Nikon D600...

Discussion in 'Shiny Things' started by Mav, Sep 16, 2012.

  1. Mav

    Mav Something witty...

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2006
    Oddometer:
    3,716
    Location:
    Blighty
    I actually feel like the 18-200 frequently isn't that sharp... Wondering about maybe the 24-120 f4...
    #21
  2. NikonsAndVStroms

    NikonsAndVStroms Beastly Photographer

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2007
    Oddometer:
    41,551
    Location:
    The Hub of the Universe
    That's a nice lens.....but expensive and it wont go that wide on a DX camera.

    But if you want to go to FX someday that and a used Tamron 17-35 2.8-4 (Don't buy one for a few months...cause they are kinda rare and I'm trying to get one! :lol3) to cover your wide end would work. That lens is only ~250 dollars, and will be a nice way to try out ultra wide if you do end up moving to FX. But if you do really like that you'll want the Nikon 16-35 VR which is another ~1,100....this gets expensive fast :lol3
    #22
  3. Mav

    Mav Something witty...

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2006
    Oddometer:
    3,716
    Location:
    Blighty
    I'm trying to ignore the fact that you are leading me back down the expensive route! :lol3
    #23
  4. NikonsAndVStroms

    NikonsAndVStroms Beastly Photographer

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2007
    Oddometer:
    41,551
    Location:
    The Hub of the Universe
    You don't want to see my wish list :lol3
    #24
  5. NikonsAndVStroms

    NikonsAndVStroms Beastly Photographer

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2007
    Oddometer:
    41,551
    Location:
    The Hub of the Universe
    It's a great choice, the dynamic range is supposed to be killer. And if you have any questions about lenses feel free to ask, I need to jump into DX research anyways to look at some options for my S5 Pro.
    #25
  6. Mav

    Mav Something witty...

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2006
    Oddometer:
    3,716
    Location:
    Blighty
    Just had a quick play with a D7000 in the duty free store here at the airport - it really is very nice: light, fast and, as N&V says, great AF coverage of the viewfinder. A quick scan through the menus show's there a heap of functionality to play with that makes the D90 look like a toy!

    The rear LCD made it hard to judge the noise on the images... but it's not going to be any worse than my D90! At less than half the price of the D600, it's a pretty compelling proposition.
    #26
  7. NikonsAndVStroms

    NikonsAndVStroms Beastly Photographer

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2007
    Oddometer:
    41,551
    Location:
    The Hub of the Universe
    That kind of AF will spoil you quickly, going back to the old 12 point on the S5 from my 51 on the D700 feels extremely limiting, and to think just in 2008 I was amazed at having 12 whole AF points over my D50's 5!
    #27
  8. eatpasta

    eatpasta Lawnmower Target

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2006
    Oddometer:
    10,959
    Location:
    Santa Barbara, Ca
    I also have a D90 and like many camera owners day dream about a new camera rig. But for the cost of BUYING a new camera rig.... my D90 takes pretty dammed good pictures.

    :1drink
    #28
  9. skysailor

    skysailor Rat Rider

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2007
    Oddometer:
    3,722
    Location:
    Kenora, Canada
    I've got a Sigma 18-200, 10-20, a Nikon 35 1.8. so m ost of my bases are covered for what I do.
    Lyle
    #29
  10. SnowMule

    SnowMule [angry moth noises]

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2009
    Oddometer:
    19,010
    Location:
    I LIVE IN A GIANT BUCKET
    With you on that one... not real impressed with the sharpenss on my 18-200 with my D90. Picked up a 12-24 and it's night-and-day difference in image quality between the two from 18 to 24mm.
    #30
  11. skysailor

    skysailor Rat Rider

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2007
    Oddometer:
    3,722
    Location:
    Kenora, Canada
    I really like both my Sigmas. The 18-200 and the 10-20, although the 10-20 spends much time in the bag. The 18-200 is my go to lens.
    Lyle
    #31
  12. NikonsAndVStroms

    NikonsAndVStroms Beastly Photographer

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2007
    Oddometer:
    41,551
    Location:
    The Hub of the Universe
    An 18-200 even done right will have a lot of compromises, getting a sharp F2.8 zoom lens (which using tamron or sigma) will make your camera's sensor seem like its been upgraded. Good glass can work magic, on my Olympus E-620 I never really liked the output of the 12MP sensor S the 10 of my E-420 but when I used my 9-18 & later 14-54 the results just popped!

    I love Tamron's for quality, the AF is a bit slow but many of their lenses are as sharp as the Nikon equivalent that costs 4 times as much. Sigma's on average for zooms have much faster AF but the image isn't is as sharp, but this isn't a constant so always research em).

    The Tamron 17-50 would be a good option and they are ~400 USD new.
    #32
  13. Mav

    Mav Something witty...

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2006
    Oddometer:
    3,716
    Location:
    Blighty
    OK, I was looking pretty set on the D7k... then I saw this ISO comparison with a D700 for the D600: http://fotospekter.si/nikon-d700-in-d600-drugi-del-primerjave/

    Check out this 25600 ISO comparison with the D700: http://fotospekter.si/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/25600-NR-ON.jpg

    And this one without NR switched on: http://nikonrumors.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/Nikon-D600-vs-D700-25600-NR-OFF.jpg

    To my untrained eye, the D600 is looking pretty damned good compared to the D700... and everyone raved about the D700.
    #33
  14. NikonsAndVStroms

    NikonsAndVStroms Beastly Photographer

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2007
    Oddometer:
    41,551
    Location:
    The Hub of the Universe
    They should have down sampled the images to the same size. And used the same RAW conversion, since they have NR on/off these are JPEGS. But based on this it looks like the D600 has a nice edge.

    My bigger question is does the D600 get banding like the D700 at ISO 25,600. Even with that issue I have to say the D700 is crazy and I've been taking images at 12,800-25,600 ISO lately though with the noise you see B&W is needed.

    But I guess this brings the issue, are you willing to pay over double the price for a camera with less AF coverage but 1.5-2 more stops high ISO? Remember with a D7000 and a fast zoom or 2 you'd be able to shoot in 2-4 stops worth of lower light levels already over the D90 and the 18-200.
    #34
  15. NikonsAndVStroms

    NikonsAndVStroms Beastly Photographer

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2007
    Oddometer:
    41,551
    Location:
    The Hub of the Universe
    [​IMG]
    #35
  16. CrashBar

    CrashBar Just Wanna Ride

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2008
    Oddometer:
    133
    Location:
    Somerville Ma
    I might finally upgrade, I need to replace my F2 and Nikomat FTn :rofl. I've been waiting for something full frame, not the size of a RB67, and would let me focus my 25-50 F4, 50-300 4.5 ED, and 85 1.8 -C. Peeping through the finder of a DX just never worked for me. And other than the 17-35 2.8 I never found any AF that hit the same sweet spot as those lenses. Assuming the D600 has a decent sized finder and can take a real focusing screen, it might be time.

    Still going to keep shooting Tri-X in my M6 hell freezes over, however.
    #36
  17. NikonsAndVStroms

    NikonsAndVStroms Beastly Photographer

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2007
    Oddometer:
    41,551
    Location:
    The Hub of the Universe
    You suck for posting that! :lol3

    Just wanted to make sure you knew that. I've been working in low light so much that seeing the D600 and knowing the D800's capabilities it's making me really want one. But I'm going to be responsible and take my own advice...next up is a 2.8 lens (to replace my F4) and a monopod.
    #37
  18. NikonsAndVStroms

    NikonsAndVStroms Beastly Photographer

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2007
    Oddometer:
    41,551
    Location:
    The Hub of the Universe
    Replace? Keep em! I still use my FE!

    It will have a nice sized finder, it's .7x VS .72x on my D700 so that's no worry for you. There are replacement screens for the D7000 so it should be an aftermarket option.

    Also there is a focus confirmation part to the bottom LCD display, with the 51 points of the D700's AF it's nice to have that flexibility. It basically tells you when you go off in either direction and gives you a dot for confirmed focus. I've had really good luck with it shooting concerts. Otherwise, for just standard photos pop it into center weighted, use exposure compensation, shoot RAW and it'll be a pretty easy transition. Just be ready to forget what you know about ISO's, 25,600 on my D700 is cleaner than TMAX 3200.

    D700
    [​IMG]

    TMAX 3200
    [​IMG]

    Here's the full D700 image:

    [​IMG]

    Looking at more D600 images you're going to need to still go B&W cause of the color noise but the "grain" should be a good bit finer.
    #38
  19. Mav

    Mav Something witty...

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2006
    Oddometer:
    3,716
    Location:
    Blighty
    Well it seems only fair :lol3

    Here's another hi iso shot, 25600: http://www.flickr.com/photos/66174868@N02/7995622061/sizes/o/in/set-72157631557088349/

    Check out the detail on the guys rucksack strap!

    Alternatively - B&H have some second Nikkor 17-55 2.8 lenses for a little under $1k... so for the price of a D600 I could get a D7k and a nice 2.8 lens... Decisions, decisions!

    Doesn't help that when I suggested to Mavette that I get the cheaper camera, she asked "Why?" and suggested I get the more expensive!
    #39
  20. NikonsAndVStroms

    NikonsAndVStroms Beastly Photographer

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2007
    Oddometer:
    41,551
    Location:
    The Hub of the Universe
    In that case, D600 and Tamron 28-75 F2.8, Nikkor 85 1.8, and a 70-200 F2.8 which one depends on what's left in the budget and if you are doing more static subject or are willing to sacrifice quality a little bit for fast AF.

    Just a quick note though, before the 70-200 you're already over 3k.
    #40