Nikon D600 crushes competition in DxOMark tests: Amazingly in stock for $2099

I am really excited about the Nikon D600 as a new, less-expensive, way to get high-performance full-frame images. Mine is arriving tomorrow, and I'll be writing more hands-on when I get it. But in the meantime, I was blown away by the amazing test results achieved by the D600 by the folks over at DxOMark. In their exhaustive tests the D600 bested not only the Canon 5D Mark III, but Nikon's own D4 for low-light performance and overall image quality...

The Nikon D600 scored an eye-popping 94 overall, behind only the more expensive Nikon D800 and Nikon D800e. In fairness, when I sifted through the actual charts of results, there were plenty of areas where the D600 didn't beat other cameras like the Nikon D4 (at ISOs above 6400 for example, the D4's low-light capability was much superior), but for a $2K camera to go head-to-head with Nikon's recent $3K offering like the Nikon D800 and other more expensive cameras like the Canon 5D Mark III and Nikon D4 is an impressive accomplishment.

Obviously there are many other reasons you might prefer a D800, D4, or 5D Mark III, so I'm not claiming the D600 is a better camera, but I am really psyched about the results. They're better than I was hoping for. The best part is that the Nikon D600 is actually in stock at B&H -- almost unheard of for a popular new model in its first week -- and can be yours for $2099, or $2599 with the newish 24-85mm lens.

Once word of the test results gets around, I expect the D600 to sell out quickly, so I wanted to give readers a heads up now, but of course I'll be passing along my experiences once I have the Nikon D600 in hand. The bar has definitely been raised for the upcoming Canon 6D, which is available for pre-order at the identical $2099 price.


Offline
Joined: 2009-06-16
David your lucky..re nikon d600
David: Sounds like a beautiful camera...and having the pop flash..a real bonus in my view So many times the built in flash of my D100/200/300 cameras have saved me Now with my unreal D3 (that Roger sold me)often reach for the flash...oops..not on this model.. take care doug ps..now with four nikon bodies...its always "wonderful" to see such progress while my digital cameras sell for pennies...$3400 for D100..thats approx $250 today..oh well.. doug P Canada
Offline
Joined: 2003-11-08
D600 and other stories...
Roger sold you his D3 so he could buy a D3s. Glad you enjoy it!!! Roger recently sold the D3s to buy a D4. Big mistake. I much preferred the images from the D3s. Meanwhile, I just picked up a D600 and love it. Lugging that D4 around is a pain. I have problems in both my hands and my elbows and can barely lift the durn thing. I still shoot some rodeo and need the continuous speed and ISO for that, but I also do it from a tripod or monopod. The D600 I can actually hold onto. The 24-120 f/4 is reasonably balanced on the D600 and the images are superb. Now I wish I had a full set of wide angle prime lenses, which would balance somewhat better and overall be a more portable rig. Rog -- too many lenses; too little time
Offline
Joined: 2009-03-12
Roger -- Interesting about

Roger -- Interesting about the D3s vs. D4. I never shot with a D3s (only the 3 and the 4) and I thought the D4 was a definite step up from the 3 in features & low-light, but wasn't willing to latch onto one permanently due to the weight & cost for my typical use.

So the D600 has been a really great "compromise." I do wish it kicked up to 8fps with the vertical grip, but aside from that I can't complain. Because it shares batteries & cards with the D7000, I'll likely make the D7000 my backup camera instead of my D700 -- except when I need the 8fps of the D700 for sports (I think for outdoor sports I'd still use the D700, since 12MP is plenty).

I got the new 24-85 with it and have enjoyed using it, but can't decide if I should trade it in on the 24-120, which I liked when I reviewed it. Ah, well, good problems to have!

--David Cardinal Cardinal Photo

Offline
Joined: 2009-03-12
Doug--Glad you're enjoying

Doug--Glad you're enjoying Roger's D3. Yes, it's amazing the progress over the last decade. As you noted though, best not to look back at those old sales receipts. I'm reminded of that whenever I have to look through my purchase records when making a warranty claim.

 

--David Cardinal Cardinal Photo

Offline
Joined: 2003-04-10
D3
Dear David: Looking for help as always You showed me how to get my Nikon 300 2.8 and 80-200 2.8 to work at 2.8 and it was such a blessing as my son Ryan got his Karate Black Belt last night. David trying to stop the action was shooting really high ISO and was surprised when some of the photos were yellow...while the picture beside it was a good exposure. It was in a public school gym where lighting is really poor I figured maybe shooting a burst of shots...the camera just can't keep up..so exposure changes??? Maybe that theory is way off base...its really the first time using high ISO digital D3 motordrive inside. Any help would be so deeply appreciated...was able to "tune out" the yellow in different photo programs..i use CS5 photoshop..paintshop pro 4..and picassa deepest thanks doug i apologize as this thread doesn't belong here..very sorry..dp POSTED A SERIES OF PHOTOS ON MY FACEBOOK PAGE IF U HAVE TIME...Doug Petepiece on facebook http://www.facebook.com/doug.petepiece Nikon D3 2.8 1/400 Iso 5000 Exp bias +0.3 Focal length 160 Max ap 3 Metering mode pattern Contrast normal Exposure aperture priority Saturation normal White balance auto Digital zoom 1 Exif 0221 File size 6.02 mb
Offline
Joined: 2009-03-12
Doug -- The difference is
Doug -- The difference is some combination of white balance + lighting. The "yellow" ones show that the lighting is closer to Tungsten than the camera has set the white balance. I can think of several possibilities: * If you were using flash, maybe it didn't fire during the yellow ones * Maybe the room lighting was changing in some way (fluorescents strobing or something) and different frames picked up different light * Somehow the camera's Auto WB got confused. Here are some solutions: * Shoot raw & use the white balance slider in Photoshop's Camera Raw to tweak it after the fact * Don't use Auto WB. Find a preset that works or make one using the PRE function for the room light (of course if the lights are strobing, then this option won't help, and you need to use #1) Hope that helps!--David

--David Cardinal Cardinal Photo

Offline
Joined: 2003-04-10
DavidThats all really good
David Thats all really good advice All photos were taken with my nikon 300 2.8....handheld..no flash The lights are terrible and spotty and the lens/which i forgot to put on limit(focus) was doing alot of hunting around...so at times i was probably picking up the roof lights Anyway...just the fact u taught me how to force the lens down to 2.8 allowed me to get some terrific photos of my son...so I am very grateful...for a long time had two 2.8 expensive lens and couldn't figure why none of my program mode photos every showed wide open setting thanks for taking the time doug
Offline
Joined: 2009-03-12
Glad to help. Let us know how

Glad to help. Let us know how the photos turn out next time!--David

 

--David Cardinal Cardinal Photo

Login to post comments