Nikon D600 a compromise but ok
 

Yes, it has a FF sensor, 24mp. But, you don't get it for $2099 and not
suffer some compromises. 1/2 plastic body, 0.7x viewfinder, D7000 body
ergonomics (Yeesh! I hope it's closer to the D300 body) but for someone who
needs FF on the cheap, this is it. The kit lens, if it's as good as the
16-85DX for $600 should be good though.

Nikon D600 a compromise but ok
 

On 13/09/2012 6:19 p.m., Rich wrote:
Yes, it has a FF sensor, 24mp. But, you don't get it for $2099 and not
suffer some compromises. 1/2 plastic body, 0.7x viewfinder, D7000 body
ergonomics (Yeesh! I hope it's closer to the D300 body) but for someone who
needs FF on the cheap, this is it. The kit lens, if it's as good as the
16-85DX for $600 should be good though.

The VF is 100% - and exactly the same spec as the D4/D800.
It doesn't have the round eyepiece that other FX slrs do, but probably
not much of an issue as there seem to be plenty of 3rd part accessories
on ebay etc which will slot in to the eyepiece frame if you feel the need.

It is a bit larger than the D7000, perhaps the same size as a D300.

There's no AF-ON button - that, the different AF module, and the "new
improved" (arguable) AF mode selector are the main differences from
D300/700. Plastic-schmastic. If it breaks, my insurance will pay for it.

Raw sensor analysis and comments about the AF system low light
performance from hands-on experience will be the make or break factor
for me - it will either be this or a D800/E for me. (My D300 is gone - I
gave it to my son for a birthday present)

I hope the D600 retains the ability to use a "one-click" on the centre
selector button in image review mode to zoom (100% if you need)
instantly to the selected focus point. The D7000 does not have this, I
presume the D800 does. It's a very handy "chimping" feature.

Nikon D600 a compromise but ok
 

On 2012.09.13 03:01 , Me wrote:
On 13/09/2012 6:19 p.m., Rich wrote:
Yes, it has a FF sensor, 24mp. But, you don't get it for $2099 and not
suffer some compromises. 1/2 plastic body, 0.7x viewfinder, D7000 body
ergonomics (Yeesh! I hope it's closer to the D300 body) but for
someone who
needs FF on the cheap, this is it. The kit lens, if it's as good as the
16-85DX for $600 should be good though.

The VF is 100% - and exactly the same spec as the D4/D800.

He meant the magnification is 0.7x. VFs that aren't 100% are usually
around 94 - 96% frame coverage.


--
"C'mon boys, you're not laying pipe!".
-John Keating.

Nikon D600 a compromise but ok
 

Alan Browne wrote:
On 2012.09.13 03:01 , Me wrote:
On 13/09/2012 6:19 p.m., Rich wrote:
Yes, it has a FF sensor, 24mp. But, you don't get it for $2099 and not
suffer some compromises. 1/2 plastic body, 0.7x viewfinder, D7000 body
ergonomics (Yeesh! I hope it's closer to the D300 body) but for
someone who
needs FF on the cheap, this is it. The kit lens, if it's as good as the
16-85DX for $600 should be good though.

The VF is 100% - and exactly the same spec as the D4/D800.

He meant the magnification is 0.7x. VFs that aren't 100% are usually
around 94 - 96% frame coverage.

As he said, "and exactly the same spec as the D4/D800",
or for that matter the D3 and D3S as well as the D4/D800.

All of the Nikon FX cameras are listed as approximately
0.7x magnification with 100% coverage, except for the D700.

The D700 is 0.72x magnification and 95% coverage.

--
Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska)

Nikon D600 a compromise but ok
 

RichA wrote:
On Sep 13, 3:01*am, Me wrote:
On 13/09/2012 6:19 p.m., Rich wrote: Yes, it has a FF sensor, 24mp. *But, you don't get it for $2099 and not
suffer some compromises. *1/2 plastic body, 0.7x viewfinder, D7000 body
ergonomics (Yeesh! I hope it's closer to the D300 body) but for someone who
needs FF on the cheap, this is it. *The kit lens, if it's as good as the
16-85DX for $600 should be good though.

The VF is 100% -

VF magnification is 0.7.

Just like all of Nikon's top of the line FX bodies, the
D3, the D3s, the D3X, the D4. The D800 and now the
D600 too.

The D700 is different, it's 95% and 0.72x magnification.

Other than that you don't know what that means, did you
have a point?

--
Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska)

Nikon D600 a compromise but ok
 

On 9/14/2012 8:05 PM, RichA wrote:
On Sep 14, 3:47 am, (Floyd L. Davidson) wrote:
RichA wrote:
On Sep 13, 3:01 am, Me wrote:
On 13/09/2012 6:19 p.m., Rich wrote: Yes, it has a FF sensor, 24mp. But, you don't get it for $2099 and not
suffer some compromises. 1/2 plastic body, 0.7x viewfinder, D7000 body
ergonomics (Yeesh! I hope it's closer to the D300 body) but for someone who
needs FF on the cheap, this is it. The kit lens, if it's as good as the
16-85DX for $600 should be good though.

The VF is 100% -

VF magnification is 0.7.

Just like all of Nikon's top of the line FX bodies, the
D3, the D3s, the D3X, the D4. The D800 and now the
D600 too.

The D700 is different, it's 95% and 0.72x magnification.

Other than that you don't know what that means, did you
have a point?

--
Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska)

Fanboy alert. Never mention anything even seemingly negative.


Exactly when did you give anything a positive review?

--
Peter

Nikon D600 a compromise but ok
 

PeterN wrote:
On 9/14/2012 8:05 PM, RichA wrote:
On Sep 14, 3:47 am, (Floyd L. Davidson) wrote:
RichA wrote:
On Sep 13, 3:01 am, Me wrote:
On 13/09/2012 6:19 p.m., Rich wrote: Yes, it has a FF sensor, 24mp. But, you don't get it for $2099 and not
suffer some compromises. 1/2 plastic body, 0.7x viewfinder, D7000 body
ergonomics (Yeesh! I hope it's closer to the D300 body) but for someone who
needs FF on the cheap, this is it. The kit lens, if it's as good as the
16-85DX for $600 should be good though.

The VF is 100% -

VF magnification is 0.7.

Just like all of Nikon's top of the line FX bodies, the
D3, the D3s, the D3X, the D4. The D800 and now the
D600 too.

The D700 is different, it's 95% and 0.72x magnification.

Other than that you don't know what that means, did you
have a point?

--
Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska)

Fanboy alert. Never mention anything even seemingly negative.


Exactly when did you give anything a positive review?

When did he give anything a *valid* review!

--
Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska)

Nikon D600 a compromise but ok
 

On 9/14/2012 9:15 PM, Floyd L. Davidson wrote:
PeterN wrote:
On 9/14/2012 8:05 PM, RichA wrote:
On Sep 14, 3:47 am, (Floyd L. Davidson) wrote:
RichA wrote:
On Sep 13, 3:01 am, Me wrote:
On 13/09/2012 6:19 p.m., Rich wrote: Yes, it has a FF sensor, 24mp. But, you don't get it for $2099 and not
suffer some compromises. 1/2 plastic body, 0.7x viewfinder, D7000 body
ergonomics (Yeesh! I hope it's closer to the D300 body) but for someone who
needs FF on the cheap, this is it. The kit lens, if it's as good as the
16-85DX for $600 should be good though.

The VF is 100% -

VF magnification is 0.7.

Just like all of Nikon's top of the line FX bodies, the
D3, the D3s, the D3X, the D4. The D800 and now the
D600 too.

The D700 is different, it's 95% and 0.72x magnification.

Other than that you don't know what that means, did you
have a point?

--
Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska)

Fanboy alert. Never mention anything even seemingly negative.


Exactly when did you give anything a positive review?

When did he give anything a *valid* review!


I don't believe you actually agree with something I posted. G

--
Peter

Nikon D600 a compromise but ok
 

PeterN wrote in
:

On 9/14/2012 8:05 PM, RichA wrote:
On Sep 14, 3:47 am, (Floyd L. Davidson) wrote:
RichA wrote:
On Sep 13, 3:01 am, Me wrote:
On 13/09/2012 6:19 p.m., Rich wrote: Yes, it has a FF sensor,
24mp. But, you don't get it for $2099 and not
suffer some compromises. 1/2 plastic body, 0.7x viewfinder,
D7000 body ergonomics (Yeesh! I hope it's closer to the D300
body) but for someone who needs FF on the cheap, this is it. The
kit lens, if it's as good as the 16-85DX for $600 should be good
though.

The VF is 100% -

VF magnification is 0.7.

Just like all of Nikon's top of the line FX bodies, the
D3, the D3s, the D3X, the D4. The D800 and now the
D600 too.

The D700 is different, it's 95% and 0.72x magnification.

Other than that you don't know what that means, did you
have a point?

--
Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska)

Fanboy alert. Never mention anything even seemingly negative.


Exactly when did you give anything a positive review?


Most cameras today function well enough when they work that anyone can
take a decent image. Low-light capability is very good, focusing (in
most cases is very good). So, the only differentiators are the problems
and the short-comings. $2100 for a 1/2 plastic body when the D300 was
$1700 and all metal, 4 years ago? Counter-balancing this is that it's a
$2100 FF. The D800 and it's horrible focusing problems, a deal-killer
for many a new Canon owner. These are the only things that really make a
difference, not whether a D600 and D7000 have fractionally different high
ISO capability.

Nikon D600 a compromise but ok
 

PeterN wrote in
:

On 9/14/2012 9:15 PM, Floyd L. Davidson wrote:
PeterN wrote:
On 9/14/2012 8:05 PM, RichA wrote:
On Sep 14, 3:47 am, (Floyd L. Davidson) wrote:
RichA wrote:
On Sep 13, 3:01 am, Me wrote:
On 13/09/2012 6:19 p.m., Rich wrote: Yes, it has a FF sensor,
24mp. But, you don't get it for $2099 and not
suffer some compromises. 1/2 plastic body, 0.7x viewfinder,
D7000 body ergonomics (Yeesh! I hope it's closer to the D300
body) but for someone who needs FF on the cheap, this is it.
The kit lens, if it's as good as the 16-85DX for $600 should be
good though.

The VF is 100% -

VF magnification is 0.7.

Just like all of Nikon's top of the line FX bodies, the
D3, the D3s, the D3X, the D4. The D800 and now the
D600 too.

The D700 is different, it's 95% and 0.72x magnification.

Other than that you don't know what that means, did you
have a point?

--
Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska)

Fanboy alert. Never mention anything even seemingly negative.


Exactly when did you give anything a positive review?

When did he give anything a *valid* review!


I don't believe you actually agree with something I posted. G


We know features, but can't review performance until the thing is
actually here or someone does it for us. So, fanboys, just wait; I'm
sure it will meet with your expectations.