Please exert less effort on engineering 3rd party incompatibilities, and more effort on creating a high-end DX D300 replacement.
Spectro: I just talked to Nikon about my d600 (yes I have it registered online and they looked up the serial number SN). You can't be a canonite and call in with a fake SN.
What they said is even if the d600 warranty is expired, they will still cover the oil issue out of warranty for now, but not other issues. (mind is a refurbish so that warranty expired long time ago) but first they want to see a sample pic first. So I will send it in when the oil spot develops again. They did say it isn't a recall/ or on the service advisory list (nikon has one and it is mostly battery) because they haven't hit the return quota yet (I think they are being liberal of how high the return quota number is, but I will be one soon). They will pay for all shipping too.
As for the d610, not an issues to me.
Nikon has made a statement on the issue:https://support.nikonusa.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/18180https://nikoneurope-en.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/55647/kw/d600but as you say, apparently not listed as an official "Service Advisory".Although not listed by Nikon as such, DPReview has chosen to call the statement a "service advisory" here:http://www.dpreview.com/news/2013/02/22/Nikon-issues-service-advisory-for-D600?utm_campaign=internal-link&utm_source=news-list&utm_medium=text&ref=title_0
fPrime: OMG... Did Dpreview actually admit here that the D600 has a sensor oil/dust issue? And all it took was a incremental model number change by Nikon! Imagine if Nikon had released a D810 as well... Dpreview might have also had the guts to finally acknowledge the Left AF focusing defect instead of hiding their heads in the sand for a year.
sandy b said, "Patco, section 12 and 23."
Sorry, Sandy, there are no occurrences of "oil" in section 12 or 23."Dust" and "residue" are mentioned, but not "oil".
marike6: From the K-3 preview: "Build quality remains top-notch, with an all-metal body that is a sharp contrast to the plasticky bodies on the Canon 70D and Nikon D7100".
From the D7100 review: "The D7100 features a solidly-built magnesium alloy body that offers moisture and dust resistance."
We get that the K3 like the K5 is solid. But not sure why some reviewers feel compelled to spin tales about one body to promote another. Having a brief play with the D7100 at B&H, my impression was more inline with the second reviewer's assessment. "Plasticky" implies a low-end, T4i or D3200 type of body which is not at all what the D7100 is.
But I've always like the K5 (and the K30, one of the best deals in photography right now) and this new release looks great.
marike said:"From the D7100 review: "The D7100 features a solidly-built magnesium alloy body that offers moisture and dust resistance.""
That's not the same as what Nikon says:"The body is also durable as it employs magnesium alloy for the top and rear covers."http://imaging.nikon.com/lineup/dslr/d7100/The majority of the body is plastic. Nothing wrong with plastic, though - I have some extremely tough power tools at least partially constructed from plastic.
Patco: "Some other things we enjoyed about the D600 were its solid, weather-sealed magnesium alloy body"Really? According to Nikon, only the top & rear covers are magnesium, so the body is mostly plastic.
marike6 wrote:"Which means the majority of the body is magnesium alloy."
Your definition of "majority" may not be that of the majority ;-)
"Some other things we enjoyed about the D600 were its solid, weather-sealed magnesium alloy body"Really? According to Nikon, only the top & rear covers are magnesium, so the body is mostly plastic.
sandy b said, "DPR clearly points out the oil issue in several places in the review, including the conclusion"Revenant said, "DPR mentioned the oil issue in the D600 review"Can either of you point out where "oil" is mentioned in the D600 review? Not doubting you, but I can't seem to find it.
Optimal Prime: Er... Isn't there a more recent Q10 announced almost a year ago...? Why is DPR only receiving the Q7 at this late stage? Strange...
Er... noQ - June 2011Q10 - Sept. 2012Q7 - June 2013
JakeB: f3.5 to f5.6.
These lenses are designed for people taking pics on vacation in bright sunlight and very limiting in most other photographic situations.
If constant f2.8 is overkill in terms of weight and price, at least go for constant f4.
RB59020 wrote: "The Sigma is full frame so it only covers a 27-52mm FOV"No, the Sigma 18-35 f/1.8 is a "DC" lens, and as such, is "Designed specifically for APS-C sized sensors", such as DX.Whether a lens is FX or DX, the same crop factor applies on DX sensors.http://www.sigmaphoto.com/product/18-35mm-f18-dc-hsm-art
mas54: Good scopes are a great aid in not crippling animals.
Not shooting them for "sport" would be an even greater aid.
Chuck Lantz: What's next? Protests against Nikon by anti-porn groups, if their products are used for those "assignments"?
If they market a camera specifically intended for porn, as they do with certain scopes specifically intended to help kill animals, perhaps.
Keithns: anybody wonder why it just says VR and not VR2
Khuon is correct. I don't believe Nikon ever includes the VR version in the official lens name, or on the markings on the lens.As an example, the name of newer version of the 18-200mm ends in "...VR II", indicating the 2nd version of the lens, but both the 1st & current versions have VR2.
"The JackPod is only .2 grams" That's amazing! That's about 1/5 the weight of a dollar bill!Kickstarter.com says it's .2 ounces.
Marty4650: I never did get the point of superzoom lenses. If your object is to "never have to change lenses" then why not just buy a Panazonic FZ200 and call it a day?
The whole point behind buying a more expensive ILC is "changing lenses."
Even though zoom lenses have gotten better, good prime lenses really deliver the best image quality. And even among zoom lenses, a 3X zoom generally will perform a lot better than a 15X zoom will. This is simply because ANY zoom lens is a compromise, and the wider the range, the bigger the compromises involved.
Personally, I feel you are paying too large a premium for having the convenience of not changing lenses. A Nikon 2 lens kit would cover the same range at 1/4th the cost... and probably deliver better image quality.
But that's just my opinion. Others will certainly disagree.
> "If your object is to "never have to change lenses""That's not my object, but I do use my 18-200 VR for those times when convenience is higher up on my list than any specific advantages I would have with some of my other lenses.
> "The whole point behind buying a more expensive ILC is "changing lenses.""While being one of the points of these cameras, changing lenses is not the "WHOLE point". Because one *can* change lenses, doesn't mean one *must* change lenses.
Jim Evidon: DNG has all of the advantages of all other formats and none of the disadvantages, since it is an open format. For those who are committed to their camera proprietary formats nothing more can be said. Serious photographers use post processing in LR, CS, DXO, etc. and find it damned annoying that every time they buy a new camera, they have to wait until these excellent processing engines incorporate yet a new format among another 1000 or so other proprietary formats. Surely camera manufacturers, Leica and Pentax excepting, should realize by now that serious photographers do not use their clunky proprietary processors that they supply with their cameras. But I suppose it is like p-----g in the wind to say this. As the saying goes, you can't teach a pig to sing. it's a waste of time and it annoys the pig.
nixda wrote: "There is a reason Aperture doesn't support DNG"
Apple lists DNG on their Aperture system requirements page:http://www.apple.com/aperture/specs/
littleroot: Love how I just installed LR from Adobe Cloud this morning and upon launching the product I am told there is a 750MB update available. So much for the claimed benefit of Cloud Subscription slipstreaming the updates. Same thing happened with Photoshop CS6, the latest ACR, etc, 200MB, updates were needed
Your post is also interesting, but if you read littleroot's message again, you might find that he was also talking about LR: "I just installed LR from Adobe Cloud this morning and upon launching the product I am told there is a 750MB update available".
Jim: Yet still no Canon G1X support...bummer.
The Canon G1 X was listed as a newly supported camera in the previous 7.1 version of ACR:http://www.adobe.com/support/downloads/detail.jsp?ftpID=5391and listed here as supported by ACR and Lightroom:http://www.adobe.com/ca/products/photoshop/extend.html#supportedcameras
BabylonPhotos: They don't say anything about the Fujifilm X-Pro1, but I see the latest Fuji X-E1 in the list of supported cameras? Does anyone know something?
"They don't say anything about the Fujifilm X-Pro1""Isn't it weird that ACR supports the Fuji X-Pro1 but not Lightroom?"The X-Pro1 is listed as supported by ACR & Lightroom:http://www.adobe.com/ca/products/photoshop/extend.html#supportedcameras
"Nikon has had a busy year, launching several new products including two full-frame DSLRs, the 36MP D800 and the enthusiast D600"Wasn't the D4 announced in early January this year?
plasnu: Any reason to choose D600 over D800, other than slight price difference?
"Any reason to choose D600 over D800, other than slight price difference?"If $900 is a "slight" difference to you, then no, I think there is no reason.