|
Forums >
Photography Talk >
D600, D700, or D800
Hi, I own a bit of gear for my D7000, but mostly it is MF lenses. I also own a pro 35mm film, Basset Rangerfinder and a medium format RZ67. I would like to add a digital full frame for my studio and event photography. I am considering the three above mentioned Nikon. I read all the pro's and con's of each as far as AF, construction, and shutter limitations. I can't rent or test them here, so I have to decide based on spec sheet reading and other photog comments. My current goal is to get a D800, but part of me is still unsure. I am still debating what would be a better investment for the money spent. Sorry to sound indecisive, but 3k is a lot to spend on a D800 unless you are 100% it is what will serve you best. I am debating whether it would be better spent on a D700/D600 and then other studio equipment like additional strobes, etc. On the other hand, I see cameras as good investment for a few years to come. Getting a higher 36MP may add more 'quality' to my landscape and portrait work. Ideas? Jul 11 13 10:30 pm Link I chose the D600 over the D800 because it didn't give me anything "more" aside from megapixels, and 24 is plenty. Jul 11 13 10:56 pm Link I'm definitely happy with my D600 and had the same conclusions as Jay. It's surprisingly lightweight and easy to handle for as good of a camera as it is. The user programmable modes U1/U2 might be handy for you if you're doing both landscape/outdoor and studio work. Jul 11 13 11:05 pm Link It's mostly about megapixels. If you think your every landscape photo would be a masterpiece, than D800 or D800e even better. It would pay of in no time. Othervice D600. Cameras don't take pictures, people do. How good are you to return your money? Jul 11 13 11:11 pm Link I actually prefer the D800. Aside from megapixels, the colour is better (the D600 is a little bit green), and I find tonal range to be slightly longer. Not a lot, mind you ... but enough that I would consider the D800 an adequate replacement for 645 or 6x6 colour film, and I would not consider the D600 to be so. Unless you want to save a few bucks, or you're going to beat the hell out of it, I'd pass on the D700. It's built better that the D600 and has better AF ... but the prints aren't as good, there's no video, the live view isn't nearly as responsive, the shutter is noisy as hell ... really all small complaints, but there are a lot of them. Full disclosure: I don't own any of these cameras. My conclusions are based on testing the models when they first come out(I work at a store that sells them), and preparing and printing a number of wide-format prints from several different photographers using these cameras. For what it's worth, I know a whole bunch of guys that make huge prints(like, 40x60s) and switched from Canon to Nikon as soon as the D800 came out. The prints DO look much better than what they were doing with their 5DIIs. I can't say there's much difference at smaller sizes, other than slightly different colour, but the massive ones look different. Jul 11 13 11:15 pm Link Also, Happy First Post, Derek. Welcome  Jul 11 13 11:17 pm Link Enmerkar Zedek wrote: They are quite different cameras, so it depends on what your priorities are. Jul 11 13 11:19 pm Link Something else to keep in mind with the D800 is how fast is your computer? Those are some BIG files that will choke an older or slower system. Jul 11 13 11:23 pm Link Derek Bennett wrote: I have medium format cameras for that, but obviously having digital in D800 is a plus. Jul 11 13 11:23 pm Link Tulack wrote: This used to be true but now is BS. Cameras ARE a major factor now. If it was true none of would be buying new cameras. I can guarantee you I cannot get the some results with my D70 as my D700. And I bet the Polaroid cameras from the 70s sitting on my shelf cannot get what my D700 can no matter how good I am. Jul 11 13 11:40 pm Link Doug Jantz wrote: Well there is a local photographer here charging $100 for a day's workshop teaching HDR photography using cell phone camera. Jul 11 13 11:50 pm Link ChiMo II wrote: i3-2100 @3100 Ghz with 8 Gig Ram Jul 11 13 11:51 pm Link Doug Jantz wrote: Yeah, like people buying new phones, because they can hear each other better. Jul 11 13 11:53 pm Link DougBPhoto wrote: I am worried about the D800 and technique as I shoot mostly handheld and on the go. I am one of those zing-zang-zoom photographers. I have to focus to make sure my hand shake don't blur the photo and most of my lenses are old manual glass. \ Jul 11 13 11:55 pm Link Zack Zoll wrote: I already own the RZ67, so I am not certain if I "need" an adequate replacement. However, the fact that colours are better come to it, but is it worth 1k more unless you are selling large gallery prints? Jul 11 13 11:58 pm Link I would chime in and say none of the above honestly. Lately I have been stuck on the D3s. It is hands down my go to for most everything unless I am shooting for a book in which I use the D800. The only trouble with the D800 that I have seen is that you will get movement easier, and the file sizes are huge (respectably so). The D3s is a work horse though, and works for just about anything that you don't need huge files for. Jul 12 13 12:00 am Link Sold my D700 to a fellow photographer to get the D600... happy with that decision and agreeing with some of the other D600 users above... it's a great camera for the money. Been using it for almost one year with some fabulous images already in my MM port taken with it... here's one. Amazing dynamic range and 2nd only to the D3s in low light performance. Definitely Nikon's 'best bang for the buck' camera in my opinion...   Jul 12 13 12:10 am Link D3s The D600 is an entry-level FF body, don't be fooled by the megashnitzel-count and it being a FF body. You'll likely regret it, if you're considering the other two. The D800 is gonna be a hog on resources (computing), it ain't cheap, and it's kinda overkill for your needs IMHO (NOT to tell you what your "needs" are!). As-mentioned, the D700 is a rock....but is old-technology to be buying right now. I own one. I'm not selling it  For the $2500+ a D3s will run you, you're shooting the cleanest images possible right now. You're shooting them with one of the fastest cameras in the world, which serves your event-shooting needs where the D600 & D800 are a whisper of a shadow to the D3s. Both the D600 & D800 have shutter-lives far inferior to the one in the D3s, so you're buying a tool that'll last you. I have a D3 and a D700, and I won't be buying until 2014 possibly? Those are my initial thoughts, anyhoo. It's your call at the end of the day/week/whatever, of course! Best wishes with the new FF Nikon  IMHO alone; Ðaniel A Betts DBIphotography Toronto (Blog On Site) DBImagery Toronto (Website) “The critic has to educate the public; the artist has to educate the critic.” ~Oscar Wilde D700:  D3:  Jul 12 13 02:38 am Link Unless you own or are willing to invest in all pro glass don't worry about the D800. Its an amazing camera, but it needs really good lenses to make it shine. Jul 12 13 03:02 am Link I have the D700 and the D800. I passed on the D600 to get the D800 only because of the focusing system. The problem for me was that the focus points in the D600 only covered a small portion of the viewfinder, and I needed greater coverage. The problems for me with the D800 are that with so many pixels crammed onto the sensor the pictures can get pretty noisy at higher ISOs and the massive file size. If most of your work is in the studio, you won't be shooting at the high ISOs so the noise won't be an issue. For landscapes, the extra detail in the D800 images would be useful. If you shoot a lot of low light work, you'll probably prefer the D600. Jul 12 13 06:41 am Link If you want professional features (settings, AF, buttons, blah blah blah) and you don't want to spend $3k, then consider the D700. Otherwise, go all the way and get the D800. Jul 12 13 07:48 am Link I got a D800 a little over a month ago. Finally upgraded from a D300. I'm lovin' it! Jul 12 13 07:56 am Link ChiMo II wrote: Don't forget if you want to tether the camera to a computer you better have a lot of free space and lots of RAM Jul 12 13 07:59 am Link I have an 800 and 800e, and a close friend let me shoot his 600. Your question about requirements is a good one. Your real question should probably be 800e or 600. The sharpness difference with one less filter in the 800e has made it my go to choice. The 600 is a little small for my big hands, look at your personal requirements, but the 800e and 24-70 2.8 is my standard kit for studio work now. You are right to look at your own needs, and if ultra crisp exposures are important, there is indeed a difference in the 800 and 800e. Cheers! Jul 12 13 08:02 am Link Have had the D800 for about 8 months now. It's great for low light and sports and just generally an all around fine camera body. I shoot with a friend who has a D600 and the IQ seems to be equal on comparable lenses. For me, the deciding factor was the 1/8000 shutter on the D800 (I shoot some sports). However, for shooting video, I believe that the D600 may be better. If you don't need 1/8000 and don't intend to shoot a lot of video, save yourself $1000 and go for the D600 Jul 12 13 08:08 am Link Pros and Cons - D700 - solid performer but outdated technology at this point - not available new, costs too much used in terms of value against the D600 in my view D600 - very nice image quality and high ISO performance not a professional body build - less resistant to moisture and grit than the D800 focusing system is very mediocre - poor performer in low light the D7100 runs rings around it as does the D800 no PC socket, no provision to lock the aperture and shutter speed settings in manual mode shutter rated for fewer actuations than D800 decent video if that is of interest D800 - the best image quality - just slightly better than D600 though not as good a high ISO performance as D600 professional body build and control layout, pc socket, able to lock aperture and shutter speeds in manual mode, higher shutter rating superb focusing - fast and accurate even in the lowest light best dynamic range higher flash shutter speed available uses both CF and SD cards better video capabilities in my view the D800 is worth the premium - FWIW I shoot with the D800 when shooting for publication or commercial print and with the D600 when shooting personal projects and I like them both. Jul 12 13 08:13 am Link I personally love my D800 and chose it over the D600 in part because of the Pro controls and layout. It's easier to use than the D600 by far in my opinion. I'm also a bit of a MP whore. Jul 12 13 08:17 am Link You also have to look at long term investment. I believe in buying something and keep it for a long time (if you could) instead of upgrading every release. 36MP seems a lot to many people today but in few years, 36MP is the norm. Remember when people were saying that 12MP was enough? Now it seems 24MP is enough.. For me, the more MP, the better. If there is a 54MP DLSR that has the same DR or better and has same noise ratio as the D800/e, I would buy it in a heart beat. The D800/e is also more rugged and has longer shutter life rating as compared to the D600. However, keep in mind that the D800/e do require sharper lenses. Jul 12 13 08:33 am Link your naked girl shots and travel shots will look the same on either camera. I own a d600 and could have bought either that or the d800. Dont buy the d700, out of date and still too expensive. d600 has controls like the d7000 and d7100 which I liked better then the d800. I didnt need 36 mega pixels and I think in practical terms for me the d600 was perfect fit. It performs great in low light I love the weight feel and controls on the d600 I also boiught mine with th 24-85mm lens aorund xmas for $2000 complete for the kit, the d800 was $2900 without a lens. It was enough ddifference for me to decide to go with the d600. no regrets. you can get some of them refurbished now for even less then $2000 The d600 has two sd card slots, the d80 has the split slots. Personally I have had both sd and cf card cameras and prefer the small size of the sd cards. I dont notice any difference in which one breaks faster. I have had more bad cf cards, maybe cuz they were older and more used. The point is buy the best that you can afford and need, and then work on technique without any problems. Jul 12 13 08:34 am Link also 36 mp IS a lot if you dont need it. In reality you will either be resing down your photos or shooting at a lower mp anyway for anything that is not trade show mural sized Jul 12 13 08:36 am Link Don't be put off by the D800 naysayers. It is probably the most versatile body out there. I did look at a D600 but it didn't have the controls I wanted but that aside I couldn't be happier with the D800. File size? yes, bigger than typical small sensor size but you are used to working with MF. Lenses, I use many "D"" and older glass with great results. Technique? come on, if you can't shoot a D800 you can't shoot anything. More internet parroting from those that don't know. I shoot sprint boat races and just had a race with close to 1900 images using the D800, 70/200 vr1 and 1.7 extender. Tossers were just compositional in nature. If I missed a tracking or focus lock it was me and not the hardware. Locks on and tracks a 12' boat coming directly at me at over 100mph and cutting across pulling 5-6 gees is no problem at all and yes hand held and yes you can count the hairs in the driver's and navigator's beards and the weave pattern in their firesuits. It's also wonderful in the studio, events and on location and low light. Do yourself a favor and just get the D800. I have the 800 but the E would be Okay as well, but I don't have "E" envy. Jul 12 13 08:44 am Link DougBPhoto wrote: Before the D600 was released, people were guessing that it was going to be a FF version of the D7000...but IT ISN'T!! Jul 12 13 08:58 am Link I own both the D600 and the D800. I upgraded from a pair of D700s. I use the D800 as my primary camera and the D600 as a backup. I have used both cameras for studio work as well as for architectural work. I prefer the D800 pro body layout and the 36Mpixel sensor. I once believed that low light performance would be a major drawback of the 36mp sensor compared to the 12mp sensor of the D700. I frequently use the D800 in low light situations and I am amazed at how well it performs. I love, love, love my D800 camera. The D600 is nice as well but, I prefer the D800. Jul 12 13 09:04 am Link By now your options for new cameras will be D600 or D800. I personally own a D700. I could never own a D600. Its a step back. The focus points are cluster closer to the center, it goes up to 1/4oooth shutter, and lack of external controls. The only thing it has going for it is the sensor. Jul 12 13 09:48 am Link Thanks all. I opted to buy mint d800 for 2k. D700 and D600 are about 1.5k on ebay used. D3s around 3k+. I found the comments very informative and helped me narrow it down. I liked the quality prints on d800 and d600. The sample I saw from d700 and d3 didn't seem to be much of an upgrade from d7000. I appreciate the double shutter life of d3s but with 3500+ price tag it irons itself out vs 2 d600 or 1 d800 and 1 d600 backup body It is true either d600 or d800 can match my current work quality These are my first pics from rebel t2i with kit lqens. Not much of a challenge. I am constantly growing as photo and want a body that last me a few years. I would like to do more landscape and high quality portrait. Theadvice seems to be get cheaper cam now to much current tools and level. I like a tool that I can grow into as my practice and lens collection improves. 500 extra for d800 isn't a big enough burden over the 1.5 d600. If it means upgrade in lens and if computer that is ok ... it too is an investment. Jul 12 13 10:32 am Link Gary Melton wrote: I'm not sure if people are really concerned with the size, personally I'd prefer the D800 if it was bigger. Jul 12 13 01:45 pm Link Tulack wrote: My old phone was 3G. My current phone is 4G. 4G works better. Jul 12 13 01:59 pm Link Enmerkar Zedek wrote: That seems like pretty sound logic for the D800. Earlier you asked if the difference is small prints between the D800 and D600 was that big, and I would say that under 16x20, it's only a difference of slightly better colour and tonal range on the D800. But that's my eyes, and the images that I was working with - your mileage may vary. Jul 12 13 05:03 pm Link Doug Jantz wrote: Jerry Nemeth wrote: This two pictures done with the same camera. Need to be really dumb to say that camera taking pictures, not person. Jul 12 13 06:01 pm Link Enmerkar Zedek wrote: Really? Glass maybe... but capture devices? Jul 12 13 06:34 pm Link |
