Previous news story    Next news story

Just Posted: Nikon D600 In-depth Review

By dpreview staff on Nov 13, 2012 at 18:36 GMT
Buy on GearShop

We've just published our 23-page, in-depth review of the Nikon D600. Aimed at enthusiasts, the Nikon D600 offers a 24MP full-frame CMOS sensor and a 39-point AF system adapted from the D7000. In many other respects, it owes a lot to its considerably more expensive cousin, the 36MP D800. When we previewed the D600 we were impressed by its image quality and how many features it offers for the money. So how does it fare when put through our rigorous studio and real-world testing? Click the links below to find out.

816
I own it
166
I want it
93
I had it
Discuss in the forums

Comments

Total comments: 500
123
Britzzzilla
By Britzzzilla (Nov 14, 2012)

Who the hell thinks DX is disappearing because this camera turned up? DP Review, wakey-wakey. Read Thom Hogan's survey results - http://bythom.com/stateofdx2012.htm

1 upvote
Josh152
By Josh152 (Nov 15, 2012)

IMO APS-C will eventually be relegated to mirrorless cameras. But it wont be any one camera that does it. It will be a slow and gradual process as full frame gets less and less expensive over time. The D600/6D are nothing more than the very beginning of this process. It will still be years before APS-C DSLRs are no more, but I believe that day is coming.

Comment edited 23 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Earthlight
By Earthlight (Nov 14, 2012)

And now we wait for the 6D to get the same points and the medal. :)

6 upvotes
ChristopherKnapp
By ChristopherKnapp (Nov 14, 2012)

I would be willing to bet money on it actually.

2 upvotes
topstuff
By topstuff (Nov 14, 2012)

I am getting a massive sense of deja vu here.

Early adopters of the Canon 5D2 had massive problems with dust and general rubbish inside the camera. I had to return two Canon 5D2s before I could get a moderately clean one. A short-lived and unsatisfactory relationship with a Canon 7D had similar problems.

In contrast, a Pentax K5 I had for a while ( which was subject to a much publicised problem with oil spots on the sensor ) was absolutely fine in my case.

Go figure.

Cameras are made in massive numbers and it seems all makers are guilty of the same problems from time to time.

5 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Nov 14, 2012)

My experiences with AF module of D7000 does not at all match some of the comments of owners below. It's AF is solid and accurate. To expect ANY camera to lock onto extremely low-contrast subjects with non-cross AF sensors in the outer regions is wishing for miracles.

Every camera manual ever printed, including the D4 and D800 manual, has the note that "AF may not lock if there is too little contrast between the subject and the background".

But I tried the D600 at Adorama and the AF had little trouble quickly acquiring focus even in dimly lit parts of the store. This is a camera I would buy without hesitation as for IQ, nothing in it's price range comes close.

3 upvotes
JDThomas
By JDThomas (Nov 14, 2012)

"But I tried the D600 at Adorama and the AF had little trouble quickly acquiring focus even in dimly lit parts of the store. This is a camera I would buy without hesitation as for IQ, nothing in it's price range comes close."

Pretty impressive that you used the camera for 5 minutes in a store and found that the AF was excellent. It usually takes me a few days of running it through different scenarios to determine how well the AF module works.

2 upvotes
rhlpetrus
By rhlpetrus (Nov 14, 2012)

Same with me, D7k works better than D80 I had. The D600 I tried (yes, on can have a feeling about AF at a store) was quite good actually, seemed better than the D7k. Can't compare to the top AF module, some tests show it's close for action, not quite same.

Comment edited 18 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (Nov 14, 2012)

DPR, there is an error on the spec page:
"MSRP Body: $2099/ £1955.99 ; With 24-85mm F3.5-5.6: $2699/£2443.99"

It is actually 24-85 f3.5-4.5 ED VR lens.

0 upvotes
Amadou Diallo
By Amadou Diallo (Nov 14, 2012)

Lens name has been amended. Good catch.

0 upvotes
cfh25
By cfh25 (Nov 14, 2012)

Also worth pointing out that this camera has had a steep drop in price since launch in UK - with kit lens at Amazon UK now £1,794.70 - down 27% in less than three months. There again, everybody has commented on Nikon UK's pricing policies

0 upvotes
cfh25
By cfh25 (Nov 15, 2012)

Amazon UK must have read the review - price has gone up to £1,965.00 today

0 upvotes
MERKAVA
By MERKAVA (Nov 14, 2012)

Yep wondering myself why a camera that has already gathered so many comments about dust, particle problems can gain a 'gold award'. Yes an impressive piece of kit, but that would be like an auto website reviewing the latest porsche (or whatever) and giving it a gold award even though it only runs on 5 of the 6 cyclinders.

I wonder if this issue was on another non Canon, Nikon body whether it would have attracted more criticism?? not saying it would have but does make you wonder.

1 upvote
fierlingd
By fierlingd (Nov 14, 2012)

I agree. The image quality section should suffer greatly if you think about it because in th real world people get black spots all over their images, which *should* effect the image quality tests. Although it's just dust, it impacted the cameras in this review as well.

It seems to be a persistant problem for mysel and others.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
spidercrown
By spidercrown (Nov 15, 2012)

I afraid your analogy doesn't work here. When an engine is running with 5/6 piston, then on the camera, probably 1/6 of pixels is dead. Or 1/6 of AF point is dead..??
There just dust and oil, why not you say that porsche has dust and oil mark in the interior?

Comment edited 38 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Josh152
By Josh152 (Nov 15, 2012)

The real issue here is just how many cameras are affected. If it is only one production run for example marking down the IQ in the review would be unfair. However if it is every or very close to every D600 built then marking it down for the dust issue makes more sense.

Given that DPR has no way to know how many Cameras are affected by the dust issue I think they handled it in as fair a way as possible. They pointed the issue out and even said they were contacting Nikon about it. That is really the best they can do.

To mark down the IQ of a camera with the second best FX sensor on the market simply because an unknown number of early run cameras have a manufacturing defect would not only be unfair to Nikon but cause all sorts of problems for DPR. Such as accusations of bias and hundreds of threads in the forums arguing about it.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Backstage
By Backstage (Nov 14, 2012)

Years ago I choose Nikon because the handgrip was perfect for my hands. Now I choose not to buy the D600 as for me the grip was simply unpleasant. I could not imagine myself using it. Sorry Nikon.

2 upvotes
WilliamJ
By WilliamJ (Nov 14, 2012)

What's the problem with the grip ? Its shape, texture, size ?

0 upvotes
FranciscoJG
By FranciscoJG (Nov 14, 2012)

The problem with the handgrip is the shape, texture, and size. Perfect match to you, all of them.

0 upvotes
NikonScavenger
By NikonScavenger (Nov 14, 2012)

I had a D7000. The AF was terrible, despite two trips to Nikon. The D600's AF may be tweaked, but I keep getting flashbacks to hundreds of soft/blurred/out of focus photos that led me to get rid of that camera at a huge loss. I think I printed out ten different focusing patterns to try to convince myself that it was my technique and not the camera, but all I had to do is get out my D300 and realize that wasn't the case--you can't make that camera lose focus once it locks on.

The dust issue is also a concern, since the D7000 had 5-6 oil/dust spots in the upper left corner of every photo after my first lens swap. For comparison, my D300 has the same amount of dust spots after 45k shutter actuations.

I'm not all that thrilled about shelling out 2 grand for a camera, then wondering if every AF point will work.

3 upvotes
rhlpetrus
By rhlpetrus (Nov 14, 2012)

Sorry to her, you clearly had a lemon. Out of the 10K images with the D7k, I likely missed less than 10 OOF and most my own fault. The AF is almost perfect.

4 upvotes
NikonScavenger
By NikonScavenger (Nov 14, 2012)

While I agree with your statement, I don't know why Nikon wouldn't provide me with a new camera after the second time it came back with the same problems.

They kept demanding I send them photos demonstrating the problem, then told me to send the camera in for "re-calibrations." After the second time I told them I wanted a new or refurbished D7k--something with a fresh serial number which they refused and I sold it not long after that.

I've had a D200, 300 and a 5DmkI with zero problems. I've been somewhat reluctant to invest in anything with a D7000 AF module since.

0 upvotes
JakeB
By JakeB (Nov 15, 2012)

You need to make an amendment. "The AF ON MY COPY OF THE D7000 was terrible."

I've been using the Nikon D7000 since March 2010 and have NEVER had a problem with focus. I find focus deadly accurate and, with the Nikon 24-70, instantaneous, even in very low light.

I'm sorry you had a bad copy, but that's what it was.

Comment edited 21 seconds after posting
3 upvotes
Philip Goh
By Philip Goh (Nov 16, 2012)

I find it intriguing that you've used the D7000 since March 2010 when it was only released at the end of 2010 and was only shipping in small volumes in November 2010.

0 upvotes
ozturert
By ozturert (Nov 14, 2012)

I think the score must be lower until Nikon finds a real solution for dust issue, then it can be increased. Dust after a couple of shots is a real showstopper for an otherwise excellent camera.

16 upvotes
Galeus
By Galeus (Nov 14, 2012)

This camera seems to gather dust quicker than Quentin Crisp's bedsit !
- come on Nikon that's just unacceptable for such a fine camera !

5 upvotes
JEROME NOLAS
By JEROME NOLAS (Nov 14, 2012)

Amazing, now put the same sensor into J1 body and make few adjustments ....you know what I mean?

0 upvotes
TakePictures
By TakePictures (Nov 14, 2012)

Good to see a review again! Can't wait for more...

1 upvote
zodiacfml
By zodiacfml (Nov 14, 2012)

I guess the sensor dirt/spots problem is due to Nikon's decision to rush the product, months ahead of the competition where design, testing, and manufacturing all have been accelerated outside their usual specs.

1 upvote
Richard Murdey
By Richard Murdey (Nov 14, 2012)

Source?

1 upvote
ozturert
By ozturert (Nov 14, 2012)

Richard, have you seen "I guess"?

1 upvote
zodiacfml
By zodiacfml (Nov 14, 2012)

Right, who could have known but I just don't like what's currently going on to what is supposed to be a great camera at launch.

0 upvotes
rhlpetrus
By rhlpetrus (Nov 14, 2012)

False hypothesis, the D600 was ready by mid-2011, as the samples show.

2 upvotes
saiko
By saiko (Nov 14, 2012)

Why Nikon is not talking about the dust issue at all?!
Should we buy D600 or wait?

Comment edited 34 seconds after posting
1 upvote
LBL2009
By LBL2009 (Nov 14, 2012)

I will wait.

0 upvotes
Illumina
By Illumina (Nov 14, 2012)

If u like it and need it then buy it..
you won't regret it..

1 upvote
WilliamJ
By WilliamJ (Nov 14, 2012)

http://youtu.be/HRYpwnSOAtk

0 upvotes
FranciscoJG
By FranciscoJG (Nov 14, 2012)

I will wait no longer. Exclusively for errors of Nikon brand, this model is a technical and commercial failure.
A bet that is going to blur and fade quietly from the market.
I'll wait for a new machine, but Nikon, do not delay so much ...

1 upvote
Bamboojled
By Bamboojled (Nov 14, 2012)

Hmmm, let me get this straight.

It is a commercial failure, yet it just received a Gold Award and 87% score.

Along with DPReview almost every review has sung praises about this camera.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IosQ4xCJBB0

It is a commercial failure yet it has remained in the top ten best sellers list at Amazon since it's introduction against cameras that are 1/2 to 2/3 less costly in that same top ten.

http://www.amazon.com/Best-Sellers-Electronics-Digital-SLR-Cameras/zgbs/electronics/3017941/ref=zg_bs_nav_e_3_281052

Your comments are not based on reality...

Comment edited 21 seconds after posting
2 upvotes
corbus
By corbus (Nov 14, 2012)

The dirtyness problem of the D600 sensor was observed of me immediatley after unboxing and placing a lens to the camera. I tried to cleaned it up (and belive me, I have cleaned lots of camera sensors sucessful before), but this time I did not got some of the dirtyness awy, mostly in the image upper left corner (lower right corner on the sensor).

From other internet articles I learned that the problem was common to lots of new D600 cameras and that oil (probably related to the mirror) was one of the reasons...

I have used lots of different Nikon cameras for over 40 years and the quality of the cameras and of course the result of the images has been the reason for that.

Another problem to my new D600 was instability in exposure. Overexposure (2/3 steps) was common. I also had instability in auto focusing, of course specially in low light.

I sent my D600 back to the seller (within two weeks) after only 1000 shots...

15 upvotes
jon404
By jon404 (Nov 14, 2012)

It seems like a very good camera, putting aside the sensor dust issue... they'll put some decent seals on it sooner or later.

But I'm old now. At 68, for serious photography, I just want something simple -- and my old FM3a is about as complicated as I want to go. And, for snapshots, our little Olympus XZ-1 does just fine.

2 upvotes
gsum
By gsum (Nov 14, 2012)

Many photographers enjoy and make use of complex features and they are well catered for. But it's a pity that Nikon don't produce a camera that just has the essentials for creative photography - a digital FM or FM3A.
Camera manufacture is the classic example of the Dilbert Principle at work - the triumph of marketing over engineering.
Incidentally, what possible technical reason is there for the poor quality of modern viewfinders when compared with the likes of the FM?

3 upvotes
harold1968
By harold1968 (Nov 14, 2012)

sorry, what does a XZ-1 have to do with a D600 review ??????

2 upvotes
Noogy
By Noogy (Nov 14, 2012)

Every review will be criticized. The best critique is the market, the hands of the customers who will eventually choose to buy or not to buy. Let's see how this drills a hole into the overall DSLR market. Will it attract APS-C users to go full frame? Will it attract owners of old full-frame bodies to "step down?" I don't agree it will impact the mirrorless market. I have a Sony NEX and I will keep it regardless of the kind of DSLR I have. In fact I think I might upgrade my mirrorless camera more frequently than my DSLR, or at least that's the plan. Most DSLRs lately are so good the need to upgrade for incremental improvements does not cut it for me.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
harold1968
By harold1968 (Nov 14, 2012)

The DSLR market will finally die when an affordable FF CSC is released
Its on drip feed at the moment

2 upvotes
VivaLasVegas
By VivaLasVegas (Nov 14, 2012)

D600 needs a portable blow drier and a wit swab handy every 100 shots.
By the 25th shot, you can't step down beyond f8 because the oil/dust will be prominent, unless you have a wit swab in handy. For a camera to score 87%, that is only usable in bright day light and a struggle in low light situation compared to D800 is crazy. While both has useless outer AF pts. in low light scenarios, D800 can acquire focus. But then again, D800 needs a solid tripod + ballhead with a wind velocity less than 3mph. You just can't win, pick your poison.

7 upvotes
lka968
By lka968 (Nov 14, 2012)

I think the D600 inhereted the inferior focus system of the D7000. I have the D7000 and only the central focus point can be trusted, the off center focus points are a hit and miss

1 upvote
Bamboojled
By Bamboojled (Nov 14, 2012)

LOL, Viva,
you LIKED your own post, that is so sad:(

Truly pathetic....

3 upvotes
russbarnes
By russbarnes (Nov 14, 2012)

What do you expect of a serial Canon troll who does nothing more than post crap like this? He hates the fact Nikon's sensors run rings round his dear Rebel, he's never even touched a full frame camera, all he knows how to do is write drivel.

6 upvotes
HiRez
By HiRez (Nov 14, 2012)

The only thing keeping me from buying this camera is a lousy button. That button near the dial on the back that I can assign to focus. Can't live without it, so I guess I'll hang on to the D700 for a while longer and keep wondering if I'll be able to afford a D800. What a shame.

0 upvotes
le_alain
By le_alain (Nov 14, 2012)

Hi, can't live without too, but....not really a problem:
You can assigne AF-ON to the AEL/AF button, and assign AEL to the top front button.
I did the same whan was using D7000 along my D700, and assigne AEL too on the D700 on the top front buton, to have exactly the same "reflex" with my configuration
;)

3 upvotes
HiRez
By HiRez (Nov 14, 2012)

Yeah, it's possible. Only thing I don't like is that button seems too far away to use constantly (which I do). I guess I could try assigning the AEL/AF button to AF-ON on my D700 and see how it is, looks like that button is in about the same place. Unfortunately I do also use the AE lock button, but maybe I could assign that to something else.

0 upvotes
Gasman66
By Gasman66 (Nov 14, 2012)

And another thing - why has the sensor dust issue not affected the score at all? Come on guys - this is a defect which makes the camera prone to putting black splotches on your photographs!! For all we know; it may not be an easy fix for Nikon at all.

At the very least, a proviso along the lines of "this is the score, pending resolution of the sensor dust issue" might have been appropriate.

23 upvotes
Giugrima
By Giugrima (Nov 14, 2012)

Well said I 100% agree. The dust issue is serious !The score should have been much lower .

1 upvote
oselimg
By oselimg (Nov 14, 2012)

Well...you'll have to wait erm.. forever for that sort of comment from Dpreview. The resolution and and low light performance is certainly very good and sensor's high ISO performance looks slightly better than 5D MKIII. Though I've never come to terms with Nikon's grey overcast in terms of colour performance. However this is a Nikon biased site. For example you'll see Nikon's name repeatedly appearing in especially the main competitor Canon equipment reviews. And any shortcomings in other brands will be repeated many times over in respective reviews. The usual tactics being the mention of a strength will be followed by "but" and a insertion of a shortcoming. It's a carefully managed brand endorsing going on here.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
2 upvotes
cuellar
By cuellar (Nov 14, 2012)

Absolutely. May be a marketing strategy as I'm now considering the D800 instead.

0 upvotes
jon404
By jon404 (Nov 14, 2012)

Thanks to Dpreview for getting this review into 'print' so soon after Photokina. So many cameras, so little time!

0 upvotes
Shamael
By Shamael (Nov 14, 2012)

If I compare the raw studio shot, D600, Sony A99, D800 and NEX-7, there is a lot to see and talk about. First, both Sony's are color acurate and match each other in every part of the studio setup. The D800 pushes green to an extreme, while D600 falsifies red to brownish deep rusty red. Nikon's color shift problems are known anyway. In sharpness all over the frame, detail seen, at ISO100, the NEX-7 can take the other 3 others and smoke them in a pipe right away, none of the 3 can compete with it. It is only beyond ISO200 that the NEX-7 loses in noise ratio, not in sharpness and detail.

3 upvotes
Shamael
By Shamael (Nov 14, 2012)

D800 suppresses parts in the dark totally so, in the box with the rolls, the other 3 show details you can't see with D800. A99 and D800 are similar in noise levels, I compared them up to 3200 ISO, D600 is a stop better, NEX-7 at least 2 to 3 stops worse. So, conclusion is that the APSC sensor draws finer and retains more detail than the FF sensors. Dynamic range in FF is better, no wonder, a 24 mpix FF is equal to a 12 mpix APSC in pitch. Now, comparing what I see on the picture all over, noise beyond 200ISO set apart, there is no real reason to come and tell me the FF is the yolk of the egg. So what is then so important in FF. Closer shallow DOF, I can get that with an APSC as well with the lens chosen for that effect. Better high ISO rendering, if you need that, all ok.

Comment edited 5 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Shamael
By Shamael (Nov 14, 2012)

But, at the size you print your pictures for a wedding, any club event, a newspaper page, or a publicity page, do you need FF? Any 16 mpix camera in APSC, like latest Fuji models, an OMD, can do that too, and, at a much lower price. All of them do more or less good video, but if video is your goal, buy a video camera. On my side I would be glad to see any company coming and putting on the market a simple photo DSLR, in APSC or FF, without all the kikikaka we find in them now. Sony has proven with A900 and A850 that it is possible, and with today's technology, a FF for 1500$ should not be a problem at all. Seems to me that simple and useful things have no more place in this world. D600 is another good camera, one more I would say, but nothing to be excited about after all.

Comment edited 59 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
gsum
By gsum (Nov 14, 2012)

Shamael:
"The D800 pushes green to an extreme"
No it doesn't. How do you manage to dream up such rubbish or is it just hearsay?

6 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Nov 14, 2012)

If offering D4 high ISO ability and D800 DR at this price is "nothing to be excited about" why give the world three pages of commentary?

4 upvotes
Gasman66
By Gasman66 (Nov 14, 2012)

Making scores "relevant to the camera category" introduces its own set of problems and assumptions. Taken to its conclusion, this method relegates the score to nothing more than a "value for money" index. I could build you a pinhole camera and sell it to you for $0.01. Where would DPreview score this piece of rubbish "within its category"??

It would probably make far more sense to compare cameras with others of their build type - ie. a category for point & shoots, another one for mirrorless, another for full frame DSLRs etc. etc.

In any event, I think in this case giving the D600 a higher score than the D800 and 5DMkIII, sends an entirely misleading message.

Comment edited 6 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
JackM
By JackM (Nov 14, 2012)

D600 = 87%. 5D3 = 82%. Riiiiiiiiiiight.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 4 minutes after posting
8 upvotes
johnparas11zenfoliodotcom
By johnparas11zenfoliodotcom (Nov 14, 2012)

D800 =82%

0 upvotes
JackM
By JackM (Nov 14, 2012)

Ok, I see now the response about how cameras are ranked only within their category. Fair enough, I guess.

Comment edited 16 seconds after posting
1 upvote
Spectro
By Spectro (Nov 14, 2012)

because it cost about a 1/3 less also

0 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Nov 14, 2012)

Sounds about right, especially is IQ is weighted properly.

1 upvote
JackM
By JackM (Nov 14, 2012)

um, no.

0 upvotes
Airless
By Airless (Nov 14, 2012)

Also I know it says that the scores are done by camera class but the larger sensor cameras seem to collectively get higher scores than the smaller ones. For example the E-M5 is clearly class leading, but it "only has 80%, which is lower than any current full frame camera.

2 upvotes
Airless
By Airless (Nov 14, 2012)

Just curious, is it possible for a camera to get 100%? What would the camera have to do to get such a grade? I think this 87% is the highest I've ever seen but it is still quite a ways below 100.

0 upvotes
Amadou Diallo
By Amadou Diallo (Nov 14, 2012)

To get 100% it would have to be the last camera ever made because at that point we couldn't review any other camera that had better features or performance.

3 upvotes
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (Nov 14, 2012)

Unless the last camera ever made was rubbish, of course ;)

4 upvotes
smatty
By smatty (Nov 14, 2012)

Amadou: I think he refers to the sensitivity comparison EV rating in your review:

Canon 6D: -3 EV
Nikon D800: -2 EV
Nikon D600: -1 EV

That would make the D600 less sensitive than the other cameras. And if the D800 is his benchmark, that he could get the impression the D600 is not "as" or "that" good in low light.

3 upvotes
PicOne
By PicOne (Nov 14, 2012)

But Amadou, DPR has always said the scores are always only relevant to basically cameras in the same class and are measurements against CURRENT competition. So, if this is true, you could give out a 100 (or at least a high 90) and it wouldn't have to be the last camera ever made.

Since models replace every ~3 years, score is really only valid this long anyway.

0 upvotes
Amadou Diallo
By Amadou Diallo (Nov 14, 2012)

PicOne,
We still hold 100% as the ideal, 'impossible to improve upon' camera. Personally, I'd find it a sad day should that camera arrive, because as camera geeks we'd have nothing more to look forward to.

0 upvotes
JackM
By JackM (Nov 14, 2012)

Amadou, you're implying that these percent ratings are good for all time. That's impossible.

1 upvote
Airless
By Airless (Nov 15, 2012)

That's the problem, they are trying to score cameras in such a way as to suggest that points are good for all time, but there are tons of examples of cameras that have identical scores in the same class but one is clearly better.

1 upvote
wetsleet
By wetsleet (Nov 15, 2012)

@JackM
You are exactly right. To say that no camera can score 100% because that would represent the end of the road in camera design is to ignore that things improve over time.

It is obvioulsy true that a camera which scored 85% 6 years ago would not gain that score if it was released and tested today. Therefore a brand new camera, released and tested today, could indeed be awarded 100% - if it represented the pinnacle of today's art - and that in no way says that things can not improve still further, tomorrow.

Question to Amadou - if 100% is not the top limit of your score sysstem, what is? What is the top achieveable score? (Then just re-base your scores on that basis, etc...)

Comment edited 16 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
JackM
By JackM (Nov 15, 2012)

^ exactly.

0 upvotes
ron purdy
By ron purdy (Nov 14, 2012)

When I have tried this camera, AF has been miserably slow and inaccurate every time.
There were times when I would hold my finger down on the shutter button for a full second or two before the focus even started working at all.

There is NO WAY I would want to use this camera to shoot indoors for that reason alone.

(IQ looks very good though.)

6 upvotes
57even
By 57even (Nov 14, 2012)

And I suppose the fact that no-one else seems to have this issue didn't lead you to suspect it may just have been the one you tried that had a problem?

2 upvotes
Bamboojled
By Bamboojled (Nov 14, 2012)

Come on, you held down the button a second or 2 and you didn't think to check settings or whether there was an issue with camera?

1 upvote
ron purdy
By ron purdy (Nov 14, 2012)

I tried two different cameras - AF is terrible in anything but bright light. If you read various reviews (including this one) many mention how this thing struggles when the scene is not bright.
From this review: "yet attempting to focus on the same subject with outer AF points leads to focus hunt and ultimately a failure to confirm focus at all."

This happened to me (with outer AF points), but it was fairly brightly lit indoors. Not good.

(57even, you should read the reviews more carefully. Do you own the camera? If so, try the outer points indoors. FAIL.)

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 3 minutes after posting
7 upvotes
Amadou Diallo
By Amadou Diallo (Nov 14, 2012)

"yet attempting to focus on the same subject with outer AF points leads to focus hunt and ultimately a failure to confirm focus at all."

You're taking that quote out of context. We were specifically referring to low contrast subjects in very low light.

3 upvotes
Gasman66
By Gasman66 (Nov 14, 2012)

**"the fact that no-one else seems to have this issue didn't lead you to suspect it may just have been the one you tried that had a problem"**

I had the same experience. Had fun with the D600 but for me - the autofocus speed and accuracy (ie. lack thereof) was a major elephant in the room.

3 upvotes
Absolutic
By Absolutic (Nov 14, 2012)

digitalrev review of shooting in low light (boxing) tells exact same story as you are http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WdqpqOoeBQM&feature=g-user-u poor AF performance, and it was not even that low of a light. D800 and 5DM3 both did much better in their real life testing

3 upvotes
Dragonfire
By Dragonfire (Nov 14, 2012)

Altough I have never tried D600 is used D7000 for many times (own a D700 + D5100) and I do laugh on comments like the AF is unusable...

What would these people say for example for a 5D mk2 AF?

People need to realize that if an AF system works based on contrast and there is low light and low contrast and the lens is not the best wide open (where the AF point is active) especially towards the edges... there is a limit for every camera/configuration/situation...

These tools are precision tools, and the user needs some special knowledge -> use the center AF point in low light and pick a high contrast point on the same filed and recompose! :)

1 upvote
marike6
By marike6 (Nov 14, 2012)

@Dragonfire +1

In low-light if you use an outer AF point on ANY camera that is not a cross-type sensor the camera can fail to lock focus in certain situations. When this happens there is usually not enough contrast for the AF system to lock on. But the argue that the D7000 AF system is slow in rubbish. The D7000 AF module has 9 cross-type sensor which should be enough for most all types of photography and it certainly doesn't take 2 seconds to even begin focusing. That's just utter nonsense.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
1 upvote
ron purdy
By ron purdy (Nov 14, 2012)

The times when I used the D600, it was NOT low light. It was well-lit interior. The outer AF were simply miserable. Try it yourself instead of getting upset about comments on a camera which you have (likely) not even tried.

**And yes, that digitalrev* review mentioned above tells the SAME story I am telling. In decently lit interior it hunts and fails far too often. And it's just damm slow. Good luck shooting weddings or such with this camera, unless you plan to use use the center AF point. It's worse than the 5D2 in terms of outer Af usefulness.

I wanted to buy this camera, but didn't because of the poor AF when using anything but the cross-type.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 10 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Kodachrome200
By Kodachrome200 (Nov 14, 2012)

So i fooled around with one in a camera shop and i find the AF area troubling. It has plenty of points there just all bunched together. I find that irritating beyond words. It looks like continuous af would be really hampered and thus action photography very difficult

1 upvote
G Davidson
By G Davidson (Nov 14, 2012)

For me thesis a major deal breaker in a camera at this price point. That and the unprecedented dust issue say to me 'wait for a better one'.

1 upvote
robjons
By robjons (Nov 14, 2012)

Higher score than D800?
I agree with the post below that DPR scoring is perplexing.
Here's an idea: list the cameras this score is relevant to (with their scores), next to the score itself. Apparently your scoring categories are so narrow, there are no more than 2 or 3 other cameras anyway (which makes your whole scoring process close to irrelevant).
Further, I'm sure its here somewhere, but I can't find a link to a scoring explanation.

0 upvotes
Antony John
By Antony John (Nov 14, 2012)

Umm, well DPR actually state that scoring is relative to the camera category.
So if you feel that the D600 and D800 are the same category of camera then go ahead and compare scores.
However, if you click on the 'compare to' button on the last D600 'conclusion' page you'll note that in this category (as defined by DPR) only the D600 is listed so there are no valid comparisons at present.

Comment edited 52 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Mike Griffin
By Mike Griffin (Nov 14, 2012)

I'm wondering; what if you use a manual eg. AI lens when shooting video. Can you then change aperture while shooting or is the lens still held at constant aperture regardless of where the aperture ring is set?

0 upvotes
photo nuts
By photo nuts (Nov 14, 2012)

This camera will (i) seal Nikon's status as the bestselling DSLR manufacturer worldwide (ii) stem the loss of converts to mirrorless cameras (iii) help ensure FF DSLRs stay relevant for many more years.

While Canon had a massive head-start when digital DSLR cameras were first launched, it appears they are now losing steam rather quickly... Way to go, Nikon!

7 upvotes
daddyo
By daddyo (Nov 14, 2012)

I'm not sure how this camera would have any effect on converts to mirrorless cameras -- they are totally different animals. Also, if you go to the studio scene comparison tool and plug in the Olympus E-M5 and compare, you might understand why there continue to be converts to the mirrorless systems. :-)

8 upvotes
liquidsquid
By liquidsquid (Nov 14, 2012)

Yeah, big, honking camera to drag with you on a trip that is darned near impossible to conceal or hike with vs. something that fits in a car console. I never have been a fan of FF due to bulk and feeling a bit ridiculous carrying one. I feel like people expect me to be a pro when I am only a hobbyist.

Each system has its place, and can compliment each other if you have bags of money for lenses. The gap for IQ is narrower than ever, so now DOF is the real differentiating factor.

5 upvotes
photo nuts
By photo nuts (Nov 14, 2012)

I agree DOF is the real differentiating factor. The new small Panny f/2.8 zoom lenses are VERY attractive, but when we realize they are actually equivalent to f/5.6 DOF on FF, they lose some of their attraction... at least that is true for me. :)

BTW, I am not sure how acceptable/bad EVFs are for landscape photography... Anyone cares to comment?

2 upvotes
daddyo
By daddyo (Nov 14, 2012)

In reply to photo nuts...

I initially had concerns about using EVF's, because I was so used to optical viewfinders. However, to my surprise, I have found that after using them for a short while, not only does it not bother me, but I can easily switch back and forth between optical and EVF's as if there were no difference. One advantage to EVF's is that what you see is what you get -- WB, Exposure, etc.

0 upvotes
jl_smith
By jl_smith (Nov 14, 2012)

@Photo nuts - EVFs are pretty much completely irrelevant to landscape photography.

1) Put camera on tripod.
2) Flip / tilt out rear LCD to make things easy (if you've got it!)
3) Compose carefully.
4) Magnify view to ensure critical focus unless the LV sucks
5) Take photo.

1 upvote
Pradipta Dutta
By Pradipta Dutta (Nov 14, 2012)

Actually, that is not entirely true. Canon got a head start when they launched their AF film SLR bodies which had significantly better AF module than that of Nikon. Launch of digital actually gave Nikon a little head start with D1 when Canon did not have a comparable offering. Canon quickly made amends though.

1 upvote
Stephan Def
By Stephan Def (Nov 14, 2012)

<< I never have been a fan of FF due to bulk and feeling a bit ridiculous carrying one. I feel like people expect me to be a pro when I am only a hobbyist. >>

@liquidsquid I totally agree with your comment & sentiment, I feel awkward and foolish, to say the least, when carrying a piece of in-your-face Hardware-Status Symbol like this one with me just to have a decent image quality. There has to be a better way...

What peeves me even more, is that I would have to shell out another small fortune to get the proper lens to go with it: 24-70 2.8 and that it does not even have VR!

It just all seems way over the top.

Comment edited 35 seconds after posting
1 upvote
MPLIEW
By MPLIEW (Nov 14, 2012)

This camera might cause a few marriage break ups for those not already on full frame. You get this, then you find that you need to get all full frame lens. In any case, it has been said that the most important piece of gear you carry with you is the 6 inches behind the camera - your head. Thanks for the review. Wonder when the D7100 is coming out.

3 upvotes
Gasman66
By Gasman66 (Nov 14, 2012)

I investigated this camera thoroughly before I bought my 5DmkIII. The D800 and 5DMkIII seemed too much camera for me, and I didn't want to wait around for the 6D. I really enjoyed my day with the D600, BUT - the autofocus really does suck. For street photography it was hopeless, and I can't begin to imagine how frustrating it would be for sports. Even acknowledging this camera's market niche, it should've lost more points because of this. The gold score is too high.

"Popular Photography" magazine have just released what I would consider a more balanced review of the D600. My advice? If you are a serious amateur, and can afford it, go for a D800 or 5DMkIII.

Comment edited 12 minutes after posting
10 upvotes
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (Nov 14, 2012)

Not our experience, although it does depend on the lens. Some G lenses (like the 50mm F1.4 and F1.8 for example, and the new-ish 85mm F1.8) are relatively leisurely regardless of the camera they're mounted on, compared to optics like the 24-70mm F2.8 or 70-200mm F2.8.

0 upvotes
Ken Johnes
By Ken Johnes (Nov 14, 2012)

and i am wondering how Bresson even got one street shot in focus with his hand controlled rotory motion activated focus lenses (is that too much for ya?) it should be called HF- hand focus i guess.

are people always running at Bolt´s speed on the streets where you live?am just curious.must be a pain in the A++ for all those poor souls who try shooting anything moving, with it.

why dont you just read the popular magazine and drink your tea,what´s the point in crying out loud about another review, here on a `review site?
and why do you care about the DPR review and the points and all when you like the pop mag´s review, what´s it with the points and gold score thingy? i wish it´s not gonna haunt you for the rest of your life.

by the way, Mr.Poirot i think you should investigate your `grey cells ´from time to time, it gets rusty.

Comment edited 5 times, last edit 9 minutes after posting
4 upvotes
Gasman66
By Gasman66 (Nov 14, 2012)

My test session - which I completely acknowledge pales into insignificance compared with DPreview's - was using the 24-85 (quickly decided I wouldn't be buying that one) and the 24-120 (which I loved). Both lenses seemed to focus slowly in my hands, particularly on automatic point selection. The D800 and 5DMkIII were both way, way better. It wasn't subtle.

1 upvote
Gasman66
By Gasman66 (Nov 14, 2012)

Ha! Great post Ken Johnes. Unless you are older than I am am - which would make me feel good - it's unlikely you have shot more hand controlled rotary motion with cerebral point selection shots than I have. Have a play with the D600 though. Maybe you'll get what I mean. IMHO, the autofocus should've been better.

0 upvotes
Ken Johnes
By Ken Johnes (Nov 14, 2012)

thanks,Gas,
now , i have tried all those cameras you mentioned and with more than enough set of lenses to say, if you cant get a shot with d600 then you you cant get it with any of them around.sure 5d3 was the fastest of them all .

by the way, hell i used to shoot ballet with nik d70 and later with can 40d and got more than enough infocus shots which paid for a 1D3 ,D300 and D700.

1 upvote
xdfortier
By xdfortier (Nov 14, 2012)

I have never missed a shot due to focusing time on the d600, neither with my ancient 24-85 3.5, my 50 1.8G, my tokina 12-24 or my 70-200VR. I missed shots because of foreground/background issues using AF-C Auto. Which I never use anymore :P

Besides, it's not even slow, nor was the D7000. Compared to a 1DX or D4, I'm sure it's 0.4 s slower, which might seem an eternity if you're used to that kind of speed ;)

0 upvotes
Illumina
By Illumina (Nov 14, 2012)

My d600 AF works good.. It's fast and accurate and it's better than D7000 (which i also owned) for sure..

0 upvotes
Tee1up
By Tee1up (Nov 14, 2012)

It's been some time since I purchase the D600 but the AF is in my opinion anything but suck. I only own an older 50mm 1.8D but I've borrowed a 24-70 and a 70-210 VR2 and I was very impressed.

I guess I don't know what I am missing.

0 upvotes
Absolutic
By Absolutic (Nov 14, 2012)

it is not just Popular Photography. Digitalrev did their comparison of D600 vs D800 vs 5DM3 (boxing in not even low light) and found the AF performance of D600 frustrating. Here is the video - check for yourself. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WdqpqOoeBQM&feature=g-user-u

I guess dpreview is in disagreement with all these reviews

1 upvote
InTheMist
By InTheMist (Nov 14, 2012)

DigitalRev has a video up comparing the 5DIII, D800 and D600 and they basically came to the same conclusion. Using the D600 in a real-world sports test (boxing) wasn't the D600's strong point.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 40 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
rhlpetrus
By rhlpetrus (Nov 14, 2012)

Well, I used a Leica M3 for 30+ years, a D80 for 4 years and now D7k for 1.5 years. Same focus system as in the D600. Almost never missed a shot. My preferred style is street photography, and candid portraits (mostly family). Never had an issue with AF with either camera. Tried a D600 and kit lens at a store, about same as D7k re AF. Can't understand what you are talking about.

0 upvotes
garyknrd
By garyknrd (Nov 14, 2012)

As a Canon shooter. I shoot wildlife and have only two supertelephoto lenses. I have been waiting for two years for a update FF so I can move to landscape.
That being said i am not going Canon. This and a good lens will do. Canon is just so far behind now in sensor technology it is scary.
Now looking for review on landscape lenses with my soon new D600.

4 upvotes
Kodachrome200
By Kodachrome200 (Nov 14, 2012)

all i can say is 14-24 2.8. pricey yes but omg <3. sharper than the equivalent primes most the time

0 upvotes
Tape5
By Tape5 (Nov 14, 2012)

Yeah why give this camera a score lower than say D800? After all that would be unfair. Because it must be only compared to cameras of its own caliber ....Huh?!

Guys that is the whole idea of scoring so a camera that is not as good as the one next to it can be scored lower....Otherwise soon we are going to have a ridiculously complex system where every camera gets a 100 because it is the only one of its kind...( which is the genuine truth already anyway isn't it?) So one way of getting a higher score for a camera becomes belonging to a cheaper class??!? This is Marxist scoring :) or Mother Teresa scoring, or don't-upset-the-kids scoring....take your pick.

Me doesn't get it. Your P&S will score higher than your uncle's Hassy soon. Your number goes up but your class goes down.........

3 upvotes
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (Nov 14, 2012)

Scoring is relative to category - a continuous scale would be an absolute nightmare, especially for older or discontinued models. There's no perfect way of doing it.

1 upvote
Benarm
By Benarm (Nov 14, 2012)

So what category does RX100 belongs to, and since RX100 didn't get above 80%, which camera is better than RX100 (relatively to its category)? Or that place is reserved for future Nikon or Canon P&S?

4 upvotes
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (Nov 14, 2012)

We've justified the RX100's pricing and award multiple times. Ultimately, if you start looking for logical inconsistencies in a complex scoring system, based on qualitative and quantitative testing of cameras with relatively frequent replacement cycles, you'll be there for a while...

Best (as always) to read the reviews in full. There's a lot in there that can't be expressed in a bare % figure.

2 upvotes
Shamael
By Shamael (Nov 14, 2012)

Well, Barney, the RX100 is a tourist P&S, unique in it's class. D600 is a common DSLR, just like any other one, it has nothing more, has even less than others, has a crappy AF system made for APSC sensors and that is why it sucks, has no flip flop mirror system, has a false magnesium housing, only the upper bridge is in that material, the rest is a plastic bomber like many others,it makes at 100 Iso a shot that is not better than any other one, even worse than the one of a NEX-7, has a good high ISO ability, similar to NEX-6 or Fuji X-1 Pro, or D800. If i read the review, there is nothing, but really nothing, i repeat, exceptional on this camera. 24mpix FF is old hat, it is a remake of A900/850 D3X sensor.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Shamael
By Shamael (Nov 14, 2012)

Now, what makes such a camera get this score and what lacks on a RX100 to get that low score. A P&S is not foreseen to have any VF, even RX1 has none. Maybe it could have a tilt screen on the rear, it's only bad point is that it is too slippery, a problem rectified on RX1. The sensor is unique, no other P&S has it. I can read your reviews as often that is want or can, I do not find any reason for this genial camera to get a low score like that, and on the other side I do not see any reason for a common camera that has nothing special to offer, like D600, to get such a high score. DPR should stop scoring. Describe your cameras, make tests, give your opinion about what you find good and what you find bad or what you think could be better, and that's it. Your scoring is, or badly explained, or inaccurate, or it is brand oriented, it could in some way be just anything, but for sure, in the view of many, not fair.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 3 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Shamael
By Shamael (Nov 14, 2012)

So, this all said, in some way, Sony's A99 being a technological wonder-work compared to D600, it will probably get 95%, or is the one stop lower in high ISO rendering another reason to downgrade it. Let's wait and see, even with same sensor, D600 can not compete with it's video system, and certainly not with all the comfort it offers during operation. I have tested both cameras, my friend has D600 and I will buy a A99 in December. I had a test model for 3 days and I can say that I was impressed by it's features. AF is more accurate than D600 AF, despite it is also an APSC sized AF system and the on chip PS Af system works only with a half dozen of Sony's lenses made for that system. Yes it is 600$ more than a D600, but it offers, when you compare it, for more than 1000$ more features and comfort. Despite this, I would prefer to find a camera on the market without all that video nonsense, i never, or seldom, use that video gambling stuff.

Comment edited 52 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Bamboojled
By Bamboojled (Nov 14, 2012)

Wow, you are the most long winded poster I have ever SEEN!
This is the second post where you wax poetically to defend Sony.
That in itself is a laugh.

All of Sony's new cameras are coming out EVF. this cuts down about 1/3 to 1/2 stop of light, and based on the A99 samples, even more.

That means that when you purchase those expensive 1.4 or 2.8 lenses, the light gathering will be less than the equivalent Canon and Nikon offerings; so you spent a lot of money for NOTHING.

You also forget that the A99 with 99% of its lenses has a similar AF coverage to the D600

So what do we have, a camera with better image quality (High ISO) than the A99 for $600-800 less, and the feature set that rivals and in some cases surpasses more expensive models

0 upvotes
TrojMacReady
By TrojMacReady (Nov 14, 2012)

Please tell me where I can find on the D600:
- the swiveling LCD
- electronic first curtain
- built in stabilization
- 6fps in FX, 8 fps in DX (10 fps in smaller crop) with AF
- AF range limiter
- 200k shutter life
- 1/250s sync speed
- fast LV with tons of info (including histogram...)
- focus peaking
- 1/8000th shutterspeed
- multi function silent cotrol wheel
- multi frame NR
- built in stereo mic
- optional external XLR inputs
- aperture control during LV and video (in MF)
- clean HDMI out (no crop)
- 1080 60P
- GPS
- full metal chassis plus metal top, rear and bottom (versus plastic chassis plus partially metal back, bottom and top plates)

And lenses? People buy large aperture lenses for more than just light (DOF control, sharpness at a given aperture etc.). Not to mention the fact that the light gathering capabilities are still increased with those lenses.

And are you saying there are 594 AF lenses for the A99? There are 6 lenses supported by AF-D now, 12 or 13 early next year.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Bamboojled
By Bamboojled (Nov 14, 2012)

I guess I exaggerated...
according to your own words...

"Almost 400 different AF lenses, of which over 300 FX, of which 68 (FX) are still in production. Which begs the question, how many does one person need?"

So it's not 99%, it's 98.5% LOL, get a life!
based on your laundry list, I don't doubt that some or many are useful.
But just like you gave me this list.
I will give you a smaller list:

-Better High ISO performance

-Lenses that are 1.4 and 2.8 will perform with the light gathering ability they are intended for.

-no ghosting from reflections on the fixed mirror

You say that people use these large aperture lenses for various reasons...I agree, but it does not change the fact that NONE of those lenses will perform in light gathering as one has paid for.

You say that fast lenses is to control depth of field; if one shoots at dusk or dawn and want to control depth of field, even if you shoot a Sony lens wide open, ISO will be bumped up degrading the image quality.

Comment edited 59 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
TrojMacReady
By TrojMacReady (Nov 14, 2012)

You handilly missed the FX part? And assuming we're talking about production lenses, that's actually 9% of all current FX lenses (third party included) now, 18% of all FX lenses beginning of next year. Again, how many does one need?

Your "light gather ability" argument still makes no sense. The light gathering ability of the lens doesn't change. The A99 with a F1.4 les still offers as good or better light gathering capabilities than a D3 plus F1.4 lens, despite the beamsplitter. Thanks to the increased efficiency of that sensor. The lens does exactly what you pay for, compared to smaller aperture lenses on the same body. According to your argument, a F1.4 lens on a Nikon body does not perform like an F1.4 either when compared to Canon, because Canon uses weaker CFA's (altough the gap used to be larger) to have more light reach the sillicon too. Nonsense of course.

The current beamsplitter shows no ghosting. In fact, none of the beamsplitters used after 2010 do. It's 2012.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 5 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Bamboojled
By Bamboojled (Nov 14, 2012)

First off, we are comparing the D600 to the A99, not a 4 year old camera (D3s)...

Again, if you are loosing 1/3, 1/2, 2/3 (A99) light, your actual shutter speed or ISO will go down or up respectively by comparison to the equivalent Nikon or Canon models, negating the advantage of the faster lens.
How difficult is this to understand.

You mention Canon vs. Nikon, as Sony really does not compete in this arena. It has never been proven or shown that this is the case in respects to the Canon.
HOWEVER, it has been proven time and time again that the Sony does suffer from light loss because of the EVF.

BTW, if you want to throw vaporware into your lens mix, then I can also point to the fact that Nikon is putting out a firmware release on the D600 that will take care of the cropping on HDMI 422 and also changing aperture while in live view, so this will be a non issue moving forward.

It also reduces your above laundry list by 2, so you will have to type less in your future defense of Sony.

0 upvotes
TrojMacReady
By TrojMacReady (Nov 14, 2012)

You have 0.5EV worse noise performance all else being equal, that's all. Some buy a faster lens to gain that ability, but your initial argument was that it negates the effects of a F1.4 lens, which as explained above is nonsense for several reasons.
And all else is not equal to begin with, since even every prime lens is stabilized, the camera copes better with slow shutterspeeds (electronic first curtain, no mirror slap) and a Nikkor or Canon lens will not fit an Alpha camera, so a pointless comparison.

It's been proven many times (visually and through measurements) that Canon uses weaker CFA's to have more light reach the sillicon (low light performance), at the cost of colour separation.

And the Sony does not suffer a light loss. First of all, the light is put to use still (it's called a beamsplitter, not an eater). Second, it's not the EVF that gets light, it's the AF sensors that do.

I have my info from the Sony Website, you're talking about a Nikon rumor. Try again. ;)

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
TrojMacReady
By TrojMacReady (Nov 14, 2012)

PS: and no, it does not reduce that list at all.

0 upvotes
Bamboojled
By Bamboojled (Nov 14, 2012)

It does negate the faster lens, as I have posted above...
The shutter speed either goes down, or the ISO goes up!!

Is this statement factual or not????

You can call it a beam splitter a bean splitter or a ham and cheese sandwich; I don't care.

The amount of light hitting the sensor is less than on equivalent Nikon and Canon cameras.

Is this statement factual or not???

The images shown in DPReview of the A99 vs. D600 are about a half a stop worse, then add to this that the A99 had a longer exposure for the same images. Which means that the D600 actually has about 2/3 better High ISO performance.

Is this statement factual or not???

You are going to argue about fluctuating light source.
Both of us don't know if this was the case with regards to the A99 test or not. One could argue that the D600 might have gotten less light which in that case would mean the D600 has even better performance in High ISO.

Vaporware is vaporware regardless of what source you quote.

Fact or Not

0 upvotes
senn_b
By senn_b (Nov 14, 2012)

pretty generous a rating; .. maybe it's deserved maybe not , .. but seeing where D700 is now as for its IQ (which is only aspect deserving my attention) , I say "wait and see" .. anyway thanks to dp staff for this meticulous and surprisingly rapid review :))

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 3 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
57even
By 57even (Nov 13, 2012)

Thanks for a great review - I concur with all your conclusions good and bad - including the sensor pollution issue. I got mine professionally cleaned for free thanks to my excellent dealer, but Nikon UK are still in flat denial if you ask them direct.

DPReview has a great track record of taking up issues on behalf of users, and now it will be very hard for Nikon to flatly deny something is up. Clearly they either over-lubricated some internal parts or their cleanroom in Thailand has a leak. Either way it's not reasonable to charge for cleaning every month.

In all other respects it is a great camera and a real "sweet spot" in terms of size, weight, cost and performance.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Deleted pending purge
By Deleted pending purge (Nov 13, 2012)

Why use terms like "pro camera", "semi-pro camera", "entry-level" etc.?
There are no such things.
There are cameras - and there are semi-pro, pro, or amateur users. And many pros go sometimes to their assignments with cameras that would raise quite a few eyebrows - yet, they manage to deliver what's been required.
All that's needed to prove this, is just hide the metadata...
Contrary to what many newcomers in the field think, it's not the hardware that delivers - it's the photographer. And a photographer (should) know how to use their camera within the frame of its technical ability, utterly eliminating wishful thinking, which is so common to newbies.
And those who tend to hold tightly to one manufacturer only should remember just what happened to dinosaurs... ;)

6 upvotes
Digitall
By Digitall (Nov 14, 2012)

I agree. What distinguishes a professional from an amateur is that the professional makes a living with photography. IMO.
What has in common is that both are photographers. I know amateur photographers with better equipment and a better technique than many professionals.
and subdivide categories only makes the equipment more elitist.
If I buy a Porsche, does not make me a race car driver, and I'm not above the law. Simply have a car more dressy than most mortals. However I'll have to follow the same rules of the road that a driver of a Lada.
And in the world of photography there too elitism, and few photographers.

1 upvote
SDPharm
By SDPharm (Nov 14, 2012)

> Why use terms like "pro camera", "semi-pro camera", "entry-level" etc.? There are no such things.

Very good point. But I think many, if not most, people here understand that 'pro camera' simply means metal body, weather sealing ,etc. These are just code words, nothing more. Similarly, 'entry-level' means plastic body, lots of 'scene modes,' etc.

1 upvote
karlreed
By karlreed (Nov 14, 2012)

I agree. Years ago, I was asked to be backup at a wedding. The happy couple were worried about the pro's they had hired. So, Dad turned up with his Contax G1 and Ziess lenses, and, his F90X and 80-200mmF2.8 AF Nikkor. The two pros, young women, had Richos with standard and wide Ricoh primes. I was embarrassed.

When the shots were compared, I did pretty well. The flash fill with the SB26 and F90X and the reach of the 80-200 made life very easy. BUT, the pros won easily with shear artistry! They really knew how to get the atmosphere, and, the standard group shots. Their gear? It was good enough for them!

Karl

0 upvotes
Felix11
By Felix11 (Nov 13, 2012)

Page 4, picture 9 says: "The D600 has two IR windows, on the front of the camera (shown here) and one the rear"

This is unclear. Does it have 2 (one on the front and one on the rear), or 3 (2 on the front plus one on the rear)?

0 upvotes
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (Nov 13, 2012)

Two. But that sentence is clumsy - I'll edit. It should say 'one on the front of the camera and one on the rear'.

0 upvotes
rusticus
By rusticus (Nov 13, 2012)

All well and good - but a "vacuum cleaner" I will not buy -
when the then every four weeks must be cleaned, no thanks

3 upvotes
Michaels7
By Michaels7 (Nov 13, 2012)

It's really funny reading the reviews on here vs other reviews and others that own the camera feed back. They're never consistent. That's why I do my own test ti see what is good and what is bad.

0 upvotes
ForeignerOnEarth
By ForeignerOnEarth (Nov 13, 2012)

Nikkor 24-85 is terrible lens, not for 24MPx. Nikkor 24-120/4 has big center-edge difference in sharpness too. Only heavy and expensive zoom 24-70/2.8 is suitable for this FX low-end body. Canon has the best 24-70/2.8 II now, amazing 24-70/4 IS and much better 24-105/4 than Nikkkor lenses. Nikon had better lenses, but last two years every new FX zoom lens is worse than Canon lenses. 70-200/2.8 II is worse than Canon too. Canon full frame lenses are amazing, the last amazing Nikkor FX zoom was 14-24/2.8. Why, Nikon????

2 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Nov 13, 2012)

Canon 24-70 2.8 II the best? Is that why Photozone test said they "expected a little more"? And where they mentioned "surprising drop in border quality at 70mm with resolution figures that are inferior compared to the old version of the lens"? I'm sure all photographers want a $2400 standard zoom with soft corners at 70mm.

Meanwhile they called the Nikon 24-70 2.8 the "benchmark standard zoom".

And the Canon 24-70 f4 amazing? It's not even available yet. And most Canon users are asking, why would they an f4 zoom with LESS range than the EF 24-105 L for more money?

I'm guessing if Canon bodies were so great, you wouldn't be fixating unreleased lenses in the comment section of a camera review.

6 upvotes
Reilly Diefenbach
By Reilly Diefenbach (Nov 13, 2012)

The 24-85VR outresolves the D800e through most of the frame, let alone a paltry 24MP. Really irritating to a lot of people, but there you have it.

4 upvotes
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (Nov 13, 2012)

The Nikon 24-85 isn't terrible but you're correct that the type of person who feels they need 24mp will be a lot happier with the 24-70. I have both and unfortunately, you get what you pay for and are willing to lug around.

0 upvotes
Gasman66
By Gasman66 (Nov 14, 2012)

Having used the 24-85 for the grand total of a day, my $0.02 worth is that it's lovely and sharp, but distortion is unacceptable. The 24-120 is a lens more deserving of the D600

Comment edited 31 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Ken Johnes
By Ken Johnes (Nov 14, 2012)

how many of those above mentioned lenses have you used personaly i wonder.

1 upvote
castleofargh
By castleofargh (Nov 14, 2012)

24-70 is really not a good example IMO.
the last 70-200 canon is an amazing thing, the 24-70 wasn't and the new one isn't a revolution.

0 upvotes
Kodachrome200
By Kodachrome200 (Nov 14, 2012)

I hate to say it but the best option for a D600 is probably the Tamron 24-70 2.8. Its spendy but sharp wide open. I know its not a Nikkor but the only Nikkor standard zoom that is sharper is the 24-70 2.8. Probably to spendy for the D600's market. Though I find the 24-85 to be pretty good. I actually want one for my D800 on account of it being small and light. might be fun at times. Though i dont like the bokeh quality on it.

This fixation on getting every last drop of resolution a camera offers absolutly baffles me. When d800 came out people were talking about always shooting it on a tripod and a bunch of other nonsense. Its a tool for gods sake, If a lens was acceptably sharp with any full frame digital or 35mm camera it will work on a D600 (or 800 for that matter) just exactly as well as it did before at least. probably stopped down you will get full res out of any lens.

2 upvotes
Bamboojled
By Bamboojled (Nov 14, 2012)

Meanwhile all of Nikon's new fixed lenses are smoking yes SMOKING any of Canon's offerings.
Interestingly, Canon's 24-70 I was a sad comparison against Nikon's 24-70, so it only makes sense that finally Canon would come out with a lens that would equal if not be slightly better.
Even though very reputable lens review sites are saying that it is an improvement, but not worth the $2400.
And as a previous poster wrote, you are comparing yet to be released lenses to make your point.
Seems to me you are really reaching.

1 upvote
Scorpius1
By Scorpius1 (Nov 14, 2012)

Lloyd Chambers rates the new canon24-70 very high.. I have used it and i have used the nikon 24-70.. the canon is excellent

0 upvotes
Scorpius1
By Scorpius1 (Nov 14, 2012)

@Marike6.. what photo zone actually said.part 1 ."Verdict

The Nikkor AF-S 24-70 is an impressive standard zooms lens that delivers very sharp and contrasty images. With its fast aperture it allows for low light shooting or alternatively object separation with limited depth of field, where it delivers an unusually smooth bokeh for a zoom lens in this focal range. It is built as solid as you'd expect a pro grade lens to be and its sonic wave driven AF is very fast and silent.
It's not without flaws, though. Distortions are very high at the wide end, but at least they are of uniform shape and thus can be corrected in software if required. CAs are very high, too, but just like distortions can easily be corrected in software (in fact most current Nikon DSLRs do this already if you shoot JPGs). The wavy image field at the low end might be an issue if you shoot flat objects and last but not least the lens is not exactly cheap.

0 upvotes
Scorpius1
By Scorpius1 (Nov 14, 2012)

@Marike6.. part 2.. "Verdict
However, in summary the Nikkor 24-70 currently sets the benchmark for F-mount FX standard zoom lenses....

benchmark "F" mount FX standard zoom.. not benchmark standard zoom.. I have both.. i prefer the canon.. canon's 7-200mm is also better.. and the 85mm 1.2l is easily as good if not better then the 85mm 1.4g.. and yes,i have both lenses

0 upvotes
Bamboojled
By Bamboojled (Nov 14, 2012)

the 24-70 should be considering that it is a new design and SIGNIFICANTLY more expensive.

That being said, your assessment of the 85 1.2 being as good as the 85 1.4G Nikon is completely without any basis on reality.

The Nikon outperforms the Canon in everything... speed of focus, focus accuracy, center to edge sharpness, resolution, size, weight, micro contrast, lens flare.

The only ace the Canon holds is 1.2, and that is so soft that most end up stopping down to 1.4 or more.

0 upvotes
Scorpius1
By Scorpius1 (Nov 15, 2012)

Canon 85mm is better at focusing wide open.. Lloyd Chambers concurs,edge sharpness is not that important with these portrait lenses,neither is great wide open,and there is some basis in reality ,I have both of them,, thats pretty real...

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 4 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
blank_
By blank_ (Nov 13, 2012)

I always admired nikon for not crippling the AF, but I guess it was necessary this time.

Comment edited 34 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Nov 13, 2012)

It would have been a tragedy if it only had one cross-type sensor.

4 upvotes
Tim Ashton
By Tim Ashton (Nov 13, 2012)

Crippled AF? Yeah. Right
Go to http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1165509

Maaate, your insecurity is showing

5 upvotes
blank_
By blank_ (Nov 14, 2012)

I guess it's hard to please everyone :)
But wouldn't you prefer d700/800 af?
I'm shooting with original 5D for a long time and to have more cross sensors with a decent spread across the viewfinder is the most important upgrade, I can imagine.

sure it's "affordable FF" but I don't think it's too much to ask for the price

Comment edited 7 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
kayone
By kayone (Nov 14, 2012)

Nice attempt at trolling. The AF system works fine, better than the D7000 version

0 upvotes
blank_
By blank_ (Nov 14, 2012)

I'm sorry, if I hurt your feelings in any way. I guess that shooting with the center cross sensor only for 5 years just made me too critical here (I seriously don't mean to offend anyone)

I always liked how nikon was using the same AF modul down to d300 compared to canon approach. I understand, that lesser model is going to miss something, but that does not mean I have to like it.

I was not speaking about how the AF works, but about the placement and spread of af points. I even prefer the huge coverage of d300, so for me it's a step in wrong direction.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 7 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
cuellar
By cuellar (Nov 13, 2012)

Here http://www.petapixel.com/2012/10/22/the-nikon-d600-has-sensor-dust-issues/ is more about the dust problem. It seems that this is a real issue and prevents me to buy it until solved.

3 upvotes
fierlingd
By fierlingd (Nov 14, 2012)

Yup.. I wish i hadn't bought it.

I tried to return it, but Aden Camera in Toronto does not allow returns.. period.. which just seems insane to me. So until Nikon Acknoledges this problem, i'm stuck with a $2000 dust/oil collectior.

Not fun.

0 upvotes
Ruy Penalva
By Ruy Penalva (Nov 13, 2012)

Sonykon?

0 upvotes
ARTASHES
By ARTASHES (Nov 13, 2012)

Why is that ?

0 upvotes
ForeignerOnEarth
By ForeignerOnEarth (Nov 13, 2012)

Ruy Penalva thinks than Nikon must produce the sensors in the plants with the title Nikon. When Nikon design the sensors and produce the steppers for the fabrics and Sony will make the serial production in the plants of Sony Semiconductors, Ruy Penlava thinks the label on the camera must not be Nikon, but Sonykon.
You have no computer Dell, but IntelnVidiaKingstonWesternDigitalNonameMarvellDell. :-)

0 upvotes
Ruy Penalva
By Ruy Penalva (Nov 14, 2012)

It should state: Nikon D600 - Sony inside. Every brand do this when use a third part (core) hardware. Roger Cicala said that this sensor unusually become dirty!

0 upvotes
Der Steppenwolf
By Der Steppenwolf (Nov 14, 2012)

Ruy Penalva: As somebody who has been working in electronics industry for almost 10 years (printers design and manufactoring) I can only hope that you are joking.
Becouse if you really think that "every brand do this" that tells me that you either live on a different planet or have some serious problems when it comes to reality perception.
Most of that "core" tech you are babbling about is made by 5-10 OEMs on this Earth...
You really need to update your calender so that you are at least on the same century as the rest of the world is.

Comment edited 42 seconds after posting
4 upvotes
Ken Johnes
By Ken Johnes (Nov 14, 2012)

what about nikon selling you a big metal plate on which it says all the names of conductors, diodes and every chip suppliers like samsung , toshiba, mitsubishi etc etc, i bet nikon buys those SCREWs too from third party. would you like to hang it around your neck , cos, there aint much space on the cam to write all of them.

if it was a car, it was easy, by the way what care are you driving, i wonder how you cope with it´s rear side full of body part supplier´s names.

oh, you ride a horse i guess,and live under a rock.
slept through all those analogue film years when canon , minolta, pentax and nikon used to supply a free marker pens to write all the names of films you use on the front those cams ?

like Don Rickles use to shout " i hate DUMBbells" !!!now i know what kind of guys he was mentioning

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
2 upvotes
Ken Johnes
By Ken Johnes (Nov 14, 2012)

and while you are at it Penalva, i am yet to see an Ipad which say Samsung ind big red letters on it,without that samsung display you cant Swipe on it without hurting your fingers :-))

"every brand does it, bla bla bla..." kiss my ***** , now i wonder if Roger Cicala will say that about me too :-)))))

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 2 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
Tee1up
By Tee1up (Nov 13, 2012)

It really is a very good, relatively affordable camera.
Well done review.

1 upvote
Retzius
By Retzius (Nov 13, 2012)

I'm hoping that in a year or so the D600 will be down to $1500 or so body only so I can pick one up. My guess is that when the Canon 6D arrives, Nikon will discount the D600 to keep it the more attractive option and to gain market share.

0 upvotes
Reilly Diefenbach
By Reilly Diefenbach (Nov 13, 2012)

1999 maybe, but that's as low as she's a gonna go until two years from now or more :^)

1 upvote
Josh152
By Josh152 (Nov 14, 2012)

The only way I see the D600 going to below $1999.99 is when it's successor is released.

0 upvotes
kayone
By kayone (Nov 14, 2012)

Why do internet fans have these warped ideas that a manufacturer would drop the price of a well selling camera body $600 within a year of its release just because 'thats what they want'. Reality check, please

1 upvote
Tord S Eriksson
By Tord S Eriksson (Nov 13, 2012)

According to Nikonrumors will the aperture problems in live view soon be over - but when the firmware update will be ready is not known!

I guess that at the same time the uncompressed video problem will be solved!

0 upvotes
dmanthree
By dmanthree (Nov 13, 2012)

Camera looks great, but hope that it never needs repairs. Based on that tear-down it looks more like a dosposable than a repairable cam.

0 upvotes
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (Nov 13, 2012)

I doubt it's unique in that.

3 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Nov 13, 2012)

Disposable? It has a magnesium alloy shell, and like most Nikons, is well put together.

http://d600.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/nikon-d600-body-shell-magnesium-plastic.jpg

I once had to have the meter in my D70 repaired by Nikon, and I still have the camera, and it works as well today is it did when I bought it. So just like an FM2 or an F2, none of these digital bodies are exactly disposable.

1 upvote
Reilly Diefenbach
By Reilly Diefenbach (Nov 13, 2012)

Anyone who doesn't get the Nikon two year warranty extension for $130 is officially an idiot.

1 upvote
Nightwings
By Nightwings (Nov 14, 2012)

You have to pay an extra $130 for a two year warranty? Hmmm I liking my Canadian Warranty even better now - 2 years on Cams and 5 on the Nikkors.

0 upvotes
MrPetkus
By MrPetkus (Nov 13, 2012)

This camera is looking more and more attractive each time. For me, the D600 ticks all the right boxes at the right price.

1 upvote
Total comments: 500
123