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.

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.

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.

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)

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.

Canon 6D announced - same price, less photographic features, than D600
but built-in wireless and GPS.

On Mon, 17 Sep 2012 16:13:25 +1200, 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.
:
: Canon 6D announced - same price, less photographic features, than D600
: but built-in wireless and GPS.

I admit to being confused by this. Built-in GPS is a specialty feature about
which most users will care little (sorry, Alan!), and built-in wireless is
useful only to photojournalists, most of whom will NOT buy the 6D.

Bob

On 20/09/2012 1:45 p.m., Robert Coe wrote:
On Mon, 17 Sep 2012 16:13:25 +1200, 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.
:
: Canon 6D announced - same price, less photographic features, than D600
: but built-in wireless and GPS.

I admit to being confused by this. Built-in GPS is a specialty feature about
which most users will care little (sorry, Alan!), and built-in wireless is
useful only to photojournalists, most of whom will NOT buy the 6D.

Many posters in DPReview's Canon 5D forum seem to be mercilessly bashing
the 6D. The "beginner level" D600 is copping some flak in the Nikon
forums too. Jeesh
Neither wireless nor GPS should add much to the production cost these
days. Neither necessarily use much power either, if new smartphones are
an indicator. May as well have it, Nikon's accessory GPS thing is a
crazy price.

On Thu, 20 Sep 2012 14:35:20 +1200, Me wrote:
: On 20/09/2012 1:45 p.m., Robert Coe wrote:
: On Mon, 17 Sep 2012 16:13:25 +1200, 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.
: :
: : Canon 6D announced - same price, less photographic features, than D600
: : but built-in wireless and GPS.
:
: I admit to being confused by this. Built-in GPS is a specialty feature about
: which most users will care little (sorry, Alan!), and built-in wireless is
: useful only to photojournalists, most of whom will NOT buy the 6D.
:
: Many posters in DPReview's Canon 5D forum seem to be mercilessly bashing
: the 6D. The "beginner level" D600 is copping some flak in the Nikon
: forums too. Jeesh
: Neither wireless nor GPS should add much to the production cost these
: days. Neither necessarily use much power either, if new smartphones are
: an indicator. May as well have it, Nikon's accessory GPS thing is a
: crazy price.

I'll bash it if it doesn't have autofocus microadjustment. And if it really is
just a FF 60D, maybe it doesn't

Bob

In article , Robert Coe
wrote:

: Canon 6D announced - same price, less photographic features, than D600
: but built-in wireless and GPS.

I admit to being confused by this. Built-in GPS is a specialty feature about
which most users will care little (sorry, Alan!), and built-in wireless is
useful only to photojournalists, most of whom will NOT buy the 6D.

gps is not a specialty feature at all and most users will find it far
more convenient than having to deal with an external gps or trying to
match tracklogs to photos. having wifi makes getting photos to the
computer much easier too.

i don't know why camera makers have been slow to adopt either of those.
neither cost all that much. they could leave them off on the entry
level cameras, however, on a midrange and certainly high end, they
should be standard.

nospam wrote:
gps is not a specialty feature at all and most users will find it far
more convenient than having to deal with an external gps or trying to
match tracklogs to photos. having wifi makes getting photos to the
computer much easier too.

All of that is indeed true.

i don't know why camera makers have been slow to adopt either of those.
neither cost all that much. they could leave them off on the entry
level cameras, however, on a midrange and certainly high end, they
should be standard.

Yes, the actual cost is peanuts, as far as just the
parts added.

There are some problems which aren't at all obvious.
Implementing either GPS or Wifi internally requires a
significant part of the camera's internal case be
non-metal. Fine for a consumer model, but not at all
easy to engineer into a ruggedized professional camera.
(And in Nikon's case, putting something in a low level
body that isn't in the high end models just does not
fit their marketing model.)

Note that "modest" alternatives in terms of the metal
casing do not allow for very effective WIFI in particular.
For example, if a half inch groove or inset along any side
of the camera is used for an antenna, it will have a strong
enough signal only on that side. If it's located on the back
side, you can't connect to an Access Point located in front
of the camera! That just isn't worth implementing.

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