D600 or D800?

specialman

specialman

Messages
8,193
Name
Pat MacInnes
Edit My Images
Yes
Just sorting my kit for work. Because there's a massive amount of video involved I need something with a bit more functionality than my current D7000 so it's one of the new Nikons.

I've put in for a wide-angle (18-35mm, 17-35 if I can get it), a 24-70mm and 70-200mm VR2, although that might end up being a Sigma 120-300mm f/2.8 for the extra reach.

Both these bodies feature audio monitoring in video mode, an important feature, plus for stills (advert/catalogue photography) the FX sensor should yield good detail, moreso on the D800.

There are obvious differences between the two with the D800 having the edge on detail and resolution, which will come in handy for stills, although I don't know how that translates to movie mode. I'm happy with the physical size of both and even the D600 sharing much of what the D7000/D71000 has to offer in terms of weatherproofing suits me.

The fps of the D600 is higher as standard in FX mode, which I like the sound of, but the D800 has the better AF system for stills. How does the Af on both stack up in movie mode?

There's an obvious substantial difference in price between the two and to be honest, the D600 will probably suit my needs. But I've read so much good about the D800 that I'm intrigued enough to see if I ca get the budget for one if it represents another step up from the D600 in both stills AND movie mode.
 
Unless you need the resolution of the D800 (massive prints) then the D600 is fantastic. Not really put mine through it's paces as I also have a D800, but I've not yet found the AF on the D600 to be a problem. I don't shoot sports, press, or wildlife... or anything else that needs top end AF though. 24MP FX is more than enough for anything really though.

The extra resolution of the D800 has zero effect on the video, as it's 1920x1080 anyway.

The only other difference is the pro layout of the D800 compared to the D7000-like layout of the D600... no rear AF On being the biggest difference for me - I keep reaching for something that's not there. If you've never had it though... you may well not miss it, or need it.

D600 is cheaper :)

AF in movie mode on both sucks! Don't use AF in moving image... no serious film maker will be using auto focus to produce video. You see it hunting around, it's slow (contrast based) and unwieldy, and unless you used external microphones, noisy. Anyone serious about moving image will be manually focusing. This is why it's a good idea to mount the camera in a shoulder rig that has proper focus pulling attachments (check out JAG35's range of stuff)... also, if you're serious about film making, forget AF lenses, and get some older manual AI or AI-S Nikkor lenses. They have a more damped feel to the focus, and have more movement from close to infinity for precision.

The cheaper D600 may allow funds for a decent used 35 or 50mm manual focus Nikkor to get you started on the film making front.

Then again if you're THAT serious about film making... IMO, you'd be better off selling up and going Canon as there are many reasons a 5DMkII or III is a better option than any Nikon for moving image, especially if low light video work is important to you.
 
Last edited:
Pookeyhead said:
Then again if you're THAT serious about film making... IMO, you'd be better off selling up and going Canon as there are many reasons a 5DMkII or III is a better option than any Nikon for moving image, especially if low light video work is important to you.
Click to expand...
But if youre that serious then spend a couple of hundred quid on a dedicated video camera, even the cheapo dedicated ones are better than the video in any DSLR
 
A couple of hundred quid? Won't be as good in many ways as it will be using a small sensor. You won't have the lens flexibility, depth of field flexibility or even image quality.

A cheapo video camera will not deliver results with the creative possibilities of a decent DSLR.
 
Last edited:
Pookeyhead said:
Unless you need the resolution of the D800 (massive prints) then the D600 is fantastic. Not really put mine through it's paces as I also have a D800, but I've not yet found the AF on the D600 to be a problem. I don't shoot sports, press, or wildlife... or anything else that needs top end AF though. 24MP FX is more than enough for anything really though.
Click to expand...

I'll be shooting a bit of action - mainly casting and fish moving, which is never that quick - and TBH, the AF on the D7000 has been great so can't see a reason why the D600 will be any worse, despite the more grouped Af points because of the FX sensor.

Pookeyhead said:
The extra resolution of the D800 has zero effect on the video, as it's 1920x1080 anyway.
Click to expand...

I'm a total ignormaus when it comes to knowledge of this. I just thought it down-scaled the full sensor and crammed it into a 1920x1080 output :)

Pookeyhead said:
The only other difference is the pro layout of the D800 compared to the D7000-like layout of the D600... no rear AF On being the biggest difference for me - I keep reaching for something that's not there. If you've never had it though... you may well not miss it, or need it.
Click to expand...

I don't use AF-ON, even when I had it on my old bodies. I've gotten used to the size of the D7000-type body, although it felt strange going from a D2x. Now I like the layout and feel, especially when gripped. They both look to have a logical button layout.

Pookeyhead said:
D600 is cheaper :)
Click to expand...

Obviously a plus point to accountants etc :lol:

Pookeyhead said:
AF in movie mode on both sucks! Don't use AF in moving image... no serious film maker will be using auto focus to produce video. You see it hunting around, it's slow (contrast based) and unwieldy, and unless you used external microphones, noisy. Anyone serious about moving image will be manually focusing. This is why it's a good idea to mount the camera in a shoulder rig that has proper focus pulling attachments (check out JAG35's range of stuff)... also, if you're serious about film making, forget AF lenses, and get some older manual AI or AI-S Nikkor lenses. They have a more damped feel to the focus, and have more movement from close to infinity for precision.
Click to expand...

On the D7000 I quickly realised the Af in movie mode sucked balls. Just wasn't sure if Nikon had poured a magic elixir down the throat of these new cameras to make them work better :lol: That's a good point about the dampening on older lenses, might have to price a few up.

Pookeyhead said:
The cheaper D600 may allow funds for a decent used 35 or 50mm manual focus Nikkor to get you started on the film making front.
Click to expand...

It's not my money, but I know what you mean :) Thankfully, my new bosses love the idea of investing in kit to do a good job.

Pookeyhead said:
Then again if you're THAT serious about film making... IMO, you'd be better off selling up and going Canon as there are many reasons a 5DMkII or III is a better option than any Nikon for moving image, especially if low light video work is important to you.
Click to expand...

I was thinking that. But for stills, which will be a big part of my shooting, I'm of the opinion that familiarity and comfort while holding the camera are key to good shooting. I'd probably get re-aqquanted with Canon quite quickly and get used to it. But I do like CLS and have all of that to consider. It's always a hard decision on that front, as Canon has some very engaging attributes that as you say, make it a clear choice for video.... 5D2 is a woeful camera IMO, I just think it's antiquated and poorly conceived despite a good sensor; 5D3 is another matter obviously and does seem to be more than equal to the D800 as a video camera at the same price. Is it as good as a the D800 when it comes to still shooting? Not used one yet...

Gary Coyle said:
But if youre that serious then spend a couple of hundred quid on a dedicated video camera, even the cheapo dedicated ones are better than the video in any DSLR
Click to expand...

Pookeyhead said:
A couple of hundred quid? Won't be as good in many ways as it will be using a small sensor. You won't have the lens flexibility, depth of field flexibility or even image quality.

A cheapo video camera will deliver results with the creative possibilities of a decent DSLR.
Click to expand...

It may sound a bit mad, but I want a dual-purpose setup despite the limitations of a DSLR; I've taken video cameras out alongside DSLRs before and I just didn't enjoy the experience.

Plus, the obvious lens flexibility and DoF options on a DSLR are better than on a small sensor video camera.
 
Last edited:
specialman said:
I'm a total ignormaus when it comes to knowledge of this. I just thought it down-scaled the full sensor and crammed it into a 1920x1080 output :)
Click to expand...

Well.. you've got the narrower depth f field from a FF sensor... so in a way, the quality is different in that respect.. but nothing else.
 
Just clean it :)
 
I've posted in the D600 thread, but I use mine for a similar job, just got a D600 and have hit the dust/oil issue in under a fortnight!

It's all very well saying "just clean it" but it sounds like the OP is like me and uses the camera outdoors, bit impractical to ask everyone to stop everything and sit there carefully cleaning the sensor, potentially in muddy or drizzly conditions, half way through a job...
 
I have a D600 and have taken over a thousand shots so far. At the moment no significant dust or oil - by significant I mean no oil at all and only what I would expect in dust terms from any DSLR when changing lens as often as I do. Just thought I'd try and balance things up ;)

I honestly don't think you can lose with either Pat, must be nice too as someone else is paying :)
 
Ari said:
I've posted in the D600 thread, but I use mine for a similar job, just got a D600 and have hit the dust/oil issue in under a fortnight!

It's all very well saying "just clean it" but it sounds like the OP is like me and uses the camera outdoors, bit impractical to ask everyone to stop everything and sit there carefully cleaning the sensor, potentially in muddy or drizzly conditions, half way through a job...
Click to expand...

Couldnt you do the clean before the job?
 
Ari said:
I've posted in the D600 thread, but I use mine for a similar job, just got a D600 and have hit the dust/oil issue in under a fortnight!

It's all very well saying "just clean it" but it sounds like the OP is like me and uses the camera outdoors, bit impractical to ask everyone to stop everything and sit there carefully cleaning the sensor, potentially in muddy or drizzly conditions, half way through a job...
Click to expand...

Yes, a lot of outdoors use.
 
Have also seen images from the D800 with horrendous sensor contamination. I admit that I have to clean my sensor due to dust but most of the time it is just a blow and a quick wipe with a sensor brush but I do have to swab occasionally.
 
Last edited:
I am tending to look more at the D800 for one reason, the remote control as I already have a wired and wireless kit from my D300 (10 pin connector). This gives greater flexability in product purchase if the wireless range needs to be longer. Thinking now along the lines of camera shutter op for wildlife shots.

realspeed
 
Last edited:
PaulButler said:
I honestly don't think you can lose with either Pat, must be nice too as someone else is paying :)
Click to expand...

Totally agree.

I own both and both are great. Some D600s have the dust/oil issues and some D800s still have left focus issues, but as long as you get a functional copy I doubt you will regret either specially that you are already happy with your D7000.
 
Pat as your spending the bosses money, ask for the D800 initially and if that isn't allowed propose the D600 as an aceptable compromise
 
If you want to record audio as well as video you will need to budget for a separate audio recorder as the audio quality of the D800 is shocking.
 
ah5168 said:
If you want to record audio as well as video you will need to budget for a separate audio recorder as the audio quality of the D800 is shocking.
Click to expand...

No worse than the D600.... or D7000... or 5D MkII.... all internal mics are crap.

Use a decent external Mic and the D800 is actually not that bad if you set the levels manually.
 
realspeed said:
I am tending to look more at the D800 for one reason, the remote control as I already have a wired and wireless kit from my D300 (10 pin connector). This gives greater flexability in product purchase if the wireless range needs to be longer. Thinking now along the lines of camera shutter op for wildlife shots.

realspeed
Click to expand...

If wildlife is your interest then the D800 provides the advantage that you can significantly crop your shots and still get a high resolution.
 
arclight said:
If wildlife is your interest then the D800 provides the advantage that you can significantly crop your shots and still get a high resolution.
Click to expand...

thats exactly what I was thinking of

Thank you

Realspeed
 
ah5168 said:
If you want to record audio as well as video you will need to budget for a separate audio recorder as the audio quality of the D800 is shocking.
Click to expand...

That might be budgeted for in time. From experience of the D7000, the sound quality was pretty good, good enough anyway for the needs of the web, which is where most of the material will end up. :)

Anyway, I've gone submitted a request for the D600 with a 18-35mm AF-S, 24-70mm, 120-300mm OS, 60mm macro and a whole heap of shizzle :)
 
specialman said:
That might be budgeted for in time. From experience of the D7000, the sound quality was pretty good, good enough anyway for the needs of the web, which is where most of the material will end up. :)

Anyway, I've gone submitted a request for the D600 with a 18-35mm AF-S, 24-70mm, 120-300mm OS, 60mm macro and a whole heap of shizzle :)
Click to expand...
nice setup :)
 
BTW Pat, not seen any posts/threads about your new job so congratulations on hooking and landing one quickly. Hope all goes well for you.
 
Nod said:
BTW Pat, not seen any posts/threads about your new job so congratulations on hooking and landing one quickly. Hope all goes well for you.
Click to expand...

Cheers Nod. Got chased by a company and had just two weeks out of work. Think my luck was in :)
 
specialman said:
That might be budgeted for in time. From experience of the D7000, the sound quality was pretty good, good enough anyway for the needs of the web, which is where most of the material will end up. :)
Click to expand...

I had a D7000, and I own a D600 and D800.... there's not much to choose between the sound on all of them. The internal mic is equally as crap IMO. I'd certainly not be able to choose between them in a blind test. If I was pushed to choose, I'd say the D800 is best.. but it is the best of three crap options. Fortunately, just plugging a decent stereo mic into it makes a world of difference.
 
Last edited:
Pookeyhead said:
I had a D7000, and I own a D600 and D800.... there's not much to choose between the sound on all of them. The internal mic is equally as crap IMO. I'd certainly not be able to choose between them in a blind test. If I was pushed to choose, I'd say the D800 is best.. but it is the best of three crap options. Fortunately, just plugging a decent stereo mic into it makes a world of difference.
Click to expand...

Thought so. Been using a Rode Video Mic and a cheap lapel mic from Maplin that was really good. As said, built-in mic is pretty pap with even the slightest of breezes.:)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top