First images of Nikon D600 with 24 MP FX sensor

Discussion in 'Digital Cameras' started by Bruce, Jun 15, 2012.

  1. Bruce

    Bruce Guest

    <http://nikonrumors.com/2012/06/14/first-leaked-nikon-d600-images.aspx/#more-40710>


    A few points worth noting:

    The D600 has a Sony 24 MP full frame sensor which will also be used in
    Sony's SLT A99.

    The D600 specification is final but nikonrumors.com doesn't have it
    all yet.

    The D600 is likely to replace the D700 after a time.

    Several reasonably affordable lenses at less-than-stellar prices will
    be available for the D600. There is yet another version of the
    24-85mm - which probably won't be much better than any of the previous
    versions - and probably a 70-200mm f/4G ED.

    For DX fans, Nikon has also announced an 18-300mm superzoom which is
    likely to be optically even worse than the 18-200mm. Buyers of these
    superzooms seem to place a higher priority on never having to change
    lenses, which makes one wonder why on earth they bought an
    interchangeable lens camera in the first place.
     
    Bruce, Jun 15, 2012
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Bruce

    Guest Guest

    because an slr is much better than a compact p&s and they can still
    change lenses if they need to.
     
    Guest, Jun 15, 2012
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Bruce

    John A. Guest

    Maybe they don't want to clean the sensor more than absolutely
    necessary, perhaps because they don't know how or are afraid they'll
    scratch it or something.

    Maybe once the economy picks up, camera owners will be more willing to
    risk damaging expensive equipment.

    Just a thought. No idea if it's true for a significant number, though
    I would guess it's >0.
     
    John A., Jun 15, 2012
    #3
  4. Bruce

    Me Guest

    From Nikon's MTF chart for the new 24-85VR it seems to be considerably
    improved over the old version.
     
    Me, Jun 15, 2012
    #4
  5. Bruce

    RichA Guest

    That body looks small and simple. Imagine if this thing comes in
    (with entry-level FX lenses) as cheap as a NEX-7 or the m4/3rds top
    cameras?
     
    RichA, Jun 15, 2012
    #5
  6. Bruce

    RichA Guest

    Those "ultra-superzooms" are not exactly light-weight, even from
    lesser firms like Sigma. Carrying an extra lens in small Lowepro bag
    would seem to be no strain, but I guess those amateurs are so "action-
    oriented" they need the extra f.l. to be in the same lens so as not to
    slow them down. :)
     
    RichA, Jun 15, 2012
    #6
  7. For DX fans, Nikon has also announced an 18-300mm superzoom which is
    likely to be optically even worse than the 18-200mm. Buyers of these
    superzooms seem to place a higher priority on never having to change
    lenses, which makes one wonder why on earth they bought an
    interchangeable lens camera in the first place.
    =======================================================

    When you are photographing a once-off event (recent example, the Olympic
    torch passing by), there may not be time to change lenses, or even to pick
    up a second camera, and a wide-range zoom gives you maximum chance of
    getting a few good pictures. Of course, if you are a professional
    photographer with a privileged viewpoint, things may be different....

    It doesn't mean that you don't change lenses on other occasions. Others
    have different needs to you.

    David
     
    David J Taylor, Jun 15, 2012
    #7
  8. Bruce

    K W Hart Guest

    Is this sensor cleaning thing a real issue? I realize that dust on the
    sensor equals spots on the image, but I've changed lenses in mid-roll on my
    film cameras with no ill effects. Does the sensor have a static charge that
    attracts dust?
     
    K W Hart, Jun 15, 2012
    #8
  9. Bruce

    Guest Guest

    film moves so any dust affects only one photo, and that's if it somehow
    gets past the light-tight foam on the cartridge.
    they do but it's not as bad as it used to be. a rocket blower usually
    takes care of any dust.
     
    Guest, Jun 15, 2012
    #9
  10. Bruce

    Bruce Guest


    Only if you are paranoid, ignorant or both. People who buy DSLRs for
    their claimed better image quality over a small sensor p&s then give
    up most of that gain in image quality by using a junk >10X superzoom
    lens could certainly be described as ignorant. But are they also
    paranoid? Discuss. ;-)


    Yes, but many/most DSLR digital sensors have automatic dust removal
    routines that operate when the camera is switched on/off. The vast
    majority of DSLR buyers will never need the sensors professionally
    cleaned. That includes most of those who change their lenses.
     
    Bruce, Jun 15, 2012
    #10
  11. Well, they just make these superzooms to force you to flex your
    imagination and limber up your preconceptions. Doesn't seem to
    work yet, though ...

    -Wolfgang
     
    Wolfgang Weisselberg, Jun 15, 2012
    #11
  12. First, each frame of film is only used once, while the sensor is used
    repeatedly.

    Second, yes, it *does* acquire a static charge.
     
    David Dyer-Bennet, Jun 15, 2012
    #12
  13. That sort of ignorant rant should be ignored.

    There *are* reasons to use 10x superzooms, there are
    reasons to avoid changing lenses while shooting, and
    people who understand that are not nearly as ignorant as
    hysterical claims that they are paranoid!
    That of course depends on a lot of things. If you shoot
    in a very dusty environment it just does not make any
    sense at all to try switching lenses. Either a
    superzoom or multiple bodies can solve most problems,
    but obviously neither is always a perfect solution
    either.

    Most of the time the camera's dust removal function will
    work well enough. When it doesn't a "rocket" type
    blower usually works. When all else fails first an
    attempt at a dry swab, and then the use of a web
    cleaning will virtually always be adequate (once you've
    learned how to do them properly).

    Yes there absolutely is a static charge on an electronic
    sensor, and they therefore attract dust particles and
    hold onto them too.

    If you shoot in dust free environments most of this is
    academic. If you frequent dusty environments then
    learning how to cope is an essential skill.
     
    Floyd L. Davidson, Jun 15, 2012
    #13
  14. Bruce

    Rob Guest

    in conjunction with a vacuum cleaner to catch the dust particals.
     
    Rob, Jun 16, 2012
    #14
  15. Bruce

    Mark F Guest

    Many of the issues caused by the tradeoffs made in making an ultrawide
    zoom can be handled by post processing. In particular, dust
    mostly cane be removed by processing by chromatic distortion
    can be greatly reduced and spatial distortion can be just able
    completely eliminated. Hence ultrawide zooms and rare changing
    of lenses.

    The main drawbacks of ultrawide zooms are weight gain, F-stop
    increase. (Size and price will also be a factor for many.)
    (If I really needed a US$10K super-telephoto or super-wideangle lens
    I'd just get an extra body, but a $3K body and $1K lens is my
    budget area, so I'm unlikely to feel that I need a $10K special
    purpose lens.)


    Bigger sensor allows for tradeoff of pixels for noise reduction.
    Noise from smaller total sensor area can't be handled by processing.
    Noise from too many pixels for a given sensor size can to a large
    extent be eliminated by combining pixels in processing: pixels
    can be combined to reduce noise with the result being almost
    as good as having had fewer larger pixels in the first place; however
    when the resolution is needed 8-million actual pixels cannot be
    made to act as 32-million actual pixels.
     
    Mark F, Jun 16, 2012
    #15
  16. Bruce

    Bruce Guest


    That's funny, because no-one is discussing "an ultrawide zoom". It
    would help if you understood what was being discussed before replying.
     
    Bruce, Jun 16, 2012
    #16
  17. Bruce

    Trevor Guest

    It can be.
    If you change digital sensors as often as you changed film, I'm sure you
    would never have a problem either!! :)

    Trevor.
     
    Trevor, Jun 17, 2012
    #17
  18. Bruce

    Guest Guest

    it's very obvious what he meant.
     
    Guest, Jun 17, 2012
    #18
  19. Bruce

    Alan Browne Guest

    If there's dust on your film capture you would not notice it unless that
    frame happened to be a high aperture number and an even smooth image
    area (no subject/BG detail). So it was bound to occur - just not bound
    to be noticed often - and when seen, likely blamed on other gremlins.

    I have to clean my sensor about 2 - 4 times a year using a rocket blower
    and 1 - 2 / year using a wet contact wipe. Doesn't take much time at all.

    When there is a mote in an image, it's corrected with the healing brush
    in a couple seconds. I wish there was a way to make a dust mask photo
    and for Photoshop (or some app) to automatically remove them when high
    aperture numbers are used and when the image is even in the area where
    there is dust.
     
    Alan Browne, Jun 17, 2012
    #19
  20. Nikon cameras and software can do that.
     
    Floyd L. Davidson, Jun 17, 2012
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.