Skulls: The buffer is not bad at all. I'm looking at your niece pictures and they perfectly fit into 1.2 DX crop mode, combine that with quality at 12bit, and the buffer would give you 70 shots max and around 60 average, without ANY loss of quality! :)
I know, I wasn't criticizing you, just adding to your comment. :)
Yes, exactly, except you don't need 60 shots in a row, 20 to 30 would suffice. More than enough.Shoot at full resolution in 12 bit RAW and you increase your buffer space without sacrificing much image quality.
Dyun27: As amazing as this camera sounds, the 28 megapixel crop sensor would worry me. It's already challenging not to introduce motion blur to the 16 megapixel D7000 sensor with longer lenses, it's definitely challenging with the 36 megapixel full frame sensor of the D800 and the D7100 24 megapixel sensor.
At 28 megapixels with a crop sensor it means having to use higher ISO settings, faster shutter speeds and using VR whenever possible. At that point I'd have to start taking a monopod or tripod wherever I go. Only the shorter lenses would be easy to use.
Definitely not imagining things. :)
@Kawika - I generally shoot at 420mm, 1/2000s, ISO 400, f/6.3. I shoot a lot of birds in flight where I sometimes have to follow the bird as it travels past me. My lens doesn't have VR, but even if it did, it would actually hurt more than help in those situations.
Well, when I did get the shot nice and sharp, it looked great even at pixel level. Why get a 36 megapixel sensor and then downsize to 24 megapixels to make it look better? Know what I mean? At that point why not just get the 24 megapixel sensor instead and spare yourself all the downsizing? Sometimes I need to crop down to 100% to get closer to a subject that didn't quite fill the frame because I didn't have a longer lens. In those situations the motion blur can be a problem. With a D600/D610 I get many sharp shots even at pixel level that I can crop. If I'm downsizing the D800/D800E/D810 file to 24 megapixels because at 100% the image is too blurry, might as well just shoot with the D600/D610.
I'm speaking from experience. After having used the D7000 for a couple of years I upgraded to the D600. The D600 was much easier to hand-hold at slow shutter speeds even though it had more megapixels, because the pixel density wasn't as high. When I later rented a D800 and tried shooting with it at the same ISO and shutter speed as with the D600, I was getting a lot of motion blur. Hand-holding a telephoto, I had to be VERY steady to not capture movement at pixel level due to the pixel density of the D800 sensor. This 28 megapixel sensor seems like it will be even more dense, hence having to use higher shutter speeds to offset the possibility of capturing movement. Some will be OK with that I'm sure, might even be OK for me, but I'm definitely feeling concerned about cramming that many megapixels into a crop sensor. Maybe Samsung has a way to counter that.
As amazing as this camera sounds, the 28 megapixel crop sensor would worry me. It's already challenging not to introduce motion blur to the 16 megapixel D7000 sensor with longer lenses, it's definitely challenging with the 36 megapixel full frame sensor of the D800 and the D7100 24 megapixel sensor.
nerd2: Samsung just announced its true monster flagship NX1 today - it has 28MP BSI APS-C sensor (should easily equal 24MP FF without BSI), 205 point PDAF + 15.6fps continuous shooting with focus tracking, 4K/UHD video support and direct hdmi out. Oh it has tilting screen and wifi too. And matching 16-50 2.0-2.8 IS lens too.
I call this true innovation. What are you doing nikon?
Yes, but how GOOD is that sensor? Is it better than what Nikon is offering in any of their bodies? How fast and accurate is that AF in real life situations? Specs are great on paper but real use is what I would be interested in. I imagine that motion blur with a 28 megapixel crop sensor would be a problem, especially on the telephoto end. I'd need to carry a tripod everywhere or shoot at high ISO just to keep the shutter speed up to prevent motion blur from being captured.
Dyun27: I am amazed at the amount of criticism on the net regarding the D750. This is the cheapest, most well-featured full frame body currently on the market. For the money it just doesn't get better than this. It's got;
- A kick-ass sensor that will give you a ton of dynamic range and resolution, plus incredible high ISO performance.
- Kick-ass AF system that will track and capture your subject better than any other Nikon body, including the pro models even in the dark.
- Built in Wi-Fi, something many of you have been whining about for a couple of years now.
- It's lighter, but also weather sealed to the same extent as the D810 (from what I've heard)
- It has great video features and you can change the aperture in live view now.
- It has 6.5 FPS without a grip at full resolution while the D700 has 5 FPS even with the grip, unless you use AA batteries.
I can't even begin to imagine how someone might have trouble making incredible photos or videos with this camera.
I don't need to own stock in Nikon to see what's right in front of me.
@ nerd2 - This is a redesigned sensor with improved high ISO range and bigger pixels, which means more light-gathering ability so it isn't the same as the one in the D600/D610 or a7.
Right now the D810 sits on top of the DxO Mark sensor rating chart (if you trust their ratings). The A7R is the only non-Nikon sensor sandwiched between the D810 and the D800/D610/D600. The dynamic range and high ISO performance is rated higher in all these Nikon models vs. A7R. The D750 with its' improved pixel pitch may end up doing even better in the dynamic range and high ISO department.
While all features beneficial to wildlife and low light shooting are important to me, I'm willing to sacrifice a couple of FPS for better image quality. As for 4K video, for now people may have to look elsewhere, but I'm sure it's coming, especially with more competition rising up from the likes of Samsung.
MikeF4Black: However stuoid it may seem (and I haven't even held the camera) the lack of a circular eyepiece surround is the dealkiller for me.
You can buy a circular eyepiece for the D750.They are available and fairly cheap.
I am amazed at the amount of criticism on the net regarding the D750. This is the cheapest, most well-featured full frame body currently on the market. For the money it just doesn't get better than this. It's got;
whyamihere: Dear Nikon,
Maybe next year's model can feature such novel updates as, "Has an ISO button."
Just a thought.
If you want an ISO button, buy the D7100.Problem solved. This is entry level with some amazing features. For more advanced options there are more advanced bodies.
Andrew770: Here is the good news about the D600 for the few with issues. Once the shutter mechanism is replaced, the D600 is perfect!
That is an outright lie. I've had mine replaced twice. It didn't fix the issue, it made it worse. Cleanings helped reduce the problem, but once the shutter was replaced, issue started all over again like when it was new. If anything helps, it's regular cleanings.... but it will take a few cleanings to be rid of the problem for good.
technotic: The D610 needs to have the cleanest sensor in history since reviewers will be examining it with electron microscopes :-)
I see what could be maybe 1, and that could be due to lens changes. Doesn't necessarily mean it has a problem.
Bob from Plymouth: Hmmmm ? Can't say I have had many more spots on my D600 than any other DSLR and I am very pleased with the results it produces.
However, there has been a problem for some and the question that springs to my mind is: Can the D610 shutter be retro-fitted to the D600? Maybe this is the shutter Nikon service centres have been fitting to D600's as their official fix. Does anyone know?
Without actually looking into the camera to compare the two shutter mechanisms I couldn't tell you 100%, but I've had my shutter replaced twice and twice the problem was not fixed. Not only was it not fixed, it made the issue worse, because prior cleanings had helped clear it up and the new shutter mechanism started throwing new debris onto the sensor, like when it was new. So,... if they're fitting the new D610 shutter mechanism into problem D600 bodies, expect the same problem in the D610. I have a feeling that they are NOT replacing the D600 shutter with a D610 shutter. Let's hope and pray that this body will be as solid as it's supposed to be with none of the debris problems included.
MSTR Photography: It appears to me that all of these images are very well done. However, none of them show the benefit of not having a low pass filter. When images are shot of lines or patterns which tend to produce moire, then we will know the true purpose of this camera. I cannot imagine that a camera without a low pass filter would be of use to a wedding or an architectural photographer who does not wish waste time removing the moire in photoshop to the detriment of image quality. However, in landscape or action shots of sports or wildlife this would appear to be a boon!
I think this camera will be most beneficial to people shooting wildlife and sports. More reach/resolution + better detail in feathers/fur, etc. So far I'm most worried about the buffer size. This is still no D400 at 6FPS and small buffer, but everything else seems pretty nice.
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???
Am I wrong in saying that both the EOS 6D and D600 have their own positive aspects about them? If the D600 scored higher than the 6D, so what?
The D600 offers 2 SD card slots, more focus points, better focus tracking, faster FPS, better resolution, nearly (if not) equal ISO performance, it has flash, great dynamic range/shadow recovery, uncompressed video, headphone jack, 100% viewfinder coverage, etc.
The EOS 6D offers Wi-Fi and GPS, it has a more sensitive center AF point, has very good high ISO performance, very good noise reduction when it comes to JPEGs and good quality video.
It's obvious (except to maybe a blind person) that the D600 just gives you more bang for your buck, hence the higher score. That doesn't mean the 6D sucks, it just means you have to pick the camera that will be more useful to YOU personally. For me the D600 was the better choice not only because of the options and performance, but because I already had Nikon gear.
LSE: Great review. The 6D could have been a lot more. But it's primitive AF, low resolution, and lack of dual card slots among other things show canon, as usual, is all about protection of their upper lines than actual innovation. In isolation, the camera is not bad, but the d600 easily bests it in many areas making the Nikon the better all around camera choice.
@ CFynn, I've seen 6D owners complain about some oil on their sensors as well. Oil on sensor is not uncommon for DSLRs, not even the high end ones. Canon is not immune to these things. My D600 had spots, so I cleaned my own sensor. Done. Now I can enjoy it as much as I want with no hassle.
JMichaelsPhoto: Why hasn't this camera been in-depth reviewed yet?
It has been extended, but clearly it still isn't finished. Last time I saw, two weeks ago somebody claimed this review was going to be posted very soon. I guess "very soon" in dpreview language means weeks.
DPReview007: 1. Is the 6D better in low light than the D600 Nikon?
2. How much better?
3. Is it better only in JPEG or also in RAW?
4. If it is better, why does DxO Mark have a much higher ISO rating on the D600 (all high end Nikons)
5. (bonus question to DPReview,and for the record, I love you guys) What's the ETA of the full review please?
The 6D and D600 are about the same when it comes to high ISO and when you're looking at RAW files. Some will say that the 6D is better by a hair, but honestly when you downsample the D600 file from 24 megapixels to 20 megapixels to match the 6D file, to me they look pretty identical. The only advantage (in my opinion) is that the 6D goes beyond ISO 25600,... however I personally would never shoot photos I plan to do something important with at higher ISO than 12800.
The 6D high ISO JPEG files look much better than the D600 files, because Canon has some pretty good noise reduction software built into the camera. Nikon in-camera noise reduction is good, but not great. Canon's noise reduction comes with a price however, because it reduces sharpness and detail.
Not sure about your DxO Mark question. I don't know how they conduct their tests exactly and why their numbers end up being what they are, especially the high ISO numbers. You'd have to ask them.