# D600



## punctatus (Dec 19, 2011)

I'm getting one, but I'll keep my d7000 for macros of the fishes. Happy with the lower res than the d800 and low light looks great. I'm used to the compact body, easier to carry around on the streets.


----------



## TickleMyElmo (Aug 13, 2009)

I cant even consider it because of the lack of an AF-ON button, cheaper construction/less weather sealing, no 100% zoom on playback by pressing the center button, and a few other little things.

Its just too consumer. Those little things may not seem like a big deal, but its a major deal when you use your camera as much as I do.


----------



## Patriot (Dec 22, 2010)

TickleMyElmo said:


> I cant even consider it because of the lack of an AF-ON button, cheaper construction/less weather sealing, no 100% zoom on playback by pressing the center button, and a few other little things.
> 
> Its just too consumer. Those little things may not seem like a big deal, but its a major deal when you use your camera as much as I do.


Well it is a lower end FX camera. You can't expect them to put all the bells and whistles in it. That's what the D4 and D800 are for.


----------



## TickleMyElmo (Aug 13, 2009)

Patriot said:


> Well it is a lower end FX camera. You can't expect them to put all the bells and whistles in it. That's what the D4 and D800 are for.


Yeah I understand. I didn't expect it to be spec'd like a pro camera, and I'm quite content with the full pro cameras I have now.

But consider this. The D700 could be had brand new for $2300, and it had all the bells and whistles. It was basically a mini-D3.

Of course, inflation, video features, multimedia, and what seems to be a new marketing strategy all play into the cost differences.

One last thought on the issue...every time a new camera comes out, people flock to buy it to have the latest and greatest. I was guilty of it for the longest time too, but I've finally stopped being new camera obsessed. I know this is all too common advice, but it really becomes clear after you have the revelation yourself. There is absolutely nothing that you can do with the newest line of Nikon/Canon cameras that you could not do with the last generation of cameras. Every time I think I need to upgrade a body, I look to my sources of photographic inspiration and realize how unnecessary the newest bodies are. 

I've been doing photography for a while now and get paid good money to do it, and theres still so much I have yet to learn and improve upon that no camera "better" or newer than what I have now will help me achieve. I feel as though there is nothing left lacking, except to grow my own skill level.

I feel as though most amateurs and new photographers are always chasing the latest and greatest, expecting a new body to revitalize their creativity or refine their skills. I feel like this is because newcomers, amateurs, and advanced amateurs really don't know what great photography is. I know, because that was me. Once you immerse yourself in the professional level and surround yourself with the work of many excellent photographers, you suddenly realize how little camera bodies matter, and how creativity, vision, education and becoming cultured in the field make such a tremendous impact. Thats not to say all non-professionals aren't cultured in excellent photography, but sadly, the very very very vast majority are not. Heck, a lot of pro's aren't either, but I'm talking about upper level pros here. Anyways, sorry to get all philosophical (I tend to do that late at night), just a friendly reminder on how little it all matters.


Now lenses, there's something that matters....


----------



## kubalik (Jul 8, 2011)

I actually got it and love it . I am not a pro , so I don't care about less weather sealing . I love the smaller package, and the video feature. (coming from D700)


----------



## Patriot (Dec 22, 2010)

TickleMyElmo said:


> Yeah I understand. I didn't expect it to be spec'd like a pro camera, and I'm quite content with the full pro cameras I have now.
> 
> But consider this. The D700 could be had brand new for $2300, and it had all the bells and whistles. It was basically a mini-D3.
> 
> ...


You are correct too. I will be keeping my D7000 for some time until I increase my skills and need something more. I rather spend good money for great quality lens that will and can last forever. I believe no one should be getting the D4 or D800 unless it will produce income to pay it off. If you have a job that needs it then good, but if you get it just to get it then no. Every week I see a post of a photography forum asking what lens to get with the D4 and D800. If you don't know what glass to use with those cameras then your not ready. I don't consider myself a amateur but I'm no where near pro status because I don't get paid to do it.


----------



## Da Plant Man (Apr 7, 2010)

I definitely wanna upgrade to prosumer. Not saying I will be a pro and get paid lots, but I really enjoy it, and my D5100 doesn't have the bells and whistles I want. What I think I should really do is upgrade to the D7000 (or D7100 when/if it comes out) and just go from there. Then spend whatever I have left on a really good lens.

I want to make enough money with photography to pay for the equipment. Thats really all I need.


----------



## Patriot (Dec 22, 2010)

Da Plant Man said:


> I definitely wanna upgrade to prosumer. Not saying I will be a pro and get paid lots, but I really enjoy it, and my D5100 doesn't have the bells and whistles I want. What I think I should really do is upgrade to the D7000 (or D7100 when/if it comes out) and just go from there. Then spend whatever I have left on a really good lens.
> 
> I want to make enough money with photography to pay for the equipment. Thats really all I need.


Now that sounds like a plan! But is the current D7XXX a big enough of a upgrade from the D5100? However the D7000 prices are falling fast. If I had the need and money I would mind getting a D600 to get me into full frame.


----------



## plamski (Sep 25, 2009)

I'm passionately waiting for D400.
With D600 and fish tank shots we will have too deep DOF because FF sensor.


----------



## etgregoire (Oct 28, 2009)

^^^ First time I've ever heard someone being disapointed about a full frame sensor lol


----------



## Da Plant Man (Apr 7, 2010)

People always try to impress me with their "20 megapixel...etc" camera. Then they don't believe me I say it doesn't matter as much. All the proof you need is the D4. 16mp and the most 'pro' you can get.


----------



## etane (May 14, 2012)

I am dissapointed at the price. I thought it's going to be around $1500. Will cost to much for me to get D600 plus lens to replace my D90 with 17-55mm f2.8 lens. D600 + 24-70mm f.28 = D90 + 17-55mm + $2k.


----------



## Nubster (Aug 9, 2011)

Da Plant Man said:


> People always try to impress me with their "20 megapixel...etc" camera. Then they don't believe me I say it doesn't matter as much. All the proof you need is the D4. 16mp and the most 'pro' you can get.


With good lenses and technique, you can get an old Nikon D1 with a 2.74MP sensor and shoot circles around someone with a D4 and no idea how to use it. Too many people think that lots of money and the best equipment make them the best photographer, or whatever hobby they are involved with.


----------



## Nubster (Aug 9, 2011)

etane said:


> I am dissapointed at the price. I thought it's going to be around $1500. Will cost to much for me to get D600 plus lens to replace my D90 with 17-55mm f2.8 lens. D600 + 24-70mm f.28 = D90 + 17-55mm + $2k.


Get a used D700 for $500-600 less.


----------



## GraphicGr8s (Apr 4, 2011)

Da Plant Man said:


> People always try to impress me with their "20 megapixel...etc" camera. Then they don't believe me I say it doesn't matter as much. All the proof you need is the D4. 16mp and the most 'pro' you can get.


Up to a point megapixels don't matter. As I've said before I've done large posters for customers that were 6mp and they were sharp. I'll take a great lens over mp any day.

If you have "decent" gear learn to maximize the results with that gear. Learn to push it beyond what you think it can do. Better yet learn to push yourself to use your equipment, and more importantly your creativity to its maximum. Once you have done that and only when you have done that upgrade. Better, faster gear doesn't make a better photographer. It just allows a good one to push harder.
Ansel Adams' shots would have been great no matter what gear he used. But whatever gear he would have chosen he would have learned it inside out and back again.



> With D600 and fish tank shots we will have too deep DOF because FF sensor.


Not really. If you take a FF and a cropped and put them the same distance from the subject, at the same focal length and the same aperture the DOF will be identical.

Tickle: Even with lenses some folks want the latest and greatest. I can tell you from experience some of the old lenses that were considered garbage had some interesting effects that when used in the right circumstances were spectacular. I can pretty much guarantee you aren't as expensive as I was. And I don't shoot C or N. But my clients were more than willing to stroke the check. Equipment isn't everything. I've had "pro" shooters with me I wouldn't let photograph my dog's poop after one outing. I've also shot with some high end pros using top of the line state of the art gear. Clients couldn't tell the difference. Like I said, equipment is only part of it. And in most cases it's the least part.
Go tell the chef at your favorite eatery his food is great. Then tell him it's his great pots and pans.


----------



## Patriot (Dec 22, 2010)

And thats why I will be keeping my D7000 for years to come. It's not the best, but it gets the job done and take great pictures. I also can't afford the top of the line gear.


----------



## concepts88 (Oct 4, 2012)

I shoot with a D7000 also, but it just does not do well in low light. My friend's D700 is a much better camera in low light..

and glass doesnt matter, I have glass that cost more than double the cost of my camera. There are limitations.


----------



## GraphicGr8s (Apr 4, 2011)

concepts88 said:


> I shoot with a D7000 also, but it just does not do well in low light. My friend's D700 is a much better camera in low light..
> 
> *and glass doesnt matter*, I have glass that cost more than double the cost of my camera. There are limitations.


You're kidding right?
Any photographer worth his salt will disagree with that statement.
Crummy glass will make a bad camera look bad. It will make a decent camera look blah and a great camera mediocre. Good glass will step each up a notch. Great glass will make you look at a shot on a bad camera and say "This looks better than I expected this camera was capable of "
On a decent camera "Wow this is good."
On a really good camera: " Wow, I'm really good!"
Glass matters as much as if not more than the body. A lens with CA will look bad on any body. A lens with BD will look bad on any body. And on and on.
Another factor is to use the right lens for what you're shooting. Great glass for landscapes isn't the best for shooting a band onstage.


----------



## Patriot (Dec 22, 2010)

concepts88 said:


> I shoot with a D7000 also, but it just does not do well in low light. My friend's D700 is a much better camera in low light..
> 
> and glass doesnt matter, I have glass that cost more than double the cost of my camera. There are limitations.


The D7000 does well in low light. I only problem that I found is the focusing isn't good. I even have trouble using the sb-910 and getting to fire in low light. This camera preforms better than most cropped sensored cameras out there now. 

And glass is highly important. You wouldn't use a f/4 lens shooting sports at night would you? You would be using something like a f/2.8.


----------



## Nubster (Aug 9, 2011)

I think that he meant that glass doesn't matter as in it doesn't help improve the D7000's low light ability.

If that's not what he meant and he does actually feel that glass doesn't matter in any situation, well....at least the other 99.9% of SLR shooters know better.


----------

