D600 or D7100?

rob-nikon

rob-nikon

Messages
7,085
Name
Rob
Edit My Images
Yes
I've been thinking of getting a 2nd body as I hate changing between a 300 and 70-200 whilst out and I usually miss the opportunity whilst doing so. I’ve been waiting for the D7100 as I thought that would be the answer but now I'm not so sure, the recent cashback offers now make the D600 quite enticing.

I'm looking to use the 2nd camera for closer wildlife using a 70-200 f2.8 VR1. Does anyone use the D600 with this lens? I've heard the VR1 is not so great on full frame due to corner sharpness but as most of my photos use wide open apertures this should not be a problem. How good is the 39 point auto focus system on the D600? Is auto focus better than the D7000? How good is the D600 as a wildlife camera?

The recent cashback offer is making me think that the D600 could be a good option, the D7100 does not seem to be that much of an upgrade if I’m keeping the D7000. The cashback offer brings the prices between the two closer. The D800 is out of the question as it would £650 more than the D600 with cashback. I’m happy with the D7000 and the recent price drop with the cashback offer makes it not worth selling, keeping it so I can quickly swap between a prime and a zoom would be great.

At present I think it’s out of a D600 or D7100. I think the D600 has the edge due to the full frame sensor, I’m guessing it would be great for landscapes and macro which are my other interests. I’m thinking the benefits of full frame would be better than the main benefits of a better AF system and extra MP on the D7100.

If anyone can let me know what they think about the D600, especially if you shot wildlife, landscapes or macro with it, or if you upgraded from a D7000 it would be appreciated.
 
Last edited:
a d7000 is a crop frame sensor , so the range is multiplyed by 1.5 so the 300 becomes 450 and the 70 200 becomes a 105 300, and also the d600 whould not use the full sensor unless you use ful frame lenses. so to get a 450mm range on a full frame you would have to get a 450mm lens , im sorry if this is hard to understand but im just learning about full frame myself, good luck
 
steve_lyt said:
a d7000 is a crop frame sensor , so the range is multiplyed by 1.5 so the 300 becomes 450 and the 70 200 becomes a 105 300, and also the d600 whould not use the full sensor unless you use ful frame lenses. so to get a 450mm range on a full frame you would have to get a 450mm lens , im sorry if this is hard to understand but im just learning about full frame myself, good luck
Click to expand...

Thanks, the lack of crop is not too much of a problem as I'm keeping the d7000. Like you say there won't be the crop multiplication factor so lenses will lack reach, this is not a problem as I'm thinking of using the d600 for closer, wider views where the d7000 and 300 f4 is too close and can't give the wider composition I want.
 
Does the smaller 39 point auto focus area cause a problem in real life situations. The area doesn't cover as much of the frame compared to the d7000 which could be a worry, I like moving the focus area to compose the photo rather than just using the centre point and recompose manually, its quite useful to cover most of the viewfinder with moving action shots.

I've just found this review, a bit more of info on both.

http://photographylife.com/nikon-d7100-vs-d600
 
Last edited:
If you like wide angles, FF is the way forward for you and since you're keeping the D7000 you'll have the extra apparent reach that crop offers you for wildlife. With the £150 cashback, the D600 ends up costing about £1300 - not cheap but not much more than a D7100. Not sure what your lens bag holds but don't forget to budget for any Dx-Fx upgrades you may want to do!

(I'm seriously considering a D600 to sit beside the D700 but I'm now able to control my GAS so am resisting the purchase!)
 
Don't have any larger lenses at present but using the 24-120 f4 and nifty fifty the autofocus is pretty bang on with the exception of really low light or non contrasting subject in really poor light, in those situations it takes a second to lock on very occasionally. Using single point focussing most of the time but I have tried the other modes and find I have no problems with the smaller focusing area.
The most oustanding thing I have noticed moving up from the d5100 is the dynamic range on the d600, it captures every bit of detail and handles shadow and highlight detail incredibly well.
I have no experience with other full frame cameras so find it hard to compare but it does feel miles ahead of the d5100. Don't be put off by the dust issue, the occasional blow out with the rocket or wipe over by the arctic butterfly sorts that out and on stubborn bunnies a wet clean is easy enough.
 
Nod said:
If you like wide angles, FF is the way forward for you and since you're keeping the D7000 you'll have the extra apparent reach that crop offers you for wildlife. With the £150 cashback, the D600 ends up costing about £1300 - not cheap but not much more than a D7100. Not sure what your lens bag holds but don't forget to budget for any Dx-Fx upgrades you may want to do!

(I'm seriously considering a D600 to sit beside the D700 but I'm now able to control my GAS so am resisting the purchase!)
Click to expand...

The cashback offer is what is very tempting with the D600. When I say wider view I mean using the 70-200 instead of the 300. Sometimes wildlife comes too close or I would like a wider composition compared to the fixed composition the 300 prime gives. It's also not always possible to move positions and zoom with my feet as my can be fixed.

Most of my longer lens are fx so its only a problem with the wider 12-24mm and 18-70mm which are dx lens. So got to consider that there 12-70mm range lens would have to be swapped.

The one thing that could be a problem for me is the smaller focus point coverage, I'd have to focus and recompose which is not a technique that would be as easy with any moving animals.
 
I'd have to say that unless you are desperate for the extra reach that with the cashback offer, the obvious choice is the D600.

I'm wrestling with the idea of either changing my D700 to the D600 for the dual card slots, quiet mode and smidgen better ISO performance or get a D7000 for some video work and general dogsbody camera.
 
I was playing with a D600 yesturday and was very close to buying one but my Local shop did not have any in stock. The focus point coverage is really bad and sometimes annoying as I prefer to move the focus point on my subject. It's something that I can learn to live with.

Image quality is amazing and you will not be disappointed at all. As for the d7100, I would wait a bit till there is enough info about it before I buy one
 
Speedy136 said:
Don't have any larger lenses at present but using the 24-120 f4 and nifty fifty the autofocus is pretty bang on with the exception of really low light or non contrasting subject in really poor light, in those situations it takes a second to lock on very occasionally. Using single point focussing most of the time but I have tried the other modes and find I have no problems with the smaller focusing area.
The most oustanding thing I have noticed moving up from the d5100 is the dynamic range on the d600, it captures every bit of detail and handles shadow and highlight detail incredibly well.
I have no experience with other full frame cameras so find it hard to compare but it does feel miles ahead of the d5100. Don't be put off by the dust issue, the occasional blow out with the rocket or wipe over by the arctic butterfly sorts that out and on stubborn bunnies a wet clean is easy enough.
Click to expand...

I'm not worried about the dust issue, the d7000 was reported to have a similar issue and I've invested in cleaning kit to clean the sensor myself.

I am worried about the lack focus point coverage, even with my d7000 I find I would like to choose a point further in at some point as I'm trying to get composition right so I don't crop away a bit of the resolution. When you say poor like light do you mean at sunrise/sunset and in dark, overcast conditions or low light inside? I think its nearly the same AF unit from the D7000 so I guessing its similar. I haven't yet discounted another D7000, but I want to explore all the possibilities.
 
I think that the D600's focus is a bit better than that of the D7000. If focus point coverage is critical to you then the D600 will be a let down. I think that is the case with full frame sensors, the Nikon D800 in crop mode will give you enough resolution and amazing focus point coverage but out of your budget
 
architectfadi said:
I was playing with a D600 yesturday and was very close to buying one but my Local shop did not have any in stock. The focus point coverage is really bad and sometimes annoying as I prefer to move the focus point on my subject. It's something that I can learn to live with.

Image quality is amazing and you will not be disappointed at all. As for the d7100, I would wait a bit till there is enough info about it before I buy one
Click to expand...

The focal point coverage is what really worries me, its not a problem for either still subjects, landscape or marco where i could use manual focus or the focus and recompose technique. For moving wildlife it could be a problem.

I'm with you on waiting to find out more about the D7100. I only thing that bugs me is if I do decide to wait the d600 cash back offer expires at the end of May, waiting means the D600 prices goes up and the D7100 will probably go down. Also I've got many trips planned for April, May and June so buying before then would be useful but not really necessary, getting the right camera is more important.
 
architectfadi said:
I think that the D600's focus is a bit better than that of the D7000. If focus point coverage is critical to you then the D600 will be a let down. I think that is the case with full frame sensors, the Nikon D800 in crop mode will give you enough resolution and amazing focus point coverage but out of your budget
Click to expand...

I have thought about the D800, a friend of mine uses one and it seems to be a fantastic camera. I have thought about trying to push the budget for one but I brought my D7000 used with a couple of marks on it. This hasn't bothered me but does hit the s/h now which will roughly be £300-330 as a new one can be bought for £525 now. It's not worth letting the D7000 go for that price, and only having one body will still mean having to change lens whilst out or miss the opportunity.
 
Well, the D600 has a crop mode which I think gives you a 10mp sensor and better focus point coverage(similar to the D7000 but not exact). What I like about how Nikon implement their new cropped modes is the way you can still see the whole view in the optical viewfinder but get a rectangular showing you what would be captured.

I guess only you can tell whether a 10MP sensor is enough resolution for your needs?
 
I've owned the D7000 and the D600. The upgrade to full frame is significant, especially for shooting in low light. The reduced focus area is a minor irritation at first but you adapt quickly.
 
rob-nikon said:
Does the smaller 39 point auto focus area cause a problem in real life situations. The area doesn't cover as much of the frame compared to the d7000 which could be a worry, I like moving the focus area to compose the photo rather than just using the centre point and recompose manually, its quite useful to cover most of the viewfinder with moving action shots.

I've just found this review, a bit more of info on both.

http://photographylife.com/nikon-d7100-vs-d600
Click to expand...

I've had no probs with the smaller 39point focus on the d600
 
Lots of people don't mind the small focus point cover as many tend to use the centre point all the time. For some that could be an issue
 
You've answered you own question.

I'm looking to use the 2nd camera for closer wildlife using a 70-200 f2.8 VR1
Click to expand...

Then you need the DX camera for extra reach.
 
I'm not sure I agree with David re the extra reach, though I do not shoot wildlife. If the intention is to use the 300 on the D7000 and use the 70-200 on the D600 I think it will give a far better range coverage than two DX bodies ...

To answer Rob's question re the focus points etc, yes they appear closer together so cover less of the frame, but there is (obviously) more frame to cover! In terms of how good the AF is, I have found it better in most situations than my D7000 ...

Wish I'd been able to afford to keep my DX gear but ...
 
As a full-time wildlife photographer looking for a smaller 2nd body for long hikes/travels, I have been considering between the D7100 and the D600 the past couple of weeks. FWIW, here are some of my thoughts:-

D600 - as a full-frame sensor user, this appeals to me immensely because for wildlife you need speed and in olde blighty we often shoot in low light so this is very important for achieving a clean image, for me anyway. Most of the shortcomings I can live with as this is a 2nd body but the focus point is a really big issue - I just cannot understand why Nikon would do this! The FPS that this camera is capable of suggests that it's for fast action shoot - so I don't understand why they'd put such a small cluster in the middle instead of spreading them out?!

D7100 - I really like the new f8-able focus. This means I can use f4 telephotos with a 2x TC. The extra focus points covering a large area (where D600 came short) is great. My concern is the potential noise - the few I saw online suggested to me that it's at best one stop better than the D5200, which is still poor compared to full-frame sensor images. I can potentially live with this but the biggy for me is the very limited buffer. This is a problem again when shooting wildlife action stuff in RAW format.

In an ideal world, the perfect cam for me is the D600 with the D7100 focusing ability (f8 focusable with spread out 51 focus points). The above are just some of my personal preferences. Your needs might be different so the things that concern me may not apply to you. Both are still decent bodies and I'm sure you will enjoy whichever one you ended up getting.

Good luck with your decision.

Des
 
dragonfly said:
As a full-time wildlife photographer looking for a smaller 2nd body for long hikes/travels, I have been considering between the D7100 and the D600 the past couple of weeks. FWIW, here are some of my thoughts:-

D600 - as a full-frame sensor user, this appeals to me immensely because for wildlife you need speed and in olde blighty we often shoot in low light so this is very important for achieving a clean image, for me anyway. Most of the shortcomings I can live with as this is a 2nd body but the focus point is a really big issue - I just cannot understand why Nikon would do this! The FPS that this camera is capable of suggests that it's for fast action shoot - so I don't understand why they'd put such a small cluster in the middle instead of spreading them out?!

D7100 - I really like the new f8-able focus. This means I can use f4 telephotos with a 2x TC. The extra focus points covering a large area (where D600 came short) is great. My concern is the potential noise - the few I saw online suggested to me that it's at best one stop better than the D5200, which is still poor compared to full-frame sensor images. I can potentially live with this but the biggy for me is the very limited buffer. This is a problem again when shooting wildlife action stuff in RAW format.

In an ideal world, the perfect cam for me is the D600 with the D7100 focusing ability (f8 focusable with spread out 51 focus points). The above are just some of my personal preferences. Your needs might be different so the things that concern me may not apply to you. Both are still decent bodies and I'm sure you will enjoy whichever one you ended up getting.

Good luck with your decision.

Des
Click to expand...

Thanks, you have basically summed up what I'm thinking and the problems with both. A fx sensor would be great but the downfall is the small point area, whilst the d7100 gives better reach, focus area especially in crop mode but noise could be an issue. If its as good at noise as the d7000 I could live with it but the buffer size is smaller and possibly a problem, probably easier for me to live with than the small focus coverage.
 
rob-nikon said:
I'm not worried about the dust issue, the d7000 was reported to have a similar issue and I've invested in cleaning kit to clean the sensor myself.

I am worried about the lack focus point coverage, even with my d7000 I find I would like to choose a point further in at some point as I'm trying to get composition right so I don't crop away a bit of the resolution. When you say poor like light do you mean at sunrise/sunset and in dark, overcast conditions or low light inside? I think its nearly the same AF unit from the D7000 so I guessing its similar. I haven't yet discounted another D7000, but I want to explore all the possibilities.
Click to expand...

Indoors with dark subjects has been the only time I have had to try a couple of times to acquire focus but it always nailed it second time round ie: dark clothing in shadows. Otherwise it's always bang on.
 
With 9, 21, 39 points in dynamic mode afc and selecting the ae/af to afon as a back button focus I would be suprised if you missed any bird in flight.
 
Phil Young said:
Do you leave it on 3D? It may have a problem if you're trying to focus, effectively, a colour that isn't very different from the BG?
Click to expand...

No phil was in afs S mode, was a kids party with one of the youngsters in the corner with a dark blue top on. Also a lot of movement as you can appreciate and not using flash. ISO 2800 f5,6 so you can guess how much light there was.
 
Get a D800 and you will have 36mp full frame and 16mp DX at the press of a button, 2 in 1. All the benefits AF wise of a D4 and better image quality too!!
 
i see what you mean now after reading it more detail. At first it sounded like the D7100 is 1.3 crop factor lol.

So is 1.3 crop inside the 1.5 crop to make it 2x crop ......
 
badboy1984 said:
i see what you mean now after reading it more detail. At first it sounded like the D7100 is 1.3 crop factor lol.

So is 1.3 crop inside the 1.5 crop to make it 2x crop ......
Click to expand...

I think it works as 1.5 x 1.3 = 1.95, so roughly a 300mm will appear as nearly 600mm compared to 300mm on a full frame sensor. Also its then 16mp instead of 24mp. This would mean a faster frame rate at 7fps and hopefully more consecutive shots as the smaller file sizes would not fill the buffer as fast.

It's quite an interesting feature in someways, a 300 f4lens would then be the equivalent of a 600mm f4 or a 70-200 f2.8 would be the equivalent of a 400mm f2.8 on a full frame camera. A cheap way of getting expensive lens without the price tag. Don't forget you can get go with the larger 24mp size and crop in post processing later. It all depends on how memory card space you have and probably buffer size.
 
I see what you mean now, it all depend on stuff we shoot to determine we need it or not i guess lol.

I still prefer buying a D700 full frame with 12mp at the moment.
 
rob-nikon said:
It's quite an interesting feature in someways, a 300 f4lens would then be the equivalent of a 600mm f4 or a 70-200 f2.8 would be the equivalent of a 400mm f2.8 on a full frame camera. A cheap way of getting expensive lens without the price tag.
Click to expand...

This is too good to be true. It will definitely not be equivalent. You can get the same aparent view angle as the full-frame camera, but not the quality or resolution of the fullframe. Not even the same pixels. D800 with 400 2.8 gives you 36mp image. D7100 with 70-200/2.8 and its native 1.5 crop factor + the additional 1.3x crop gives you 15.4mp image. And these pixels on DX are very tightly packed and they stress the lens far more than the full-frame.

And then there is a resolution thing. Looking at MTF charts I am pretty sure that D800 with 400/2.8 will outresolve D7100 with 70-200/2.8 by a very far margin.

Don't forget that cropping is not unique capability of DX cameras. Full-frame sensors can be cropped too.
 
mpe said:
This is too good to be true. It will definitely not be equivalent. You can get the same aparent view angle as the full-frame camera, but not the quality or resolution of the fullframe. Not even the same pixels. D800 with 400 2.8 gives you 36mp image. D7100 with 70-200/2.8 and its native 1.5 crop factor + the additional 1.3x crop gives you 15.4mp image. And these pixels on DX are very tightly packed and they stress the lens far more than the full-frame.

And then there is a resolution thing. Looking at MTF charts I am pretty sure that D800 with 400/2.8 will outresolve D7100 with 70-200/2.8 by a very far margin.

Don't forget that cropping is not unique capability of DX cameras. Full-frame sensors can be cropped too.
Click to expand...

Your totally right, its my very bad way of explaining. There is no way dx would beat an fx camera In quality. Is it really, nearly the difference between using a 1.4 tc on a 16mp d7000 and losing one stop of light, compared to using a d7100 in 15.4mp crop mode and not losing any light but using a smaller area of the sensor?
 
The extra light gathering ability of a full frame sensor is obvious as soon as you start to shoot with one. To me it seemed like a huge leap.
 
rob-nikon said:
the d7100 is the normal 1.5 crop sensor size,similiar to the other nikon dx cameras there is 1.3 crop that effectively makes it a 2x crop like 4/3 sensors.
Click to expand...

And you get 16MP to use when in this mode. No loss of quality or max aperture. I just got one for my wife (ahem :lol:) for this very reason. Noise levels so far seem very well controlled. I use a D700 and I've not noticed anything that bothers me. Put a 300mm f4 prime on the 7100 and it should be awesome with this extra crop. Effectively 600mm f4 and £7k's worth of lens for £700 via HDEW. :clap:
 
Last edited:
flashp said:
Put a 300mm f4 prime on the 7100 and it should be awesome with this extra crop. Effectively 600mm f4 and £7k's worth of lens for £700 via HDEW. :clap:
Click to expand...

It's here again. See my comment above.

You say that you could replace 600mm lens by 300mm + two crops. Wouldn't it be better to use 1/2.5" sensor from your Coolpix and 85/1.8 lens? That would get you 600/1.8 for even lower cost right?

No. 300 f/4 and no other short lens can never match or replace 600 f/4 no matter what camera you put it on. It is a law of the physics that plays role here.

Look at 600 f/4 MTF (at true 600mm) chart:
2173afsnikkor600mmf4ged.jpg


Ano now the 300 f/4 MTF (at 300mm):
pic_002.gif


Well, unfortunatelly there is no 60mm lines/mm line in the chart. Should it be, would you expect it to be better than 30mm on the 600mm? Probably not.

While it is true that the AF-S 300 f/4 is great lens and D7100 fine camra, it can for sure never reach the performance of 600mm and full-frame camera like D800, especially when stressed out with extremely high pixel-density sensor like the one in D7100.
 
Last edited:
mpe said:
It's here again. See my comment above.

You say that you could replace 600mm lens by 300mm + two crops. Wouldn't it be better to use 1/2.5" sensor from your Coolpix and 85/1.8 lens? That would get you 600/1.8 for even lower cost right?

No. 300 f/4 and no other short lens can never match or replace 600 f/4 no matter what camera you put it on. It is a law of the physics that plays role here.

Look at 600 f/4 MTF (at true 600mm) chart:
2173afsnikkor600mmf4ged.jpg


Ano now the 300 f/4 MTF (at 300mm):
pic_002.gif


Well, unfortunatelly there is no 60mm lines/mm line in the chart. Should it be, would you expect it to be better than 30mm on the 600mm? Probably not.

While it is true that the AF-S 300 f/4 is great lens and D7100 fine camra, it can for sure never reach the performance of 600mm and full-frame camera like D800, especially when stressed out with extremely high pixel-density sensor like the one in D7100.
Click to expand...

D800 is twice the price and the lens £7000. Apples and oranges a bit here. That combo would be £9000. My suggestion is a combo costing £1700. I haven't suggested it's better than a D800 + 600mm, just hell of a lot cheaper.

I'll grant you the D800 + 600mm should be better. I'd be shocked if it weren't!

What I'm trying to say is that for those who don't have £9k for a body and 1 lens (this is me) is that the results should be very good and less affected than those obtained with teleconverters. Scope for cropping in PP will be affected as well as ultimate image size. But hey, there's a £7300 price difference!
 
Last edited:
In camera crop modes are a lie.

The 1.3x crop is useless. Might as well shoot at full sensor size and then crop the image in post processing. Same result.

Same with apparent extra reach with this DX vs FX debate. No, you don't get any extra reach. You get higher pixel density over a smaller area. Go full frame then crop off half the image gives the same result as buying a crop sensor DSLR. Shoot using 24MP D600 then crop to 12MP will get you same result as D300s.

Problem with higher pixel density of DX 24MP sensor is that it spots any imperfections in the lens. DX 24MP requires a better lens than D800!!

So buy full frame, it will improve every other aspect of your photography. Then crop in post processing, giving you more creative freedom.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top