# Any thoughts on the new Nikon D600 FX with 24-85mm?



## hassiman (Oct 3, 2012)

Just wondering if any members had tried one of these?


----------



## LouieSherwin (Oct 3, 2012)

I don't have one but this seems to be the Nikon that I wish they had produced several years ago when I moved to full frame. If I wasn't fully invested in Canon now I would have one. I really would like something like the nikkor 28-200 for travel but Canon only has their beastly 28-300.

For some good information on the camera and lens and for a somewhat different point of view on many photographic subjects check out kenrockwell.com. 

-louie


----------



## Jack Henry (Oct 3, 2012)

An interesting article on Ken Rockwell's site about the D600 D800 & D4

Scroll down on this page

http://tinyurl.com/ara5n

Until you get to this heading.

D600, D800 and D4: All The Same Guts!


----------



## clee01l (Oct 3, 2012)

> For some good information ... on many photographic subjects check out kenrockwell.com.


I'm not too sure that "good information" and "Ken Rockwell" belong in the same sentence. I certainly disagree with his comments on the D800. My experiences with the D800 do not match his negativism. 
Ken Rockwell is an opinionated self promoter. Why else would he come out with a book extolling the virtues of the D800 and then proceed to trash the same camera on line?
For another take on the D600 take a look at Thom Hogan.
http://www.bythom.com/d600.htm

The D600 is marketed toward the consumer end of the camera market, where as the D800/800E and D4 target the Pros. The body is not as rugged as the D800, but rugged enough for everyday use. The D600 will certainly take sales away from the D800 which is why (I think) they were released in the order they were.  I also think we have reached a point in sensor development that will probably see a shift in DSLRs away from the APS-C size format. Something to keep in mind when choosing between buying DX and FX lenses.


----------



## gregDT (Oct 3, 2012)

Mr Rockwell is an acquired taste that some (myself included) have not taken to. But read what he says and make your own choices. 

I was interested in reading Dave Hobby and his concern about the drop in flash sync speed from 1/250 to 1/200. I've no personal experience of the D600 but for me that drop would be painful.


----------



## Replytoken (Oct 4, 2012)

gregDT said:


> I was interested in reading Dave Hobby and his concern about the drop in flash sync speed from 1/250 to 1/200. I've no personal experience of the D600 but for me that drop would be painful.



I am curious to know what your current set-up and subject matter are that the 1/3 stop loss would be painful.  Mr. Hobby's blog post was an interesting read, and the comments were all over the map on this subject.  I can understand the different opinions, but it would be educational for me to learn more about situations where this loss was not just an inconvenience, but painful.

--Ken


----------



## gregDT (Oct 5, 2012)

You loose a 1/3rd of a stop of light. It seems to be a big deal for Dave Hobby but mileage may vary. For me I do sometimes find I'm struggling to balance ambient light with the flash and would love to cut a bit more of it out of my shot without having to alter my aperture. Sometimes 1/250 sec allows too much light into the camera for what I'm trying to achieve. If I was shooting with a D600 it would be just that bit more of a problem. 

 However what would be the big killer for me would be motion. At 1/250 sec I can just about freeze a person moving at walking speed (catwalk models, children, sports in my case) I  the subject is running  about I'd need to be at 1/500 sec at least and immediately using flash becomes impossible unless I start messing with the high speed flash pulse mode which kills recycle times. So dropping the sync speed down to 1/200 sec just removed my ability to photograph with flash in daylight for anything moving faster than a slow walk. Fashion show work would seriously suffer for me and I suspect most of my images would not longer be sharp.

It's certainly not a deal breaker but depending on the type of photography a person does it's worth highlighting and highlighting as a negative. I'm sure for a very large number of people it's not going to be a problem.

So I'd struggle to admit to it being painful rather than just inconvenient. Inconvenient enough for me to be concerned about upgrading to one.


----------



## Replytoken (Oct 6, 2012)

Thank you for the detailed reply.  It was informative, and I agree that it might be a concern to those upgrading.

--Ken


----------



## sizzlingbadger (Oct 6, 2012)

I hired a D800 and decided it wasn't worth upgrading from my D700. The D600 does however look to be good value for money.


----------

