Previous news story    Next news story

iFixit tears down the Nikon D600 - Chipworks confirms Sony sensor

By dpreview staff on Nov 8, 2012 at 18:27 GMT

iFixit.com has performed a complete tear-down of the Nikon D600, reducing it to its component parts to see how easy it is to repair. Nikon's latest full-frame DSLR scored a low 'repairability' score, of 2 out of 10 since 'most components almost require a certification in soldering in order to properly remove'. On the plus side, the tripod mount is easy to remove, if you ever cross-thread it accidentally. iFixit has also worked with semiconductor experts Chipworks to take a very close look at the D600's 24MP CMOS sensor.

We're days away from publishing our in-depth review of the Nikon D600 but until then, here's what it looks like with the hood off...

iFixit.com takes apart the Nikon D600

Among the good news that iFixit found when taking apart the Nikon D600 is that the tripod mount can be easily replaced if it becomes damaged or cross-threaded. The hand grip is also relatively easy to replace, should that become damaged, and the depth of field and function buttons on the front of the camera can be accessed without too much trouble, if they were to become stuck or broken. 

The bad news, according to the guys at iFixit is that unsurprisingly, most of the rest of the camera is very very hard to repair due to the huge number of soldered joins and screws holding everything together. The D600's LCD screen, too, is fused to the rear case and cannot be removed without replacing the entire rear plate of the camera. So if you're a D600 owner, keep that LCD screen cover attached at all times.

This might explain Nikon's recent move to halt the sale of components to repair shops outside its authorized repair network.

The Sensor - Chipworks takes apart the D600's 24MP CMOS

iFixit has worked with Chipworks - experts in semiconductors and electronic reverse-engineering - to take a closer look at the D600's 24MP sensor. As expected, it's a Sony-built IMX128 sensor (although Nikon insists it is designed to its specifications) with a pixel pitch of 5.9 microns. 

The D600's 24MP is a Sony-built IMX128. This electron microscope image shows the pixel configuration on its surface. Pixel pitch is 5.9 microns.
814
I own it
166
I want it
93
I had it
Discuss in the forums

Comments

Total comments: 134
SonodeaPhoto
By SonodeaPhoto (10 months ago)

The camera is not designed to be taken apart for obvious reasons! It's not crap. I have been using it hard for 8 months and the quality is amazing. The D600 surpasses any Nikon model below it and especially the D300. Production methods improve rapidly making it easier and more profitable without sacrificing quality. Give it a chance before you criticize something you never used or refuse to read about. If you need to disassemble your camera and worried about putting it back together you need to get in another line of work.

0 upvotes
keepreal
By keepreal (Dec 17, 2012)

I note there is a review of the D600 but I will not bother reading it. Maybe DP Review could flag up equipment which is jerry built and make a habit of telling us at the outset to save wasting our time.

I usually like to read the more interesting articles at DP Review even though I am quite happy with my D300 and regularly get quality more than adequate for prints about 2 ft long. That's just as well because there is no way I would get a D600 if its build is such crap. I suspect Nikon are building to the market and lowering quality favouring their profit margins, unconcerned except with their top professional grade equipment.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 57 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
ForeignerOnEarth
By ForeignerOnEarth (Nov 13, 2012)

Sensor has various parts:
pixels in the silicon, readout channels in the silicon, timing engines, sometimes A/D convertores, unicate color filters, microlenses, unicate AA filter.
These parts can be and are combined for various camera makers. When one camera is 8 fps and the second camera is 4 fps, be definitelly sure the readout channels differ very much and it cannot be the same sensor.
The sensors in D300s and D90 cannot be the same, but everybody talk about they are. Only pixels in the silicon could be the same.
The various camera makers do not have the same AA filter and the same color filters.

0 upvotes
ForeignerOnEarth
By ForeignerOnEarth (Nov 13, 2012)

Please see:
The DSLRs changed from 6MPx to 24MPx, this is the 4x smaller pixel and the high ISO in 100% resolution is not 4x worse, but 4x better. The gain in last 8 years is 16x better.

Comment edited 29 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
ForeignerOnEarth
By ForeignerOnEarth (Nov 13, 2012)

4x higher resolution and 2EV gain is 16-times improvement in total.
In 2004 year ISO 800 on APS-C is about ISO 3200 now in 2012 year . I do not calculate FX D600, but DX 5200 - the same area of the sensor.
The efficiency must be under 100%.
Suppose the efficiency is now 80%, yes, it is less but we could suppose 80%.
Were the efficiency in the year 2004 = 80% / 16 = 5% ????

The image quality is 16-times better now. Are the hardware of the sensors 16-times better now? The efficiency was 5% and now is 80% ????

NO, SURE NO.

The sensor hardware is not the carrier of the improvement.
The software of image processing changed!!!! Here is the bigg difference between 2004 and 2012 year. The 16-times improvement is mainly on image processing and the smaller part is the hardware improvement.

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 4 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Abbas Rafey
By Abbas Rafey (Nov 11, 2012)

I like nikon except for their slow focus and being under sony mercy to supply them sensor chip

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (Nov 11, 2012)

So clearly you've never used an AF lens on a D3s or D4.

Oh, neither the D3s nor the D4 uses a Sony sensor. And the 1 series doesn't either. So clearly Nikon has NOT relied on one sensor manufacturer as you've implied.

1 upvote
snappyjari5
By snappyjari5 (Nov 13, 2012)

still..can they built their own sensors or they still need somebody to do the job for them? Hmm....does this review gives a great hit to the face to all the nikon user?

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (Nov 13, 2012)

snappyjari5:

Nikon does not build its own sensors.

0 upvotes
samir sinha
By samir sinha (Nov 11, 2012)

All this hullabaloo over sensors and who made which ultimately boils down to the fact that who is behind the camera taking pictures. And that's what finally matters.

2 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (Nov 11, 2012)

Fine go use a Sigma Foveon sensor at ISO 3200 and blame the person taking the picture.

3 upvotes
iae aa eia
By iae aa eia (Nov 10, 2012)

i still remember little time ago, when sony bought minolta, many people getting very angry when someone said nikons were coming equipped with sony sensors, and nowedays some of them still don't let the chance of saying that sony built it but UNDER nikon specifications just to, (maybe) unconsciously, make sure it's not exactly a sony sensor (what?). well, it's not, it's a sony sensor with, perhaps, some technology got from minolta in it and, perhaps, a bit hand of some ex-konica folks :]

but never ever forget, UNDER nikon specs.

Comment edited 13 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
iae aa eia
By iae aa eia (Nov 10, 2012)

* don't 'miss' the chance

0 upvotes
Alizarine
By Alizarine (Nov 11, 2012)

Still built by Sony :P

2 upvotes
iae aa eia
By iae aa eia (Nov 12, 2012)

ooooh yeeeeah...

0 upvotes
Shamael
By Shamael (Nov 10, 2012)

Sony sensor made to Nikon specs. We have a "one say" in our country that claims that you can only be sanctified if you have the faith. So believe what you want and keep shooting as long as the thing works, even with an AF that is not so reliable and oil spots on the images. I left the Nikon boat recently and it needs a lot of work for Nikon to get me back. Pricing and quality issues are one of the major reasons for it. Close to 300$ to get a collar for a tele lens, 100 and more $ for a lens cover, wireless modules as options, different flash adapters for different series, and so on. It sucks.

1 upvote
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (Nov 10, 2012)

Oil on the D600 sensor? Um, I've read minor dust, but not oil.

0 upvotes
Frank C.
By Frank C. (Nov 10, 2012)

Sony sensor in a Nikon... what a dreadful idea! Too bad it isn't genuine like my iphone with its 100% exclusive Apple parts! ;-)

1 upvote
Aaron Sur
By Aaron Sur (Nov 10, 2012)

http://micgadget.com/29723/the-undercover-report-on-how-the-new-iphone-5-is-made-inside-foxconn-factory/

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (Nov 10, 2012)

Aaron Sur:

I'd hope that Frank C was being ironical.

0 upvotes
Boerseuntjie
By Boerseuntjie (Nov 10, 2012)

Were do you think Samsung Phones are made? ;) Happy Elves in the North Pole...no lets see.mmm. Foxconn Korea

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (Nov 11, 2012)

Dearest Boerseuntjie:

In fact Samsung makes many of the major parts of the iPhone and Foxconn is more like a parts assembler for the iPhone at least.

A websearch of the terms "Foxconn Korea" indicates no Foxconn manufacturing in South Korea, though yes Foxconn did, past tense, some design work there.

Please drop your knee jerk attacks on Samsung.

Two weeks ago I got to use that Samsung 85mm NX lens, and it's a good bit better than anything from Nikon, Canon, or even Fuji.

Welcome back.

2 upvotes
What do I know
By What do I know (Nov 11, 2012)

Samsung is just as bad as foxconn, who are you kidding? and Samsung lenses as good as Canon, Nikon and Fuji? what kind of crack are you on?...please... maybe the lenses that are made in China....LOL
http://news.yahoo.com/samsung-factories-sound-bad-foxconn-214030203.html

Comment edited 4 times, last edit 4 minutes after posting
1 upvote
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (Nov 11, 2012)

What you don't know:

In fact some of the Samsung NX lenses are better than high end Canons, Nikons, and Fujis.

My 30mm F2 was made in Korea, as is the much newer 85mm F1.4.
Clearly you have used neither, and I have, while I've owned Leica lenses , and still own Zeiss lenses. So yeah I trust my judgment more than knee jerk claims by those who have not used the equipment. Yep, I've used ostensibly high quality Nikon lenses and they're not too great compared to Zeiss, while some Samsung lenses are.

So no you don't know much. Another thing about South Korea, there are independent trade unions. That's a big difference from China.

Yes, Samsung does do some manufacturing in China too. But most of the sophisticated guts of a Samsung phone come from Samsung--perhaps Samsung China.

You're further deluding yourself by implying that Chinese manufactures can't do high quality lenses.

Comment edited 49 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Boerseuntjie
By Boerseuntjie (Nov 12, 2012)

"What he does not know" is HowaboutRAW likes to run his mouth and when you hit the i-function button on a Samsung lens you get sued by apple...LOL, how original of Samsung to name it the i-function
Since when is made in Korea as good as made in Japan and your claims have no proof they are just your opinion and that don't count for a lot.. sorry ;)
Ps, I was never away but thanks for welcoming me back

Comment edited 5 times, last edit 4 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (Nov 12, 2012)

Boerseuntjie:

Sorry but the magazine Popular Photography tested and reviewed the Samsung 85mm 1.4 lens and called it nearly flawless. (The review was in the printed magazine--it's not online that I can find.)

Then there's the fact that all Nikon and Fuji lenses are disappointing compared to Zeiss lenses, whereas some NX Samsung lenses aren't.

I see a repeated pattern of xenophobia in your postings here. E.g. the implication that "made in Korea" means crap for some reason of cultural deficiency on the part of Korea.

Even if Apple sued Samsung over the name "iFunction", that button does not do something that any Apple product already does. In fact that camera button is an useful invention unique to Samsung, and it would function exactly the same without the "i" name.

0 upvotes
MattiD80
By MattiD80 (Nov 9, 2012)

Sony makes very good sensor. Knowing it's from them is good to hear, although I suspected it, seeing the very similar performance in DxO, and other testings.

1 upvote
cunguez
By cunguez (Nov 9, 2012)

Days away from publishing your review of the D600...

Not to be a totally ungrateful brat, but will can we get some hint as to whether or not we will EVER see a review for the 1DX or D4??? Sometime in this product cycle, I hope?

Comment edited 6 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Boerseuntjie
By Boerseuntjie (Nov 9, 2012)

Did we need confirmation that it was a Sony sensor? , knew that when this camera was announced.

2 upvotes
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (Nov 9, 2012)

Nikon have up to now insisted that it is built to Nikon's specifications, or 'designed' by Nikon, at various points. This is solid confirmation that it's a Sony sensor - something that Nikon has never explicitly acknowledged. Of course, the processing is Nikon, and we know that can make a huge, huge difference to IQ.

1 upvote
Alizarine
By Alizarine (Nov 11, 2012)

Yes I think, because technically, when a company insists that they're making something themselves (or for themselves) when they apparently aren't... well, in a realistic sense.

0 upvotes
Nishi Drew
By Nishi Drew (Nov 9, 2012)

After all, a camera is just a fancy box to keep unwanted light out

1 upvote
JakeB
By JakeB (Nov 10, 2012)

In the days of film, yes.

In the days of digital, that's only part of the story; cameras are now light processing computers.

0 upvotes
Summi Luchs
By Summi Luchs (Nov 9, 2012)

It's not all wrong with soldered electrical connections. They may be more difficult to repair but they are mechanically much more stable than plugged connections. A plus for device like a camera that should survive bumps and vibrations.

1 upvote
NickBPhotography
By NickBPhotography (Nov 9, 2012)

Based on that, I think I'll stick to replacing the grip on my cameras and that only :P.

0 upvotes
echelon2004
By echelon2004 (Nov 9, 2012)

I'm not sure why we should care about how hard or easy it is to repair the cameras? I can understand why the sensor origin can be a bit interesting, but only if the manufacturer also owns the design and the complete assembly.
I understand why preview reports about it, I just can't see the point with iFixit.

1 upvote
Boky
By Boky (Nov 9, 2012)

shouldn't there be focusing PCB located at the bottom of the camera -> the most important thing!

Boky

Comment edited 5 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
saiko
By saiko (Nov 9, 2012)

All right. Thanks iFixit.

But where is the review by DPReview?!
When is it coming?

1 upvote
Barney Britton
By Barney Britton (Nov 9, 2012)

Hopefully next week - tell your friends!

0 upvotes
Riezer
By Riezer (Nov 9, 2012)

Plastic-fantastic and not-so-fantastic weathersealing...eww!

2 upvotes
Boky
By Boky (Nov 9, 2012)

not plastic - magnesium with extensive bracing...
why people comment on things they don't understand?
Boky

7 upvotes
WilliamJ
By WilliamJ (Nov 9, 2012)

Precisely because they don't know that they don't know.

2 upvotes
Fox Fisher
By Fox Fisher (Nov 9, 2012)

I don't understand why people are suprised by the sony sensor. For certain product segments, it may actually be cheaper to buy them from a supplier than developing a new in-house one. It's basic capitalism.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
1 upvote
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (Nov 9, 2012)

Nikon doesn't build sensors.

Sony, amongst others, does.

3 upvotes
saiko
By saiko (Nov 9, 2012)

I thought Nikon does, for some of their cameras at least...

0 upvotes
Nishi Drew
By Nishi Drew (Nov 9, 2012)

The D4 should be using a Nikon sensor

0 upvotes
Plastek
By Plastek (Nov 9, 2012)

Depends what you mean by "Nikon sensor" - they propably had some input in design, and that's where the story ends. Sensor manufacturer (r. or a.) made all the job.

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (Nov 9, 2012)

Nishi Drew:

No the D4 does not use a Nikon sensor, I've forgotten the company's name--Renes... However Chipworks identified the D4 sensor's manufacture some weeks ago.

Yes, Nikon could do some of the engineering, they did on the D2H. And I believe Nikon still makes chip steppers for chip manufacturing.

0 upvotes
Alizarine
By Alizarine (Nov 11, 2012)

See how Nikon's gallant campaigning for their "this is OURS!" thingy has led its consumers to believe?

Well at least, Sony gets paid. On the other hand, Pentax users are proud of using Sony sensors today instead of Samsung ones before.

0 upvotes
CameraLabTester
By CameraLabTester (Nov 9, 2012)

The Annual Nikon Photography contest: New Category

"Putting back together a fully dismantled Nikon D600 in World Record Time"

.

6 upvotes
eddiephtgrphr
By eddiephtgrphr (Nov 9, 2012)

A bunch of wires attached to a few chips and covered with mostly plastic makes me wonder if it is worth more than two grand. I don't doubt the picture quality it produces but it should've been solid and robust enough if it's double the price of my D7000.

1 upvote
LKJ
By LKJ (Nov 9, 2012)

That's what the D800 is for.

0 upvotes
wmac
By wmac (Nov 9, 2012)

what is not robust and solid in that photo?

As an electronics engineer I see a very complicated and carefully designed machine in the photo.

1 upvote
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (Nov 9, 2012)

eddiephtgrphr:

It puts the D7000 to shame for lowlight and video. But that first was expected. The D700 also easily beat the D7000 for lowlight.

0 upvotes
Illumina
By Illumina (Nov 9, 2012)

@eddiephotographer
It is definitely more solid and robust than D7000..
I have both..

0 upvotes
mikusa
By mikusa (Nov 9, 2012)

Whereas I look at a photo like that and am floored by the tech involved and consider myself lucky to be within reach of it financially. Although I live in Africa, so it's harder to forget how far we've come....

0 upvotes
Alizarine
By Alizarine (Nov 11, 2012)

All electronics are like that: they're awfully cheap, parts-wise, but awfully costly too, in terms of manpower required for research, development, planning, and marketing.

0 upvotes
RonnySM
By RonnySM (Nov 8, 2012)

Thiswould be relevant if cameras were always going wrong. As a long time Nikon user (but I think this is still relevant to Canon, Olympus, Pentax, etc etc) I have never had the need to get my camera fixed for any reason.

If well looked after or even bashed about by pap's and sports guys, they generllay last a long time. Maybe the rubber grips come lose, or the sensor needs cleaning but no need to worry about anything worse.

2 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (Nov 9, 2012)

At one time there were several complaints about the D700 in the comments section at B&H, probably not there anymore, since that camera has been discontinued. There were mechanical problems with the shutter.

0 upvotes
gustabod
By gustabod (Nov 8, 2012)

OK can they put it back together now?

8 upvotes
Antony John
By Antony John (Nov 9, 2012)

Would you buy it if they did? ;-)

3 upvotes
snappyjari5
By snappyjari5 (Nov 13, 2012)

i think they cant put it back together..just like the market for this camera will drop after all the nikon enthusiast found out that there is a sony sensor inside it,they wont buy it..

0 upvotes
momo
By momo (Nov 8, 2012)

Wish they can find out why there is a dust issue Nikon is not acknowledging.

0 upvotes
VivaLasVegas
By VivaLasVegas (Nov 8, 2012)

D600 is 1000% PLASTICKY.......just stating facts.

1 upvote
LKJ
By LKJ (Nov 8, 2012)

One D600 contains ten D600s worth of plastic?

8 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Nov 8, 2012)

Actually the D600 a magnesium alloy shell with only the front panel plastic as seen here:

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

No need to feel threatened because D600 IQ is off the charts.

6 upvotes
shaocaholica
By shaocaholica (Nov 9, 2012)

Whats your point? Plastics are great.

4 upvotes
russbarnes
By russbarnes (Nov 9, 2012)

He doesn't have a point. He chooses to spend his entire insecure existence as a serial silly little Canon troll who's been broken by the fact that Nikon's cameras combine with Sony sensors to make the best image quality out there in the DSLR world. Pity him instead ;)

6 upvotes
Nishi Drew
By Nishi Drew (Nov 9, 2012)

^ Because all Nikon bashers are Canon users... right... there's only Canikon and Sony only makes sensors, not cameras.

0 upvotes
lensberg
By lensberg (Nov 9, 2012)

D600 IQ is good... but definitely not off the charts... 5D III renders betters overall details & colour saturation as compared to the Nikon...

Only area where the D600 is better is in shadow detail preservation...

Personally i prefer a tad more chroma noise... at least the image retains better details... Nikon, with it latest generation cameras seems to be employing stronger noise reduction even in RAW files and as a result they give the appearance of being cleaner but also flat...

0 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Nov 9, 2012)

"Only area where the D600 is better is in shadow detail preservation..."

You're delusional. DR for the D600 is about 3 EV better than the 5D. Color depth is better, and high ISO is equal to the class leading D4. Had a look at DxOMark lately? I guess not.

0 upvotes
shaocaholica
By shaocaholica (Nov 9, 2012)

I honestly don't care at all about IQ aspects that can be fixed/matched with a single slider in post.

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (Nov 11, 2012)

shaocaholica:

Quote:

"I honestly don't care at all about IQ aspects that can be fixed/matched with a single slider in post."

And that statement reflects a delusional understanding of what software can do for image quality.

Comment edited 46 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Mathias Japri
By Mathias Japri (Nov 8, 2012)

Yikes, Now you can make your own D600E...

3 upvotes
Simon97
By Simon97 (Nov 8, 2012)

It is quite normal for a product to have parts sourced from many different companies. Thank about the different types of plastics, glass, metals, motors, microphones and other electronic components that make up a camera.

In some cases the only thing a company will do is to put their name on it (and it was probably stamped on in a factory somewhere else.

I do small scale manufacturing. I design and do a lot of my own manufacturing to get my final product, but I still had to source parts and materials from other companies. It is how this stuff works.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
10 upvotes
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (Nov 8, 2012)

And this level of cooperation has always been common in Japan, especially with lower-end cameras which are cranked out like cell phones.

0 upvotes
KAMSA
By KAMSA (Nov 8, 2012)

Stil very happy with my Sony a200 ;) also my KM5D and took the last one more then ones apart :D glad i'm not a Nikoninan :D

0 upvotes
keepreal
By keepreal (Nov 8, 2012)

Sounds to me as though iFixit.com have taken apart Nikon. At the prices you pay for these high end cameras, you are entitled to expect a lot better than this.

Comment edited 22 seconds after posting
2 upvotes
M Jesper
By M Jesper (Nov 8, 2012)

What did you hope to find a pot of gold ?

13 upvotes
migus
By migus (Nov 8, 2012)

Well, two of my nikon FF lenses have design/execution aperture issues: Oil stickiness and broken springs. These problems are actually common, even in legendary prime lenses --e.g. 20/2.8D AF)-- from Nikon. http://shimonmor.com/TEMP/20mmlensrepair.html

1 upvote
mikusa
By mikusa (Nov 9, 2012)

Perhaps you should build your own....

Entitlement complex?

0 upvotes
stuntmonkey
By stuntmonkey (Nov 8, 2012)

It still amazes me that they considered the roof of the pentaprism a viable area to house circuit boards. So much crammed in there.

2 upvotes
malanski
By malanski (Nov 8, 2012)

If you think that's amazing then take a look at this:

http://cypresslin.web.fc2.com/Memo/M-PentaxMX.html
(a camera from 1976)

I never thought there were so many elements between the pentaprism and the case

2 upvotes
Ruy Penalva
By Ruy Penalva (Nov 8, 2012)

You pay for a Nikon but get a Sony. Why not buy the original?

1 upvote
Digitall
By Digitall (Nov 8, 2012)

Welcome to global market!

Wait till Hasselblad sell you a NEX7 ;)

9 upvotes
Der Steppenwolf
By Der Steppenwolf (Nov 8, 2012)

Sony has crap lenses. How good is your camera without a decent lens on it ?
Some thinking before posting would be nice.

14 upvotes
Nikolai Vassiliev
By Nikolai Vassiliev (Nov 8, 2012)

Nikon has a crap lenses compared to Zeiss and Sony Zeiss (except a few newly developed).

7 upvotes
hippo84
By hippo84 (Nov 8, 2012)

Der Steppenwolf - Canon/Nikon lenses aren't even close to Sony Zeiss lenses. I prefer to have 10 high quality lenses instead of 150 mediocre ones

6 upvotes
Princess Leia
By Princess Leia (Nov 8, 2012)

Der, you don't know what you are talking about. Sony Zeiss and Sony G lens are as good or even better than Nikon or Canon lenses. Remember, it is quality than quantity!

7 upvotes
ARTASHES
By ARTASHES (Nov 8, 2012)

Ruy Penalva
With that logic 20 years ago practically all cameras were Kodaks

3 upvotes
migus
By migus (Nov 8, 2012)

Done that: Bought NEX body (only) to terminate my nikkor glass. It's almost like carrying a lens w/ a tiny appendix. Happy. Will continue buying NEX bodies till all my nikon lenses have a clean & cheap Sony sensor attached. If FF sensor in future NEX bodies, even better. My real investment remains in the Nikkor glass, not the volatile bodies and sensors.

2 upvotes
Pradipta Dutta
By Pradipta Dutta (Nov 8, 2012)

So, you think the sensor is the only thing in the camera? Sony only provides the sensor...

3 upvotes
LKJ
By LKJ (Nov 8, 2012)

Seen what's inside an Apple product? ;)

4 upvotes
marike6
By marike6 (Nov 8, 2012)

Because then you'd be stuck mounting Sony glass. Yikes.

0 upvotes
RezaTravilla
By RezaTravilla (Nov 8, 2012)

because Nikon has hidden talent such as NEF processing inside the camera.
Nikon Also has 12 multiple exposures and speak frankly, Nikon autofocus maybe the best than others. Although Nikon never claim it. Always accurate.
It's silly just to judge camera from it's sensor.
About the lens, well we have our own budget. CZ indeed is a great lens but the price truly insane. Compare the same new 50mm, i rather buy Nikon.
Besides actually Nikon and Zeiss are brothers. History tells Nikon was born from 8 german's engineers which from Carl Zeiss. So the character were similar.

Btw for LKJ hahahahaha that's why i use Samsung. Apple takes profit margin very high but inside of it is made in china and used vendors who treat labour badly.

Comment edited 3 times, last edit 3 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Fox Fisher
By Fox Fisher (Nov 9, 2012)

It's fun to see how many troll's here are trolling about sony glass :) The normal sony lenses are in the same quality range as nikon or cannon. But the zeiss ones... they LoL on the face of canon and nikon glass. Go see for yourselves.

1 upvote
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (Nov 9, 2012)

Ruy Penalva:

The D600 is better in lowlight than the Sony A99, even though both use this same Sony sensor, that's a very good reason to buy Nikon.

If you want a Zeiss lens with a Nikon mount, there are 5 or 6 manual focus Zeiss lenses with that F mount. The manual focus 85mm is extraordinary.

At this FF size a real optical-prism viewfinder is still better than the white panel OLED tech than Sony uses in the A99. (Yes I know that the OLED VF can display information that the optical VF can't.)

0 upvotes
Kim Seng
By Kim Seng (Nov 9, 2012)

Who care who make what and who use what. The main concern is if that camera can funtion best I will buy it. It is totally nonsence to discuss such issue.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (Nov 9, 2012)

Kim Seng:

Well at high ISO green and magenta banding is a known problem with Sony full frame sensors, so there's a reason to care about which company makes what.

This banding is less of a problem on the D600 than on the Sony A99.

0 upvotes
Zerg2905
By Zerg2905 (Nov 10, 2012)

@hippo84, Fox Fisher and all others with the same "perspective": so who builds, in your opinion, the best 24-70 and 70-200 mm lenses in the world (let's say only from optical point of view, and not mentioning nuclear war-proof construction)? And the best 17 mm? 24mm? And the best fixed focal 300, 400, 500, 600, 800, 1200 mm lenses? A hint: by miracle, except the 17 & 24 mm, all mentioned lenses have AF. Cheers! :) P.S.: for all DxO fans, and assuming DxO is the supreme authority for testing methods - you don't buy just the sensor folks, you buy far more than that in a camera. This is why my 1981 AE-1 Program still rocks. With its "less than Zeiss" 50 mm FD lens.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
0 upvotes
snappyjari5
By snappyjari5 (Nov 13, 2012)

guess a lot of nikonian nod their heads in disbelieved whn reading this and wish that this is just a dream...and after this all praises thrown to this cmera bfore will turn to something that is bad and bla..bla..bla..come on guys..if sony was not good..then why nikon wants sony to supply or build the sensors for them ? (even according to their specs) R u saying that these guys at nikon that u hail lots of years before these are not good ? SO WHICH ARE TRUE THEN, THE GUYS AT NIKON OR SONY THAT ARE NOT GOOD? WHAT EVR THE ANSWER IS,IT WILL REFLECTS BOTH..BELIEVES ME...

0 upvotes
ianimal
By ianimal (Nov 8, 2012)

Ain't Nikon making some of the equipment Sony are using for making sensors? If so I guess there is alot of sharing between these companies. I don't know, but also it looks like Japanese companies buy into each other and may share and support each other? Not all, but some. Maybe Olympus could make some lenses for Sony (Sony now owns some parts of Olympus)? The odd part is why all this secrets about who is working with who.
I have a friend who did work with reparing TV's. He told me in most of the TV's there where parts from LG. That was some years ago I must add.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
MarkByland
By MarkByland (Nov 8, 2012)

Yes, quite like most computers use Intel processors. Pentax uses the same sensor as the D7000 in the K-5/II/IIs only slightly more pixels on a side, so 16.3MP Vs. 16.2MP. I've used both cameras and, personally speaking, I like the way Pentax seems to unlock just a bit more potential from it.

1 upvote
Fergutor
By Fergutor (Nov 8, 2012)

@MarkByland "Yes, quite like most computers use Intel processors"
Not so much. You can buy processors from the only two x86 makers and build your own computer along with many other hardware parts (wich is a no-brainer thing). This two makers does not make their own computers, and most computers makers doesn't make any internal parts. Precisely with cameras this is curious because each brand, use to do its own parts and others brand's parts are competition (thus sensor brands are kept secret). We could compare if you could find in e.g. Intel parts inside an AMD processor, or if suddenly camera makers tend to build cameras around few non-camera-brands sensors.
On the other hand, yes, your example with the D7000 and the K-5, makes one think that way.

0 upvotes
MarkByland
By MarkByland (Nov 8, 2012)

@Fergutor, I think you may have missed my point entirely. But that's okay. You basically re-iterated what I said and took it a step further in that you elaborated on what's inside Intel. Between AMD and Intel, even buying the silicon from a source indicates the processor is a culmination of many efforts, granted, but what's most important is the die stamped on the outside.

The Sony sensors have turned up in Olympus, Nikon, Pentax, Sony, etc. Soon, many will be running Sony in one form or another. VERY similar to how Intel is running in many computing devices was my point.

I'm not sure if you understood my comment as saying exclusively Intel or what, but the idea is that, regardless of what's inside of the processor itself, it's that little logo on the outside that appears in a large portion of devices.

0 upvotes
Fergutor
By Fergutor (Nov 8, 2012)

@MarkByland
You clearly missed my point entirely: to make it easy, you compare computers with cameras, and processors with sensors, and you can't because no processor maker actually make computers and camera maker do make sensors. That is why this whole article is written, because it is curious...ok? And that is why my reply to you...ok? It was nothing to be offended about. Not bad intentions from my part ok? And to play with your example if an hypothetical Intel computer comes with an AMD processor then voila! AMD would be like Sony (if AMD hypothetically were a computer maker too). Goodbye.

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
BSmi067
By BSmi067 (Nov 8, 2012)

But Intel do make computers - server level rather than ones you and I might buy - but we get the point - they do have Intel processors in them... Perhaps ARM and cellphones would have been a better analogy.

0 upvotes
Fergutor
By Fergutor (Nov 9, 2012)

Yes I should have said personal computers, my fault. In fact AMD also do servers and now with ARM processors too. Nvidia too, is making ARM processors and CUDA servers. But none of them is making nowadays personal computers.

0 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (Nov 9, 2012)

"Precisely with cameras this is curious because each brand, use to do its own parts and others brand's parts are competition (thus sensor brands are kept secret). We could compare if you could find in e.g. Intel parts inside an AMD processor,"

Intel business chipsets (Q-series) have ARM cores in them (to monitor and control the computers remotely when their are "turned off"). Close enough? ;)

0 upvotes
Pradipta Dutta
By Pradipta Dutta (Nov 9, 2012)

The steppers that Sony uses to fabricate the sensors are made by Nikon.

0 upvotes
MarkByland
By MarkByland (Nov 8, 2012)

What, no video with uber cute girl?!?

0 upvotes
onlooker
By onlooker (Nov 8, 2012)

"The bad news, according to the guys at iFixit is that unsurprisingly, most of the rest of the camera is very very hard to repair due to the huge number of soldered joins and screws holding everything together. The D600's LCD screen, too, is fused to the rear case and cannot be removed without replacing the entire rear plate of the camera."

This may be one of the ways to minimize production cost. Something for something. Although it would be interesting to see similar teardowns of D800, 5D III, and A99. Is it coming?

0 upvotes
twald
By twald (Nov 8, 2012)

Fusing the LCD to the glass is becoming more and more popular. One of two advantages is that it cuts the number of substrates and air gaps between the image and your eyes, thus reducing glare. The other advantage is that the display assembly is thinner.

1 upvote
backayonder
By backayonder (Nov 8, 2012)

A Tear down what a waste of time. If the thing breaks you just send it to a repair centre. This comment is coming from a Electronics repair Technician. There are no parts to buy or if there was what would you buy, then calibrate the camera. The sad thing is that in the future I can see peoples decisions on purchase being based on iFixit.

1 upvote
Rolo King
By Rolo King (Nov 8, 2012)

Nobody bases their purchase decisions on iFixit teardowns. If they exist, they're really few. These exist mostly as advertising for the tools they're selling (it also serves as a quick guide). On a camera, there are mechanicals problems which can be fixed without exotic replacement parts too.

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (Nov 9, 2012)

Rolo King:

"Nobody bases their purchase decisions on iFixit teardowns."

Um except for example the 13" Mac Retina is much more appealing than the 15" variation and notice of the significant build differences between the two was first broadly available from iFixit.

Hint: The 13" Retina Mac is much better thought out for repair than the bigger one. Still not upto a well done HP laptop, but those HPs are heavier and thicker.

Also the iPhone 5 is much easier to repair than the latest iPod Touch, though they look very similar on the outside. But I guess no one is going to buy an phone if all he seeks is a music player and wifi web device.

The latest 10" Samsung Android tablet is much easier to repair than an iPad, that information comes from iFixit.

0 upvotes
snappyjari5
By snappyjari5 (Nov 13, 2012)

can the nikon users handle more sad news whn they found out other siblings of D's are also using the SONY sensors?

0 upvotes
onlooker
By onlooker (Nov 8, 2012)

"We're days away from publishing our in-depth review of the Nikon D600"

This. :)

1 upvote
Octane
By Octane (Nov 8, 2012)

I don't understand the obsession with who manufactures the sensor. Looking at the DxO tests Nikon has 6 cameras in the top 10 list. Canon, who makes their own sensor, has one in 10th place. And that one camera is their most expensive one, while the D600 is the most affordable full frame camera today.
Nikon is smart, they pick the best from different suppliers and put it together as an amazing camera. That's what made the difference for them in the past 6 years where people thought they were hopelessly behind to now being the top quality SLR producer.

Comment edited 51 seconds after posting
15 upvotes
Richard Butler
By Richard Butler (Nov 8, 2012)

Because Sony also sells its sensors to other companies, so you know the sensor could become available in cameras from other brands? I find that interesting.

12 upvotes
Absolutic
By Absolutic (Nov 8, 2012)

Because Nikon loves to tell that they make their own sensors or that they' redesign sensors, which is B.S.

9 upvotes
jnk
By jnk (Nov 8, 2012)

Agreed with Octane:

Who cares who makes the sensor as long as it works ...!

My Apple iMac's CPU is from Intel and the graphic chip is from ATI Radeon - why does it perform better then my Windows 7 with the same Intel/ATI setup? - it's all about 'how' it is implemented and in this case - Nikon's implementation made it possible scoring 94 on DxOMark.

5 upvotes
howardroark
By howardroark (Nov 8, 2012)

The day someone can explain to me in what why the DxO score applies to the real world I think I'll have one of the great mysteries of life solved. That score is no way to judge a CAMERA. If it makes you feel warm and fuzzy about a sensor, good for you. The camera is a different ball game.

3 upvotes
Turbo Hampster
By Turbo Hampster (Nov 8, 2012)

I agree Octane
I think it was a good decision of Nikon's to use Sony sensors in their cameras as they are currently the best.

I think what gets people is DXO ONLY measures sensor performance. So when the Nikon fanboys crow about owning the DXO top spots the credit should really go to Sony seeing as they are the ones that make the sensor

3 upvotes
Nikolai Vassiliev
By Nikolai Vassiliev (Nov 8, 2012)

But what EXACTLY DXO marks - lunar craters or seeds in the water-melon piece?
Theirtesting methods are unclear and high-iso colour-less shooting biased, cause even high-end MF backs scored lower than cameras without any remarkable things except high-iso, like Nikon D700.

0 upvotes
migus
By migus (Nov 8, 2012)

One should pay attention to the makers of the core components, if not for the due credits, at least for an educated future decision. Nothing wrong w/ being a system integrator, if it works and it's sustainable in the long run. However, i take exception with "although Nikon insists it is designed to its specifications": My cheese, cold cuts and suits (not really) are all cut to my specs. Yet i can't claim to be a cheese maker, nor a tailor.

0 upvotes
papparazzi
By papparazzi (Nov 8, 2012)

Simple: Nikon does NR/coversion directly on raw. That's why they get better DR from the sensor when sony themselves don't.

0 upvotes
AbrasiveReducer
By AbrasiveReducer (Nov 8, 2012)

The way I look at it, Nikon is fortunate they don't have the ability to make a state of the art sensor on their own. Having to rely on Sony seems to be working out just fine.

1 upvote
DuxX
By DuxX (Nov 8, 2012)

Who cares who produces sensor until the results are fantastic?? Nikons currently have the best picture quality and that's all that a user needs to care.

2 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (Nov 9, 2012)

Well, it maybe works for now - until Nikon completely loses their own capability to design sensors in timely fashion. After that, Sony will be able to extract all their profits - after all, sate of the art sensors are not commodity (especially now after Kodak implosion).

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (Nov 9, 2012)

@Absolutic:

Nikon doesn't claim to build sensors, back in the D2H days (a still extraordinary 4MP APSC DSLR) Nikon did some sensor engineering and may still.

You appear to have confused Nikon and Canon.

@peevee1:

Neither the Nikon D4 nor the 1 series use Sony sensors, so Nikon has clearly made sure to keep sensor supply options other than Sony.

0 upvotes
HowaboutRAW
By HowaboutRAW (Nov 9, 2012)

Turbo Hampster:

The D4 does not, and the D3s, D3 and D700 did not use Sony sensors.

Those are all more interesting cameras that the D7000, D600 or D800 (excepting the D800e).

0 upvotes
allenns
By allenns (Nov 9, 2012)

Seems that more and more modern technology devices are becoming difficult to repair other than by the original manufacturer. The new Applemac computers are typical of this scenario making the customer having to rely on taking out long term insurance cover.

0 upvotes
mrgs1
By mrgs1 (Nov 10, 2012)

Shame its always about problems when it should be about the enjoyment of photography getting enjoyment and mastering the camera improving your photos etc. The D600 is a nice camera to use i like it, cameras are complex they are small there not a PC where you play around inside the more you cram in the less space its going to be less user repairable.

0 upvotes
Total comments: 134