Anyone else tempted to go Nikon D600?

DTBaan wrote in post #15024535
just a friendly fyi.

https://photography-on-the.net …?p=15004910&pos​tcount=521

there's a nikon thread here.
https://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthre​ad.php?t=991840

Thanks, never saw that one.

Not trolling - though the effect might be the same. I'm genuinely disappointed.

This thread has made me think twice about all that glass. I don't have fancy stuff like 50 f1.2 but I have a great copy of my workhorse lenses (70-200, 85 f1.8, 135L, 24-105L) - something hard to forefit.

Good info on the D800 variable cropping capability - so I wasn't out to lunch wishing for that! Sweet!

5Diii. OK, this might also look like trolling because I know how unpopular this is. I just wish I had a pop-up flash and I don't really care so much that others don't agree. I use it as a Master sometimes, but mainly I set it to manual output at a very low setting to add some eye-light and lift shadows.

My shooting is mostly casual so hauling around a flash doesn't always happen (maybe half the time). Even if I have it; its intimidating (to the subject) and sort of geeky for family situations. I like FF IQ and DOF but I'm not a perfectionist for casual stuff - pop-up is fine on low-output settings esp. outdoors. So in part its a matter of principle that Canon is imposing their will on this matter where Nikon isn't - the IQ, AF. and other aspects of D600 are likely neck-n-neck with 5Diii.

Mainly it's a matter of reducing to a single FF body and pop-up is essential as a casual family camera.

The variable cropping that the D800 has is the same as just cropping a Canon FF camera in post, there is nothing to be gained here.

ehouli wrote in post #15025122
Aha... and how many are bragging about it? this is the second time someone tells this, the other being with a Kenko TC if I remember it right... unless I see something more "official", on paper, it still goes up to 5.6 only...

Well, I guess if you need it on paper by Canon you'll be losing a lot, as they just won't do it.
I'm very very happy with my 400L f/5.6 with my Kenko TC.

Alex_Venom wrote in post #15026016
Well, I guess if you need it on paper by Canon you'll be losing a lot, as they just won't do it.
I'm very very happy with my 400L f/5.6 with my Kenko TC.

And for sure you must be taking wildlife pictures in a very, very sunny place that love to wander around by mid day lucky you!

no worries, thats why i said friendly reminder before if it was to get nasty. was noted that things like this (nikon) shouldnt be in the canon eos thread.

NBEast wrote in post #15025692
Thanks, never saw that one.

Not trolling - though the effect might be the same. I'm genuinely disappointed.

This thread has made me think twice about all that glass. I don't have fancy stuff like 50 f1.2 but I have a great copy of my workhorse lenses (70-200, 85 f1.8, 135L, 24-105L) - something hard to forefit.

Good info on the D800 variable cropping capability - so I wasn't out to lunch wishing for that! Sweet!

5Diii. OK, this might also look like trolling because I know how unpopular this is. I just wish I had a pop-up flash and I don't really care so much that others don't agree. I use it as a Master sometimes, but mainly I set it to manual output at a very low setting to add some eye-light and lift shadows.

My shooting is mostly casual so hauling around a flash doesn't always happen (maybe half the time). Even if I have it; its intimidating (to the subject) and sort of geeky for family situations. I like FF IQ and DOF but I'm not a perfectionist for casual stuff - pop-up is fine on low-output settings esp. outdoors. So in part its a matter of principle that Canon is imposing their will on this matter where Nikon isn't - the IQ, AF. and other aspects of D600 are likely neck-n-neck with 5Diii.

Mainly it's a matter of reducing to a single FF body and pop-up is essential as a casual family camera.

For the first time, I am tempted. For what I shoot, and what I expect/demand from my image files, Canon has yet to provide what I need:

Extremely clean images at 1600 ISO, for around $2000.
By "extremely clean", I mean no noticeable noise grain in dark, out-of-focus areas when viewed at 100% - even when exposed properly (as opposed to exposing to the right, then correcting in PP).

I have reason to believe that the Nikon D600 will deliver what I am demanding.
I do not have any reason to believe that the Canon 6D will provide this type of high ISO performance. I know that many top-shelf photographers were hoping that the 5D3 would give at least 2 full stops of RAW low-noise performance over it's predecessor, the 5D2. They got a third of a stop. What a disappointment. It's like the only way Canon is going to give us that type of high-ISO performance is if we shell out $7 grand for a 1Dx. Nikon / Sony have given us better high-ISO performance in prosumer grade bodies, at prosumer prices.

If extremely clean RAW files at ISO 1600 (without any PP) is your primary need, it may behoove you to consider a move to Nikon.

Tom Reichner wrote in post #15040946
For the first time, I am tempted. For what I shoot, and what I expect/demand from my image files, Canon has yet to provide what I need:

Extremely clean images at 1600 ISO, for around $2000.
By "extremely clean", I mean no noticeable noise grain in dark, out-of-focus areas when viewed at 100% - even when exposed properly (as opposed to exposing to the right, then correcting in PP).

I have reason to believe that the Nikon D600 will deliver what I am demanding.
I do not have any reason to believe that the Canon 6D will provide this type of high ISO performance. I know that many top-shelf photographers were hoping that the 5D3 would give at least 2 full stops of RAW low-noise performance over it's predecessor, the 5D2. They got a third of a stop. What a disappointment. It's like the only way Canon is going to give us that type of high-ISO performance is if we shell out $7 grand for a 1Dx. Nikon / Sony have given us better high-ISO performance in prosumer grade bodies, at prosumer prices.

If extremely clean RAW files at ISO 1600 (without any PP) is your primary need, it may behoove you to consider a move to Nikon.

not sure of your expectations, I doubt Nikon is much cleaner... Last I checked, the D600 vs 5D3 were very similar at that ISO...

Hi guys, bumped in to this thread by accident... I am a canon user but I love to explore and test new items in the field of photog.

Last year a friend wanted to. Surprise me, she got me a 50mm 1.4 lens for Nikon thinking I use a Nikon... I did not sell it as I hate to give out gifts... I used it as a paper weight

So a few weeks ago when the d600 was announced... I w aited out but I already had a bug in my head... After seing the specs compared to the 6d I decided to buy the d600... Got it last friday... I must say, it is a heck of a camera... I will be using it for a while before I sell it as I want to test these waters out, so far, I simply love what it's giving me...

Could I ask if anyone knows where I can buy Marumi macro +10(set of 4) filters. 67mm??
I live in the Netherlans and cannot seem to find them anywhere here.

D600

Nope no plans on it. Still quite happy with the D300. I dont get into the "must upgrade when every new body comes out" thing either.

DavidR wrote in post #15025795
The variable cropping that the D800 has is the same as just cropping a Canon FF camera in post, there is nothing to be gained here.

This is correct, however it misses one thing which might be important for some folks - Nikon FX (full frame) bodies can mount and use Nikon DX (crop) lenses, because they use the exact same F mount, which has a longer distance from lens to sensor/mirror than Canon. This extra distance is also a potential disadvantage because it means you can't adapt many other brands of lens to shoot on Nikon.

Unless camera brand is some sort of badge of self-worth, I think the sensible thing is to look at what you want to shoot - then figure out which cameras/lenses best fit that need ...and if you do find yourself looking at a different manufacturer, then work out whether the move is worth the cost and disadvantages of switching.

I remember years back when photographers spent more time comparing the photos we produced, rather than agonising over which camera/lens/settings we used - though to be fair we did argue over which film was the best!

Rob

RobKirkwood wrote in post #15068724
This is correct, however it misses one thing which might be important for some folks - Nikon FX (full frame) bodies can mount and use Nikon DX (crop) lenses, because they use the exact same F mount, which has a longer distance from lens to sensor/mirror than Canon. This extra distance is also a potential disadvantage because it means you can't adapt many other brands of lens to shoot on Nikon.

Just cant use pre-AI lenses (ie before 1977). Only AF series that cant be used on Nikon DSLR's are F3AF ones. Other than some bodies cant meter or AF on older lenses, just have to do it manually then.

I have both the D600 and D800. Am I happy? Very. Sensor performance is a big deal. Especially, at low ISO. Can it perform well in low light situations? Yes! Canon's current offerings are great but, they lost me temporarily bcoz' of the banding. Fix that and I'll be glad to spend my money. Until that day comes, I'll continue to hold on to my 1Ds 3 which has the best performance at low ISO compared to the current 1D X and 5D 3.

For your viewing pleasure.

jdizzle wrote in post #15073904
I have both the D600 and D800. Am I happy? Very. Sensor performance is a big deal. Especially, at low ISO. Can it perform well in low light situations? Yes! Canon's current offerings are great but, they lost me temporarily bcoz' of the banding. Fix that and I'll be glad to spend my money. Until that day comes, I'll continue to hold on to my 1Ds 3 which has the best performance at low ISO compared to the current 1D X and 5D 3.

For your viewing pleasure.

I like your dynamic duo.