D600 - £2000!

Has anyone pulled the trigger on one yet?

I am sorely tempted since the prices have fallen with Panamoz.
 
Phil Young said:
I'm betting Nikon would classify the D600 as consumer but definately not in their pro lineup and I doubt prosumer.

To me the D600 is the D7000’s update just with a larger sensor...and the D7000 is consumer. If there is a D7000 successor I reckon it will be very similar to the D600 just with a DX sensor instead...
Click to expand...

If they replaced the D7000 with a DX version of the D600 then they'd be replacing it with itself :LOL:
 
Cagey75 said:
People are rating this camera on the build? I would think end result matters most.
Click to expand...

Not simply build. Size and weight are considerations to me. I like the camera to feel balanced when paired with good lenses (and FX lenses can be quite heavy). The d7/800 and d3/4 are great in this respect. If the camera is too light it feels wrong to me.
 
Don't get me wrong, just openly wondering what other's thoughts are. When I switched from a D200 to the D90 [anyone who's shot a D200 beyond ISO 400 will know why], I did miss the build quality, and weight. I feel more at home now with the D800, I do like a sturdy body and all the controls it can hold outside the menu system. But when they start labelling with this 'consumer' stuff ... I see compacts and bridge cams as consumer ... people who just want a camera to take snap shots. I think it's a little insulting to the enthusiast or even long term, skilled photographer who just can't afford the "pro" bodies, to call the likes of the D90/7000 consumer. Your average casual snapper shouldn't be buying these cameras. They don't need them.

The guy who sold me the D90 admitted he had over done it. He was only taking snaps of his kids on holidays and special occasions. With the money he was going back to compacts.
 
Last edited:
Cagey75 said:
Don't get me wrong, just openly wondering what other's thoughts are. When I switched from a D200 to the D90 [anyone who's shot a D200 beyond ISO 400 will know why], I did miss the build quality, and weight. I feel more at home now with the D800, I do like a sturdy body and all the controls it can hold outside the menu system. But when they start labelling with this 'consumer' stuff ... I see compacts and bridge cams as consumer ... people who just want a camera to take snap shots. I think it's a little insulting to the enthusiast or even long term, skilled photographer who just can't afford the "pro" bodies, to call the likes of the D90/7000 consumer. Your average casual snapper shouldn't be buying these cameras. They don't need them.

The guy who sold me the D90 admitted he had over done it. He was only taking snaps of his kids on holidays and special occasions. With the money he was going back to compacts.
Click to expand...

Compacts have only recently started to hit the same level of image quality as DSLRs though in the last few years in my opinion, so owning a D90 even for holiday snaps just means that you'd be giving yourself more choice when it comes to the point where you want to do something "different" instead. Camera's like the Sony NEX range (plus newer RX gear) and the Nikon J/V ranges of compact cameras are superb and idea for anyone who wants excellent images from a camera that does actually give you some control over the result you want at the end of it.

My dad is a great example infact as he doesn't want to justify the cost of a DSLR to get the images he wants, but hes consistently annoyed at the quality of the 100 quid point and shoot camera he got, so a compact system like a J1 would be spot on for him.
 
Cagey75 said:
I think it's a little insulting to the enthusiast or even long term, skilled photographer who just can't afford the "pro" bodies, to call the likes of the D90/7000 consumer.
Click to expand...

073611B1-5D1F-4567-86F0-0211DE7C3E18-115-00000001FF02D29C_zps392bee31.jpg


Complaints on a postcard to...... :LOL:
 
James J said:
Compacts have only recently started to hit the same level of image quality as DSLRs though in the last few years in my opinion, so owning a D90 even for holiday snaps just means that you'd be giving yourself more choice when it comes to the point where you want to do something "different" instead. Camera's like the Sony NEX range (plus newer RX gear) and the Nikon J/V ranges of compact cameras are superb and idea for anyone who wants excellent images from a camera that does actually give you some control over the result you want at the end of it.

My dad is a great example infact as he doesn't want to justify the cost of a DSLR to get the images he wants, but hes consistently annoyed at the quality of the 100 quid point and shoot camera he got, so a compact system like a J1 would be spot on for him.
Click to expand...

That's a bit of a contradiction though. When I say compacts, I mean £100 p&s cameras.
 
Cagey75 said:
When the D90 was out first it was hailed as one of the best dslrs ever. It was Nikon's dream. They weren't labelling it consumer back then.
Click to expand...

Yes they were, it's never,ever, been a "professional" camera, it's always been part of the Consumer range.
 
They are silly labels no matter the manufacturer. Even "entry level" annoys me,. I know shooters who use a D40 and create mesmerising images. The camera is just a tool end of the day. To quote Bananarama ... "It aint what you do it's the way that you do it" ... yeah, I went there!

I wonder do builders go "He's only using a consumer model drill, mine's a Black and Decker Pro Dx123..." :D
 
Last edited:
Cagey75 said:
They are silly labels no matter the manufacturer. Even "entry level" annoys me,. I know shooters who use a D40 and create mesmerising images. The camera is just a tool end of the day. To quote Bananarama ... "It aint what you do it's the way that you do it" ... yeah, I went there!

I wonder do builders go "He's only using a consumer model drill, mine's a Black and Decker Pro Dx123..." :D
Click to expand...

It's still an "entry-level" camera, regardless of how mesmerising the images are, by dint of it's build quality and feature set, oh and by the fact that (when new) it was the cheapest Nikon DSLR, hence the "entry-level" into Nikon DSLR ownership ;)
 
James J said:
I thought it was labelled "prosumer" or am I being confused with some canon jargon instead?
Click to expand...

I think that was just a made-up name, even if it wasn't it would apply to the D300s/D700 rather than the D90/7000/600....
 
James J said:
My dad is a great example infact as he doesn't want to justify the cost of a DSLR to get the images he wants, but hes consistently annoyed at the quality of the 100 quid point and shoot camera he got, so a compact system like a J1 would be spot on for him.
Click to expand...

Except that the j1 doesn't take as good pictures as a dslr, no where near in fact, and its as big as a m4/3 and NEX, so not worth the sacrifice of the small sensor. The RX100 is a better option than the j1, pocket sized yet has a sharper lens and same size sensor.
 
Last edited:
Can someone tell me why it matters if a camera is classed as "consumer" or "professional"? Don't they still do the same thing?
 
It matters to the user and the intended use. Doesnt a compact do the same thing as a D4.
 
Last edited:
Its put in a category for people to easily 'predict' the feature set/expected build/AF quality etc. If Im looking for a compact I dont go into the pro section to look for it do I.
 
One of America's most successful wedding photographers was shooting with a Canon 40D and a Canon 70-300 DO IS lens. He didn't seemed to bothered about what people thought of his kit. He just took great pictures. That was kind of the point I was trying to make.
 
ryanyboy said:
One of America's most successful wedding photographers was shooting with a Canon 40D and a Canon 70-300 DO IS lens. He didn't seemed to bothered about what people thought of his kit. He just took great pictures. That was kind of the point I was trying to make.
Click to expand...

It doesnt matter to me what the camera is classed as, but what I like in a camera (large body, metal build, lots of external controls and no scene mode dial) tends to equate to what would be classed as a pro body. I would have no problem with what its classified as for me. I dont really care what people think about my kit, although I guess seeing a big camera will give people confidence in you (a bit like if you had an appt with a solicitor and he was in jeans and tshirt you may lose some confidence).
 
cambsno said:
It doesnt matter to me what the camera is classed as, but what I like in a camera (large body, metal build, lots of external controls and no scene mode dial) tends to equate to what would be classed as a pro body. I would have no problem with what its classified as for me. I dont really care what people think about my kit, although I guess seeing a big camera will give people confidence in you (a bit like if you had an appt with a solicitor and he was in jeans and tshirt you may lose some confidence).
Click to expand...

Most people think that any DSLR is a pro camera, look how many people get asked to shoot weddings with their bottom of the line D3xxx or 1xxxD! The distinction is only made by people who care about kit (and is made in an unfair fashion by those who willy wave- this is not directed at anyone by the way). I buy the kit that does the job I need it to, not that looks the part!
 
I thought it was like one of those unsaid things everyone knows but never says. Yes, we all have G.A.S
 
Cagey75 said:
I thought it was like one of those unsaid things everyone knows but never says. Yes, we all have G.A.S
Click to expand...

But do we? I am happy with my kit. I assembled it slowly and worked out what I needed at each stage. I know now that the only things that would improve my kit are either too expensive (large canon primes) or just daft (Leica digital M). The only thing I am likely to buy is a bigger bag and if the 7D2 appears with better high ISO noise control one of those.

The D600 to me seems a very capable camera and very good value if you are happy to buy a grey import and I am sure for most people here it would be more than adequate! People are just afraid that the gear whores with all the money would sneer and laugh at them.
 
I was happy when i was using a bridge cam a few years back ;) Doesn't mean I wasn't lusting after expensive gear. I just could never afford it, and I got on without it. It's like people who watch Top Gear and can't even drive - they can still look, and wish. And why not?? Nowt wrong with it.
 
People scoffing about a scene mode is just utter snobbery. Don't use it if you don't want too, It's not like its using up a valuable function button or anything.
 
To be honest, I wouldn't scoff at it, but I do rather when they are omitted. If you never use them, they can feel 'in the way' - I hate clutter. I'd actually love if they brought out RAW only Dslrs. As I never shoot jpeg. It's not snobbery, it's just about what suits me.
 
Cagey75 said:
I was happy when i was using a bridge cam a few years back ;) Doesn't mean I wasn't lusting after expensive gear. I just could never afford it, and I got on without it. It's like people who watch Top Gear and can't even drive - they can still look, and wish. And why not?? Nowt wrong with it.
Click to expand...

You are confusing lust with G.A.S.- the A stands for acquisition! ;)
 
If you like the camera and it does what you want it to do then get one. No one camera will ever have every item you want and no items you don't want it's called a compramise.

I would rather have one over a D700 due to the weight of it and the ability to shoot video. I don't care it has scene modes or a 1/4000 shutter speed.

I think people are just picking it apart to make them feel there current camera is ok. If your current camera does all you want there is no need for you to look at the D600 and go i wish it had x,y and z instead of a,b and c. Keep what you got and use it!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top