pixelatedscraps
Well-known
willie_901
Veteran
The D3/D700 will last a long time. I did not buy the D600 because I didn't think the build quality was at the same level as the D700/D3.
This year I budgeted money to update my D700 bodies. I decided to switch to two Fujifilm XT-1 bodies with Fujinon XF lenses instead. This decision was based on the following:
1. Nikon never offered a pro body in-between the D700/D3 and the D4/etc. The D800 was plagued by early AF manufacturing issues. I really don't need or want 36 MP. The D4 is too large and too heavy and I don't need the high-speed capabilities.
2. The X-Pro 1 with the Fujinon primes outperforms the D700 with G lenses in several areas important to my work. The XT-1 is a bit better than the X-Pro 1. The improvement is not huge, but it is there. Of course the D700 data stream is much older. Of course the D800 and D4 systems outperform the XT-1 body.
3. The D600 shutter fiasco made me sad and disgusted with Nikon.
4. My gigs require me to carry a mobile studio wherever I go (including backups.). Switching to Fujifilm makes life much easier due to the smaller size and lighter weight. I can use the XT-1's WiFi and remote camera control App instead of using my current CamRanger set up. Less space, less weight is a real advantage for me.
If my needs were different (sports, high-end advertising, huge prints) I would have probably stayed with Nikon.
I am making the transition slowly. Right now I have one XT-1 and one 700. I hope to complete the switch before June,
pixelatedscraps
Well-known
Sounds similar to me. I did entertain the thought of getting the XT-1 and buying into the Fuji system but it just didn't feel 'there' yet. I like shooting Zeiss glass: the 21mm and 100mm were my two most-used lenses alongside the 60mm Micro-Nikkor and as far as I can see, the lenses do not exist (yet) in the Fuji lineup. I'm sure they will one day and maybe then I will revisit the X system. It certainly is the most favoured out of all the mirrorless systems (for me).
I use flash a lot these days, though I much prefer natural light. In particular, 1x SB-900 and 2x SB-700 all with Phottix Odin receivers. There isn't the equivalent for Fuji yet. So I'm down 3 key lenses and a lighting system (though I could switch to LED I suppose).
Once Zeiss expand their range of lenses, I most likely will take another look at Fuji but I don't see that happening for another 2-3 years yet.
GaryLH
Veteran
A lot of your current lenses for the Nikon dslr can be used ASIS via a metabones speedbooster on the Fuji xt1 just as an FYI, so long as u are ok w/ manual focus. The Zeiss 21 and other lenses would stay approximately the same fov and gain a stop. Get the other af lenses u want as they become available.
Gary
Gary
redisburning
Well-known
can the metabones stop down g lenses?
also, you're going way lower resolution, the sensor does "interesting" things at 100% and the native lineup is way, way overhyped. competent? sure. as good as Zeiss? please.
also, you're going way lower resolution, the sensor does "interesting" things at 100% and the native lineup is way, way overhyped. competent? sure. as good as Zeiss? please.
photo_fred
photo_fred
Jeez, didn't Nikon say last week they are going to replace the shutters in all the D600's, in or out of warranty. If so, what's the problem?
GaryLH
Veteran
Yes they can stop down g lenses.
In another thread, the op is thinking about xm1.. So 16mp does not look t o be an issue.
Good enough is the key to everything. Not everyone has same criteria.. Only one that can say is the buyer.
Gary
GaryLH
Veteran
Op had it replaced. Failed during an assignment after it was replaced, now doesn't trust the d600.
Gary
__jc
Well-known
Took them too long. Was it OK by them if people had this problem for more than a year before they decided to do something about it? Prior to that they were in complete denial so how was anyone supposed to guess they were going to do diddly squat?
Contarama
Well-known
I think anyone with a receipt of purchase of a D600 should be given a D610 in exchange...painful in the short term for Nikon...gainful in the long term.
redisburning
Well-known
well being able to electronically control the aperture makes it considerably more useful. manually focusing lenses with poor focus rings can be lived with, I suppose.
and "good enough" is not at all compelling. a person with a D800 and lenses like the 21 distagon and 60 micro-nikkor isn't going to want to step down to a camera with less than half the pixels and half the sensor area. once you get a taste of what quality is like it's hard to give that up.
and there is a big difference in final output. or is it just ignorable now that the 32 touit is better at f2.8 than the fuji 35 at f8 across the frame? and that's based on a lens that isn't even that great on the numbers front, the ZM50P. but hey, I thought the 35/1.4 was better than a summilux ASPH? sure thing.
you can get a 50MP for your D800. you can get a coastal optics 60/4 for your D800. you can get a 55 distagon for your D800. all of which use the whole frame of the lens, at a significantly higher resolution.
the whole small sensor and especially Fuji thing has been so utterly blown out of proportion for it's output quality that it's legitimately astonishing. I shoot their lenses on 4x5. I get that they are decent lenses. But it's not even the same league. It's a substitute to a D600 like a corolla is a substitute to a lemans car. it's a substitute to a D800 like the same corolla is to an F1 car.
the OP wants his Nikon prosumer camera to work. not a gadget.
I don't even get paid for photos and when it gets serious I go to Canon. "good enough" is NEVER good enough. the best I can do isn't good enough. I have too much pride in my work to use a camera that I know gives inferior results, even if everyone else is blind to it.
pixelatedscraps
Well-known
Well said.
Basically, the D600 is a failure. Returning a US$2000+ body to clean the sensor every couple of months or replacing the entire shutter assembly (and in my case, the image sensor) twice in the first 13 months is NOT a finished product. Then multiply that by the hundreds of reports of D600 oil spot issues and you have, essentially, the problem: Nikon released a faulty product. Lifetime repairs is not a solution if it happens every month. For non-NPS members that means they are without a camera for anywhere from 3-14 days on a regular basis throughout that product's lifetime. Unacceptable.
Regarding the pro-travel camera, that is partly my wussy set of demands saying I want something small and light but also capable of print-quality editorial. On holiday, I'd prefer not to lug around any more camera gear on my shoulders than is absolutely (and minimally) necessary. Professional conventionality says you would bring the same equipment (hmmm, my smaller and lighter D600!) with you on travel assignments. My requirements are for the smallest and lightest possible without sacrificing IQ or feature set: think Galen Rowell and his FE2 with pancake lenses.
That said, I don't know if I agree that a Fuji XT-1 with the 56mm f/1.2 lens is simply a Corolla
BW400CN
Bessamatic forever!
One simple and maybe stupid question as I do all sensor cleaning on my D70 by my own.
Is it possible to clean the "oil spots" on the D 600 by your own with sensor swaps?
That would make a D 600 interessting for me - because prices drop to under 1000,-€
Is it possible to clean the "oil spots" on the D 600 by your own with sensor swaps?
That would make a D 600 interessting for me - because prices drop to under 1000,-€
GaryLH
Veteran
There seems to be enough professional out there using all sorts of camera that do not have Nikon or Canon name behind it... So just because they don't use a digital camera that is not your opinion of a professional camera....
As I said the op mention in another thread he was interested in Fuji as well.. But i guess u really don't care about that do u?
Gary
x-ray
Veteran
Fuji has terrible service. I owned a $50,000 Fuji Lanovia Quattro scanner and there were only two techs in fuji that could service them or even knew anything about them. Fuji downsized a few years ago and discontinued their top end scanners and fired the one tech on the east coast. When they discontinued their scanners they dropped all support which means no more parts. When this happened the tech on the west coast was at retirement age and he retired. This left everyone with their Finescan line of scanners with no service and no parts.
Leica. What a joke. My M9 that I purchased new has been at Leica 3 times in just over a year for various problems. The total time is over 6 months. My lenses have been back 4 times and now Leica is replacing my 90 apo asph.
I'm a Nikon user too and belong to NPS. I've used Nikon since the F and have never had a problem and NPS service has been great. Any issues were in the early days of the D1. I'm currently a D800 and Df owner and have a load of lenses and could not be happier.
Good luck! I feel your pain with 000's on it.
pixelatedscraps
Well-known
I think there is a touch of confusion here. Saying Canon/Nikon is preferable for a professional photographer isn't just a conversation about bodies, lenses and AF superlatives. 98% of pros (a personal observation, I have yet to see a single non-CaNikon pro at a press event, sports, architecture or product shoot but I'm sure one or two exist) shoot these two brands because of the ecosystem that surrounds the bodies and lenses.
We are talking the dozens of accessories not just from CaNikon but the multitude of third party makers. Every pro I know shoots these two brands confident in the knowledge should anything go wrong, their nearest rental store will have something for hire at a moment's notice. At least where I live, there isn't even Sony FF options available for hire.
Plus, once you've invested in all the speedlights, radio triggers, L brackets and a million other tiny CaNikon-only doohickeys, switching to Fuji, Leica, Olympus or Panasonic becomes a logistical nightmare.
Fuji and Olympus are getting close, granted. Which is why I am keeping a close eye on them and hope they continue innovating in the way they have done up until this point. IQ has improved amazingly for mirrorless cameras in just two years, catching up to the best of APS-C cameras - and that's an amazing thing - but they're just not for me on an ecosystem level.
MFT is the closest in terms of lens lineup but they are critically short in several areas - wide angle to ultra wide, fast aperture lenses, tilt shift, fast telephoto primes and zooms, the list goes on. Catching up, but there is a pretty big gulf.
At a web level, an iPhone 4S shot with good lighting and technique can appear like it's been taken with something far more expensive, and so for the majority of the public an LX7 is more than enough.
I have no beef with any manufacturer apart from Nikon over the D600. Though I do wish there was less plastic sometimes
pixelatedscraps
Well-known
I've heard and read nothing but good reports about Fuji customer service. I particularly like how they highlighted the initial focusing problems with the X Pro-1 and XE-1 and also the light leaks of some XT-1s without question. It was almost immediate from what I remember. Compare that to 16 months into the D600 saga and there still hasn't been an official announcement that someone screwed up big time with the shutter.
Product recall? Seems like it's beneath Nikon to do that at this point. Ah, the Df, such a divisive yet technically brilliant camera. I'm a fan of the ergonomics - it brings me back to F2, FE2 and FM2/3A days, but I'll wait and see if they release one with interchangeable focusing screens and the 51-point AF from the D800/D4.
redisburning
Well-known
Getting paid doesn't make you knowledgeable.
I got a few friends from highschool who make their living as photogs who regularly ask me for help with PS/lens selection and whose photos, frankly, aren't anything special. Not that mine are, but still.
You can justify it anyway you want but I'm going to stick with the numbers and my eyes.
I'm serious; Fuji made a lens specifically for their system. Zeiss slapped a telecompressor on the back of a years old 6/4 planar and it was better. I like my 150/5.6 Plasmat an awful lot but I don't have any delusions it's actually as good as an APO Symmar-S.
Nor do I have any delusion that a 16 meg Fuji is even roughly comparable to any FF camera in output. Some people do. But then, people think some awfully strange things out of ignorance.
burancap
Veteran
redisburning
Well-known
that one really doesn't work, so the embarrassment smiley was a good choice.