Restless — An Alex Hall Portrait (Full Film) | Faction Skis

Member of the Month

KilaTsunami
October, 2024

Online

Welcome to the Newschoolers forums! You may read the forums as a guest, however you must be a registered member to post. Register to become a member today!

Switching systems? - Nikon D600/610

profile picture
PacificRimJob
Posts: 24725 - Karma: 29,944
So, I'm planning a move to a more modern setup soon, and so naturally I've first and formost looked into staying with Canon and going with a 6D/5D2, however... realizing the affordability (and having the knowledge of the quality/ergonomics) that Nikkor glass provides, I'm now also considering the D600/610, and completely switching systems. (that old D glass... aperture rings? yes!)

Yeah, this is silly to some, I understand, but I don't feel it's completely ridiculous from a cost-standpoint.

So, my question is, who has had adequate experience with the D600, and how do you feel about it for video and/or photo? What are the serious caveats you can tell from in comparison to the Canon system and is there any honest reason why I shouldn't do this aside from the obvious bullshit answers?

Know this, i'm not a TOTAL Nikon n00bzor, but i'm pretty new to their higher end stuff. Educate me, Nikon folks!
Feb 24 2014 7:00AM
37 8
profile picture
Laurent.
Posts: 10056 - Karma: 25,313
Just get a D800E and spend the rest of your days masturbating over the DxO mark score ;).
Feb 24 2014 7:26AM
4 1
profile picture
PacificRimJob
Posts: 24725 - Karma: 29,944
Yeah, no thanks. the D800 is overkill on so many levels IMO.


Feb 24 2014 9:00AM
1 1
profile picture
1337
Posts: 31054 - Karma: 29,246
the nikon sucks for video
the controls are ass backwards
d600 has defective oil stains on most of the sensors, get the d610, if you have to switch

pros:
nikon has rad fucking glass. they have the 14-24, 24-70, 70-200, and 200-400 zoom range covered with four of the best zooms IMO
their primes rock too
Feb 24 2014 9:17AM
2 2
profile picture
Laurent.
Posts: 10056 - Karma: 25,313
Canon users will never have the Holy Trinity.

Click for larger image
Feb 24 2014 9:25AM
11 0
profile picture
m3owzza
Posts: 411 - Karma: 4,528
theres a dx lens in there.. so no haha

also no aperture control in live view for photo or video, hence lenses with aperture rings

also no lower settings for raw (canon can do medium and small raw)
Feb 24 2014 9:37AM
7 0
profile picture
PacificRimJob
Posts: 24725 - Karma: 29,944
The video quality out of Nikon is not really that bad from what I've seen... I'm not super perturbed by that.

That said, wouldn't using an aperture ring mitigate what I feel is the biggest flaw... (that you have to go out of live view to switch aperture, then back in)?

Those oil stains don't seem to be as common as perceived (just like on the D7000) that said, i'm looking at the 610 as well.

the biggest reason for moving is because of the glass. The D lenses are crazy affordable and extremely well built, and yeah.. the holy trinity of zooms is preeetty sexy IMO. That said, i'd skip the 24-70. I would only use a wide zoom and a Long zoom if I was doing an event. anything in the middle can be covered by at 50.
Feb 24 2014 9:54AM
0 0
profile picture
JuliusJ
Posts: 3778 - Karma: 2,106
This is most relevant to gripes about Nikon that I have, I still have to think about it a little bit. The lenses are SO much more affordable in my opinion. I didn't have a ton of Canon gear when I switched, but have no regrets about it. I don't take videos, so I cannot speak for that, but have thought about buying a GH2 and just using my Nikon glass.
Feb 24 2014 2:28PM
0 0
profile picture
lIllI
Posts: 1255 - Karma: 1,986
I don't understood why someone who needs that sort of resolution would settle for the lowly 35mm sensor size.
Feb 24 2014 3:35PM
1 0
profile picture
snowisawesome
Posts: 447 - Karma: 76
I own both the D600 and the D800.  Honestly I think my 600 seems to shoot less grainy video in some instances due to the differences in sensor.  Both look awesome and shoot amazing photos.  For anyone who says the video quality on a Nikon sucks is wack.  I've used them for over 3 years now and never once have thought about changing to Canon for any reason.  The only thing I really don't like is no aperture change in LiveView which shouldn't be an issue for you.  I'd say go for it.
Feb 24 2014 4:59PM
0 0
profile picture
Mag
Posts: 8155 - Karma: 14,809
Nikon is now replacing all D600's with oil spots with D610's for free I believe.
Feb 24 2014 5:17PM
0 0
profile picture
buttrapinpirate
Posts: 497 - Karma: 225
I agree with about everything said minus the video sucking on Nikons. I don't agree with that, the quality is still phenomenal. The actual video modes however aren't the easiest compared to Canon. What I can add to this though that made me pick a D700 over a D600 (it doesn't shoot video so I know this isn't applicable entirely to you), is the button configuration. If I was in the market for a D600 I might consider a D800 even over it, although it's overkill. I'm just not a fan of how they put the MASP and U1 and U2 modes up there instead of the ISO, WB and QUAL buttons on the top like all the prosumer and pro bodies, which I use frequently. I know it's different for everyone, and it may not even apply to you, but it does for me. So it's something to think about if you fiddle around with that shit a lot. Other than that I really like the D600 and I don't get the oil sensor issue, tried three different bodies, and never saw that come up. I'd say go for one, because they're really damn cheap, especially when you consider you're getting FF. Which is so worth it
Feb 24 2014 5:49PM
0 0
profile picture
gusestomp
Posts: 1377 - Karma: 746
hmmmm :)
Feb 24 2014 6:56PM
1 0
profile picture
erikK
Posts: 3245 - Karma: 2,328
Guys, the D800 can control aperture in live view. "Instead of rotating the command dial, power aperture enables smoother aperture controls during movie live view using a button designated via custom menu" - Nikon website
Feb 24 2014 9:11PM
0 0
profile picture
PacificRimJob
Posts: 24725 - Karma: 29,944
D600 + 28 f2.8D/50 f1.8D/85 f1.8D = under 2 grand. pretty sure this is happening.
Feb 25 2014 2:09AM
3 0
profile picture
JuliusJ
Posts: 3778 - Karma: 2,106
try to snag a 24mm instead, not a whole lot more expensive and a lot sharper.
Feb 25 2014 2:45AM
0 0
profile picture
JuliusJ
Posts: 3778 - Karma: 2,106
But nice, sweet setup.
Feb 25 2014 2:45AM
0 0
profile picture
erikK
Posts: 3245 - Karma: 2,328
might as well get the d4s that was just announced so you can shoot at 400,000 ISO and 1080/60p
Feb 25 2014 3:30AM
0 0
profile picture
PacificRimJob
Posts: 24725 - Karma: 29,944
Good call.


Feb 25 2014 7:51AM
0 0
profile picture
TWoods
Posts: 10014 - Karma: 8,386
This isn't the holy trinity - the it's the 14-24 f2.8, not whatever that DX 10-24 is

Honestly, I like the old D-series lenses better than any of these. I wish you could still buy them, I will be buying and shooting with D series glass as long as I'm able and can still find it.

Feb 25 2014 4:09PM
1 1
profile picture
Balto
Posts: 25985 - Karma: 4,404
Definitely the DF
Feb 25 2014 4:21PM
0 1
profile picture
Laurent.
Posts: 10056 - Karma: 25,313
Someone mislabeled that picture, I just took the first one from google.

I blame that blogger for the mishap.
Feb 25 2014 4:48PM
1 0
profile picture
TWoods
Posts: 10014 - Karma: 8,386
So do I. haha.
Feb 25 2014 5:32PM
0 0
profile picture
Mag
Posts: 8155 - Karma: 14,809
Why? I've only ever used the 50 1.8D so my view could be smeared by the fact it's the cheapest and probably worst mechanically, but manual focus was very poor, other than the aperture ring I don't see any advantage.
Feb 25 2014 7:21PM
1 1
profile picture
PacificRimJob
Posts: 24725 - Karma: 29,944
Eh, it's not that bad IMO. It's not as nice as older vintage stuff, but the D series rings are way better than the dinky shit Canon lenses give you...

I have a 50 f1.8 AI that I could always use in place, anyway. The ring on that is fucking wonderful.
Feb 25 2014 8:29PM
0 0
profile picture
TWoods
Posts: 10014 - Karma: 8,386
I shoot on the 80-200 2.8 af-d 28-70 2.8 af-d and 300 f4 af-d.

I have also owned / shot with the 80mm f1.4 af-d, 105 and 135 f/2 DC,

I have wet dreams about the 28mm f/1.4, someday....


An incomplete list would include - in order of more important to me to less

1. color rendition and the way they render an image.. from the way they handle shooting directly into the sun and the flare, (that you can learn how to control and use when you want to for creative purposes) to bokeh, etc... they just have a feel that the newer glass does not.

2. built like a fucking tank. I love how durable they are, though you do pay for that with weight

3. that super sexy finish

4. cost - it's INSANE how cheap you can find it if you look, and it's without question pro glass.


I have the 50mm too, I really like it personally in terms of the image it gives, although it definitely isn't built all that well. on a DX it's a wonderful portrait lens.
Feb 26 2014 8:18PM
0 0
profile picture
.jr
Posts: 5313 - Karma: 356
Shit.. where?
Feb 27 2014 2:05AM
0 0
profile picture
TijmenDal
Posts: 4849 - Karma: 1,295
I've been thinking about switching to Nikon too. Apart from vintage glass, I don't see any reason to stay with Canon (as a photographer) really. It just sucks their focusing rings move the wrong way around (I'm used to Canon, Olympus and Minolta so...)
Feb 27 2014 9:46AM
0 0
profile picture
Laurent.
Posts: 10056 - Karma: 25,313
I use a shitload of different brands and I've never actually had a problem with that, you just have to 'feel' it bro.
Feb 27 2014 12:07PM
0 0
All times are Eastern (-5)