I'm sure that most people have seen by now that the D610 has been unveiled. Let's not pretend- this is a fix for the D600 oil/dust/shutter issue. It's not a new model and a slightly faster FPS and marginally improved weather sealing aren't going to make anyone think otherwise. And that's ok. Nikon's drawing a line under the 600 and effectively admitting its problem and releasing a follow-on free from its taint rather than fix the issue under the same model name and risk it not being realised by your average Google-search consumer. I'm fine with that. What I'm not fine with is, at time of writing in the UK, the 610 costing 50% more than the 600!
It's a problem fix for a documented and acknowledged issue. You want to relaunch as a new model to avoid the reputational damage? Fine, I'll play along. But don't charge people an outrageous premium to purchase a working product as opposed to a faulty one. It's more expensive than the D800!
I don't intend this blog to be ranty, God knows there are enough bloggers ploughing that furrow, but I couldn't help this striking me as an insult to their customer base on the part of Nikon.
Update: D610 price has dropped 10%. Body prices as per Amazon UK now stand as follows:
D600 £1280
D610 £1599
D800 £1835
Showing posts with label D600. Show all posts
Showing posts with label D600. Show all posts
Monday, 21 October 2013
Tuesday, 10 September 2013
Introducing the D610?
There are rumours that the D600 is about to have a refresh, which is something I speculated might happen in an article I wrote about the D600 dust issue. I agree with NikonRumors that we're going to see next to nothing in terms of a spec update, just a new model to fix the dust issue that plagued (or at least was said to plague) the original model. I'm curious as to whether it will also improve the small focus area which is the other common criticism of the D600 model. Assuming this is the case, it'll still leave me with the tricky decision of paying the extra for the new model or picking up an even cheaper D600 (at time of writing, you can pick up a body for £1100, presumably this'd drop below £1000 with the release of the 610).
The D600 was launched almost exactly a year ago.
The D600 was launched almost exactly a year ago.
Monday, 24 June 2013
The D600 dust issue
For those of you not aware, the D600 is known to have an issue whereby dust and/or oil collects rapidly on the sensor, manifesting as spots and smears on photos.
I'd not really thought about blogging about this, firstly because it involves going into a level of (mechanical) technical detail which is an area in which I would not normally dwell and secondly because there's a huge amount of content out there already on the subject. What convinced me to write on the subject was that all the other content I could find tended to only focus on one facet of the issue and a lot of it has not been updated as new information has come to light or attempted to reconcile its own content with other content on the web. I thought I'd attempt to summarise everything I've encountered in my research on the issue. An article that covers everything, from perception to causes to solutions, hopefully in a succinct manner, updating as I discover anything new.
Perception: Is there actually an issue?
Not famed for being a source of universal agreement, the Internet is divided on whether there's an issue at all. The ever-high-profile Ken Rockwell has said that he thinks it's an example of Internet gossip but this would seem to fly in the face of user after user after user who are reporting firsthand experience of the issue, not to mention that it's been reported by no shortage of experts such as LensRentals, petapixel and dpreview. A number of other commentators have gone along the "all cameras get dust on the sensor" route, but this seems to be missing the point that those citing the issue are stating not that "it collects dust" but the speed at which it does it. These aren't first-time camera owners, they've had DSLRs before and are saying that the D600 gets it much faster than any other they've seen, sometimes right out of the box.
So yeah, I think there's an issue. At least for a sizeable chunk of the D600 user base.
What do Nikon say?
Given that the issue had been reported since the product launched in September 2012, it wasn't until February 2013 that Nikon acknowledged the issue. Reports prior to that include stories of cameras being sent in for servicing being returned with the amount of dust described as being "within acceptable tolerance".
Even Nikon's announcement from February is somewhat half-hearted. It's not a "yes, there is an issue" so much as "we hear a bunch of people are unhappy, here's what you can do about it". And that is to send it to them for cleaning. Shipping at your cost but the service should be free.
Is dust a big deal?
So it's dust on the sensor. Just clean it, right? Sure, that works, but be aware that a typical report of the issue is that it manifests from only a few hundred actuations. Do you really want to be cleaning your sensor (or sending it off for servicing, even) that frequently? Not to mention that I believe self-cleaning may actually void your warranty.
What's causing it?
Short answer- nobody really knows. There are a couple of theories around mirror box scratches or short shutter curtains.
Is there a permanent solution?
Since it's a hardware issue, something physical within the machine, it seems likely that there's nothing the user can do. But what about Nikon? A number of users who have returned their D600s to Nikon stated a service category of B1 or B2 on their service reports. Both of these denote that camera parts were replaced (B1 being minor, B2 being major). Are Nikon replacing parts that cause the issue with alternate versions that prevent it? This would also fit with some reports of speaking with Nikon customer service, although these are hard to verify. Does this also mean that new runs of the 600 are being manufactured with these new parts? Possibly, but we've no real way of knowing (or at least I've not found anyone who's compared the parts suspected of causing the issue on older or newer models).
One thing worth mentioning is that there have been reports of the issue apparently improves over time.
Are all D600s affected?
Difficult to say. Nikon's serial numbers work by region so it's harder to tell what's a 'newer run' (the first digit denotes the region) and thus whether it's a 'bad batch'. From the research I've done, it seems that cameras get hit (or at least some users report it) regardless of country, run etc. If newer models are being produced with fixes, it doesn't seem to be apparent from the available evidence. But then not all users say they have the issue so could random bodies really just not have it? Conclusion: Do I get one?
Let's review. From launch, it seems there was an issue affecting a good portion of the cameras. According to some, that gets better. If it doesn't, apparently Nikon can fix it for free if they've not already fixed the route cause on new units.
I'll be honest, it's given me severse cause to hesitate purchasing but I'll keep an eye on news for it while waiting for old stock levels to die down and probably take the plunge before too long.
I'd not really thought about blogging about this, firstly because it involves going into a level of (mechanical) technical detail which is an area in which I would not normally dwell and secondly because there's a huge amount of content out there already on the subject. What convinced me to write on the subject was that all the other content I could find tended to only focus on one facet of the issue and a lot of it has not been updated as new information has come to light or attempted to reconcile its own content with other content on the web. I thought I'd attempt to summarise everything I've encountered in my research on the issue. An article that covers everything, from perception to causes to solutions, hopefully in a succinct manner, updating as I discover anything new.
Perception: Is there actually an issue?
Not famed for being a source of universal agreement, the Internet is divided on whether there's an issue at all. The ever-high-profile Ken Rockwell has said that he thinks it's an example of Internet gossip but this would seem to fly in the face of user after user after user who are reporting firsthand experience of the issue, not to mention that it's been reported by no shortage of experts such as LensRentals, petapixel and dpreview. A number of other commentators have gone along the "all cameras get dust on the sensor" route, but this seems to be missing the point that those citing the issue are stating not that "it collects dust" but the speed at which it does it. These aren't first-time camera owners, they've had DSLRs before and are saying that the D600 gets it much faster than any other they've seen, sometimes right out of the box.
So yeah, I think there's an issue. At least for a sizeable chunk of the D600 user base.
What do Nikon say?
Given that the issue had been reported since the product launched in September 2012, it wasn't until February 2013 that Nikon acknowledged the issue. Reports prior to that include stories of cameras being sent in for servicing being returned with the amount of dust described as being "within acceptable tolerance".
Even Nikon's announcement from February is somewhat half-hearted. It's not a "yes, there is an issue" so much as "we hear a bunch of people are unhappy, here's what you can do about it". And that is to send it to them for cleaning. Shipping at your cost but the service should be free.
Is dust a big deal?
So it's dust on the sensor. Just clean it, right? Sure, that works, but be aware that a typical report of the issue is that it manifests from only a few hundred actuations. Do you really want to be cleaning your sensor (or sending it off for servicing, even) that frequently? Not to mention that I believe self-cleaning may actually void your warranty.
What's causing it?
Short answer- nobody really knows. There are a couple of theories around mirror box scratches or short shutter curtains.
Is there a permanent solution?
Since it's a hardware issue, something physical within the machine, it seems likely that there's nothing the user can do. But what about Nikon? A number of users who have returned their D600s to Nikon stated a service category of B1 or B2 on their service reports. Both of these denote that camera parts were replaced (B1 being minor, B2 being major). Are Nikon replacing parts that cause the issue with alternate versions that prevent it? This would also fit with some reports of speaking with Nikon customer service, although these are hard to verify. Does this also mean that new runs of the 600 are being manufactured with these new parts? Possibly, but we've no real way of knowing (or at least I've not found anyone who's compared the parts suspected of causing the issue on older or newer models).
One thing worth mentioning is that there have been reports of the issue apparently improves over time.
Are all D600s affected?
Difficult to say. Nikon's serial numbers work by region so it's harder to tell what's a 'newer run' (the first digit denotes the region) and thus whether it's a 'bad batch'. From the research I've done, it seems that cameras get hit (or at least some users report it) regardless of country, run etc. If newer models are being produced with fixes, it doesn't seem to be apparent from the available evidence. But then not all users say they have the issue so could random bodies really just not have it? Conclusion: Do I get one?
Let's review. From launch, it seems there was an issue affecting a good portion of the cameras. According to some, that gets better. If it doesn't, apparently Nikon can fix it for free if they've not already fixed the route cause on new units.
I'll be honest, it's given me severse cause to hesitate purchasing but I'll keep an eye on news for it while waiting for old stock levels to die down and probably take the plunge before too long.
Tuesday, 16 April 2013
Nikon D7100 vs. D600
As mentioned before I'm a D7000 owner, Nikon's top-tier cropped sensor model. I'm keen to upgrade to a full frame camera and had been waiting with bated breath for the release of Nikon's entry-level full frame model, the D600, which I felt didn't quite deliver what I wanted from a model at that position in Nikon's product hierarchy, both in terms of price and functionality. The latest twist in the tale is the introduction of the D7000's successor, the D7100 released a short time ago.
As a bit of background, Nikon have got a point where all of their current models have been released in the space of a little over a year and it looks like there are some baselines being established across the lineup- the Expeed 3 processor (used across all current models) and the 24.7mp sensor on the lower half of the portfolio, for example.
What I find curious is that the new D7100 offers a number of key technical specs which are superior to the D600 despite being from a lower tier. Obviously this isn't unusual if the higher tier camera is an older model but the 600 launched a mere five months prior to the 7100.
My interest is particularly from the viewpoint of HDR photography, which is what I find myself doing, most commonly. Much has been made of the impressive dynamic range of the now-standard Expeed 3 processor in the D600 and its ability to provide 1-shot HDR from RAW as well as an in-camera HDR function. So it's safe to say that the D600 is a very capable HDR camera despite only provide 3-step auto-exposure bracketing (AEB), something I've commented on previously. This does not detract from the oddness that the D7100, with the same sensor and processor, still provides 5-step AEB on a lesser model. Why almost immediately one-up your own new camera, which made much of its HDR capabilities, with one from a lower tier?
So why is this a problem? If the 7100 is superior for HDR, why not just upgrade to that? Because the 7100 is still crop sensor just as the 7000 was, thus forcing HDR shooters into deciding between superior HDR capabilities (not to mention the D7100's increased focus points and built-in WiFi) on a crop sensor or a full-frame model that doesn't quite deliver what it should on the HDR front, the likely result being that, like me, they may either refrain from purchasing altogether or, worse from Nikon's POV, notice that the Canon EOS 6D doesn't force them to choose.
Edited on 17/04/2013
As a bit of background, Nikon have got a point where all of their current models have been released in the space of a little over a year and it looks like there are some baselines being established across the lineup- the Expeed 3 processor (used across all current models) and the 24.7mp sensor on the lower half of the portfolio, for example.
What I find curious is that the new D7100 offers a number of key technical specs which are superior to the D600 despite being from a lower tier. Obviously this isn't unusual if the higher tier camera is an older model but the 600 launched a mere five months prior to the 7100.
My interest is particularly from the viewpoint of HDR photography, which is what I find myself doing, most commonly. Much has been made of the impressive dynamic range of the now-standard Expeed 3 processor in the D600 and its ability to provide 1-shot HDR from RAW as well as an in-camera HDR function. So it's safe to say that the D600 is a very capable HDR camera despite only provide 3-step auto-exposure bracketing (AEB), something I've commented on previously. This does not detract from the oddness that the D7100, with the same sensor and processor, still provides 5-step AEB on a lesser model. Why almost immediately one-up your own new camera, which made much of its HDR capabilities, with one from a lower tier?
So why is this a problem? If the 7100 is superior for HDR, why not just upgrade to that? Because the 7100 is still crop sensor just as the 7000 was, thus forcing HDR shooters into deciding between superior HDR capabilities (not to mention the D7100's increased focus points and built-in WiFi) on a crop sensor or a full-frame model that doesn't quite deliver what it should on the HDR front, the likely result being that, like me, they may either refrain from purchasing altogether or, worse from Nikon's POV, notice that the Canon EOS 6D doesn't force them to choose.
Edited on 17/04/2013
Thursday, 1 November 2012
D600 revisited
I've continued to follow the D600 after its ridiculously pricy UK launch and, at time of writing, it's come down in price 21% on Amazon to a much more reasonable £1540. This puts it much more within my price range for what I'd be prepared to pay for a camera at this level, i.e. entry-level full-frame, but there was one more disappointment when we had the release announcement which is that it only does three-stage Auto Exposure Bracketing (AEB). For those you who aren't aware, AEB makes HDR photography (which I do a lot of) very easy- I switch it on, hold down my shutter release and my camera will take three photos at varying levels of exposure for my HDR software to combine.
...and that's my point, this is what I do with my current camera, a D7000, and the D600 doesn't give me any more exposures. The D800 will let you do up to seven so I was hoping for at least five from a camera that costs twice as much as my 'humble' D7000.
Or so I thought, but then reading about how the D600's sensor already has a superior dynamic range and so each of those three exposures is still delivering more from an HDR perspective. Just how much more is a bit more difficult to quantify.
I also realised that, in order to get the benefit of the new camera, I'd also have to replace all my DX (cropped) format lenses so I'd be looking at at least a £3000 spend in total.
Maybe not something I'll be doing too soon, then...
...and that's my point, this is what I do with my current camera, a D7000, and the D600 doesn't give me any more exposures. The D800 will let you do up to seven so I was hoping for at least five from a camera that costs twice as much as my 'humble' D7000.
Or so I thought, but then reading about how the D600's sensor already has a superior dynamic range and so each of those three exposures is still delivering more from an HDR perspective. Just how much more is a bit more difficult to quantify.
I also realised that, in order to get the benefit of the new camera, I'd also have to replace all my DX (cropped) format lenses so I'd be looking at at least a £3000 spend in total.
Maybe not something I'll be doing too soon, then...
Thursday, 20 September 2012
Prescient
Five days after I pointed out that the UK price of the D600 is too high, it drops by 18% on Amazon. Coincidence?
Yes.
But still, it's not even been released yet and they already dropped it by that much. Still, it needed doing.
Yes.
But still, it's not even been released yet and they already dropped it by that much. Still, it needed doing.
Friday, 14 September 2012
D600 launch
So after much rumour, speculation and leaks, Nikon finally announced it's new entry-level full-frame (FX) model, the D600. As mentioned in previous posts, this is a camera I was looking at getting based on leaked and rumoured specs as the next logical stop up from my DX format D7000. I must say, the final release did have a pretty big sting, for those of us in the UK at least: the price. Remember that this is meant to be the "lets make full-frame affordable for the consumer market" model. Now in the US, it's $2100 which I would be more than happy to pay for what this camera is. I mean, I'd jump at that. But in the UK, it's £1975 or USD$3200. 50% more! And I'm taking Amazon.com vs. Amazon.co.uk so it's about as much of a like-for-like comparison as you can get.
This is how bad it is- it's cheaper for me to purchase a return flight ticket to New York and buy the camera while I'm there than it is for me to buy one from Amazon.co.uk. And I don't mean pennies cheaper; I did the briefest of searches for flights and found that I'd still save over £230 on the cost of the camera. Madness.
This is made more ridiculous by the fact that the D800 is 'only' £2204. Less than £250(12%) more for a camera two tiers above the D600. Surely Nikon have got to do something to sort this pricing out but I can't see myself making a purchase before they do.
This is how bad it is- it's cheaper for me to purchase a return flight ticket to New York and buy the camera while I'm there than it is for me to buy one from Amazon.co.uk. And I don't mean pennies cheaper; I did the briefest of searches for flights and found that I'd still save over £230 on the cost of the camera. Madness.
This is made more ridiculous by the fact that the D800 is 'only' £2204. Less than £250(12%) more for a camera two tiers above the D600. Surely Nikon have got to do something to sort this pricing out but I can't see myself making a purchase before they do.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)