Just Posted: Nikon D600 real-world sample images [UPDATED]

Sorry, but these don't look all that hot to me. I don't see great resolution, great sharpness, or anything.

I come from a background of Canon, 7D and Mark II, and I sold these and am now very satisfied with the quality of, of all things, an Olympus e-m5 m43 camera (with their good lenses, of course). These look worse than what I see fro that camera.

Am I missing something?

Just saw a nice D600 video demo, and it really is impressive. It's all nature so no opportunity to check for moire, but if the D600 lacks the moire that exists in the D800, I may have to bag my plans to get a Fuji X-E1 to go with my D800, and get this camera. Thanks for the samples DPR, they look terrific.

D600 Video
https://vimeo.com/49395253

I want a D700s with just that sensor that's all !! Don't need polycarbontae too, to smalll body, left whell (even if it can be block, which is a plus..) Same confort, solidity as D300 or D700, but with this sensor. I don't want the D800 and his 36 Mpx

Why dont they make camera's with iso 25 and up for example? It would prevent me to take a ND filter with me for example.... also you can still buy 25 iso film if you want very fine grain, so why not on digital?

Excellent camera, but since there are so many cameras that do extremely well at ISO 6400 and higher, the high ISO argument is not as important as it used to be. For me, these days I just want something that won't get in my way by being too big or heavy. That's why I've recently changed my way of thinking regarding what type of camera I use. I sold my D700 and currently use an E-M5. Now, I'm likely going to buy the Fuji X-E1. Why? The image quality is amazing, it's a beautiful camera, the size/weight is good and the lenses are excellent. At this point in my life, I'm interesting in being more creative and less worried about what the guy at the zoo thinks of me when he and his D3s look down on my little mirrorless camera. Besides, many of those zoo show-offs with the huge rigs are very often coming up with far less creative and compelling images than I come up with when I'm feeling free and creative with my 'little' camera. I used to be 'that guy'...

Good enough to show my faults as photographer that much better. Pre-ordered.

I think that all modern DSLRs (and some mirror-less) have reached a level of image quality that renders demo pics useless. These images could have been taken with every other serious cam as well.

It's all about features, handling, lenses and accessories that makes a system superior over another.

Where are some low light indoor photographs.......

ISO performance is one stop better than my Nikon D5100....

Where are the real sample photos for Sony A99?

I'm a long time fan of DPR, but recently it starts to irritates me. This post should show us the sample pictures of D600, what annoys me is that it took 5-6 steps before I can actually see the sample pictures.

Just got back from NYC where I made a bunch of street images with my GRD III. To say that these city street shots are a bit cleaner and more detailed would be a bit of an understatement.

I don't know if the D600's high ISO is as good as the D800, but the images are bright, clean, sharp and colorful, even at high ISO. I see very little at all to complain about. Nice job DPR. Thanks.

in the past 100 iso/asa was considered fast. Yet, beautiful pictures were made by famous photographers. Nowadays people just care how it performs on 6400 iso or higher.
You think you can shoot better pictures if you have 256000 iso grainless?

I'm sure its a very nice camera in all aspects, its just that for me a camera that limits you makes me more creative.

Is the purpose of these images to showcase the 24-120/4 or to showcase the abilities of the D600? The answer is obviously the 24-120, or else Nikon's best lenses would have been used: The 14-24, 24G, 35G, 85G, 200G, 70-200VRII, etc.

Another basically useless 'review'/'preview' by DPR.

Good body/sensor combination but looks flat to me. Poor lens?

Hmm... even viewing enlargements of the "Original" images, they don't seem light years better than m4/3s, e.g., Oly OM-D EM-5 can do nowadays. Some of these nighttime, high-ISO shots too are very chroma blurred, again not all that different than m4/3s or ASP-C.

Another huge hit for Nikon. Great color and sharpness.

I like what I see. I see more resolution and about the same noise, if not less than the D700. The colors stay strong and real at high ISO.
I personally think and for my work, this is a better compromise than the D800 - which is not really a shining high ISO monster. I was slighty disappointed by the D800 images. You got tons of resolution, but on the other hand it showed a very processed look, noise showing up very early, albeit very thin. Which is no surprise of course. But these D600 images are very clean at low ISO.

I would like to buy it as a backup body to my D700. And give the movie feature a shot, would love to play with with 1.4 lenses. And use it when 24MP is needed (bigger prints etc...)

But I'm going to hold it out until the price comes down a bit.

How can we be sure these weren't taken with, say, a Nokia Lumia 920?

Hmmm...not very impressed. Strange colors and quite "flat".

PK

That certain other camera test site has samples up with many showing the same scene at different ISOs. ISO 1600 is nearly free of noise. Great camera for those old primes that APS-C cameras made too telephoto.

does the left focus point work though?

I think d800 is not direct competitor to 5d mk III, but d600 is

I guess I need to see a doctor about my testosterone levels, because apparently all this FF hoopla is not giving me the boner it is giving everyone else... Just be happy we live in such times to have so many GOOD options by so many major brands.