nikon d600 vs d700

kar1

kar1

Messages
239
Name
karl
Edit My Images
Yes
Right, some help please you lovely lot.

I'm upgrading to ff. D600 or D700

I mainly shoot portraiture. One of my main issues is low light. I know the D600 has twice the mp.

Which would you recommend?
 
D600 isn't great AF wise in low light, centre focus spot slightly better. But the high ISO and shadow detail is so much better. Maybe try both in the conditions you want to use it in and make a decision from there.
 
Doesn't the D600 suffer from grease spots on the sensor and hence the release of the D610? It's only what I've heard, I have no experience of either camera.
 
Not looked into the D600 issues yet, but will do.

As for focus I normally use single point anyway and recompose. Or if doing event stuff, single point-continuous
 
I used mine for a wedding recently, I wasn't far off chucking it across the room as the AF was so frustratingly bad on the D6x0.
 
I bought a D700 recently (low mileage) to replace my d300 and it does everything i need, fast and good focus and low light shooting. Planning to upgrade my d7000 to another FF body soon as well.
 
I maybe wrong but isn't the d600 focus is like the canon 5d mkii where it tracks well using centre focus? Otherwise focus point might struggle in low light?
 
the d600 cheap and nasty ff worst ff camera nikon have ever made im my opinion it still has a green auto button how ameteur is that !
d700 on the other hand fan bloody tastic great for low light
 
There surely can be no contest between these two?
D700, pro build and S/H about £600. It may only be 12Mp, but use it with decent glass and it is a cracking camera. Fast AF and with a MB-D10 and an EN-EL4a battery 8fps. OK , so I do own one, and it's a bit heavy ( especially with decent glass). I can afford a D810 or D750, but can't see a reason to upgrade (yet). As for a D600? Bit like when I went to buy a D7000, and just happened to try a D300s. No contest. For me at least.
 
Northstar100 said:
What did you have problems with Stu?
Click to expand...
Inconsistent AF, especially when not using the centre point & pretty useless in the darker periods of the day, even with a 1.4 lens on.

badboy1984 said:
I maybe wrong but isn't the d600 focus is like the canon 5d mkii where it tracks well using centre focus? Otherwise focus point might struggle in low light?
Click to expand...
Yes it definitely does struggle in low light.

holty said:
the d600 cheap and nasty ff worst ff camera nikon have ever made im my opinion it still has a green auto button how ameteur is that !
d700 on the other hand fan bloody tastic great for low light
Click to expand...
What does the auto button have to do with?! Every camera has a P mode which is pretty much the same.

The D600 is great in low light, in terms of how it works at high ISO in terms, and the quality of the files in RAW are fantastic, it's just let down by some other issues.
 
some poor advice given here regarding the two. if you are budget contained to D600 and D700 then i would recommend you to save a bit for the newer D750.

otherwise D610, D610 will most likely to wallop the D700 in many aspect. D610 shares pretty much the same principles as with D600 but without the oily shutter mech which result in a "full liquid bath clean" for the sensor on every 2-3k clicks for the D600. Personally i wouldn't recommend D600 to anyone because of the oily shutter mech. but D610 is another animal

D610/600 has FAR FAR FAR superior sensor, FAR superior low light performance in terms of iso noise; better and faster focus in all conditions; more compact size and less weight; dual card slot; better image processor expeed 3;

only gripes with D610 is the limited extent of focus point which the D750 duly addressed. but in almost all of the photography condition this is more of a annoyance than a hindrance.
 
Last edited:
Some good arguments! The 600's af is a little concern.

I may look into the 800 too although the 36mp might be a bit over kill. Will need a new pc then too, lol. For the sake of a 150 part ex on mine, I may get the 7100 while I save up for ff
 
What camera and lenses do you have at the moment Karl? Something to take into consideration is the potential impact of swapping lenses etc :)

While the D750 is a beast don't discount some of the older bodies, there's a difference of £1000 between buying a low mileage D6\700 and a new D750 which could buy some seriously nice glass :cool:

Have fun deciding, I've spent months in a similar conundrum :D
 
Not really relevant but I've just noticed that the D610 has come down to £847.40 at Panamoz... But i'm not sure just how 'bad' the AF issue is with it? Never really struggled with my D7000 other than the odd trip through the focus range. I find it is mainly down to glass that causes it to struggle.

I'm contemplating something new, either a D7100 or a D610. Not really sure if FF would benefit me for what my main interests are, portraiture and general photography.
 
There isn't anything wrong with the D610 and D600 AF system, it is used on the Nikon DX range cameras. the AF points focuses very fast and accurate especially for your portrait use. as I said, the AF points only covers the DX range of the FX sensor meaning the border of the frame do not have any AF points, which is particularly annoying for landscape/architectural type of photography, i.e. compose reframe by having to use the central points to pickup the contrasty bit of the scene instead of selecting the AF point that is over the scene.

So nothing wrong with the AF just not enough coverage

going to D700 is just wrong unless you can get one for very cheap when you have cheap viable FF bodies in the form of D610 and D600.

Also if you visit the D6x0 owner threads, there are loads of people who owns the D600 have reported that Nikon either replaced the shutter mech with D610's one or they simply returned a new D610 to the owner...
 
Last edited:
I've had a D700 and moved to a D610 for a weight saving. I do still miss a number of features on the D700 (AF mode/area select switches in particular) but otherwise I'm happy with the switch.

AF on center point is as good the D700 I reckon (but certainly no better) but the other focus points are pretty naff in dim light, I mostly focus and recompose so this isn't such an issue but there have been times I would have like the D700 instead. However, when you look at the images all is forgotten as the sensor is truly magical.
 
Again, good replies!

I've currently got the D7000.

18-105 which I'm switching for mid zoom 2.8
70-200 2.8
50 1.8
 
Weddings, church and reception as far as low light is concerned. For me, the ISO doesn't feel strong enough and I can't always shoot wide open or use flash.
 
With regards to high ISO the D610 is better as you can retain a bit more detail due to the higher resolution, however I never felt like the D700 wasn't good enough in this respect, in fact I was constantly impressed until it moved on.
 
kar1 said:
Weddings, church and reception as far as low light is concerned. For me, the ISO doesn't feel strong enough and I can't always shoot wide open or use flash.
Click to expand...

Absolutely what ST4 says below...

ST4 said:
The AF is a bit limp in low light compared to the D800 in the 6x0 series. Shame as the resolution and ability to pull back shadows without noise creeping is is excellent.
Click to expand...

I find the AF to be almost totally useless in low light situations with the D610, and wouldn't want to use it for weddings etc long term.
 
As others have said, you're best off with the d750 if AF is you're main concern. I currently have d600/610 and 750 and have owned d3/d4. 750 produces pretty remarkable results albeit is uninspiring in use compared to the big bodies. D610 is fine for pretty much everyone and would certainly be better than canon wrt sensor\af value for money.
 
I have owned a D700 for several years and then a D600 for about year. I ended up getting a D800 (mostly due to sensor issues).

For me and my style of photography (wildlife, astrophoto, travel photopgraphy, landscapes, cityscapes, macro, family - all amateur) the D600 clearly is a much better camera. In fact when I look at my old D700 RAWs in Lightroom I often think about how great it would be if I had a chance to reshoot them again with newer gear. The pictures I had to bracket, stitch or filter on D700 can shoot straight away now. Shoots that would have been lost due to exposure or dynamic range of the scene can be recovered now, much more headroom for post processing, less colour shifts, cropability, etc.

However, I am sure there are people who shoot different genres (sports, action, ...) who care about frame rates, AF speed, can't afford missing a frame, etc. These will probably think the opposite. Luckily, I don't make my living on action photography :)

So think about what you shoot and then decide.
 
Is there any chance you could hire a D600/D610 and a D700 and find out which one suits you best?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top