Torn between D600 and D800

Discussion in 'Nikon' started by dave_terry|1, Dec 26, 2012.

  1. Currently I own a D70s and an F6. It's clearly time to upgrade the digital, but I'm having a hard time deciding between the D600 and the D800. I have been kind of out of photography for a couple years, so it's like I'm a noob all over again. So I was hoping you folks could answer a few questions, to help me decide.
    1- I'm not sure if I really need the extra resolution of the D800. What would be the maximum size print you could easily (without a lot of time and PS expertise) make from a D600 file, vs a D800 file - I shoot mostly RAW, BTW. I ask because I like to print 13X19, but I will want to print larger in the future.
    2- I absolutely love shooting with my F6, everything about it is just perfect. I love the feel, the metering system, the look viewfinder, how quiet it is, everything. Do either of these cameras come close to that experience? If not, which digital camera comes the closest?
    Thanks for any help you can give me in making this decision.
    Dave
     
  2. Hi Dave. I have D600 and it's a great camera for the price. It would meet your needs just fine. My advice is to go to your local camera shop and try them both out to get a feel for the ergonomics. The D600 has been getting some good reviews. Can't go wrong with either. You may even consider a used D700 with low shutter count. There are still any around. Great camera for good price (just no video).
     
  3. MPIX is pretty popular site for processing prints. They print at 250 ppi. Here's a table on their site that
    gives the optimal and minimum resolution for a bunch of different print sizes,
    http://www.mpixpro.com/help/help.aspx?id=21#anchor_112.

    D600 native size is 6,016 × 4,016. That's about 24" x 16" optimal.
    D800 native size is 7,360 × 4,912. That's a little smaller than 30" x 20" optimal.

    Both can scale up to their largest print size, 45" x 30" and be well above their minimum.

    I'm not very familiar with SLR film cameras so I'm not sure how the F6 would compare to anything
    digital.

    Good luck.
    -- Wade
     
  4. First the issue of print size. The 24 MP of the D600 will let you print mural size prints. You will not find an advantage in more MP. Perhaps if you severely crop..... The work flow with the d800 is an issue.

    So check this out. The D800 uncompressed 14 bit NEF is 77.3 MB! Turn on the compression and it is a mere 38 MB. This requires a serious computer to sort out and a ton of storage. This compared to 36 MB and 20 MB respectably on the D600.

    The D600 is faster. 5.5 FPS versus 4 if I recall. It is lighter by a touch.

    All in all the D600 will be a major step up from the D70 and you will be amazed at the results. There may be an F6 on ebay soon.
     
  5. The D600's substantial resolution is going to make you giddy. Save the extra $, and sauce up your computing platform to make the workflow more enjoyable.
     
  6. Print size is a matter of mpix. Whatever people want to make you believe the more pixels the better print you can get, no discussion. All depends of the intent of the print, what the market it is meant for. Yes you can print a mural from a D600 but even a D800 file won't be enough if the viewer are supposed to view it at close range. If it's intended for far distance viewing it's ok and so was 35mm film, if it's for more intimate viewing you will need a large format camera. So You have to decide according to your needs.
    A more important concern for you now is the user interface of the camera. You mentioned you love the F6. The D800 will offer you the same interface while the D600 will be closer to what you are used to with the D70.
    Body speed is not only about fps, at 4 fps the D800 is no slouch, it's not a D4 but accept if you intend to shoot sports it won't be an issue. The D600 has a bit more fps but has a slower AF system meaning it will be slower at getting proper focus on moving subjects and slower at tracking them.
    In regards to work flow it is true that the larger files of the D800 requires more computer power. Honestly I have not seen any work flow downgrade on my MacBook Pro Retina Display since I upgraded from the D300 to the D800. So if you have a recent computer with enough RAM and storage the difference between the D600 and the D800 won't be an issue.
     
  7. Not sure I want to pixel peep too much, but you might want to check if your computer is capable in processing large/er RAW files from either of these rigs. If you're pedantic about your technique, you should be able to obtain really nice files from quality scanners (Imacon for instance).

    As to ergo, I'd go to a store and test these models first hand. Each new camera will have somewhat different feel....and we either adjust to it or not. I came from F2A and 25+ yrs of use and I adopted the D700 (instantly) as if there were no other rigs on the market. I liked the size over D3 and the flexibility. It produces large files, certainly in viewable mode on the wall....and I'd venture to say that even 40x60 is possible. But, I don't print that large nor I wish to have images this big....did I mention the cost of such print ? Several months back I printed a 16x20 shot that I took with the lowly 300/4.5...and the guy that printed told me that I had room to make it even bigger (below). Not trying to sell the D700 to you.

    I think the D600 and D800 can pull decent size enlargements with ease. For time being, and there are some resolution, price, etc. differences. The F6 is the last film camera (?) that Nikon produced before digital...and it appears that they adopted v. similar body type.
    Good luck in choosing.
    Les
    00bATT-510187684.JPG
     
  8. I have a 600 and 1/2 of an 800, like both. The AF system in the 800 is more responsive for fast moving subjects and covers a larger area, but the 600 is not bad. I don't have a F6 (envious), but I think I agree with the concept that using an F6 and D800 together would be a little more seamless, but using both an 800 and 600 at the same time is OK, also.
    If possible, try both in a store and go with the one you like better. If both are in front of me, I would pick up the 800..., I think, BUT,
    The 600 is faster(fps) and quieter and lighter.
    Photo output quality seems good on both, significantly better than my previous 12MP full frame Nikons. I have not made a direct comparison between the 600 and 800 files yet. Doubt that I could tell much difference if everything were set the same.
     
  9. Considering the OP's current digital is a D70s, and is basically starting over, why no recommendation of a D7000?
    Spend the extra money on glass. It is tough to be "basically a NOOB" and somebody hand you a D800.
    I have just seen the comparisons of the D5200 and the D600, I believe I am sticking with the crop sensor.
     
  10. My "humble" old 12Mp D700 prints excellent A3+ sized prints, while the D800 exceeds the capability of my printer and my pocket to print larger. In short the D600's resolution should be plenty for you. Spend the money saved on a lens or two to do justice to the camera body.
     
  11. Body speed is not only about fps, at 4 fps the D800 is no slouch, it's not a D4 but accept if you intend to shoot sports it won't be an issue. The D600 has a bit more fps but has a slower AF system meaning it will be slower at getting proper focus on moving subjects and slower at tracking them.​
    Ok. We are talking fast moving targets. The D600 shoots nearly 40% faster. That trumps the imperceptable difference in autofocus speed. If we are shooting these things we ought to be using autofocus tracking which is virtually the same. So give me 40% more frames to choose from. I will gladly put my D2H at 8 FPS against either one when it comes to capturing action. Do not discount the advantage of higher frame rate.
    There is an autofocus issue that made me pass by the D600. The area covered by the focus points is way too small.
    But we are forgetting that Dave is upgrading from a D70s. This will be an epic upgrade either way. As a D3X and D800 owner I would be remiss if I were telling a friend who is in the same situation as Dave that he/she ought to pony up the $1000.00 for the difference between the D600 and D800 unless they could tell me what features and why they need to spend that much money. Or not go with the D7000 as was pointed out. But if Money is no object to Dave then he should buy a D4.
     
  12. Dave, I shoot with the D800e 14bit RAW + Large JPEG. The RAW files, when converted to 16 bit TIFF are 200+ MB. The JPEG files are around 15MB on average. You'll have to upgrade your computer memory as well as the software for processing your RAW NEF's. DxO V8.xxx is what I use for RAW processing and makes the appropriate adjustments for CA, etc. You can always shoot at 1.5 crop(about 15MP, slots between 12MP and 16MP) or 12 bit if the size of the files are too much. As for the native print size, you're looking at 24x16 out of the camera jpg, at least this has been my experience. Good luck with either camera!
     
  13. Dave, either the D 600 or D 800 will work well for you. I have made 50 in prints from a D 300. And 20 x 30 and 24 x 36 in prints from my D 600. Getting great prints from a D 600 and D 800 will be more a function of using high quality lenses and good shooting techniques. Check out www.lensrentals.com for his list of recommended lenses for a D 800. For your pc, have a minimum of 8 GB RAM. More is better, like 16GB. Based on your F6 comments, I would go for the D 800, but the D 600 will get the job done. You can rent them first and try them out. Joe Smith
     
  14. Costco has the D600 package with the 24-85, 70-300 and wu-1b and case for $2,389.00 going now with free shipping
     
  15. I saw this same $2389 Costco deal in-store today.
     
  16. Great! Thanks for all the quick responses!
    I will be shooting mostly landscapes, possibly branching out into portraiture in the future. My computer is an iMac 27inch, with 1TB storage, and 12 GB RAM. I added PS CS5 a while ago (still haven't used it yet, but I am familiar with CS1 and CS2). I also just added LR4, and got the tutorial course at LL.
    My lenses, which all work with my F6, are all D lenses, and all have aperture rings. A couple zooms, a 16,24,50,110 macro. Zooms are a 24-85 (older one, w/out the VR), and an 80-400VR. I prefer primes for the convenience of setting hyperfocal.
    There's a kit at Costco right now on the D600, camera plus two lenses- 24-85VR, and 70-300VR, for $2389. A $900 discount, according to them. Being kit lenses, I know they aren't great, but I'm thinking I can sell the lenses on ebay to recoup some of the cost. Best Buy has the D600 with the 24-85 for $1999, which is makes it a free lens. I think this sale expires in a couple days. These sales are what rattled my cage to do this now, but then I started thinking maybe I should step up and get the D800 instead, even though it's not on sale.
    Affording either one is a bit of a stretch, so I'll probably go with the D600 kit. Anyone know how the 24-85 in the kit compares to the older non-VR one with the aperture ring that I already own?
    Thanks again, everyone.
     
  17. LOL. Two posts about the Costco deal while I was working on my follow-up post. Just shows you how long I take to post.
     
  18. I own D700 and D800. I will get a second D800 early next year. My recommendation to you is to rent both bodies, shoot what you typically shoot and see how you feel about each of them. Then make your decision based on your own personal experience. For my first D800, I rented it twice before I decide to buy it.
    My original plan was to sell my D700, but I love them as well, so not sure that will happen with them.
     
  19. The D800 feels more like your F6, although both cameras will be larger than your D70s, and will have lots of extra junk on them. Take that how your will.
    Assuming your machine isn't too bogged down, it sounds like you could handle the files from either camera and produce excellent large prints. With the D600 however, if will be more important that you do things like output sharpening. For the work you're describing either camera should produce the same results up to 16x20, with the difference being that the D800 files are larger, but require slightly less effort to produce a tack-sharp print. Regardless of the methods used, assuming you process both files the same, the D800 will be able to print 150% the size. That's also assuming your lenses have that resolution too.
    There's some other differences too, but honestly none of them really sound like they apply to you.
     
  20. If you ask then you know just enough to get into trouble. There's a print on the wall at South Coast Photographics. Its A0 size. it was taken with a D40 (6mp). And as they say, its all in the lens.
    Prices are easing for good used D700's at around $1400. Since I sold mine six months ago for $2600 I'm way ahead. There is moderate discounting of D600's. $2000 including a 24-85 VR. I would expect that Nikon has a bit too much stock. I'd wait a bit and see if D600 prices ease further.
    On the D800, forget it for action. Its a studio, portrait, landscape camera. And you'll need to get used to large files..the D600 files are big too. Its not so much storage...that's cheap...it's about cache, RAM and swap space. There is a recent thread on here about it a few days ago.
     
  21. If I were you I would look through the viewfinders of D600 & D800, and D700...cause I think you'll find that none will look as big and open as your F6. I have an F3 and F100 and D700, and to me, the D700 finder was the only one that came close...had a look through both D600 & D800 in a shop, compared with my D700, using same 50 1.4 AF-D, and they both felt more "cramped" to me.
    I really feel all the DSLR finders are second rate to the film bodies...never looked through an F6, but i'll bet it's fantastic . Good luck !
     
  22. I meant to add, save your dollars and get a nice D700... it's a fantastic camera, all the megapixels you'll ever need in the real world
     
  23. I will be shooting mostly landscapes, possibly branching out into portraiture in the future. My computer is an iMac 27inch, with 1TB storage, and 12 GB RAM. I added PS CS5 a while ago (still haven't used it yet, but I am familiar with CS1 and CS2). I also just added LR4, and got the tutorial course at LL.​
    I shot the D600 for one afternoon, processed some sample landscape shots, and then sent it back and got the D800E. If you buy the D600, you will forever wish that you had gotten the D800. The D600 was not noticeably better than my Canon 5D II had been, but the D800E definitely was better in terms of what I like to shoot.
    You clearly have plenty of computing power to handle the large files.
    The image quality of files from the D800E is absolutely stellar. You will not regret it. It is about as close as you could possibly get to medium format in 35mm. You will need good lenses for both cameras.
    --Lannie
     
  24. Dave, let me add something to what I said. Just saw a refurbed D800 (body) at around $2300 at Adorama. Not sure if this would be a deal breaker, but....just saying.
    Les
     
  25. As others have said, the D600 and D800 will give you the printing size power you need. My old D90 could make 13x19 prints easily. The key is the lenses you use. I have two D90 prints - one using an 18-200 dog of a lens (terribly soft), and one using a 16-85 (tack sharp...probably the best Nikon-branded DX zoom you can buy). That said, you should head to a camera store, check out both, and figure out the best lenses to use. I have a D800; the D600's focus points are just too cramped to the middle of the finder for my tastes.
    I again considered a D600, but bought a D700 as a backup about a month later for about $1600. It doesn't see any action unless I'm shooting action or just walking about in the city, but I really like having it around when I don't feel like dealing with those large D800 files. The D700 also has plenty of res for what you want to print, and you can get a nice one with low shutter count for much cheaper than what I paid. Even though it's a five year old camera, a D700 would be a HUGE upgrade from the D70 you have. You should consider all three of these smaller body FX models.
     
  26. I have always had Nikon pro bodies but this time I bought the D800e and use it for sports and it's perfectly fine. Don't believe those that tell you it's only a studio or landscape camera, they obviously haven't used one. I have only used my D3 once since I bought the D800e.
     
  27. Zooms are a 24-85 (older one, w/out the VR), and an 80-400VR...
    ...the D600, camera plus two lenses- 24-85VR, and 70-300VR... Being kit lenses, I know they aren't great...​
    Should you consider this offer on the D600, then a word on these lenses. They're not your "usual" kit lenses but more than a cut above it. I would not dismiss them too easily.
    Choosing between the old 24-85 and the new 24-85VR, I'd take the VR lens. It's better (and frankly, the old AF-D 24-85 is not that great). The 70-300VR versus the 80-400VR is something to try too; I don't think the 70-300VR is better but it's quite a bit smaller, it has a more advanced version VR and the autofocus probably is a bit faster than the 80-400VR. Different trade-offs, so to speak, but the 70-300VR is a completely different thing than the 70-300G and 70-300D of years ago.
    That D600 deal sounds really nice, in fact.
     
  28. I have always had Nikon pro bodies but this time I bought the D800e and use it for sports and it's perfectly fine. Don't believe those that tell you it's only a studio or landscape camera, they obviously haven't used one.​
    That is completely unfair and wrong. I own both the D800 and pro bodies. The faster frame rates are vastly superior for action sports. You can take great sports shots one at a time. You can take more and better ones 8 to the second.
    That is why virtually all pros who shoot fast moving sports use them and why Nikon can get tons of money for them.
     
  29. ShunCheung

    ShunCheung Administrator

    If you even need to ask whether you should get a D600 or D800, I would get a D600, but I would hold a D600 in your hands and make sure that you are comfortable with its controls. The D600 has the more amateur-grade controls similar to those on the D7000, D90, and D80. I personally prefer the controls on the D800, which is similar to the controls on the D300 and D700. However, I also have a D7000 and at least I have no problem switching among those bodies.
     
  30. Some people still seem to be confusing pixel numbers, image resolution and linear magnification. The D800 will not allow you to print 50% bigger than a D600. And likewise the 24mp D600 won't give you prints twice as big as a 12mp D700.
    For the same ppi print "resolution" a D600 can print 1.4x bigger than a D700, and a D800 can print 1.7x bigger. The print size differential between 24mp and 36mp is only 1.22, or 22% bigger. Factor in that most lenses will struggle to keep up with the pixel resolution of a D800, and the perceptible difference in print quality becomes almost negligible.
    BTW, I'd forget any comparison to the F6. Once you've seen what a camera like the D600 can do you'll probably never touch 35mm film again.
     
  31. As suggested above, why not look at the D7000? I have a hard time seeing why a D600 is worth 3x the discount price of a D7000, FX sensor transplant notwithstanding. Not sure what Nikon's up to with FX pricing. If they really want to sell FX, they'll have to do way better, value-wise, than the D600. Perhaps Dave should hold off and wait for a better price or a better entry level FX body. The IQ gap between a D70 and D7000 isn't subtle.
     
  32. Cameta Camera, as well as Adorama and others have the refurb D600 body for less than USD 1700.
     
  33. acm

    acm

    Dave, D800 it is, hands down. I have been using it for last 2 weeks and the image quality is mind blasting. View an image at 100% and you will be surprised at its sharpness. The "new" Nikon color balance here is also to my liking. Its superbly ergonomic and beautiful to look at. It has been externally designed by Italdesign Giugiaro, its a stylish machine. Forget everything and just go for it!
     
  34. Apurva - have you had a chance to compare D600 vs D800 ? I am curious to know if D600 comes close to D800 as D600 is what I am looking at too.
    I am coming from D7000 which still suffers from the backfocus issues for me :(
     
  35. BTW, I'd forget any comparison to the F6. Once you've seen what a camera like the D600 can do you'll probably never touch 35mm film again.​
    Unless of course you like shooting film, which many people still do. Especially F6 owners, I reckon. The D600 is digital and produces wonderful images, but it's toylike compared to the F6 in build, and the F6 has a higher max frame rate.
     
  36. acm

    acm

    Vikas, no, I haven't had a chance to shoot with D600. However I can tell you one thing. D800 is just fab. There are a lot of negative myths around the D800 like you can't hand hold, very large files, left focus issues etc. You definitely can handhold D800 at reasonable shutterspeeds if your shooting techniques like breath-holding are right. Files are a bit large- around 40 MB Lossless compressed 14 bit RAW and 20-25 MB large fine JPEGS. But one can get a 2 TB external hard drive very cheap these days and RAM is also cheap. The Left focus issues has been sorted out by Nikon and my copy is well after the cutoff serial number mentioned elsewhere on the net.
    By the way D7000 has the SAME pixel density as D800 so if you hand hold D7000 you definitely can with D800
     
  37. By the way D7000 has the SAME pixel density as D800 so if you hand hold D7000 you definitely can with D800​
    If the D7000 has the same pixel density as a D800, and If I pre plan for this situation, what advantage would there be going to a D800?
    Within my budget, apparently a little pre planning of photographs can save a lot of equipment dollars.
    I crop most photos somewhat anyways, please help me understand this. I do not like to buy expensive equipment for the sake of buying equipment. I want results and image quality at the best price.
     
  38. acm

    acm

    John, advantage of D800 over D7000 according to me is the Full Frame sensor which will give better isolation of subject (shallower DOF). Also D800 has much better dynamic range. And then of course there is this Cropping advantage, if you call it one.
     
  39. ShunCheung

    ShunCheung Administrator

    Actually the D7000's pixel density is slight higher than that on the D800. But the D800 has the advantage of a much larger sensor; that means:
    • more than twice as many pixels for larger prints
    • more room for down sampling to improve low-light results
    • compatibility with high-quality wide-angle lenses designed for FX
    • compatibility with PC-E lenses for landscape and architecture
    The D800 also has a better AF system, although I am also happy with the one on the D7000 and D600.
     
  40. Actually the D7000's pixel density is slight higher than that on the D800. But the D800 has the advantage of a much larger sensor; that means:
    • more than twice as many pixels for larger prints
    • more room for down sampling to improve low-light results
    • compatibility with high-quality wide-angle lenses designed for FX
    • compatibility with PC-E lenses for landscape and architecture
    The D800 also has a better AF system, although I am also happy with the one on the D7000 and D600.​
    The price differential of $2,000 between the D7000 and the D800 could be spent on lens. This would bring the capabilities of the D7000 very close to a D800, especially in the light gathering category. I guess my opinion is to invest in glass, not the body, if money is limited. My 105mm f1.8 lens from 1983 still WOW's me, even if only used on my D7000 body. [​IMG] I am in this for the long haul at the lowest overall investment. My photography skills need more effort than my spending skills!! LOL
     
  41. John, you're partly right about the light-gathering ability. If the OP had no Nikon lenses whatsoever, then $2,000 worth of glass would be a much better purchase. I have no idea what he owns right now, but if he already had an f/2.8 zoom of some sort and a 50 f/1.4, then there is absolutely nothing that $2,000 will give him in terms of light gathering, unless he chooses to spend half of it on one of those Voightlander f/.95s with a less-than-stellar reputation.
    Oh, or he could buy a manual 50 f/1.2. There's that too :)
    Either way ... if he doesn't like primes, than once he has an f/2.8 zoom, the lens part of the brightness conversation is basically over.
     
  42. Thanks Apurva. I really can't afford the additional 1200 dollars to get D800 instead of the D600 (with teh 24-85 lens available with 128GB SD card) as I am just a hobbyist ;) I know that's just my problem and no one can really help me there.
    One thing I do wonder is if the dust/oil issues of D600 will force Nikon to upgrade D600 to something else shortly and then I will be really mad at myself.
     
  43. acm

    acm

    Vikas,
    D600 with 24-85 has a real bargain offer going on with the lens thrown in practically for free. Grab it. I this D600 would be as fab and after all its the man behind the camera that matters. And Nikon wouldn't replace/upgrade D600 any time soon.
     
  44. @Apurva -
    Thanks.. I bit for the D600 from Adorama..
     
  45. "This would bring the capabilities of the D7000 very close to a D800"

    Not really. First of all, the D4 and D800 share Nikon's best AF system currently available. The D7000 does not. This made the choice easy for me.
    With regard to IQ, the IQ of the D800 far exceeds the IQ of the D7000 IF you are comparing apples to apples (meaning you are not comparing the full frame of the D7000 to the DX cropped frame of the D800).
    With regard to ergonomics, the D800 is far, far superior to that of the D7000. I have not used a D600 but did own the D7000 and was never happy with its size or controls. And it is missing numerous features a more advanced used would want.
    "You can take great sports shots one at a time. You can take more and better ones 8 to the second"

    You may get more but not necessarily better. 8fps is not fast enough for most fast action sports. In fact, even 11 fps is often too slow to capture 'the' moment for fast action sports. I am getting consistently better sports action shots one-at-a-time as opposed to what I got with my D3 at 11fps. But if I were shooting for pay, I would choose the camera with the fastest frame rate.
     
  46. ShunCheung

    ShunCheung Administrator

    The price differential of $2,000 between the D7000 and the D800 could be spent on lens. This would bring the capabilities of the D7000 very close to a D800,​
    So exactly which lens would you get for $2000 (or even more) to give the D7000 the same capability as the D800 can to use the 24mm/f3.5 PC-E lens for tilt and shift?
     
  47. So exactly which lens would you get for $2000 (or even more) to give the D7000 the same capability as the D800 can to use the 24mm/f3.5 PC-E lens for tilt and shift?​
    Nobody said "same". Spending all that money on a D800 today cuts into the money most people have for future purchases. If the D800 is a necessity today for making money, buy it. The OP said hobby. I am also a hobby picture taker. In that light, the D800 does not hold a candle to a D7000 and the camera I will get in 3 years with the money I have saved. Again, I am in this for the long haul. The Mayan calender end of the world did not happen. I was happy with a D70s and did not need a D80 or D90, which left me money for the D7000. With my frequency of buying cameras, my next purchase will be a 50mp crop body! LOL
     
  48. So I decided on the D600 kit at Costco.
    I went to the Costco near me, and when I tried to pay for it, I found out I couldn't use Visa. This is really stupid, because I went home to buy it online, and I can use Visa on their website. So I will have to wait a few days before I can try it out.
    Anyway, thanks for all the responses. It is much appreciated. I ended up choosing the D600 mostly because of cost. That and the lenses in the kit, since it seems like the 24-85VR is better than my current 24-85, and it's the lens I keep on the camera most of the time.
     
  49. Spending all that money on a D800 today cuts into the money most people have for future purchases. If the D800 is a necessity today for making money, buy it. The OP said hobby. I am also a hobby picture taker. In that light, the D800 does not hold a candle to a D7000 and the camera I will get in 3 years with the money I have saved. Again, I am in this for the long haul. The Mayan calender end of the world did not happen. I was happy with a D70s and did not need a D80 or D90, which left me money for the D7000. With my frequency of buying cameras, my next purchase will be a 50mp crop body! LOL​
    I disagree. I went from a D80 to the D800. The idea that the D800 has a 3 year life-cycle is incorrect. I can see myself using it in 10 years. The MP on it is just ridiculous and will be hard to beat for a while. It is also very well built. Unlike the cheaper Nikons. It reminds me more of an old F2 body in many ways than the newer D(whatever) bodies. And the shutter...dear lord, you can hear the quality in it. It is an almost pornographic sound it is so perfect.
    Yes, the D800 is 3x the price of the D7000. And the D7000 is a great camera. But the $2,000 you "save" isn't really a savings. You are actually getting more for that money. A lot more. Hell, it even has a PC socket! No more weird little hotshoe things! Under equal use, the D800 will outlast and outperform the D7000. And it will last me far more than 3 years.
    That said, you do make a good point in that there is no point in buying beyond what you need. I got to a point where my 6 year-old D80 wasn't keeping up with my work. My D800 should go to 10 years easily. Which, on a 3 year cycle = Well, what you would pay today in cheaper cameras.
    Of course I also have an F2 and two FT bodies and all the lenses I still keep around....
    Those were some solid cameras...
     

Share This Page