D600, for me too little, too late for too much

Started Sep 13, 2012 | Discussions thread
Flat view
ThomasH_always Regular Member • Posts: 302
D600, for me too little, too late for too much

For me D600 is a very clear and decisive "no by."

That's the short opinion. Below is the long one.

Approx. 3 years ago Sony A850 hit the streets.
24.60 Mpix, FX format, $2000.

Now 3 years later Nikon comes out with their D600, controls like in the D7000, 1/4000 shutter speed. Confronting fans and users by a price far off and beyond the "rumor" from "reliable sources" that the body price will be settled at roughly $1500-1600.

Of course it was only an "unsubstantiated rumor," but the rumor should have been known best to Nikon's PR people. They used the "leakvertisement" in many cases, they should have spread their own rumor, along the lines, "we cannot imagine that a price far off Sony A850 would be viable."

And so we have here the camera, with meager functionality, except for the expected noise property, and the depth of field resulting from this frame size, at a price which knocks off some people, while others say "most affordable Full Frame." I am struggling to make up my mind, is it a good price, or gold digging? I think its the latter.

The fact is, that at least here in the US, we all "after Bush" have much less. Contrarily to people's declining purchasing power, the cameras and lenses seem to explode in prices, but they provide no new innovation or add-on value. Its mostly "tinkering," incremental improvements. Except for the new sensors, and of course the accompanying data copy/storage electronics. But even that is in part merely tinkering. Lets look at some other miniaturized electronics sold in millions of cases, with ever raising speed and power, called "laptops." They do not explode in prices! Why should they? Manufacturing lines all paid off, software lays out the mother boards, keyboards are being made in billions for pennies, so the screens. Similarly the DSLR's! Its all made in hundreds of millions pieces, shutters are as old as 30-40 years, so are mounts, and many other parts. Where is the justification for such raise in price?

Your mileage may vary. I set a limit for my photographic equipment to be $25,000 total, mostly lenses of course, but also tripods, heads, lighting etc. The entire set. I will not spit out $2000 on a body with childish controls, when I can get the same results for a half price.

Any DSLR body is expected to age very fast, and mirror less might replace them anyways, its a real possibility. Considering my insider knowledge about design and manufacturing processes and costs, I think such prices are Gold Digging. This includes of course the EOS-5 as a parade example (I also own a small Canon set, and I called the EOS-5 "a $1300 camera for $3000," to dismay of my friends who own them. Well, now for $4000. Suit yourself.)

This photographer will stay out of such purchases. Rather Lego and dresses for our girls. I think its not very clever to pay that much for a DSLR. Rather pay to bring your body and the camera body to a fascinating location worth photographing. As always, your mileage may vary.

In any case, should you get, the D600, enjoy! May it translate into superior results.

Nikon D600 Nikon D7000 Sony Alpha DSLR-A850
If you believe there are incorrect tags, please send us this post using our feedback form.
Flat view
Post (hide subjects) Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow