D600

[jeremypayne]

Again, what is the actual downside of the D800 compared to the D700 for the end users?

Agreed ... all these posts and I still don't get it.

The D800 IS the D700 replacement.  The D600 is something new.

[chex]

The D700 was an anomaly. A bonus. It makes no sense for a manufacturer to sell effectively the same camera for £4000 and £1800 simultaneously. Maybe the only reason it existed was because of Nikon's spat with Sony.

If you want a D4, save up. Quit whining.

Regarding the 5D precedent -  Canon had the expensive, lower res but faster large body and a slower hi-res smaller body. This is exactly what Nikon is doing now, and as far as we know maybe what it always wanted to do.

[Hulyss]

Yes, I assume I'm maybe a little elitist with material, and I like it, seriously. Is it complete bollocks to be elitist ? I don't think so, and I'm not here to justify why I buy Nikon or Zeiss primes over Tamron or Sigma devices. It is kinda obvious (and I do not have that much money, I spend wisely and take my time). It is like going on stage with Peter Jackson and saying : "Hey dude !! you complete moron with your pricey RED Epics, you elitist crap !! ... why not using a simple camcoder, seriously ?? "

That said, I do not like the way taken by Nikon since the D7000, speaking about body. D800, D600, D4 with useless card slot ... look like Nikon is sold to Sony. I am for independent companies who can make the choices they want and I don't think Nikon is very free in this story.

I JUST WANT TO KNOW why on hearth Sony... sorry, Nikon, do not use the good 16MP sensor of the D4 in a D800 body !!

[Fips]

I am for independent companies who can make the choices they want and I don't think Nikon is very free in this story.

Yes, but this is simply not possible as technology advances. At some point, some devices, sensors in our case, become so sophisticated and design and production so expensive that there is just a market for a very small number of manufacturers.

I'd rather have a Nikon with a very good Sony sensor instead of a mediocre Nikon in-house chip.

[Ligament]

I just want to quote the progressively demented and full of BS Ken Rockwell on the D600. I can't read his site anymore. Unfortunate thing is he has wide reader base and naive consumers make purchase decisions based on how easily his cameras photograph his children.

"The D600 also runs faster and has much better resolution than the D800"

"24 MP is more than twice as many as anyone needs for anything"

"24MP is the optimum resolution for FX."

"The biggest things I see compared to the Nikon D800 are smaller size, optimum resolution (D800 has too much!), a smaller sea of AF sensors, faster frame rate, less weight, and a much lower price.

Unless I discover something seriously missing when my own D600 arrives, I will no longer be recommending the D800 and D800E for anything other than testing lenses. The D800 and D800E are a pain to use in the field for their lack of programmable presets, and cost too much."

[Hulyss]

I do not want to start polemic but ... this is all about business, not facts. Ken seems to survive with his site, and it is his business. I do not think he had that much click on his D800 / D800E links but he know that the D600 tend to be a best seller. So he drive customer base to click in mass on his links to buy the mainstream sony D600, thus making money for him. He is not that crazy after all

(but yea... when you read it, the first batch of his review is like the speech of a starving hobo )

[BernardLanguillier]

I JUST WANT TO KNOW why on hearth Sony... sorry, Nikon, do not use the good 16MP sensor of the D4 in a D800 body !!

Because:
- the D4 sensor is only 16mp and the market for the D600 needs 24mp,
- the sensor of the D600 is probably much cheaper,
- chances are that it is also one of the best for DR and higj ISO.

As far as Sony controlling Nikon, it is probably just the other way around. Nikon is be very far the largest customer of the imaging sensor division of Sony. We would probably not have Exmor if Nikon had not funded the development... Sony's own SLRs are far from representing enough volume.

Cheers,
Bernard

[Josh-H]

As far as Sony controlling Nikon, it is probably just the other way around. Nikon is be very far the largest customer of the imaging sensor division of Sony. We would probably not have Exmor if Nikon had not funded the development... Sony's own SLRs are far from representing enough volume.

Not to question you on this Bernard... but are you sure Nikon funded Sony on the Exmor?

Given the depth of Sony's pockets I find this very hard to believe. In fact it sounds like Nikon fan boy spin to me.

I think the reverse is true - I think its highly likely Nikon would be dead in the water today (or at best struggling to keep pace with the others) without Sony sensors. If Nikon had the capability to deliver a sensor like the exmore on its own it would have done long before it payed Sony. In fact, if the D800 did not have such an impressive sensor I think virtually no one would buy it as its ergonomics are in my opinion an absolute abortion (and thats being kind). Not to bash Nikon though - the D4 has wonderful ergonomics.

Personally, I think Sony is very cleverly getting a leg into the industry through Nikon and would not be surprised to see them punt Nikon down the road 'if' they can get their own DSLR sales up to a reasonable level. Wether this happens is questionable. Irrespective however, lets remember its Sony at the heart of the Nikon - not the other way around.

[dreed]

Good point! Polycarbonate is really strong and impact resistant. Many impact-resistant goods are made from it. One of the few disadvantages is exposure to ketones will degrade it.

I'm pretty sure that giving any camera a bath in a substance such as acetone will not be good for it, which is to say that this issue is not likely to be cause for concern for anyone and more to the point is if it is then you should probably have your camera sealed up inside something else because the environment is not very equipment friendly. The parts of your camera that are actually plastic, such as the buttons, wheels, LCD screens, etc, are all not going to be very happy if exposed to unfriendly material long before the body decides it no longer wants to play.

Also, UV can cause it to become brittle.

Unless you leave your camera in the middle of the Sahara Desert for some number of years, I doubt this is going to be cause for concern.

And, not to ignore facts, but magnesium is very stiff stuff,

May be, but I sure as hell wouldn't want a camera made from pure magnesium as it just wouldn't be a very good all-weather device due to magnesium's reactivity.

like 20 times greater (Young's modulus), and really tough to deflect.

Every magnesium-alloy camera body I own that has been painted black is nice and shiny silver along the bottom because it has been slung over my shoulder enough times for the paint to have worn off (in other places too!) If those cameras were pure magnesium, those bodies would have huge holes in them already due to paint wearing off and the metal oxidising when wet.

[mac_paolo]

I just noticed that D600 has no AF-ON button near the AE/AF-L.
I use the AF-ON on almost 95% of the shots. D600 may not be a chance for me anymore

[BernardLanguillier]

Not to question you on this Bernard... but are you sure Nikon funded Sony on the Exmor?

euh... Considering the fact that Nikon must have sold at least 10 times more APS-C/FF sensors that Sony did in their own cameras, it seems pretty obvious that Sony semi-Conductor made a return on their investment thanks to Nikon.

Do you disagree with this business analysis?

If you don't, and assuming that you have some knowledge of B2B buiness in Japan, you will agree with me that Nikon has a major influence on the strategic decisions of Sony sensor division.

Given the depth of Sony's pockets I find this very hard to believe. In fact it sounds like Nikon fan boy spin to me.

Please stop projecting your views of the world on me. I own 2 Sony cameras at the present time and like the company for reasons I will not make public here. I am not a Nikon stock holder and don't care the least bit about who controls who. It simply doesn't make any difference for me, I am just an observer here.

But since it seems you have you own insights, how about explaining us why Sony decided to release their new flagship with a 24mp sensor instead of their own 36mp marvel that would be the only selling point of the D800?

Cheers,
Bernard

[dreed]

...
But since it seems you have you own insights, how about explaining us why Sony decided to release their new flagship with a 24mp sensor instead of their own 36mp marvel that would be the only selling point of the D800?

Since anyone that does know why won't comment and only those that don't know will, I figure that lets me have a word or two

The two main possibilities are:
(a) the sensor is fabricated by Sony but designed by Nikon. The contract Nikon has with Sony's fabrication business is such that the part of Sony responsible for sensor design never gets to see it;
(b) Nikon is paying a premium for the sensor as part of an exclusive use period for the design.

Others include:
(c) Sony needs to attract people to the platform and they don't see slow shooting cameras with lots of megapixels as the way to do that. They'd rather have a smaller number of megapixels that can shoot faster because this is what most of the photographers that you see on TV news have in their hands.
(d) The demands that 36MP puts on shooting style are not at one with those who Sony sees as being their target market and thus they were concerned about lots of people ending up with "soft photos".
(e) The sensor-based image stabilisation that Sony use is not yet ready for a 36MP sensor.
(f) Sony isn't convinced that the world+dog wants 36MP (bigger files need larger hard drives and faster computers) right now and is willing to sit back and watch..
(g) A variation on (c) is that the brief from marketing about what would help Sony get a bigger part of the DSLR pie did not include lots more megapixels at the time it was being designed.

[Colorado David]

Perhaps Bernard gets this since he lives in Japan, but a lot other people don't.  Everyone tries to project a western business model of competition on Japanese business.  While they are free to compete and certainly do, there is a larger component of national pride in the way they do business.  There is room in the market for Canon and Nikon and Sony and they all want to do well for themselves, but they also want to perform well out of a sense of national pride.  I am not suggesting that their competing products are coordinated, just that there isn't the same priority placed on burying your competition.

[RFPhotography]

Chex, Canon actually had 2 large bodies, the 1D and 1Ds lines.  They've now 'combined' the two large bodies into one but have continued on with incremental improvements to the 5D.  

Bernard, wrt inflation you're probably talking about headline inflation (e.g., CPI).  CPI isn't a good gauge because it includes highly volatile components such as food and energy.  The more relevant figure; and the one policy makers follow, is core inflation which removes that volatility.  Core inflation in the last, just over, 4 years (not 5 since the D700 was announced in July 2008) has been in the range of 2% per year in most of the G8 countries (not sure about the G20 but it has some less stable countries in it) and includes, for many countries, a deflationary period in late 2008 and much of 2009.  This is very, very low and would not lead, on that basis alone, to any significant increase in prices over that time.  It is; however, a fact that electronics and computer components exhibit disinflation in pricing.  That's why we get successive generations of equipment with better performance at the same or better prices.  As far as the JPY/USD exchange rate losing 60% of its value, on July 14, 2008 (I'm using that as a proxy for the announce date of the D700 since I don't know the exact date), the Yen was at 106.8.  It is now at 77.65.  That is a drop of about 27.3%.  Not near the 60% you tout.  Factoring in the two components of price disinflation and the exchange rate, without access to some modeling I'd suggest there's probably more profit in the D800 than there was in the D700 which would, on a relative basis, put it higher in the model line than the D700.

The target market of the D600 - if it's presumed to be people moving up from DX bodies, and to borrow a couple other people's thoughts that they'll use it with a Tamron all-in-one lens or the basic kit lens - "needs" 24MP?  Wants?  I'll grant wants.  Needs?  Not so much.

Josh, given the money that Sony has been bleeding for the past number of years, their pockets ain't all that deep.

David, I worked for a Japanese company for 6 years.  Believe me, they want to beat their fellow Japanese competitors just as badly as N.A. companies do.

[BernardLanguillier]

Perhaps Bernard gets this since he lives in Japan, but a lot other people don't.  Everyone tries to project a western business model of competition on Japanese business.  While they are free to compete and certainly do, there is a larger component of national pride in the way they do business.  There is room in the market for Canon and Nikon and Sony and they all want to do well for themselves, but they also want to perform well out of a sense of national pride.  I am not suggesting that their competing products are coordinated, just that there isn't the same priority placed on burying your competition.

Yes, that is very true. Besides, Sony is a large corporation with a very serious business situation ahead of them. Their business units have fery stringent profitability objectives and Sony Semi Conductor's imaging sensor unit's CMOS sensor effort is profitable thanks to the business Nikon as been providing them for 8+ years.

Cheers,
Bernard

[Chairman Bill]

Looking over the D600 specs, the fewer focussing points is of note, though fewer, but more spaced out over the screen would suit me just fine (I tend to find a point at about hyperfocal distance & focus there, or do so manually). I could live with the less good AF. Weather sealing looks OK, & I could live with that. The ability to close off the view-finder when tripod mounting the camera is a big issue for me. The D600 doesn't seem to have this feature. The clip-in cover on the D200 worked, but only until I lost it. Is it a deal breaker? Maybe.

The D600 is smaller & lighter (definite advantage when yomping over the mountains) than the D700, which is in its favour, but not a deal-maker.

A 24mp sensor is a big deal, and what makes it a tempting proposition. But that D800/D600 price differential just makes me think a D800 makes more sense.

Actually, looking at the cost, just sticking with the perfectly good D700 makes most sense, but where's the fun in being sensible?

[FredBGG]

Unless you are invested in Canon lenses, there is simply zero reason to pick the 5DII.

Cheers,
Bernard

Having many Canon lenses should not make much difference. Canon lenses sell used at close enough to new prices to easily replace them with mint nikon equivalents. Been there.. done that...

[Morris Taub]

Looking over the D600 specs, the fewer focussing points is of note, though fewer, but more spaced out over the screen would suit me just fine (I tend to find a point at about hyperfocal distance & focus there, or do so manually). I could live with the less good AF. Weather sealing looks OK, & I could live with that. The ability to close off the view-finder when tripod mounting the camera is a big issue for me. The D600 doesn't seem to have this feature. The clip-in cover on the D200 worked, but only until I lost it. Is it a deal breaker? Maybe.

The D600 is smaller & lighter (definite advantage when yomping over the mountains) than the D700, which is in its favour, but not a deal-maker.

A 24mp sensor is a big deal, and what makes it a tempting proposition. But that D800/D600 price differential just makes me think a D800 makes more sense.

Actually, looking at the cost, just sticking with the perfectly good D700 makes most sense, but where's the fun in being sensible?

I'm going to take the sensible and maybe less fun path for the moment. Keep using my d700. It does all I need. I would like up to 24mp down the road a bit, but am willing to wait 12-18 months. See what else might come. See how prices shake out a bit. Right now, here in france, the d600 is listed for 2100 euros and the d800 for 2769. That's not a huge difference, so I think I'd go D800 if i needed a camera body today.

Like Bernard pointed out, the D700 was introduced at 2800. About nine months later I was able to pick one up via Grays in England for 1620 euros. They had gone down to around 2200 euros in france at the time. So, maybe within a year a minty new D800 would make a nice upgrade for me.

The D600 isn't that much smaller or lighter than my d700 so there's no draw there. I'd definitely want to hold and play with both bodies. See how they fit in my hand. I love the fit and feel of the d700. I'm curious to see image quality compared between the D600 and the D800 shot at around 24mp in size. I also keep hoping for something even smaller and lighter from nikon with an fx sensor. Maybe in 18 months?...

Right now my printing is no larger than 12 inches on the longest side. A while back I did a test print with a pro lab in Paris. I sent them a cropped nef, maybe a third cropped, for a test on a b&w print. It came back and looked great. Print size is 13x23 inches. This is why I'm hanging on to my d700. I've got what I need for today.

[Chairman Bill]

Morris

I'm keeping my D700 too. I've printed at 16"x24" & all looks just fine. I reckon I could go to 20"x30" without major difficulties. I don't expect to be printing any bigger than that just yet.

[Rob C]

I'm going to take the sensible and maybe less fun path for the moment. Keep using my d700. It does all I need. I would like up to 24mp down the road a bit, but am willing to wait 12-18 months. See what else might come. See how prices shake out a bit. Right now, here in france, the d600 is listed for 2100 euros and the d800 for 2769. That's not a huge difference, so I think I'd go D800 if i needed a camera body today.

Like Bernard pointed out, the D700 was introduced at 2800. About nine months later I was able to pick one up via Grays in England for 1620 euros. They had gone down to around 2200 euros in france at the time. So, maybe within a year a minty new D800 would make a nice upgrade for me.

The D600 isn't that much smaller or lighter than my d700 so there's no draw there. I'd definitely want to hold and play with both bodies. See how they fit in my hand. I love the fit and feel of the d700. I'm curious to see image quality compared between the D600 and the D800 shot at around 24mp in size. I also keep hoping for something even smaller and lighter from nikon with an fx sensor. Maybe in 18 months?...

Right now my printing is no larger than 12 inches on the longest side. A while back I did a test print with a pro lab in Paris. I sent them a cropped nef, maybe a third cropped, for a test on a b&w print. It came back and looked great. Print size is 13x23 inches. This is why I'm hanging on to my d700. I've got what I need for today.

[/b]


And so, I suspect, has everyone else. But that wouldn't be fun, would it?

Rob C