D3 or D600

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deleted member 66768
  • Start date Start date
D

Deleted member 66768

Guest
I am changing one of my D700 bodies and have the option to get either a D3 or D600..

Any advice would be great, I understand that the D3 has superior build/AF and battery life and that the D600 will certainly have better IQ

Need to decide today

So is it newer tech/sensor or the insane build quality of the D3
 
You've pretty much summarised the main differences, so it depends what you want to use it for. The other thing to consider is the control lay out is different on the D600 - the D3 will be much closer to the D700 in terms of buttons and functions.

So if you shoot for a living, or shoot lots of things that move, then probably the D3. Interesting article here though on the D600 by a pro who thinks it will make a pretty good sports set up. http://scottkelby.com/2012/my-first-nfl-shoot-with-the-nikon-d600-and-some-other-new-gear/
 
I would say unless you really need to don't bother.

The d600 will have better IQ but handling ,build and AF would be classed as a step backwards by most.
The D3 is just a d700 in a larger body, with slighter hight,bar that it will preform exactly as your d700.
 
Go for the D3, the D600 AF is truly woeful in comparison, it's not bad in general but terrible compared to the D3

Even the D700 and D3 share the same AF my D3 always gave better results than the D700, The D3 also has far better battery life, faster FPS, 100% viewfinder coverage and 2 card slots, worth every penny it might cost you to upgrade

And theres a mint low shutter count one in the sale section right now at a good price
 
Last edited:
Gary Coyle said:
Go for the D3, the D600 AF is truly woeful in comparison, it's not bad in general but terrible compared to the D3

Even the D700 and D3 share the same AF my D3 always gave better results than the D700, The D3 also has far better battery life, faster FPS, 100% viewfinder coverage and 2 card slots, worth every penny it might cost you to upgrade

And theres a mint low shutter count one in the sale section right now at a good price
Click to expand...

except D600 also got the 100% view finder and 2 card slot. d600 got better IQ , better DR and better high ISO though. the only downside is the build.
 
Gary Coyle said:
Go for the D3, the D600 AF is truly woeful in comparison, it's not bad in general but terrible compared to the D3 Even the D700 and D3 share the same AF my D3 always gave better results than the D700, The D3 also has far better battery life, faster FPS, 100% viewfinder coverage and 2 card slots, worth every penny it might cost you to upgrade And theres a mint low shutter count one in the sale section right now at a good price
Click to expand...
How much ? I'm not on the classifieds so can't see
 
hyeongsoong said:
except D600 also got the 100% view finder and 2 card slot. d600 got better IQ , better DR and better high ISO though...
Click to expand...

No, it doesn't. It does if you downsample, and then only marginally if at all.

The D3 and the D700 are essentially the same camera except the D3 is "more" of everything. Buffer/processing power/af speed/etc etc. It's not huge unless you are working very demanding subjects/situations. The build quality is nice, but it's also heavier/bulkier.

IMO, the D600 is a joke. It's basically a D7000 w/ a FF sensor. It's a high MP FF lure to get people to move to FF where everything is more expensive. The only advantage I see with it is it will AF at f/8.
 
I've owned both, the D700 first and I switched to a D600, and IMO unless you need the resolution or the video capability, you'd be far better off with the D3.

The D600 does have better IQ, that's of no doubt, but the rest of the camera (esp after using a D700) is a let down. Like me, you may think you'll get used to it, and many people probably do, but I couldn't.

I had used one in a shop before I switched, and actually was more impressed than I thought I would be with the feel of it, but after using it for a few weeks, I really began to not get on with it. It's hard to put my finger on, and had I come from a d90/d7000 I may have felt differently.

To sum it up, I no longer own the D600, and I think that says it all!
 
EspressoJunkie said:
I've owned both, the D700 first and I switched to a D600, and IMO unless you need the resolution or the video capability, you'd be far better off with the D3.

The D600 does have better IQ, that's of no doubt, but the rest of the camera (esp after using a D700) is a let down. Like me, you may think you'll get used to it, and many people probably do, but I couldn't.

I had used one in a shop before I switched, and actually was more impressed than I thought I would be with the feel of it, but after using it for a few weeks, I really began to not get on with it. It's hard to put my finger on, and had I come from a d90/d7000 I may have felt differently.

To sum it up, I no longer own the D600, and I think that says it all!
Click to expand...
Me neither, it feels like a toy compared to D3 or D700
 
Decided to go with the D3. Wow is it built well, feels more responsive than the 700
 
I think anyone coming from a full sized body is going to be just a tad disappointed with the smaller models. I'm still trying to get myself to like my D800 after using a D3 & D2Xs for the last few years :shrug:
there's just something about the bigger ones that is just so right :thumbs:
i made that choice last year when i bought the D3 & i'd go the same way now without hesitation. :thumbs:
 
Ergonomics and handling are all well and good, but for me, end result matters most. The D600 may be a bit light and small for an FX body, but it'll produce the goods.
 
Cagey75 said:
Ergonomics and handling are all well and good, but for me, end result matters most. The D600 may be a bit light and small for an FX body, but it'll produce the goods.
Click to expand...

See that's exactly how I thought when I got mine, but as I said after a few weeks I just couldn't get used to it.

The sensor is fantastic though, and IMO if Nikon had put it in the D800's body they would have made a near perfect camera.

But they didn't :(
 
You're probably right in saying it depends what you camefrom. I useda D200 for a while, and switched to a D90 - it took me a while to get used to the difference. The D90 really felt cheap and light in comparison - but the end result was what I was after, especially better ISO performance, the D200's biggest downfall.

But, once I got used to the D90, It began to feel more comfy. And when I changed to the D800 that felt pretty hefty towards it, and there was another round of getting used to.

I wouldn't trade the D800 for any other body out there right now [well, maybe a D4, but I'd sell it, and buy a D800E and a nice lens :D ]
and I'm sure the D600 would feel strange to me now. But, it's a matter of a week or two to get used to it. And when people are viewing your images, they won't care what you used to shoot with ;)
 
They're really different tools for different jobs. There are plenty of times where I get better IQ out of my D4 than I do out of the D800. And even though they have the same AF system/processor, the D4 is just faster.

If you can use the D800/e at ISO 800 or below, have excellent quality glass (diffraction limited at ~f/5.6-8) at the diffraction limit aperture, no TC's, and faster SS's or tripod/flash, then the D800 is excellent, as is the D600 in regards to IQ.
If you can't do that you have to "normalize"/downsample in order to recover what is lost due to smaller photo sites... And no cropping. If you crop, you loose the benefit of the extra MP's and downsampling.
 
EspressoJunkie said:
To sum it up, I no longer own the D600, and I think that says it all!
Click to expand...

Well I've just gone the opposite way. For a while now I've been shooting weddings with a D700 and a D600. At first I was reaching for the D700 more but as time went on I started to lean more & more towards the D600. So now I've sold my D700 and have 2xD600's.

Mainly because of the dual slots and better IQ/DR than the D700. Not that the D700 is a slouch, it's not.

Those who moan about the build quality, dust issues and button layout really are just moaning about nothing. The build quality is just fine. It's a camera, not a hammer. Dust issues? Clean it. Button layout? Seriously....get a grip (i mean figuratively not a vertical one).

Plus the shutter sound on the D600 is much quieter even without the quiet mode on. I no longer have to be slightly embarrassed when taking photos during a quiet church ceremony as the D700 shutter comes clattering down.

Oh and lastly the D600 can do video which neither the D3/D700 can do.
 
whats the rear of the D600 like? thumb position wise?
eg my D3 has a lovely thumb groove as did my D2xs before but the D800 has a barely perceptible lump that makes me feel like it's going to pop out of my hand! :shrug:
kinda like a wet bar of soap (but obviously not quite that slippery :nuts:)
 
Upon using the D3 for abit tonight the camera is notably more responsive. When you fire the shutter it is instant, probably twice as fast as the D700 as a wild guess. A beauty of a camera.
 
sk66 said:
IMO, the D600 is a joke. It's basically a D7000 w/ a FF sensor. It's a high MP FF lure to get people to move to FF where everything is more expensive. The only advantage I see with it is it will AF at f/8.
Click to expand...


gadgeteer said:
Well I've just gone the opposite way. For a while now I've been shooting weddings with a D700 and a D600. At first I was reaching for the D700 more but as time went on I started to lean more & more towards the D600. So now I've sold my D700 and have 2xD600's.

Mainly because of the dual slots and better IQ/DR than the D700. Not that the D700 is a slouch, it's not.

Those who moan about the build quality, dust issues and button layout really are just moaning about nothing. The build quality is just fine. It's a camera, not a hammer. Dust issues? Clean it. Button layout? Seriously....get a grip (i mean figuratively not a vertical one).

Plus the shutter sound on the D600 is much quieter even without the quiet mode on. I no longer have to be slightly embarrassed when taking photos during a quiet church ceremony as the D700 shutter comes clattering down.

Oh and lastly the D600 can do video which neither the D3/D700 can do.
Click to expand...


Not used a D3 and no doubt it will be a superb camera (it was the flagship at one point) but I don't think you can say the D600 is a joke.

I went from the D90 to the D600 and love it, its tough enough for me water sealed etc and even non-photographers say they can see a difference in the photos compared to the D90 (which was excellent) On the whole a very capable camera
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top