My experience with the Nikon D600 oil sensor problem

Ummm... why not buy an A99 or A7r? I work with Sony bodies now. The experience is great, you can rely on a few A-mount zooms for most work and pretty much shoehorn anything onto an A7 for stills.

If you are in Asia then Sony pricing is also more reasonable compared to North America, last time I was in Hong Kong the A7 was retailing around $1300, only slightly more than half of the D600's price. If mirrorless isn't up to professional torture (although I've been abusing my NEX-7 and it held up fine), there is always the (also cheaper than D600) A99. I've dumped my entire Canon system (7d, 600d, 5 lenses) for Sony in 2012, and life hasn't been better.
 
x-ray said:
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.
Click to expand...

Fuji's consumer service in HK and the US is simply wonderful. Best camera company I have dealt with. My X-E1 received a full repair w/ a new LCD screen put in. How long was the turnaround? 2 days.

Leica's service on lens is also fine, at least that's what my experience is. The M9 is not a good camera (design-wise), but Leica has honored their policy and did their best with its issues.
 
redisburning said:
that one really doesn't work, so the embarrassment smiley was a good choice.
Click to expand...

Now I am really, really confused! :eek::eek:

Your posts are always so technically informative! I always enjoy reading them, but I am afraid you have completely lost me on these nontechnical posts.
 
burancap said:
Now I am really, really confused! :eek::eek:

Your posts are always so technically informative! I always enjoy reading them, but I am afraid you have completely lost me on these nontechnical posts.
Click to expand...

my signature is a sarcastic take on fuji brand worship based on a particular joke in the comic Detroit Metal City. while it does reflect my personal experience with Fuji raw files as well as finished images by others, it should not be considered part of my posts.
 
YYV_146 said:
Ummm... why not buy an A99 or A7r? I work with Sony bodies now. The experience is great, you can rely on a few A-mount zooms for most work and pretty much shoehorn anything onto an A7 for stills. If you are in Asia then Sony pricing is also more reasonable compared to North America, last time I was in Hong Kong the A7 was retailing around $1300, only slightly more than half of the D600's price. If mirrorless isn't up to professional torture (although I've been abusing my NEX-7 and it held up fine), there is always the (also cheaper than D600) A99. I've dumped my entire Canon system (7d, 600d, 5 lenses) for Sony in 2012, and life hasn't been better.
Click to expand...

Well, that's good news for you and I'm glad Sony has a happy user. I only use primes for my work and Sony's lens lineup (for me) is even weaker than MFT or Fuji's. While Sony may work for some, it certainly does not for me in it's current state. No Phottix Odin radio triggers that allow 360• flash triggering up to 100m range, no Zeiss 21mm or 100mm Makro-Planar and no 15mm that I aspire to own. Plus no 60mm workhorse macro. Again, the ecosystem argument applies here too. It's getting there but from what I've seen there are simply too many Sony bodies and not enough lenses.

Also, the D600 here retails at below $1000 as everybody is avoiding it like the plague. Even the D610 is selling for about $1200. Sony A7 is roughly the same as the D610.

Ultimately the problem is still this: Nikon ****ed up badly with the D600 and should be doing something more than offering continual repairs.
 
well to be fair the A99 uses all the Minolta lenses and there are ways to use Zeiss primes (since you have ZF mount versions) so it's lens database is pretty significant. It's just that some of the lenses aren't the newest.
 
redisburning said:
well to be fair the A99 uses all the Minolta lenses and there are ways to use Zeiss primes (since you have ZF mount versions) so it's lens database is pretty significant. It's just that some of the lenses aren't the newest.
Click to expand...

Point taken. But mounting an adapter (with or without another glass layer) is not an option for me, though I do see the advantage in being able to use old legacy lenses lying unused. It's definitely something to look forward to, mounting an old 105mm f/2.5 AI'd (one of my favourites) onto the D800E but I don't know why any pro would want to put a 45 year old Nikkor / Rokkor on an A7R / D800E for work purposes that isn't capable of resolving the maximum out of the sensor though...

EDIT: Wait, this is suspiciously turning into a system vs. system discussion. My apologies if I instigated that but it was not my intention...let's try and keep this to the D600 oil sensor problem and / or user experiences of Nikon's servicing (if possible!). Thanks guys :)
 
pixelatedscraps said:
Well, that's good news for you and I'm glad Sony has a happy user. I only use primes for my work and Sony's lens lineup (for me) is even weaker than MFT or Fuji's. While Sony may work for some, it certainly does not for me in it's current state. No Phottix Odin radio triggers that allow 360• flash triggering up to 100m range, no Zeiss 21mm or 100mm Makro-Planar and no 15mm that I aspire to own. Plus no 60mm workhorse macro. Again, the ecosystem argument applies here too. It's getting there but from what I've seen there are simply too many Sony bodies and not enough lenses.

Also, the D600 here retails at below $1000 as everybody is avoiding it like the plague. Even the D610 is selling for about $1200. Sony A7 is roughly the same as the D610.

Ultimately the problem is still this: Nikon ****ed up badly with the D600 and should be doing something more than offering continual repairs.
Click to expand...

The lack of wides is indeed one of Sony's problems. The 24mm ZA is excellent, but unfortunately they lack a high-performing superwide.

Minolta has excellent Macro lenses in the 60-100mm range, sony also has a 100mm f2.8 G lens, which is a bit on the pricy side but excellent. I would also argue that Sony's portrait line is stronger than Canon and Nikon's, with the excellent 50mm f1.4 Zeiss, two very good 135mm primes and a super-sharp 85mm f1.4.

And of course you can mount ZF lenses to both the A and E mount...
 
YYV_146 said:
The lack of wides is indeed one of Sony's problems. The 24mm ZA is excellent, but unfortunately they lack a high-performing superwide.

Minolta has excellent Macro lenses in the 60-100mm range, sony also has a 100mm f2.8 G lens, which is a bit on the pricy side but excellent. I would also argue that Sony's portrait line is stronger than Canon and Nikon's, with the excellent 50mm f1.4 Zeiss, two very good 135mm primes and a super-sharp 85mm f1.4.

And of course you can mount ZF lenses to both the A and E mount...
Click to expand...

Well, don't forget Canon / Nikon also have the same Zeiss 50mm f/1.4 Planar, 85mm f/1.4 Planar, 135mm f/2 APO Sonnar as Sony does. I believe the superlative 100mm f/2 Makro-Planar only comes in EF and F mount though.
 
Canon CPS are just as bad as Nikon, one of my 7month old 1dxs has a fault and the first thing I did was a bit of googling and within 30 seconds I see lots of people with the same fault yet when you phone Canon they are 'completely unaware of the fault'.
I must say replying to the original post I would still rather have a Canon;);)
 
pixelatedscraps said:
Well, don't forget Canon / Nikon also have the same Zeiss 50mm f/1.4 Planar, 85mm f/1.4 Planar, 135mm f/2 APO Sonnar as Sony does. I believe the superlative 100mm f/2 Makro-Planar only comes in EF and F mount though.
Click to expand...

The ZE/ZF 50mm planar design is inferior to the Sony Zeiss version (more CA, much less sharp wide open). The Sony is also an autofocus lens, which makes it perhaps a bit more practical and desirable.

I'm not familiar with the ZE/ZF 85mm, but the Sony 85mm Zeiss looks quite similar to the Minolta 85mm 1.4, so I doubt that Zeiss actually designed the lens...It is also my experience that the limited edition Minolta 85 can handily outperform the new Zeiss 85mm at most apertures, so Sony may well be cutting corners compare to the best Minolta could do.

As for 135mm, Sony's offerings are unique. No other brand has a 135mm f1.8, and although the design is similar to the APO-sonnar, being both an autofocus lens and 1/3 stop faster, it cannot be considered as the same lens. The 135mm STF is perhaps the best portrait lens I have ever used, and can deliver results no other long portrait lens could. The closest comparable offering might be Nikon's 135mm Defocus Control, but with Nikon you can only get limited Bokeh control wide open, and only control either the foreground or background (but not both).
 
the 135DC is not even close to as powerful as the apodization function of the 135STF.

the 135/1.8 is, like you said, faster and AF. the APO Sonnar is a better lens in most other ways (it's really spectacular).

also, you are correct, the 50 and 85 planars are not the same designs (which are barely modified c/y planars).
 
redisburning said:
the 135DC is not even close to as powerful as the apodization function of the 135STF.
Click to expand...

Defocus control has greater capabilities stopped down. But if the lens is already stopped down to f4 or f5.6, what is the point of controlling bokeh smoothness? :D

My only nitpick with the 135mm STF is the 1 1/2 stops of light thrown away. In decent light I've been pushed to use iso 400 and above for handheld work, and the result shows in post processing latitude.

Other than that it leaves every other long portrait lens in the dust. Bokeh is just so much better, you cannot help but wonder how you've ever thought your other lenses had good OOF rendering.

redisburning said:
the 135/1.8 is, like you said, faster and AF. the APO Sonnar is a better lens in most other ways (it's really spectacular).
Click to expand...

And also a bigger, heavier one...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom