Nikon D600 as first fullframe?

Chocoloco said:

Chocoloco wrote:

Hey guys!
I'm beginning to take my photography more important and I'm trying to build up my portfolio.
The time has come that I want to buy a my first fullframe dslr.
After some reading, I thought the Nikon D600 might be a good option.
But I wonder if there might be a similar Camera without the Vidoe-option (don't really rely on that).
Any thoughts?
Cheers,
Judith

Click to expand...

The similar camera without the video option would be the Nikon d700. It is a little older and so there are a few things to consider.

1: The d700 has a more professional build quality, meaning it is heavier and just slightly larger. This is good or bad depending on what you prefer.

2: The d700 is capable of faster shooting especially if you use the optional grip. (8fps vs 5). The d700 is also capable of up to twice as fast shutter speed.

3: The d700 has a more advanced focus system (more focus points, more cross type)

4: The d700 1/2 as many pixels. 12mp vs 24. There is no advantage to the lower resolution except for disk storage.

5: The d600 has better image quality particularly in low light. The ISO performance is close, but the dynamic range of the d600 is better by 2 stops (a lot), and slightly better at color sensitivity as well. All in all a better sensor in the d600.


The d700 is still a great camera (I still love my d700), but all in all the d600 is a better camera. Unless you need to save money, the d600 would be my recommendation.

From what I've seen, you won't save a huge amount of money by buying a D700, they seem to be holding their value.

Chocoloco said:

Chocoloco wrote:

Hey guys!
I'm beginning to take my photography more important and I'm trying to build up my portfolio.
The time has come that I want to buy a my first fullframe dslr.
After some reading, I thought the Nikon D600 might be a good option.
But I wonder if there might be a similar Camera without the Vidoe-option (don't really rely on that).
Any thoughts?
Cheers,
Judith

Click to expand...

Any camera you get today is going to have video; it doesn't really cost much to incorporate. The only way to avoid the video option is to not press that button on the camera.

Bjorn_L said:

The d700 is also capable of up to twice as fast shutter speed.

Click to expand...

True. And if you need 1/8000th then you need 1/8000th, no doubt about it. However, the base ISO on a D600 is 100 and will go down to 50. Whereas on the D700 it's a base of 200 going down to 100. So what you lose on the shutter you gain on the ISO. Just pointing it out.

Chocoloco said:

Chocoloco wrote:

Hey guys!
I'm beginning to take my photography more important and I'm trying to build up my portfolio.
The time has come that I want to buy a my first fullframe dslr.
After some reading, I thought the Nikon D600 might be a good option.
But I wonder if there might be a similar Camera without the Vidoe-option (don't really rely on that).
Any thoughts?
Cheers,
Judith

Click to expand...

I would probably prefer the D700 for a lot of reasons. The build quality for starters and the control layout is entirely professional. Everything is pretty much where I expect it to be. Of course I own one as well as a D800 and a D3S and these are all the level I enjoy and am used to.

The D600 is a great enthusiast FX camera though. Moreover, it's brand new rather than a used D700. Judith, I would suppose a lot would depend on your experience and what you're used to now. If you have never had a D200 or better level camera, I'd get the excellent D600.

As with every high quality camera, it depends more on the photographer than the gear.

Good Luck and have fun.

Chocoloco said:

Chocoloco wrote:

Hey guys!
I'm beginning to take my photography more important and I'm trying to build up my portfolio.
The time has come that I want to buy a my first fullframe dslr.
After some reading, I thought the Nikon D600 might be a good option.
But I wonder if there might be a similar Camera without the Vidoe-option (don't really rely on that).
Any thoughts?
Cheers,
Judith

Click to expand...

Hi Judith,

I have both the D3 and the D600. I intended to use my D3 for my serious photography ( which I did), and the D600 for more casual work. I didn't think the 600 could handle the constant usage that D3 was built for. Images from the D600 are hard to resist. I'm finding myself grabbing the 600 for almost everything, including sports ( it really isn't fast enough to catch all the action, but very close at 5.5 frames per second.) For events such as weddings, the D600 is definitely superior to the D3. Right now the d3 has been relegated to inclement weather use. It has far better build quality tHan the D600, and we know that in 2007, it was the class leader in action photography. It still does a h-ll of a job. But the D3 like the D700, is a little old.You would probably be served better by a current model camera.

If you are looking for a "entry level FX camera," there are are really only two choices. The Nikon D600 and the Canon EOS 6D. If you read the reviews the Nikon is superior. It is an excellent camera, that while not "professional," can certainly be used as one. Have fun

Rich

Hey there,


I'm surprised that so many people answered right away.
Thank you for your opinions!
I''ll go for the D600
The next step is finding the cheapest place to buy my new baby.

Thanks, you'll be hearing from me often from now on, cause I think this is a pretty fantastic forum here



Cheers!

Judith

I own a D600 and it is a really great camera. However, you should be aware that there is an issue with a number of these cameras with spots appearing on the sensor. I have just got mine back from Nikon who replaced the shutter, and the spots have appeared again almost instantly.

I'm not sure even with this problem that I'd advise against buying - the D600 is rated as having the second best sensor of any camera, better than any canon and even the very expensive D4! Added to that it has respectable shooting speed (5.5 fps) and the U1 and U2 memory modes which really ought to be in every nikon by now, and its hard to find another camera Id want in comparison!

But if you do decide to buy knowing about the spot problem, make sure that you take it into consideration - for example, I would not buy this camera in anticipation of an expensive holiday of a lifetime safari or something, because you may well get home and find all of your pictures ruined. I'd also make sure to avoid a grey market copy, if you have the spots you might need to send it in a few times for service.

It's a huge shame that such an incredible camera is marred by this QC issue, but I am still hopeful that ultimately either it will be fixed or go away, and I will get to enjoy the camera properly!

Yes, I would love to buy this camera, but I hear and read about these issues and I know I would hate myself for beeing so impatient. Now I start thinking, I should wait. But I don't think I can go on without a camera for another year. Looking for alternatives now, but I'm a little bit lost.

Perhaps I should just keep it on a cropped-sensor-level for now and look for something inexpensive and consider buying my first fullframe in a couple of years.

Boy he really scared the h-ll out of you. Yes, there have been reported issues with this camera, and I will not minimize them. But I am not going to exaggerate them either. It has become less of an issue over the last several weeks. In addition, Nikon reluctantly is trying to clean up the mess. To say that if you take this camera on a trip, you may come back with a ruined set of photos is a gross exaggeration of the issue. Unless you are shooting f16 or higher (stopped down), in all your pictures, you will not see such a problem.

As with any DSLR, the sensor does get dirty and the D600 dirtier than most. But you would have to clean any camera anyhow. In addition, you may not even get a D600 camera with such a problem. Its a real problem, but not with every D600. The positive trade off is that the camera produces absolutely beautiful pictures in the right hands. I just thought I would balance the opinion of gThe other poster.

Haha, well it's not just what I read here.
I also saw a few videos on YouTube, for example
showing this issue.

The thing is, I understand that not every camera has these problems. But with only making 646 $ a month right now, I don't want to gamble. Unless I can be 100% sure to get a full refund..

Chocoloco said:

Chocoloco wrote:

Haha, well it's not just what I read here.
I also saw a few videos on YouTube, for example

showing this issue.
The thing is, I understand that not every camera has these problems. But with only making 646 $ a month right now, I don't want to gamble. Unless I can be 100% sure to get a full refund..

Click to expand...

At that income, I would hope you're ok enought to purchase a camera. I'd hate to have to sell it later because of financial issues. Why not look at a good used camera like a D200 or D300? It would be a superb way to learn photography.

As far as gambling on the D600, you're giving up on one of the finest cameras made right now. That's a bit of a shame, really.

As I said its a famtastic camera, amd minus the spots it's certainly the camera Id chose above any other in the world.

However, I am taking a break right now from cloning hundreds of spots out of the pictures I took today. I got the camera back on Friday from Nikon after they eplaced the shutter and cleaned the sensor. This suggests that Nikon still do not have a reliable fix for the problem. They are also not willing to replace my body despite this, and instead want me to give it to them yet again for another new shutter!

I knew about the dust spots when I got my D600, but bought it anyway because of people posting on forums that it isnt a big deal, it goes away quickly (mine didnt even slow down after 7000 clicks) and just means possibly cleaning slightly more than other cameras. This is just simply not true, it is a huge problem, reoccurs so fast that sensor cleaning is a waste of time, and Nikon cannot fix it. Buying the camera is a gamble, and if you get a bad one like mine (which seem fairly widespread) you will probably have to send it away for long periods repeatedly and still not have it fixed.

It is otherwise a wonderful camera, but as Im part way through a long period of boring and frustrating spot removal yet again, its hard for me to be positive. And I dont want to downplay a problem that for many of us is very real and serious.

Chocoloco said:

Chocoloco wrote:

Hey guys!
I'm beginning to take my photography more important and I'm trying to build up my portfolio.
The time has come that I want to buy a my first fullframe dslr.
After some reading, I thought the Nikon D600 might be a good option.
But I wonder if there might be a similar Camera without the Vidoe-option (don't really rely on that).
Any thoughts?
Cheers,
Judith

Click to expand...

Hello Judith,

It is always difficult to class a camera as 'good' because it all depends on how it is being used. To put a little slant on things - remember that it is the person using the camera that makes the photo, and choosing the camera is like 'selecting the right tool to undertake the job it is meant to do'. Some cameras will be more suited to landscape photography, some for sports/action/moving wildlife, some for lower light photography, some to take more knocks, some to last longer, etc, etc.

Most cameras these days will produce excellent results if they are being used: 1. Correctly 2. For the job that they were intended for.

I suspect that a lot of the niggles you see on forums are likely to be either due to the extreme 'pixel peeping' mindset that is often reinforced by hype and marketing methods, and/or comments getting made about a camera not performing well in a certain area, but when you look at the specs of that camera it is evident that it would struggle in that area. Either way, the comments can be a bit misleading.

Perhaps if you could say the type of use that you intend, you will get some more informed information about the suitability of the D600 to your needs.

Regards,

Gary

--
http://garymurisonphotography.co.uk

Maybe if you tell us why you want to go full frame. What are you shooting with now, and why does it not meet your needs?



A used D700 is a great camera, less expensive that the D600, better in some ways, but not as many megapixels, not as good in low light. Or a high end APSC camera like a D300, or D7000/D7100

I'm doing a photography internship for a few months to learn more about hotel interior shots. That's why I don't have too much money right now, but I saved a while for my new camera.

What I'm looking for is not a camera to learn basics, for that I used a filmcamera since I was 13 and since I'm 16 I use a Nikon D80. Now, 7 years later, I want to go from hobby to more professional. I plan on doing weddings, children and families and interior.
I agree that one must learn the basics. And a crappy photographer is still a crappy photographer with a D600 in his hands. But I'm really unhappy with the quality of the pictures I take.

JamesRL said:

JamesRL wrote:

Maybe if you tell us why you want to go full frame. What are you shooting with now, and why does it not meet your needs?

A used D700 is a great camera, less expensive that the D600, better in some ways, but not as many megapixels, not as good in low light. Or a high end APSC camera like a D300, or D7000/D7100

Click to expand...

Sure

I must admit that it took me quite a while to decide to go for full frame.

I need something that works great in situation with low light, makes low-noise pictures with high iso. I love the look that full frame camreas have. Taking the same picture, the full frame cameras give it such a nicer look.
Especially for interior I think full frame is the better option.
Also, I don't want to spend lots money now just to find myself buying a full frame one year later. I rather spend I little bit more now and buy propper gear and keep it for the next couple of years.

The D600 does sound good for you, perhaps get one from a shop with a good no questions asked return policy, shoot the hell out of it for that period and see if spots are showing up, and if they are then return it for a refund. This might also give you a better idea about whether you need full frame, even if you end up returning the camera.

Just make sure that you check, I was happy with mine and didnt want to go looking for trouble, so didnt check for spots until they became a problem at wide apertures, which was too late to return he camera to the shop.

Forgive me if this comes across as harsh, but a full frame camera isn't going to help you if you hate your shots today.

The D80 is a competent camera (with a few quirks). Sure the D600 is better, especially in low light, but no camera can perform without a compentant operator. The D80 is certainly capable of decent shots. I have a D200 with the same sensor in a more pro style body, and I make some decent shots. You need to learn the techniques for improving your shots, in lighting, composition and other techniques before you move on to a better camera. Otherwise you will still get shots you don't like, in higher resolution.