Nikon D600 announced ... Not Sub-$2000 ...

[Ronald_H]

My opinion can be summarized as follows:


Shut up and take my money! by eduo, on Flickr

 

[celluloidprop]

I don't get the "it's crippled" (etc.) comments.

The big drawbacks vs. D800 (aside from resolution) appear to be studio lighting related. And it doesn't have a 1/8000 shutter speed.

Both of these appear to be fairly niche issues.

 

[Keith]

For some FX (36x24mm) is the Holy Grail of photography for others its just another format. Larger then Micro 4/3rds and DX but smaller then 56 x 41.5mm(digital MF) 6x6/7/8 MF 8x10 large format. Each of which have their own particular pluses and minus.

I don't think full frame 24x36 can ever be regarded as 'just another format' by Nikon or any manufacturer.

There's a zillion lenses out there made to suit it ... many going back to the early part of last century.

 

[Pablito]

I thought I'd wait to see what they came up with but the D800 is much more appealing. Laugh at me, but I hate the shooting mode dial. Much prefer the buttons like on the D300s and D800. I'd like to see flagship replacement for the D300s, a beefy 24mp APS body made for pro /semi-pro use.

 

[I Love Film]

If they had come out with a D600e (no AA filter), I would be sold.

Meanwhile, in no rush to dump my D700, a superb camera in every respect.

 

[willie_901]

The pixel density is not high enough for general use without an AA filter.

 

[Keith]

If they had come out with a D600e (no AA filter), I would be sold.

Meanwhile, in no rush to dump my D700, a superb camera in every respect.

But obsolete of course ... just like the Xpro-1. 😀

 

[Turtle]

Would make a good back up to the D800 when prices settle down. Its high ISO and dynamic range will make all the difference to its appeal. If it is a cracker, it could cause quit a bit of trouble for the rumoured Canon 6D. A D600 and D800 makes for a very flexible pair for a wedding/commercial photographer. The problem with all these 'smallest/lightest' cameras as working tools usually becomes evident as soon as they end up in large male hands, however.

 

[kshapero]

D7000 + FX sensor = D600
A good thing

 

[Paddy C]

The weird thing about this camera and the hype around it (IMO) is that the Sony a850 was $2000 US when released and had a 24mp sensor when Nikon only had the 12mp that was in the D700 (no knock on the D700).

Which is to say, there already was an "affordable" full-frame and it came out three years ago.

Still, Nikon's done a good job with it and the price should benefit everyone.

 

[doolittle]

I think if the rumours had been about a $2100 D600 there would have not been as much buzz about the camera before (and after) the official release. The rumoured $1500 price tag sure got everybody talking.

 

[Ronald_H]

Whatever the cost (which I think is perfectly bearable), it is exactly what I need. And it costs only a bit more than my D200 + 18-135 lens, way back in 2006. I think I'm overdue a new dSLR.

 

[Athos6]

The main problem

The main problem

I would have been excited about this camera or a D400 a year ago. But while Sony, Fuji and Olympus can out with exciting new stuff Nikon sat around and released the Nikon 1 turd... Now, when they finally release it, it seems so boring, so ordinary. So I really don't care about the price. Why would I buy it when it seems like the "old" paradigm, there is nothing that Nikon really offers that you cannot get with a smaller, cooler package. Don't get me wrong I have always been a Nikon fanboy. It just seems like the camera world changed in the last couple of years and Nikon hasn't begun to react yet.

 

[Turtle]

I guess it depends on what you want. This camera is one of the new crop of APS-C sized FF DSLRs and if you want a small DSLR I guess it has appeal, in part due to access to the wider Nikon system. Same goes for the Eos 6D that is expected.

Revolutionary, no, but evolutionary perhaps. For me, I am in the market for a considerable amount of DSLR equipment and so I am watching closely how both Canon and Nikon systems are progressing. Personally, I would not consider any other systems due to the lack of depth to them, which matters to me.

I would have been excited about this camera or a D400 a year ago. But while Sony, Fuji and Olympus can out with exciting new stuff Nikon sat around and released the Nikon 1 turd... Now, when they finally release it, it seems so boring, so ordinary. So I really don't care about the price. Why would I buy it when it seems like the "old" paradigm, there is nothing that Nikon really offers that you cannot get with a smaller, cooler package. Don't get me wrong I have always been a Nikon fanboy. It just seems like the camera world changed in the last couple of years and Nikon hasn't begun to react yet.

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

About $700 cheaper, but still. I can't see the appeal of this, let's be honest, half-assed full frame camera.

Whoa: dissin' a Nikon?

 

[KenR]

Full frame Nikon

Full frame Nikon

I think you can get a variety of full frame Nikons for $250-$300 - all film of course. 🙂

 

[jtm6]

I think you can get a variety of full frame Nikons for $250-$300 - all film of course. 🙂

Some are 1/10 that price and come with a 6 month warranty from a local dealer, KEH, not eBay, etc. 🙂

 

[jarski]

heh another small full frame body just got announced from Canon: 6D.

good times 🙂

 

[Keith]

Wow ... tough audience at DPReview! 😱

The new FF 6D Canon is getting a pasting from quite a few people.

 

[I Love Film]

Oh, really? Then I suppose I better toss out my Kodak SLR/n.

The pixel density is not high enough for general use without an AA filter.