos send it in. If your looking for spots shooting white wall you should quit photography. Ive had water and sand kicked up on my lens but that doesnt stop me from capturing unforgettable memories. If you own a $2000 camera im sure you have at least a $100 software to fix imperfections. Im no pro but I can figure out how to work around it. Yes ive seen examples of bad spot and I know there are really bad copies but please dont make it seem like the d600 is awful. Remember there are other cameras out there. And please dont say im already invested in lens because I basicly gave away my oly gear to get into full frame. Your buget shouldn't be an excuse because there are cheaper alternatives. Sorry for the rant. NOw go capture that moment!

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Alan Brown
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,677Gear list
Like?
credibility lost?
In reply to Art Zaczek, Jun 30, 2013

I took a good look and found a few spots (underlined) but most seem to be made up to my eyes.

it would have been best to not post this at all than to discover what seems to be made up. Even altering my monitor angle (to improve contrast) make no effect on most of those underlined positions.

-- hide signature --

There is a very fine line between 'hobby' and 'mental illness.' :'!':

 Alan Brown's gear list:Alan Brown's gear list
Nikon 1 J2 Nikon D600 Sigma 70-300mm F4-5.6 APO DG Macro Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm f/1.8G Nikon 1 Nikkor VR 10-30mm f/3.5-5.6 +1 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
CFynn
Senior MemberPosts: 5,211Gear list
Like?
Re: It's been fixed for some time.
In reply to Steve Bingham, Jun 30, 2013

Steve Bingham wrote:

These are neither dust specks nor oil. They are simply long dashes produced in software such as PS CS6. What utter nonsence.

Certainly not dust or oil.

I've never seen anything like it - is it common for software to produce marks like that? Or are you suggesting ithey were made deliberatly?

 CFynn's gear list:CFynn's gear list
Fujifilm X10 Nikon D800E Nikon AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.4D Nikon AF Nikkor 105mm f/2D DC Nikon AF Nikkor 180mm f/2.8D ED-IF +14 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Timefreezer BE
Forum MemberPosts: 60
Like?
Re: It's been fixed for some time.
In reply to Steve Bingham, Jun 30, 2013

Steve Bingham wrote:

These are neither dust specks nor oil. They are simply long dashes produced in software such as PS CS6. What utter nonsence. I strongly suggest you spend a little more time reading in the forum and less time posting. I have been posting for 11 years and have a MS in Photography (Brooks Institute of Photography - 1982), and made a damn good living as a pro and photo instructor - now retired - mostly. You probably don't know what that is, but perhaps google can help you.

The serial numbers tell MUCH more than cronological time. And why would Nikon tell YOU anything!!!!!!!!!!!!!! You have made it to my very slim ignore list - #2. Have a nice day.

Look at the pictures at 100%. He underlinedthe spots. Who is the fool?

There are enough cases where people got new replacements or new shutters and the problems was not solved.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Art Zaczek
New MemberPosts: 7
Like?
Re: It's been fixed for some time.
In reply to Timefreezer BE, Jun 30, 2013

Thank you very much for taking a little bit of time to see the issue.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Art Zaczek
New MemberPosts: 7
Like?
Re: It's been fixed for some time.
In reply to Steve Bingham, Jun 30, 2013

If you would have taken a little time and enlarged my images you would see I have underlined the oil spots. Hundreds of posts without any proof like you do NOT give you any more credibility, I can tell you crap all day too and that’s your nonsense. I don’t care what you do or did – this does not give you any more authority on the subject like you know it all. Again, everyone here or on other sites can’t be for real according to you, never owned a D600 or don’t know what they are looking at. Nikon would not tell you any more either. What’s with the (!!!!!!!!!!!!!)? You don’t know me so don’t tell me what I don’t know or what to do! You have a nice day too!

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads