Comments on: Is The Nikon D600 Priced Too High For Its Features?

By: Brett Despain

Brett Despain — Thu, 29 Nov 2012 18:56:00 +0000

Considering that the Canon really dumbed down the EOS 6D from the 5D MkIII, and considering that Nikon left 8/10′s of the Nikon D800′s features intact on the D600, I’d say that the D600 is a real bargain. Consider the D600′s closest, and as yet unarrived, competitor the EOS 6D. The 6D doesn’t have an onboard flash, has only one SD card slot, has only an 11 point AF system, the flash sync speed is 1/180, it shoots just 4.5 fps and will be priced almost identically to the D600. The EOS 6D does have onboard wi-fi and GPS, but those are easily added options to the D600. Also, the 6D is missing the D600′s almost unbeatable 2016 pixel color sensitive metering. I know from using this camera for a couple of weeks now that the metering system is almost unbeatable. When I went digital in 2002, I switched from Nikon to Canon. Considering D600 has more of the features that I want over the EOS 6D and the EOS 5D MkIII is $1500 more, it was an easy decision to go back to Nikon. I got my D600 at Costco – $2900 for the body and two really nice VR lenses and still saved $600 over body only price of the Canon 5D MkIII. Considered in these terms, the D600 is a real value.

By: Ralph Hightower

Ralph Hightower — Mon, 19 Nov 2012 15:55:00 +0000

Cal,

I’m still shooting with my Canon A-1 film camera, flash sync: 1/60, shutter speed: 30-1/1000, ISO: 6-12800.

I need to quit reading Canon Rumors or else I’ll never buy a DSLR. 6D versus 7D? Now there’s a rumor about a 7D II.

By: Cal Romaneschi

Cal Romaneschi — Sun, 18 Nov 2012 23:32:00 +0000

I had my old Canon F1 film camera for a long time before it became obsolete but now days a camera will be obsolete in a year or two. The D600 is not even made in Japan so Nikon must be making big bucks off this plastic camera and it will be obsolete in a year or so. To bad that the greedy CEO’s of these big companies will be dead before they can spend all that money they made off us.

By: Alwyn Smit

Alwyn Smit — Thu, 04 Oct 2012 06:08:00 +0000

I happen to like the body, bigger than a D7000 and smaller than a D800. Build quality seems fine (not like I chuck my gear around), don’t mind the ISO range being limited (never taken a shot past 3200 anyway). I don’t care for the 1/4000 and 1/200 issues, but that’s not a deal breaker. I can get around it in the end. What I refuse to get around, is the price. Cheap! Are you friggin kidding me? Maybe in pounds or dollars yes (don’t know). In South African rands however this thing is going to sell for R23 000. Canon’s 6d is coming in at R19 500. Anyone who thinks this is cheap at R23 000 has obviously got too much bloody money. I won’t be switching to FF because of this camera, that’s for sure. And then there’s the Nikon lens issue. FF=Expensive. Canon at least offer their customers a choice within the L range at reasonable prices. Look for a 70-200 F4 in the Nikon range? Oh right, there aren’t any! No for Nikon’s version of the 70-200 you have the 2.8 which sells for… that’s right R23 000. I should have listened to a friend of mine when he told me to go Canon because of the lens range offered, but no I didn’t listen.

By: stefanhellbergDOTcom

stefanhellbergDOTcom — Mon, 24 Sep 2012 17:36:00 +0000

That is a really helpful answer. Thanks!

By: Ron Adair

Ron Adair — Mon, 24 Sep 2012 15:08:00 +0000

The A850 was a marketing stunt, nothing more. You will not see that kind of price on Sony DSLRs going forward. Sony was selling at a loss to try to gain market share. The A99 is an indication of that.

By: Ron Adair

Ron Adair — Mon, 24 Sep 2012 15:06:00 +0000

On the contrary, Stefan. You actually have the equivalent shutter speed of 1/16,000 second compared to the D700 due to the fact that you can shoot at 100 ISO base, and can go to 50 ISO in Low-1 mode. Additionally, the dynamic range at ISO 50 is noticeably improved over the DR at ISO 200 on the D700, and monumentally improved over the D700′s DR at ISO 100.

I realize it feels like you’ve lost something because you don’t have that top shutter speed that you are accustomed to seeing — but the D600, technically speaking, offers MORE flexibility (not less) in this case.

By: Kalyanasundaram Sambantham

Kalyanasundaram Sambantham — Sun, 23 Sep 2012 13:30:00 +0000

Sir,photo which i have attached is taken with D7000 at 1/8000.I do feel disappointed
over the price of D600 though I am a Nikon lover.

By: Steven_L_Berry

Steven_L_Berry — Sat, 22 Sep 2012 03:42:00 +0000

Buying any camera is always a series of trade-offs. It’s like wanting a car to be bigger on the inside, but smaller on the outside. Unless you have unlimited funds, you have to give up something. You have to decide if the camera meets your needs and is within your budget.

I shoot mostly landscapes with my D90, shooting several frames and stitching them in Photoshop. My problem is too many pixels. I also shoot grandkids playing in the backyard. I really don’t need more camera for what I do.

I used to shooting weddings on film. I had two medium format camera bodies and carried a backup 35mm. If I had a problem, I didn’t find out until I got the proofs back from the lab. Any digital camera would have been wonderful at any price.

I once saw an article in a photo magazine where the editors had given disposable film cameras to half-a-dozen pros and asked them to shoot whatever they wanted. As you can guess, the results were incredibly good. Who is behind the camera is far more important than the camera.

Don’t get caught up in thinking you need the latest and greatest camera. It probably won’t make the slightest difference to your photographs.

By: geoffcbassett

geoffcbassett — Tue, 18 Sep 2012 23:37:00 +0000

I honestly think that because High ISO is used as a selling feature, they calibrate the sensors more for the High ISO range than the low.