Sell D700 and buy a D600?

D

daveb99

Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,511
Edit My Images
No
I'm a keen amateur and shoot mostly the following:

People (often my kids) and portraits
Landscapes
Motorsport
...plus anything else that takes my fancy!

I currently have a D700 which I'm very happy with - it ticks pretty much every box.

However I have to say I've been tempted by the new D600, especially with Panamoz selling them at such a good price. The benefits I can see are:

- Smaller and lighter (this is a big plus for me; the D700 sometimes gets left at home because of the weight of it compared to other options!)
- 24MP v 12MP - considerably more detail, which will allow me to crop more heavily (should be great for motorsport)
- Video - I will use this occasionally to film things like school plays etc on a tripod / attached to something using the Gorillapod. It's always dark in there and my P&S / iPhone obviously don't cut it! I might even start getting arty with it!

The marginally inferior build quality and ergonomics / layout of the body don't really concern me - I'm not out in pouring rain or taking pics under pressure chasing celebrities, so I think I'd get on fine with the D600.

My only slight concern is the AF. I do occasionally take fast moving subjects (e.g. my kids running towards me or something) and the D700 just nails it every time. The D600 AF is more akin to that in the D7000 I believe, so I'm kinda hopeful it will cut the mustard, but slightly uneasy about taking the plunge and then finding it just doesn't do the job like the D700 does in this department.

My lenses are:

Nikon 24-70 2.8
Nikon 50mm 1.4G
Nikon 28-300VR (I've found this to be as sharp as a 70-300VR so use it primarily for motorsport)
Nikon 28-200G (Ultra light and compact and amazingly sharp for its size!)
Tamron 17-35 f/2.8-4 (very cheap and very sharp ultrawide for FX)

I guess I'm after the best sensor in the lightest, most compact body I can afford (providing it is easy to use, which I'm sure it will be). I don't use AF-ON and the 1/4000 min shutter speed (vs 1/8000 in the D700) doesn't concern me either - especially as the base ISO on the D600 is 100, not 200.

I've had my D700 the longest out of any of my DSLRs (by far) as it just does the business, but I can't really see any other reasons why I wouldn't make the switch to a D600 - so would welcome people's opinions!

Looking at the D600 gallery photos on Imaging Resource (including the NEF files) and the recently posted DXOMark scores, it is very, very tempting indeed!
 
Last edited:
I think you've already talked yourself into it ;)

It's the most common decision facing Nikon users right now, specifically D700 and D7000 users. Those wanting a similar body but FX sensor, and those with the already FX body, with better build, but looking for better resolution, and maybe the HD video feature too.
 
daveb99 said:
I currently have a D700 which I'm very happy with - it ticks pretty much every box.

I do occasionally take fast moving subjects (e.g. my kids running towards me or something) and the D700 just nails it every time. ... slightly uneasy about taking the plunge and then finding it just doesn't do the job like the D700 does in this department.


I've had my D700 the longest out of any of my DSLRs (by far) as it just does the business,
Click to expand...

Cagey75 said:
I think you've already talked yourself into it ;)
Click to expand...


I'm not so sure :thinking:
 
Very selective quoting there. Everything else he said suggests he has his mind made up.

daveb99 said:
However I have to say I've been tempted by the new D600, especially with Panamoz selling them at such a good price. The benefits I can see are:

- Smaller and lighter (this is a big plus for me; the D700 sometimes gets left at home because of the weight of it compared to other options!)
- 24MP v 12MP - considerably more detail, which will allow me to crop more heavily (should be great for motorsport)
- Video - I will use this occasionally to film things like school plays etc on a tripod / attached to something using the Gorillapod. It's always dark in there and my P&S / iPhone obviously don't cut it! I might even start getting arty with it!

The marginally inferior build quality and ergonomics / layout of the body don't really concern me - I'm not out in pouring rain or taking pics under pressure chasing celebrities, so I think I'd get on fine with the D600.





I guess I'm after the best sensor in the lightest, most compact body I can afford (providing it is easy to use, which I'm sure it will be). I don't use AF-ON and the 1/4000 min shutter speed (vs 1/8000 in the D700) doesn't concern me either - especially as the base ISO on the D600 is 100, not 200.



Looking at the D600 gallery photos on Imaging Resource (including the NEF files) and the recently posted DXOMark scores, it is very, very tempting indeed!
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Cagey75 said:
Very selective quoting there.
Click to expand...

Of course, it displays what he is really thinking, worried about going from familiar camera with good results into ... the unknown!
 
I know the d700 was a once in a life time camera at the time and will always preform great.But its had its day now, its 4 year old tech and things have moved on alot.Hense why so many are being sold second hand now.
I was a douter of the d800 but after buying one would not go back to a d700 unless I had to.

From the small amount of info so far the d600 also beats it in most respects aswell.The only thing the d700 has over both the new cameras is fps.

With the d600 im not sure I could go back down in size and build. Ive never used the d7000 but after going to the d700 my d90 felt to small and toy like. If you can live with that and the fps drop I see why not to do it. Maby try get some hands on time with one first.
 
I am seldom an early adopter of new technology. My one exception was the iPad when it first came out. Watching the D800/800e with left-side focus issues has reinforced my cautious nature. If you are really as satisfied with your D700 as you say, then keep it...at least until you get some solid feedback from the early adopters on the real-world performance of the D600, so you know exactly what you're getting when you buy one.
 
I can tell you that I bought the D800E yesterday and it has 0 issues ;) Tested the left focus issue right off, all good.
 
I've got the d7000 and the D700, barely use the D7000 unless for wildlife. Cant say I'd even consider swapping myself, not even to the D800, more megapixels dosen't cut it for me nor saving a few ounces in weight, thats about all it amounts to in my opinion.
 
Thanks for the replies so far. The fps thing isn't an issue for me either, I never seem to rattle off a long sequence of continuous shooting and 5.5fps is plenty.

My biggest concern would be the AF, I am hoping that Nikon has equipped it with faster and more accurate AF than the D7000, especially given the difference in RRP and the fact it is FX and therefore a 'premium' body (if not pro-level).

Any views on the AF capability? Guess it's rather hard to judge given that so few people have received their D600's (especially in the UK)..
 
daveb99 said:
Thanks for the replies so far. The fps thing isn't an issue for me either, I never seem to rattle off a long sequence of continuous shooting and 5.5fps is plenty.

My biggest concern would be the AF, I am hoping that Nikon has equipped it with faster and more accurate AF than the D7000, especially given the difference in RRP and the fact it is FX and therefore a 'premium' body (if not pro-level).

Any views on the AF capability? Guess it's rather hard to judge given that so few people have received their D600's (especially in the UK)..
Click to expand...

What is all this about the D7000 having some sort of focusing issue.It's a tad if that slower or more accurate then my D3s? It's got a fantastic focusing system.
The top speed motorcycles on this page are doing no less than 150mph and 230mph taken with a D7000. http://iwantpics.co.uk/World wheelie Top Speed 2012.html
 
pmac said:
whats cukoo about that. what does the d700 offer then, apart from fps over both the d800 or d600.

it has better build.and AF over the d600 and only fps over the d800.
Click to expand...
Well for one who originally stated it only had better fps than the D600/800 you seem to have changed your mind a little and youre starting to answer your own question and have added a couple more features where the D700 is better so ill leave you to carry on thinking and you'll eventually get there
 
pmac said:
whats cukoo about that. what does the d700 offer then, apart from fps over both the d800 or d600.

it has better build.and AF over the d600 and only fps over the d800.
Click to expand...

Better build and better AF are quite important. Plus it doesnt have the 'scene mode dial', weather sealing, higher shutter speeds, higher flash sync.
 
cambsno said:
Better build and better AF are quite important. Plus it doesnt have the 'scene mode dial', weather sealing, higher shutter speeds, higher flash sync.
Click to expand...

Thanks, worth thinking about.....

I'm not concerned about the weather sealing (the D600 is partially weather sealed and I'm not going to use it in a storm!) nor the higher minimum shutter speed, nor the flash sync at 1/200th. It's the AF I guess - perhaps I should wait for some reviews but that will be a while...
 
If you feel the improved features will make a big enough change to your photography to justify the cost of upgrading, then do it. Personally, I'm still delighted with my D700 and I'll have had it 4 years in January, and I can't see how the D600 would change my life, so it ain't for me. Each to their own though!
 
viewfromthenorth said:
If you feel the improved features will make a big enough change to your photography to justify the cost of upgrading, then do it. Personally, I'm still delighted with my D700 and I'll have had it 4 years in January, and I can't see how the D600 would change my life, so it ain't for me. Each to their own though!
Click to expand...

Thanks, it isn't about changing my life, but if it means I take it with me more often, and can crop my Motorsport shots more tightly sometimes, and do a bit of video, then for the minimal outlay involved it could be worth it. It's just the AF I'm worried about - perhaps I shouldn't be! It's just that the D700 AF is so damned good I guess - especially with my 24-70.
 
Gary Coyle said:
Well for one who originally stated it only had better fps than the D600/800 you seem to have changed your mind a little and youre starting to answer your own question and have added a couple more features where the D700 is better so ill leave you to carry on thinking and you'll eventually get there
Click to expand...

If you read my first post properly.. I said the only advantage it has over BOTH the new cameras is fps,not just the d600.
It has better build than the d600 thats for sure.
If I was just upgrading to FX from my d90 now, I would probably go with the d600.
After owning a d7/800 it would be a hard choice if I needed a back up,as I'm used to the larger body and functions.
 
pmac said:
If you read my first post properly.. I said the only advantage it has over BOTH the new cameras is fps,not just the d600.
It has better build than the d600 thats for sure.
If I was just upgrading to FX from my d90 now, I would probably go with the d600.
After owning a d7/800 it would be a hard choice if I needed a back up,as I'm used to the larger body and functions.
Click to expand...

Crikey its all kicking off in here! Come on guys, calm down! I understand the need to correct someone sometimes though I guess. As the bouncers say, "Do your talking while you're walking" :-)
 
daveb99 said:
Crikey its all kicking off in here! Come on guys, calm down! I understand the need to correct someone sometimes though I guess. As the bouncers say, "Do your talking while you're walking" :-)
Click to expand...
How on earth was it kicking off :lol: if you think it was then 10 minutes in the wedding forum would frighten you to death. :D
 
I've never felt like the AF on the D7000 has been anything to be concerned with.

I used center point 3D tracking 99% of the time. The annoying thing is that the AF system covers approximately 50% of the entire frame, that is what's not really good enough for me but I make do and adjust my shooting style when necessary.
 
Looking at ken Rockwell (yeah I know) the af area looks fairly small. I don't know if the 700 is same as 300, but on my 300 it covers a lot of the frame.
 
Phil Young said:
I've never felt like the AF on the D7000 has been anything to be concerned with.

I used center point 3D tracking 99% of the time. The annoying thing is that the AF system covers approximately 50% of the entire frame, that is what's not really good enough for me but I make do and adjust my shooting style when necessary.
Click to expand...

I think the d600 has the same problem.
 
Phil Young said:
I wouldn't call it a deal breaker...but if I could pay slightly more for the whole frame I would.
Click to expand...

Isn't the AF coverage the same for all Nikon fx camera's?
I thought so but not 100% sure
 
If you are going to do it you should do it sooner rather than later as D700 values will drop fairly fast in the near future.
 
cambsno said:
Better build and better AF are quite important. Plus it doesnt have the 'scene mode dial', weather sealing, higher shutter speeds, higher flash sync.
Click to expand...

And an AF-ON button. Back button focusing for a left eye dominant tog will be awful on the D600 which why I sold my D7000.
 
The23rdman said:
And an AF-ON button. Back button focusing for a left eye dominant tog will be awful on the D600 which why I sold my D7000.
Click to expand...

I've never used back button focusing, do you need to hold your finger on there? Why is this prefable to using the AF-L?
 
rjbell said:
I've never used back button focusing, do you need to hold your finger on there? Why is this prefable to using the AF-L?
Click to expand...

You set the camera to AF-C, then when you press the button it focuses (the same as when you half press the shutter), once you have focus you can let go of the button and focus is locked.

The advantage of separating focus from shutter release varies, depending on what you shoot, there are several threads on the forums discussing it's merits.
 
there's no way i'd swap from a d700 to a 600...the body is just too amateurish with not enough direct buttons and controls. I'd know that the camera just wouldn't feel as good to handle.
 
rampanthamster said:
there's no way i'd swap from a d700 to a 600...the body is just too amateurish with not enough direct buttons and controls. I'd know that the camera just wouldn't feel as good to handle.
Click to expand...

Some lovely shots on your 500px site Rowan.
 
Loads of D700s up for sale!

Good time to buy I think and haggle prices down with this many on the market - I still think its worth saving £400 minimum and buy a good second hand D700.....can use the cash to get a 85mm f1.8G :D
 
Think the scene button would be handy for me as sometimes my wife or girls take pictures with my gear. Not sure about the build quality as i've not handled one but my D300s is great with a grip and great without it for holidays or trips were space and weight are a premium.
 
chivers67 said:
Think the scene button would be handy for me as sometimes my wife or girls take pictures with my gear. Not sure about the build quality as i've not handled one but my D300s is great with a grip and great without it for holidays or trips were space and weight are a premium.
Click to expand...

It's smaller than a D300 though.
 
D700 is a better camera for me for so many reasons.
not least as i have it under continual warranty and its still a A1+ piece of kit.

if you could get good photographs with a D700 4 years ago it dose not matter where the technology is you can still get good photographs today.
that has not changed its the photographer not the camera.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top