D600 - £2000!

The Canons 6d spec and price is floating around cyber space and its the same price and virtually the same spec albeit with built in wifi as the d600, so don't get your hopes up there either.


A new 20mp sensor
Full Frame
4.5fps
ISO Range 100-25600
DIGIC5+
APS-C Sized body
Weathersealed
SD Card
Built-in Wifi & GPS
11 AF Points, f/2.8 Cross-type in the center.
3″ LCD
Full HD (1920×1080)
Available December 2012
Price: $1999 USD Body Only (Speculated price)
 
Last edited:
cowasaki said:
Well I don't think I've actually seen anyone slating the D600 or D800 on here! The D600 is, at the moment at least, deemed to be over priced for what is said to be on offer. It is basically a FF D7000. Now the D7000 is a decent enough camera but if you are spending a couple of grand you don't want a "decent enough camera" you want something special. The D800 is something special and is available for not much more than the price that the D600 is reported to be coming in at.

The D700 is a classic. It is still highly thought of and for good reason! Would I swap my D700 for a D800, absolutely! Would I sell my D700 for £1100 or whatever and then find another £800-900 to upgrade to a D800, no! The reason is that I personally don't see anything in the D800 that is worth ANOTHER £800-900......
Click to expand...

People are moaning at the cost, people are saying it shares the same flawed AF system as the D7000, nothing positive there.

And your argument of selling a D700 for £1100 and the spending 800-900 to upgrade to a D800.....

Surely you'd put it on interest free credit at Jessops or A N Other retailer offering interest free deals and if a D800 isnt worth £80 or 90 a month then its clearly not that good.
 
NeilMc said:
People are moaning at the cost, people are saying it shares the same flawed AF system as the D7000, nothing positive there.

And your argument of selling a D700 for £1100 and the spending 800-900 to upgrade to a D800.....

Surely you'd put it on interest free credit at Jessops or A N Other retailer offering interest free deals and if a D800 isnt worth £80 or 90 a month then its clearly not that good.
Click to expand...

Well no I'd do it like I said but it's not worth that amount over the D700 to me. That's not to say it wouldn't be for others.
 
Lots of people comparing the D300, D700, D800 to the cost & specs of this camera from a negative perspective; remember they are all pro cameras...Nikon lists this in their Consumer section. They are not looking for pros to add this to their stable, they are interested in people (like me) that think the D7000 is great, and want to move upwards rather than pro users extending their collection downwards.

I agree the scene modes are redundant (never used them on my D7000), and I also agree that the price made me sorely tempted to extend to the D800, however that is still £250 more, I don't need (and I don't think I want) the extra pixels and massive file sizes, and I don't have a collection of super glass to get good results from the D800. If you have the lenses then the D800 makes more sense, but if you're starting down the FF route then I think this camera looks good. Sure the price is higher than I want, but it always will be. For me this is a purchase I've been planning for a while and why would I wait 6 months to (perhaps) save a bit of money when I can start making money from the D600 now.

There's always something better and cheaper on the horizon, you could spend your whole life waiting...
 
daktar1 said:
Lots of people comparing the D300, D700, D800 to the cost & specs of this camera from a negative perspective; remember they are all pro cameras...Nikon lists this in their Consumer section. They are not looking for pros to add this to their stable, they are interested in people (like me) that think the D7000 is great, and want to move upwards rather than pro users extending their collection downwards.

I agree the scene modes are redundant (never used them on my D7000), and I also agree that the price made me sorely tempted to extend to the D800, however that is still £250 more, I don't need (and I don't think I want) the extra pixels and massive file sizes, and I don't have a collection of super glass to get good results from the D800. If you have the lenses then the D800 makes more sense, but if you're starting down the FF route then I think this camera looks good. Sure the price is higher than I want, but it always will be. For me this is a purchase I've been planning for a while and why would I wait 6 months to (perhaps) save a bit of money when I can start making money from the D600 now.

There's always something better and cheaper on the horizon, you could spend your whole life waiting...
Click to expand...

All very true. What lenses are you planning on buying?
 
rjbell said:
All very true. What lenses are you planning on buying?
Click to expand...

A 50mm 1.8f Prime (£90 for a 'D') and a 16-35mm f4 WA zoom (my commercial work is interiors). That's all I can afford for now, but once the dust has settled and I have sold my D7000 and a few lenses I will get a 28-300 super zoom (for travel and family stuff). The 70-200 2.8f would follow next, if things go according to plan....

Any other recommendations?
 
Like you i'm thinking of making the move to FF, but will be left with no money for lots of lenses, so was interested in what approach you where going with. I don't really use zooms so that not a priority. I was thinking a 20mm and a 50mm prime to start me off. Then i saw a review and comparison of the 24-70 vr tamron and nikon's 24-70mm. I preferred the tamron so that might be an option too.
 
NeilMc said:
Surely you'd put it on interest free credit at Jessops or A N Other retailer offering interest free deals and if a D800 isnt worth £80 or 90 a month then its clearly not that good.
Click to expand...

That's the kind of thinking that got the world into the credit crunch...

If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

As it happens, my D700 has just died (for the second time, but there will be no coming back from this one...) so I guess I'll be in a position to make a choice between the options and at current prices my choice would be D700>D800>D600.
 
Nawty said:
That's the kind of thinking that got the world into the credit crunch...

If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

As it happens, my D700 has just died (for the second time, but there will be no coming back from this one...) so I guess I'll be in a position to make a choice between the options and at current prices my choice would be D700>D800>D600.
Click to expand...

Actually, that's not true. If people didn't borrow there would be no money. Money is created out of thin air by lenders from debt.
 
The23rdman said:
Actually, that's not true. If people didn't borrow there would be no money. Money is created out of thin air by lenders from debt.
Click to expand...

True, rampant consumerism (and war) is the basis of our world economy and I admit to being as guilty of this as most in this area but to suggest that you should upgrade to a D800 because it's "only" £90 a month gives an insight into the posters mindset and also shows quite a misunderstanding of photography IMHO.

Anyway, just ignore me, I'm old enough (in mind, if not body) to be cynical about most things...
 
NeilMc said:
Reading this post you'd think the only decent cameras Nikon had produced are the D700 and the D300s.

Everything else just seems to get slated, the D7000, the D800 mainly be people who've never even held one, let alone used one and now the D600 is getting panned before its even out in the shops.

Is this all based on genuine facts or is it just D700 owners desperately trying to keep value in their cameras ?????

I've been fancying a D800 for ages now so I've been reading loads of reviews, forums etc and I am still none the wiser.
Click to expand...

To be fair the D700 and D300 are Nikons best ever bang for buck digital slr's.

I have owned a D7000 and while being a decent camera it does have it's flaws. The D800 is also a great camera if used for what it is designed for but is not as good an all rounder as the D700 in my opinion. I have also used a D800 and again it has it's flaws.

I prefer the D700 to the D800 mainly because of the variety of different photographs I take. The D700 gives me 8 fps when I need it, the D800 would not. The D800, the D7000 and probably the D600 (same as the D7000) has well known issues with it's autofocus system, so for me my D700 is perfect.

The D700 with a grip essentially gives me a similar performance to a D3, but I also have the option of removing the grip when I don't need the extra fps. If Nikon offered a camera that was a cut down version of the D4 but at the same size as the D800 with the grip giving me the option for the extra fps I would buy one until then the D700 is the best fit for me within Nikon's range.

Other people will be different, but at the moment the D800 and the D600 would not suit me at all. If my D700 bit the dust and I only had the choice of the newer models I would have to buy a D4, which is a scary thought considering the cost and even it would not be ideal as I would not be able to remove the built in grip. For me personally the new models are a waste of time because they offer me no upgrade path, however they will likely be suited to many others.

So for me the D700 is king and the D300 as a second body compliments it well. It has the same focus system, the same battery, grip etc and it's easy to jump from one to the other when needed.

I also have no interest at all in shooting video so the lack of video on my camera's suits me well.
 
Last edited:
The D90 was the best DX "bang for buck" - the D300 had the better, tougher body sure, but have you ever heard of anyone breaking a D90 body? It's a cracking camera, probably one of the best all round, affordable DX cameras ever. The D300/s were over priced for too long, the 300s still is!
 
Wow! Woke up this morning to read all 20 pages (on my phone) of this thread. Long live TP!
 
Cagey75 said:
The D90 was the best DX "bang for buck" - the D300 had the better, tougher body sure, but have you ever heard of anyone breaking a D90 body? It's a cracking camera, probably one of the best all round, affordable DX cameras ever. The D300/s were over priced for too long, the 300s still is!
Click to expand...

Many would say the d90 was well over priced at launch. It's a fair enough camera for amateur use. The focus system alone is worth the extra money on the d300. Especially now that both can be got at bargain basement prices. A decent used D90 will fetch around £350 a used D300 around £400-£450. No brainer really.
 
Last edited:
I can buy the D600 at £1700 from Netherlands through work and it has the same European warranty (verified with Nikon). But, I will wait for a few good reviews first and if the price drops after 2-3 months it will be less than £1500 through European purchase.
 
At £1700 [€2000] it would be a lot more tempting. That's closer to the price many thought it would/should be. That's 2/3 the price of a D800. Much more realistic.
 
I used the D700 since launch and have since swapped now to Canon... but, would I buy a D800 or the D600 as an upgrade if I had the D700 still? Nope... the D700 is a serious piece of capable technology and I cannot see what "real world" difference you will see here, apart from huge file sizes and slowdown in LR.

To be honest, the files were so good from the D700 I could (and have) printed them huge with no quality issues, so I still feel that MP is just the marketing crap its always been.

Anyone wanting the best value camera's from Nikon in the DX or FX range should take the D300s or the D700. People would argue they are old technology now, pffft, only people who are gadget freaks who simply must own the latest in technology.

The truth is, if you saw shots taken with any good quality camera by someone that knows how to use it properly, you would never tell which is which or probably see much of a difference.

Save your money, get a D700 and have cash left for decent glass.
 
jamesoliverstone said:
I used the D700 since launch and have since swapped now to Canon... but, would I buy a D800 or the D600 as an upgrade if I had the D700 still? Nope... the D700 is a serious piece of capable technology and I cannot see what "real world" difference you will see here, apart from huge file sizes and slowdown in LR.

To be honest, the files were so good from the D700 I could (and have) printed them huge with no quality issues, so I still feel that MP is just the marketing crap its always been.

Anyone wanting the best value camera's from Nikon in the DX or FX range should take the D300s or the D700. People would argue they are old technology now, pffft, only people who are gadget freaks who simply must own the latest in technology.

The truth is, if you saw shots taken with any good quality camera by someone that knows how to use it properly, you would never tell which is which or probably see much of a difference.

Save your money, get a D700 and have cash left for decent glass.
Click to expand...

How are you finding the 5dmk2 in comparison?
 
Sensor development is differently slowing down. ISO performance must have got close to there limits of current technology. I would be curious to see if the new 16mp NEX's have improved over the older ones. I got a horrible feeling i'll upgrade to FF then they will bring out the new organic sensors which will be amazing and everyone will be selling there bulking FF cameras and be buying m4/3s!:)
 
Last edited:
daktar1 said:
Lots of people comparing the D300, D700, D800 to the cost & specs of this camera from a negative perspective; remember they are all pro cameras...Nikon lists this in their Consumer section. They are not looking for pros to add this to their stable, they are interested in people (like me) that think the D7000 is great, and want to move upwards rather than pro users extending their collection downwards.

I agree the scene modes are redundant (never used them on my D7000), and I also agree that the price made me sorely tempted to extend to the D800, however that is still £250 more, I don't need (and I don't think I want) the extra pixels and massive file sizes, and I don't have a collection of super glass to get good results from the D800. If you have the lenses then the D800 makes more sense, but if you're starting down the FF route then I think this camera looks good. Sure the price is higher than I want, but it always will be. For me this is a purchase I've been planning for a while and why would I wait 6 months to (perhaps) save a bit of money when I can start making money from the D600 now.

There's always something better and cheaper on the horizon, you could spend your whole life waiting...
Click to expand...

There isn't a difference of £250 though. Someone actually posted in this thread that there is somewhere that it is possible to get a D800 for UNDER £2000 which sticks them on a par with each other. Even if the difference was £250 though we are talking about a difference of just over 10% due to the high relative costs. We are not comparing £150 and £400 where £250 is a highly significant difference...... Like I have continued to say nobody says that the D600 is not a decent camera just that it SHOULD be cheaper for what you are getting. It is a brilliant consumer camera.
 
Cagey75 said:
The D300/s were over priced for too long, the 300s still is!
Click to expand...

I agree that the D90 was/is a great camera, and that it is still being sold shows how popular it was/is, and probably how much Nikon make from producing it. ;)

However, the D300/S, along with the D700, were probably the best combination of features, performance and build quality that Nikon, or any other manufacturer for that matter, has produced. :shrug:

That people are still comparing newer cameras to these models, and not comparing them favourably, shows that in some ways they were ahead of the game with the features, performance and build quality that Nikon gave them. The D300S is keeping its price because there is nothing with a similar balance of everything to touch it, even now.

With this D600 people are saying entry level full frame, but the D700 is already there, and pixels aside, a better camera imho. If I was in the market for a full frame camera, it would be a new (if there are any left) or low count used D700. I was seriously considering one until I had to replace all my stolen gear. :bang:
 
cowasaki said:
There isn't a difference of £250 though. Someone actually posted in this thread that there is somewhere that it is possible to get a D800 for UNDER £2000 which sticks them on a par with each other. Even if the difference was £250 though we are talking about a difference of just over 10% due to the high relative costs. We are not comparing £150 and £400 where £250 is a highly significant difference...... Like I have continued to say nobody says that the D600 is not a decent camera just that it SHOULD be cheaper for what you are getting. It is a brilliant consumer camera.
Click to expand...

You're not comparing like with like. If you want to make the comparison compare rrps. The d600 will soon drop in anycase
 
boyfalldown said:
You're not comparing like with like. If you want to make the comparison compare rrps. The d600 will soon drop in anycase
Click to expand...

I am comparing like for like. I am comparing the best quoted prices for each camera. My comments about the D600 might well change if, after a month or so, the price drops to £1599 or something like that but for now they are virtually the save price so the comments are right.
 
Panamoz although they are imports they're UK stock i believe. Out of stock at the minute but there price is £2010, however you can get a 5% discount if you pay by bank transfer.
 
cowasaki said:
There isn't a difference of £250 though. Someone actually posted in this thread that there is somewhere that it is possible to get a D800 for UNDER £2000 which sticks them on a par with each other.
Click to expand...

To be pedantic, the difference between the two cameras is £600. As things stand you're comparing the list price of one camera with the street price of another, older one. As a true price comparison won't be available until
the D600 has been in the shops for 6 months or so perhaps using the launch prices (the higher figure that the camera actually shipped at, in the D800's case) would give a fairer representation of the facts....
 
rjbell said:
Panamoz although they are imports they're UK stock i believe. Out of stock at the minute but there price is £2010, however you can get a 5% discount if you pay by bank transfer.
Click to expand...

They may well be "UK stock", but try getting Nikon UK to carry out any warranty work on them ;)
 
Flash In The Pan said:
To be pedantic, the difference between the two cameras is £600. As things stand you're comparing the list price of one camera with the street price of another, older one. As a true price comparison won't be available until
the D600 has been in the shops for 6 months or so perhaps using the launch prices (the higher figure that the camera actually shipped at, in the D800's case) would give a fairer representation of the facts....
Click to expand...

Of course the price difference will be larger in a few months when the D600 price comes down like the D800 did, but if you were going to buy now, which is what a lot of people are talking about, the D600 in comparison to the D800 now, is not a good deal imho, and lots of other peoples by the sound of it.

People are talking about prices in other countries, but in the US at least the situation is more clear as I think the difference between the D600 and D800 is about $8-900, making the choice clearer now. And one would assume that difference may even rise as the D600 price comes down over time there.
 
I had a play with one yesterday in Jessops Birmingham.

It has a nice feel to it however it is less substantial compared to the D800. My money would go on the D800.
 
cowasaki said:
I am comparing like for like. I am comparing the best quoted prices for each camera. My comments about the D600 might well change if, after a month or so, the price drops to £1599 or something like that but for now they are virtually the save price so the comments are right.
Click to expand...

for all the comments you know, just from history, thats exactly what will happen. Just on that basis you need to compare RRPs to give you an idea of the relative prices
 
redhed17 said:
Of course the price difference will be larger in a few months when the D600 price comes down like the D800 did, but if you were going to buy now, which is what a lot of people are talking about, the D600 in comparison to the D800 now, is not a good deal imho, and lots of other peoples by the sound of it.

People are talking about prices in other countries, but in the US at least the situation is more clear as I think the difference between the D600 and D800 is about $8-900, making the choice clearer now. And one would assume that difference may even rise as the D600 price comes down over time there.
Click to expand...

The street price in the States is going to depend on how strictly Nikon USA enforce their MAP (Minimum Advertised Price) policy and how many of their dealers are willing to flout it.......
 
boyfalldown said:
for all the comments you know, just from history, thats exactly what will happen. Just on that basis you need to compare RRPs to give you an idea of the relative prices
Click to expand...

I'm comparing the amount someone would have to pay now not some guess at a price later. If the price does drop to £1500 then my comments would change but until then AND ONLY TILL THEN it is over priced in comparison.
 
Flash In The Pan said:
They may well be "UK stock", but try getting Nikon UK to carry out any warranty work on them ;)
Click to expand...

Just get a 12-month replacement warranty from Panamoz for a few extra ££'s and still walk away with a new camera for less than anywhere else and no need to worry about repairs.
 
cowasaki said:
I'm comparing the amount someone would have to pay now not some guess at a price later. If the price does drop to £1500 then my comments would change but until then AND ONLY TILL THEN it is over priced in comparison.
Click to expand...

I'm assuming its OK to disagree with you, and you know you don't NEED TO TYPE IN CAPS to try and get a point across I don't agree with?

Your comparing the RRP of a camera thats not available to buy yet with the street price of one thats been around 6 months or so. No-one can actually buy it now. Thats hardly a great comparison. And you know, just from whats happened to every camera model before that the street price will drop from RRP over the first few months retail. BTW I'm already being offered UK stock on launch day at £1,750, which does kind of illustrate the point
 
Last edited:
gramps said:
Just get a 12-month replacement warranty from Panamoz for a few extra ££'s and still walk away with a new camera for less than anywhere else and no need to worry about repairs.
Click to expand...

It's still comparing apples with oranges though......;)
 
Flash In The Pan said:
It's still comparing apples with oranges though......;)
Click to expand...

True, my 24mm f1.4 from them, all the way from HK ... £1270 (apple) - local Nikon Dealer, 15 miles up the road £1,629.00 (orange) ;)
 
gramps said:
True, my 24mm f1.4 from them, all the way from HK with no tax or VAT paid and no Nikon warranty... £1270 (apple) - local Nikon Dealer, 15 miles up the road who has paid the tax/VAT and offers an official Nikon warranty £1,629.00 (orange) ;)
Click to expand...

There, fixed that for you :D
 
gramps said:
True, my 24mm f1.4 from them, all the way from HK ... £1270 (apple) - local Nikon Dealer, 15 miles up the road £1,629.00 (orange) ;)
Click to expand...

*cough* only £1,629 if you buy the most expensive UK stock there is. £1,495 if you go for the cheapest. Just to give you a more realistic orange
 
Last edited:
boyfalldown said:
*cough* only £1,629 if you by the most expensive UK stock there is. £1,495 if you go for the cheapest. Just to give you a more realistic orange
Click to expand...

I still prefer the cost of apples :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top