SiliconVoid: In recent years I have defended DPReview dozens of times across the internet regarding their integrity and analysis, specifically regarding their ability to assess a product on its own merits and across its designed capability range - instead of penalizing a product for what it lacks in a comparison. THEN I read this review.
If you add the D600 to the scoring module on page-25 you can see what is supposedly areas that would allow it to score differently (higher in this case) and it is interesting that the areas showing better performance are simply not substantiated in the pages of the 6D review. Not to mention areas of heated debate and comparison (the 6D's inferior 11-point AF system and Canon's tired old 63 metering zones) where even though DPR hops on the bandwagon to proclaim Canon's failings of the 6D their own testing shows that the 'lowly' 11-point AF and 'zone' metering system out perform the D600.
What the hell is that, does DPR write the reviews before or after testing???
SiliconVoid...you should get out more.
Noogy: DPR can continue to lavish praises over the D600 and I don't care. They completely ignored the quality control issues in the process, yet felt it was ok to give it a gold rating. Come on guys! But then again that's the reason I proceeded to buy the 6D way before this review came out, because DPR ceases to be the benchmark on camera reviews that it used to be.
Noggy...buyer's remorse can be a real b$tch sometimes.
Ted Williamson: The lack of a built in flash is a show stopper for me. As a consumer focused camera it's a very strange design decision not to include it.
armandino...you obviously never heard of a fill-flash, which many of us use. What an unintelligent generalization.
Mssimo: Does the D600 really have more "features" than the 6D? I thought the wifi deal was really cool.
thx1138...where is this "real world feedback" you're referring to?Do tell.
Ahh the grain...the hi-contrast and saturation...love it!
Nigel Ward 2: Camera World are already taking orders on the new 18-35mm lens for £669 !That's SIX HUNDRED AND SEVENTY POUNDS for an f/4.5 at 35mm lens!
The world has gone mad.
The problem is that with recent advancement in digi cams the f/4 is becoming now the "new" f/2.8. So expect many more lens products built around the ~ f/4 aperture and costing a pretty penny.
font9a: Wait, the 18-35 doesn't have <N>?
Nope.It's a consumer grade lens, very similar in construction and features to the 'pedestrian' 24-85mm kit lens that comes with D600.
SeeRoy: " classic looks should become even more pronounced as it ages"Yeah? I thought cameras had a life expectancy of about 18 months these days so it'll have to brass up quickly.
My thoughts exactly.
Or the camera retail package may contain a 1200 grit sand paper and Cape Cod polishing cloth packed as an optional accessories?
DaytonR: Oh wow , this camera is set to become a classic !
Your English is good, no need to use alternative. Also, what you refer to as "my Leica" is the largest M model you could pick, being M9. Compare it to an M-E model and you'll see there isn't so much of a difference in size as you'd like to convey. Price maybe, but size - not really.
The RX-1 is compact camera alright, but this "compactness" you keep banging about comes with its price, a Frainkensteined optics with a design that prohibits lens interchangeability. The lens are practically integral part of the body with the back element almost touching the sensor itself.
But you somehow just can't get over the usability vs wow factor, so more power to you.
Plenty, just look around you, Everlast66.However if you're so keen on a $3k fixed lens mirrorless camera just because it's the first full-frame non-Leica compact camera out there, by all means go for it. Horses for courses.
Oh wow, I wouldn't be so sure. Especially not with fixed 35mm lens as only option.
Abhijith Kannankavil: center pinch cap??? great.
But, the price. :( Hope they dont update the 24-105 anytime near.
Re pinch-style lens cap - I guess they learned a trick from an old dog ;) It's been about time.
The price is high for this type of lens indeed. Hopefully its performance can back that up. Let's wait and see the full blown review/test.
maxnimo: I've never seen a zoom lens (FF, APS or MFT) that's sharp edge to edge at any price. I've never even seen a wide angle prime lens (FF, APS or MFT) that's sharp edge to edge at any price. So, unless this lens is magic, it's overpriced by 500 %, since blurry, distorted edges will make it useless for any wide angle shooting I do. To sum it all up, all the wide angle zooms I've ever seen up to now are anywhere from poor to total garbage.
"I've never seen a zoom lens... that's sharp edge to edge at any price.... To sum it all up, all the wide angle zooms I've ever seen up to now are anywhere from poor to total garbage."
Well then you better catch up and start learning and seeing then...borrow a Nikkor 14-24 f2.8 for one, and start "seeing it".
Some good coverage on Photo Plus Expo, also comparison photos with the older f/2.8 sibling:
luxborealis: My initial reaction was "What a rip-off" $224 more for the tripod collar/mount - that make the total package over $1600. To compare it to the $2100 ƒ2.8 - the extra $400-500 is worth it.
If they were to just make the tripod collar included in the lens, economies of scale would drop the price well below $200. It tells you that in this case, Nikon is more about marketing and price points than photography. I know they are in competition with Canon, but really, this is petty.
HOWEVER - The lack of a collar is also a general comment on photography. Fewer photographers these days are willing to go the extra mile by using a tripod. By far, most who buy this lens will never use a tripod or monopod. Are VR and higher really that good that a tripod is no longer needed? For some work, yes. For most, photography is a weekend hobby that doesn't warrant the additional quality possible with a tripod - so why bother including a tripod collar when most won't really need it.
I kind of share your frustration, however unless this lens is used on the smaller polycarbonate-build Nikon DSLRs like 3000 and 5000 series, you may not actually require a tripod collar...it's not a heavy lens and should balance very well in a setup where the camera is attached to the tripod, not the lens.
Hansplast26: I think this lens is overpriced (like many nikon lenses), yet it will sure sell like hot cakes. For a fraction of the price you get the very decent Tamron AF 70-300mm f/4-5.6, for field work this lens will do just great.
The Tamron lens you're referring to is a consumer grade lens. The new Nikon 70-200 f/4 is a semi-pro grade. Apples and oranges.
Come on guys, the photo was taken at f/5 and appears to be focused at the exposed rock ridge in the middle of the frame. The exposed rock is also lot further away than the left (bush) and right (golf green) in this composition.IMO, we shouldn't be expecting much of a sharpness across the shot, really.
Mike99999: Meh... once again APS-C occupies the sweet spot between size and price:
Steady on Mike...you're getting ahead of yourself a little...
GPW: All of Manfrotto equipment is overpriced. I am in the process of replacing my Manfrotto tripod, monopod and heads with the much better and cheaper Induro brand. I own the Induro AT413 tripod and it kicks Manfrottos butt in terms of build,stability and price.
I agree that Induro is one of the best new manufacturers of camera support equipment, but Manfrotto has been around for a long time and used by many leading photographers for decades.
Manfrotto could be a little on a pricey side, that's true, but the same can be said for Gitzo, Arca swiss, Really Right Stuff products to name the few.
That said Induro (parent company of Benro) has some of the best tripods, monopods and heads money can buy these days. I own their carbon fibre CT214 tripod with BH2 head and couldn't be hapier - lighter, packs shorter and fits insde my rucksack perfectly, but when it comes to indoor shooting venues I tend to always pull my Manfrotto 055PROB out of the bag with 468MGRC2 head on it.
Fave Photog: Is the purpose of these images to showcase the 24-120/4 or to showcase the abilities of the D600? The answer is obviously the 24-120, or else Nikon's best lenses would have been used: The 14-24, 24G, 35G, 85G, 200G, 70-200VRII, etc.
Another basically useless 'review'/'preview' by DPR.
@Toccata47...sorry but there isn't a D600 kit available at the moment with 24-120 f/4. I checked with the Nikon distributor who confirmed only two options at the moment - body only and combo with 'affordable' 24-85VR. H ehinted a possibility of 18-300VR in the future, but not 24-120 f/4.