D600 shots are soft in Dpreview tests
 

"Anthony Polson" wrote in message
...
The Nikon D800 is noisier than the D600, not surprising given
that it has 50% more pixels crammed into the same area.

Only before the D800 image is averaged back to the same number of pixels as
the D600. Then the noise is pretty much the same. The D800 simply gives you
the option of more pixels when noise is not an issue, with about the same
noise per pixel.
The only real benefit I can see of the D600 is the price.

Trevor.

D600 shots are soft in Dpreview tests
 

On Sat, 15 Dec 2012 20:04:59 +1100, "Trevor" wrote:


"Anthony Polson" wrote in message
.. .
The Nikon D800 is noisier than the D600, not surprising given
that it has 50% more pixels crammed into the same area.

Only before the D800 image is averaged back to the same number of pixels as
the D600. Then the noise is pretty much the same. The D800 simply gives you
the option of more pixels when noise is not an issue, with about the same
noise per pixel.
The only real benefit I can see of the D600 is the price.

Trevor.


Saves space too, raw pic's average 26m so you can get more pic's per card, and
save some HD space.

You can also save money on remote shooting, since it uses the cheap IR remote,
the 800 doesn't and requires the expensive radio one!

And it's lighter...

D600 shots are soft in Dpreview tests
 

wrote in message
...
. ..
The Nikon D800 is noisier than the D600, not surprising given
that it has 50% more pixels crammed into the same area.

Only before the D800 image is averaged back to the same number of pixels
as
the D600. Then the noise is pretty much the same. The D800 simply gives
you
the option of more pixels when noise is not an issue, with about the same
noise per pixel.
The only real benefit I can see of the D600 is the price.


Saves space too, raw pic's average 26m so you can get more pic's per card,
and
save some HD space.

Given the cost of memory cards and HD's these days, I'll pass on that
"benefit".


You can also save money on remote shooting, since it uses the cheap IR
remote,
the 800 doesn't and requires the expensive radio one!

Hate IR remotes, so that's not an issue for me. Cheap radio ones are
available.


And it's lighter...

Yes, but not by enough to worry me. Even the price is not enough less to
attract me. The D800 would have to be the best value camera available atm
IMO. Of course each individuals personal requirements and funds may differ.

Trevor.

D600 shots are soft in Dpreview tests
 

On Sat, 15 Dec 2012 20:33:47 -0500, wrote:
: On Sat, 15 Dec 2012 20:04:59 +1100, "Trevor" wrote:
:
:
: "Anthony Polson" wrote in message
: .. .
: The Nikon D800 is noisier than the D600, not surprising given
: that it has 50% more pixels crammed into the same area.
:
: Only before the D800 image is averaged back to the same number of pixels
: as the D600. Then the noise is pretty much the same. The D800 simply
: gives you the option of more pixels when noise is not an issue, with
: about the same noise per pixel.
: The only real benefit I can see of the D600 is the price.
:
: Trevor.
:
:
: Saves space too, raw pic's average 26m so you can get more pic's per card,
: and save some HD space.
:
: You can also save money on remote shooting, since it uses the cheap IR
: remote, the 800 doesn't and requires the expensive radio one!

I've used the IR remote on my Canons, and it's a nice feature to have. But it
works only if the trigger is in front of the camera, so I'm not sure it's a
substitute for a radio remote, which would presumably be omni-directional.

Bob

D600 shots are soft in Dpreview tests
 

On 17/12/2012 10:46 a.m., Robert Coe wrote:
On Sat, 15 Dec 2012 20:33:47 -0500, wrote:
: On Sat, 15 Dec 2012 20:04:59 +1100, "Trevor" wrote:
:
:
: "Anthony Polson" wrote in message
: .. .
: The Nikon D800 is noisier than the D600, not surprising given
: that it has 50% more pixels crammed into the same area.
:
: Only before the D800 image is averaged back to the same number of pixels
: as the D600. Then the noise is pretty much the same. The D800 simply
: gives you the option of more pixels when noise is not an issue, with
: about the same noise per pixel.
: The only real benefit I can see of the D600 is the price.
:
: Trevor.
:
:
: Saves space too, raw pic's average 26m so you can get more pic's per card,
: and save some HD space.
:
: You can also save money on remote shooting, since it uses the cheap IR
: remote, the 800 doesn't and requires the expensive radio one!

I've used the IR remote on my Canons, and it's a nice feature to have. But it
works only if the trigger is in front of the camera, so I'm not sure it's a
substitute for a radio remote, which would presumably be omni-directional.

I think the D600 has sensors on the front and on the rear - at least
there's something which looks like an IR port on the inset panel between
the info button and the card slot cover.

D600 shots are soft in Dpreview tests
 

On Sun, 16 Dec 2012 16:46:35 -0500, Robert Coe wrote:

On Sat, 15 Dec 2012 20:33:47 -0500, wrote:
: On Sat, 15 Dec 2012 20:04:59 +1100, "Trevor" wrote:
:
:
: "Anthony Polson" wrote in message
: .. .
: The Nikon D800 is noisier than the D600, not surprising given
: that it has 50% more pixels crammed into the same area.
:
: Only before the D800 image is averaged back to the same number of pixels
: as the D600. Then the noise is pretty much the same. The D800 simply
: gives you the option of more pixels when noise is not an issue, with
: about the same noise per pixel.
: The only real benefit I can see of the D600 is the price.
:
: Trevor.
:
:
: Saves space too, raw pic's average 26m so you can get more pic's per card,
: and save some HD space.
:
: You can also save money on remote shooting, since it uses the cheap IR
: remote, the 800 doesn't and requires the expensive radio one!

I've used the IR remote on my Canons, and it's a nice feature to have. But it
works only if the trigger is in front of the camera, so I'm not sure it's a
substitute for a radio remote, which would presumably be omni-directional.

Bob

The 600 has sensors both on the front and the back, but of course a radio
trigger would have better use if the camera is hidden somewhat, but since I
already own an IR remote and not a radio remote, it's a benefit to me!

D600 shots are soft in Dpreview tests
 

Robert Coe wrote:
On Sat, 15 Dec 2012 20:33:47 -0500, wrote:

: You can also save money on remote shooting, since it uses the cheap IR
: remote, the 800 doesn't and requires the expensive radio one!

I've used the IR remote on my Canons, and it's a nice feature to have. But it
works only if the trigger is in front of the camera, so I'm not sure it's a
substitute for a radio remote, which would presumably be omni-directional.

Radio shutter remote control are only expensive if made by the camera
maker. My radio remote is about seven years old, has controlled three
different cameras, works in all directions up to at least 30 yards,
and cost me less than a six foot *wired* remote from the camera
maker. It does everything the shutter button does with no problems at
all.

--
Chris Malcolm

D600 shots are soft in Dpreview tests
 

On 2012.12.18 06:19 , Chris Malcolm wrote:

Radio shutter remote control are only expensive if made by the camera
maker.

Or if they are Pocket Wizard's or another high end (high performance) brand.

The PW's are a far superior product, have greater range and "fire"
reliability.

But for casual users, the studio and so on, the cheap Chinese triggers
are more than adequate. (I bought a transmitter and 2 receivers, used,
for about $35. New it would have been about $60).

A basic XMT/RCV pair of PW's was over $400 last I looked.

--
"There were, unfortunately, no great principles on which parties
were divided – politics became a mere struggle for office."
-Sir John A. Macdonald

D600 shots are soft in Dpreview tests
 

On 2012-12-18 14:39:46 -0800, Alan Browne
said:

On 2012.12.18 06:19 , Chris Malcolm wrote:

Radio shutter remote control are only expensive if made by the camera
maker.

Or if they are Pocket Wizard's or another high end (high performance) bra nd.

The PW's are a far superior product, have greater range and "fire" reliability.

But for casual users, the studio and so on, the cheap Chinese triggers
are more than adequate. (I bought a transmitter and 2 receivers, used,
for about $35. New it would have been about $60).

A basic XMT/RCV pair of PW's was over $400 last I looked.

Yup!
I have the Phottix Plato for my D300S, and it does allI need of it.
http://www.phottix.com/en/wireless-r...tix-plato.html

Then they have all sorts of other choices all at reasonable prices when
compared with the brand name stuff, including a live remote.
http://www.phottix.com/en/wireless-remotes.html


--
Regards,

Savageduck

D600 shots are soft in Dpreview tests
 

On 2012-12-18 15:39:15 -0800, Savageduck said:

On 2012-12-18 14:39:46 -0800, Alan Browne
said:

On 2012.12.18 06:19 , Chris Malcolm wrote:

Radio shutter remote control are only expensive if made by the camera
maker.

Or if they are Pocket Wizard's or another high end (high performance) bra nd.

The PW's are a far superior product, have greater range and "fire" reliability.

But for casual users, the studio and so on, the cheap Chinese triggers
are more than adequate. (I bought a transmitter and 2 receivers, used,
for about $35. New it would have been about $60).

A basic XMT/RCV pair of PW's was over $400 last I looked.

Yup!
I have the Phottix Plato for my D300S, and it does allI need of it.
http://www.phottix.com/en/wireless-r...tix-plato.html

Then they have all sorts of other choices all at reasonable prices when
compared with the brand name stuff, including a live remote.
http://www.phottix.com/en/wireless-remotes.html

Here are their prices:
http://www.phottixstore.com/

--
Regards,

Savageduck