Comaparing the D7000 and D600 images

[jesus_zendejas]

<p>I currently am testing a D600 and have yet to decide if I will keep it or stay with the D7000. I have always been a happy D7000 user. I do like the FX since my studio setup will definitely take advantage of the extra space given of FF.<br>

I started to do test samples and with two different lens already the 50mm 1.8d and 24-70 2.8 the D600 images are more yellow in auto and and in incandescent WB. I have setup the settings the same i.e. ADL set to off ISO settings, A and E settings the same in manual mode etc..<br>

My results so far are not what I expected. I find the D7000 images more favorable. Either I have a bad copy or this is the difference between DX and FX. This is my first FX so can't really compare.<br>

Another thing that I noticed is that while shooting the d600 in cropped mode (for comparison) framing the shot at 99% identical to the D7000, the image from the D7000 looks closer. I didn't setup a tripod but I sat in a chair and positioned my elbows in the same location. <br>

<br />Any input on this will be greatly appreciated. I'm attaching the photostream from flickr click <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/91504024@N05/8363782692/in/photostream/">here </a></p>

 

[dave_wilson1]

I'm not sure I get it... What are you actually comparing. Just shoot in RAW and adjust later, or set your WB and other

image parameters manually. I don't see how this exhibits any real comparison to consider the results of.

[kohanmike]

<p>I also don't understand how a full frame camera makes that much of a difference to the space in a studio, I use a Dx camera and just choose the appropriate lens to make up the difference in focal length equivalency. In other words, to shoot a portrait with say 105mm on full frame, I use a zoom set at 70mm, to shoot a wider catalogue item with say a 35mm full frame, I use zoom set at 24mm on my Dx camera. Yes, the depth of field might be somewhat different, but not that it would make me go full frame.</p>

[Wouter Willemse]

<p>Sounds like you are comparing the effectiveness of the Auto White Balance.... not something I would read a lot into. Either shoot RAW, or make a custom white balance setting for your studio, and use that (or do both). And if you are comparing the shots on the cameras themselves, it might also be the LCD panel on the camera - those aren't colour calibrated, so differences may occur. Either way, it has got nothing to do with FX versus DX, in my view.</p>

<p>The difference in framing - the D600 viewfinder is not 100% in DX mode (only 100% in FX), while the D7000 is 100%. Minor difference can occur. Once you use either one of the two, the difference becomes of little importance, since you'll be working with one body at a time, instead of comparing them. So, in this case, do consider how you will actually use the D600 if you decide to get it - and judge it on its own mertis, rather than comparing it in everything to a D7000. In the end, the only thing that matters is whether the D600 offers a real advantage to you in day-to-day use.</p>

[elliot1]

<p><em>"</em><em>My results so far are not what I expected."</em> What were you expecting?<br>

<br>

The D7000 and D600 are essentially the same camera except for the DX/FX sensor size difference. The D7000 is already high in resolution. The D600 gives you a bit more. You essentially gain a much larger viewfinder with a bit more resolution. And lower noise levels at higher ISO (about a stop or so improvement) which should be the most noticeable improvement, but of course, shooting in studio would not reveal these advantages.<br>

<br>

According to the 'numbers' (DXOmark testing), there are slight differences in dynamic and color range, but the difference would be subtle, and minimal at base ISO.<br>

<br>

</p>

[ilkka_nissila]

<p><em>the D600 images are more yellow in auto and and in incandescent WB.</em></p>

<p>The camera doesn't decide what kind of color balance you get, it is <em>your</em> responsibility. You can do this by adjusting the white balance manually, changing the picture control modes, for JPG images and if you shoot RAW, you can make the colors what you like with great flexibility in the raw converter and image editing software.</p>

<p>Note also that the camera's display isn't well color corrected; you should use a computer with a calibrated display to evaluate the colors rather than the screen of the camera.</p>

<p><em>I noticed is that while shooting the d600 in cropped mode (for comparison) framing the shot at 99% identical to the D7000, the image from the D7000 looks closer.</em></p>

<p>I'm not sure what you mean; how close you are while taking the shot determines how the perspective (proportions) in the image look; the camera doesn't contribute to this. If you talk about framing, I would put the camera on a tripod and shooting a stationary subject rather than guessing. It is possible that the frame lines for DX mode aren't perfectly aligned/accurate, but they should be reasonably close.</p>

 

[ulrich_brandl]

<p>Hi, if you shoot from the same point and with the same lens, you get more objects in your frame in FX than in DX. The whole sensor area is used for calcuating the white balance. If you don't shoot an uniform area this might lead to different results in WB. At least a possible explanation for your observation.</p>

[jesus_zendejas]

Thanks for the feedback.

 

As far as the studio space goes. If I

keep this kit ill be selling everything

else that I own since I will be doing

studio only and currently my project will

be of the nursery for my newborn. The

difference 50mm on a dx vs fx is huge

in a small room. I won't have to go in

the closet to get a portrait of Mother

and baby on the rocking chair. With Fx

I can stand outside the closet plus

more. After that project is done ill

setup In the living room as always. I

will not be taking any gigs so I will

be working with two lens at most. The

50mm and 25-70.

 

For comparison I am aware the LCD

screen may not be calibrated or the

same. I Remember reading green tints

on them.

 

I compared the images on a calibrated

screen with an Xrite. The images of the

d600 look lighter and yellow and the

d7000 look darker and cooler.

 

The d7000 looks more of "what you see is what you get."

 

I just got the kit yesterday and I didn't

want to spend too much time

comparing IQ but I wanted to make

sure that I didn't have a bad d600

 

I really don't like comparing one tech to

another in such way since they have

different processors.

 

Ill continue testing in street photos and

setup the studio in the nursery and do

a custom white balance.

 

I will not always be shooting in the

studio so I want to make sure I have a

decent photo out of the camera.

 

I do process my photos but I try to limit it as much as possible unless I'm doing HDR or BnW.

[sem_svizec]

<p>> The camera doesn't decide what kind of color balance you get, it is <em>your</em> responsibility.<br>

If one sets WB manually. But with auto-WB you get what the camera guesstimates. Mind it is very difficult for the camera to decide whether it should "neutralise" a colour cast due to a coloured light-source or it should leave it as-is. Subject colour may mislead it, and mixed lightning is particularly challenging.<br>

I recall the Nikon auto-WB preference has been modified at one point so that it would tend less towards neutral white than it used to, so that for example golden-hour shots remain more yellowish. <br>

WB should be the same if set in temperature (K) or by shooting a preset manual. I'm not sure if the incandestent WB preset is a fixed temperature or something semi-auto. In any case, shooting a grey card or at least white paper for optional correction in post-processing is a helpful habit. </p>

[andylynn]

<p>If it's field of view from a 50mm lens you're concerned with, I have an inexpensive solution: get the 35mm DX lens. Don't worry about color balance. There's always variation from model to model and you have to do it yourself in post anyway if you want it perfect.</p>

[jesus_zendejas]

I currently have the 35 1.8dx but that is

going away too. I'm not too concerned

with the field of view. I prefer the

view I get with the FX.

 

I took some photos this morning before

sunrise and while looking at the LCD

the photos looked good. I got some

breakfast and afterwards I Fired up the camera again to

review them and now there are no

photos. I normally don't delete photos

on camera so I know I didn't delete

them by accident or format the card for

that matter.

 

Back to testing in a few hours.

[ShunCheung]

<p>Or you can shoot RAW and fine tune your white balance in post processing.</p>

<p>When I first used the D7000 a little over two years ago, I thought its auto WB had improved over that on the D300. That is especially obvious indoors. Generally speaking, the newer DSLRs such as the D7000, D600, and D800 are better than those from 4, 5 years ago such as the D700 and D300. But I always shoot RAW and usually adjust that later on, if necessary.</p>

[ann_overland]

<p>Always shoot RAW + jpeg. Even if you mainly use jpegs today, ten years from now you may want to go back to work on the RAW's from when your child was a baby.<br>

<br /> I cannot see a difference in color temperature in the two photos. But I do notice that the D600 photo is exposed a bit more than the D7000 photo.</p>

[ariel_s1]

<p>Jesus, instead of spending $2,000 on a D600 to get wider angle with your 50mm f/1.8, why not just spend under $200 to buy the 35mm f/1.8 for your D7000? Problem solved. Your solution to me of buying a camera just to match one of Nikon's cheaper lenses (if it's the f/1.8D, it's literally the cheapest lens that they produce) is like buying a transatlantic flight for the free peanuts; you're going about it all wrong. If you find yourself using the 50mm f/1.4 wide open or at f/2 on the D600, then that would be the time when you're finally seeing an advantage from DX to FX.</p>

<p>Your argument that you "aren't too concerned with the field of view" of a 35mm on DX completely contradicts your earlier posts. In fact, it looks to me like your grasping at straws, decided that you needed and FX camera, are trying to justify it to yourself, and were hoping that we'd agree with it. Especially, as you mention, that the D7000 images look better to you. Read this article, it's very enlightening:<br>

http://theonlinephotographer.typepad.com/the_online_photographer/2008/11/i-feel-vindicat.html<br>

Put your 35mm lens on your D7000, and you will find it equivalent to using the 50mm lens on the D600. The result in being able to use the extra space will be nigh-identical.</p>

<p>As for the color cast, as mentioned there are a few things. First of all, it could be that you are reviewing the photos on your LCD, which isn't a good idea. Second, don't be afraid to tweak white balance if needed. And third, as Shun mentions, and this is what I do, just shoot in RAW and use your favorite image editor to correctly set white balance and color space later. I light Adobe Lightroom 4, since it allows batch editing, so if I set the white balance on the first photo in a studio, as long as lighting doesn't change, I can just apply that setting immediately to all the photos in the session. If an individual photo needs a little tweaking, then adjusting the yellow/blue or green/magenta slider or using the dropper to readjust is trivial.</p>

[jesus_zendejas]

I think Ann Overland understands what

I failed to explain. Yes the D600 looks

a bit more exposed. For the sample

shots my wife looked more yellow and

her hair was brighter with the d600.

For the D7000 she looks more like her

skin tone and her hair is darker.

 

Ariel. Using the 35dx on the D7000 has

been a great investment. I could easily

get the 17-55 2.8 dx for a wider reach

when I go to a car shows. The 35 does a great job but sometimes I'm limited to

the space of the location indoor or

outdoor. I also have the sigma 10-

20mm but indoor shots I would have to

use the flash or use a higher iso. I don't

like using flash too much with cars and

people walking in the frame having a

longer exposure with a Lower ISo is

not ideal. I lost some good shots when

a person made it into the frame. I could

have waited another few minutes for

people to clear but it gets tiring.

 

Why I choose to upgrade from dx to fx

is because I enjoy landscape and I

have plans to make a calendar or maybe sell some prints down

the road and having more detail would

be ideal. That is at least one reason.

 

Lets forget the field of view lenses for

now and anything lens related.

 

I'm just trying to make sure the D600 is

working normal especially since the

photos magically disappeared from this

mornings walk about. I had 2 memory

cards so if one had an issue the other

should have saved the pictures as I

tested them before I walked out the

door.

 

I use LR to edit. So ill post another

sample once I do a strobe setup with a

custom white balance and the temp

that the Ab-800 are recommend to with

not modifiers with a raw and jpg.

 

When I tested the display model at

bestbuy the pictures looked great. Ill

also take the camera to best buy set

both cameras the same and use my sd

card and compare if its exposing

properly.

 

My concern is that the camera exposes

properly. I really don't want to spend

too much time fixing it post if the

camera is off to begin with such as over exposing or not recording the colors correctly.

[jesus_zendejas]

Update: I decided to look into D600 issues and I discovered that the d600 over exposes. I also found an article how one d600 was

damaged and the prong that pushes the aperture closed was bent. I shall check to see of if mine is bent. I did do my tests at 2.8 and 1.8

to get a feel of the bokeh from both cameras so maybe that's my issue. Ill update with more results.

[andylynn]

<p>Don't trust everything you read on the internet - one guy with more exposure than he expects doesn't mean a design flaw. You just need to try the camera in your usual situations, see whether exposure meets <em>your</em> expectations, and if it does not (and is consistently over) you can use the exposure fine tune in the menus (not sure how this is on a D600 but on a D800 it's Custom menu, item B6) to change the defaults.</p>

[dave_wilson1]

If you really want to know what's up, shoot in RAW on both cameras and do very specific, very specific, comparisons of

very specific characteristics that you wish to compare. Otherwise it is just speculation and more baloney to add to the

confusion. What do you want to test? Auto ISO, lens angle of view, metering, focus points, etc.... (yes I know how many times I wrote very specific, lol)

[jesus_zendejas]

<p>I have updated the flickr stream. Photos are still yellow and over exposed. I have also tested another lens and the 24-85 seems to render the exposure and wb more accurately.Maybe the problem is the nikon 24-70 2.8</p>

<p>I'm on my way to Best Buy to compare back to back with their display unit. <br /> Meanwhile here is the <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/91504024@N05/8363782692/in/photostream/">link </a></p>

[jesus_zendejas]

Alright. My trip to best buy was good. At least with the d600 and 24-85 display unit the pictures and histogram matched at almost 99%

with my d600 and 24-85.

 

The local stores didn't have a 24-70 so ill have to make a drive to another store to compare.

However taking the photo with my 24-70 the photo did look yellow and over exposed.

 

While this does not happen with my 50 1.8d and 24-85 I'm going to guess its the lens.

I uploaded anther photo to the Flickr stream.

 

I don't mind doing post if I shoot raw but lets think about it. Taking photos of a white dress and an egg and they look yellow on location my

first reaction is to adjust something.

 

Now imaging that I have the adapter that streams to my smartphone and I have a fancy setup and customer can print on location like a

photo booth and the people look yellow than that would not work.

 

I'm just trying to figure out what the problem is and if it can be fixed or simply exchange it. I want to make sure it's not me before I do

anything and so I can start enjoying the camera.

[andylynn]

<p>What you really need to do is get two of each DSLR that Nikon has made in the last 10 years and shoot exactly the same shot in several different exposure settings on each, then make a chart so you can establish a median and standard deviation for the white value and exposure of your camera and see if it falls outside some acceptable margin. (I don't know what that is, but I guess 1 standard dev is a good starting point.) Ask Ken Rockwell, he can tell you more about the math involved.</p>

<p>But, being serious. Looking at your shots on Flickr, I can't say that either version is "right" or "wrong" or that either of your cameras is broken or working. Remember, it's always been true that no two cameras will take the same shot and have them come out exactly the same - minor variation isn't a problem, it's just a thing that happens. You need to judge not whether your two cameras are <em>exactly the same</em> but whether both render images <em>that you like</em>. So long as the variation from what you like is minor you can adjust it in the fine tuning settings. Did you try the exposure fine tune on the D600? Did it have the effect you're looking for? How about dialing in a white balance trim?</p>

<p>Also, I see you're shooting in JPG. Remember that different camera models have different versions of the raw to JPG processor, and different conversion settings. You will of course see differences in the curves used, the treatment of highlights and shadows, and the color balance. This is not an error, it's normal.</p>

<p>If that were my D600 I'd probably dial in -1/3 in the exposure fine tune, shoot raw, and declare victory.</p>

<p>Now I can't see exposure info from the D7000. The D600 stuffed elephant was shot at 1/8, f/2.8, ISO 800. Was the D7000 shot the same? What exposure numbers do you need to use on the D600 to get an exposure you consider correct?</p>

[ann_overland]

<p>In the cafe shot, it looks as if the 24-70mm lens is causing a warmer color temperature, both in auto WB and in incandescent mode. It looks as if the newest 24-85mm lens is doing the better job regarding WB. A warmer color temperature would normally cause hightligts to blow faster than a cooler color temperature. That is why it is important to adjust WB even if you shoot raw. Maybe the newest lens is better because it is less contrasty than the 24-70mm?</p>

<p>In the nurcery shot I don't notice a warmer color temperture with the 24-70mm, only that the exposure is a bit different (lighter). I think that that could also be caused by more contrast in the 24-70mm lens.</p>

<p>The photo of the man is overexposed, I don't know what might have caused that. It could have been too much contrast. But I think that LR has underexposed the photo.</p>

<p>The 24-70mm is a FX lens, and I guess you would expect it to perform differently on a DX camera. In this case it seems to have performed better on the DX camera, according to you.</p>

[jesus_zendejas]

Andy- I do IT work and I understand that every electronic made works different. Slight color temp from one iPhone to another etc.

identical computers one over heats and one doesn't.

I have worked with imaging machines and have adjusted white balance input and color output for the printing. We have applied color

profiles. To have a constant end product. If one of my 50 machines looks or makes people look yellow I try to figure out what's wrong. I

swap parts out to resolve the issue. We do Xrite calibrations as well. If all else fails with calibrations then we exchange critical parts to

colors. (Camera board, lens, print head, ink, toner etc.)

 

When I saw my issue my trouble shooting mode kicked on.

I don't work on cameras but I work with them as my side job and hobby.

 

When my d7000 didn't over expose or cause pale people to look yellow with the same lens I assumed it was the d600

But now that only the d600 has this issue with the 24-70 seems to throw me off. Why only one combo and not the other in RAW?

 

Do you suggest I do a fine tuning each time I change a lens?

 

Anne- in the nursery I have the G.E. reveal bulbs. According to G.E. it filters out yellows to produce better light.

Maybe that's why in the nursery we don't see too much yellow variation but we do see the exposure difference.

Maybe this is how it is supposed to be.

In the cafe you can see both the warmer and exposure difference.

The man in stream does look over exposed and yellow. When Lightroom auto adjusted to -1.7 that is the same setting that the camera

shop person set the camera to. LR did adjust a few other things but i left it for comparison. Normally i would override the auto

adjustments. The camera store guy took two shots and the -1.7 made the next shot look normal in exposure but still yellow.

 

Ill be going to the local camera shop for comparison shots again. They have a 17-55 2.8 that we can test but not a 24-70.

If the 24-70 2.8 is supposed to over expose and give warmer colors the way it is with my d600 than ill live with that but if it is not I rather

exchange it than adjust 300+ photos of any event. I always try to get a good out of the camera shot. With minimal editing as possible.

Getting an over exposed shot when my Meter is centered is not what I would expect.

 

Doing studio work would make think I didn't meter the lights correctly and my custom white balance didn't work. Compensating one or

the other would drive me insane especially if I swapped out lens assuming its not the camera.

 

I changed my view on post editing. We make photos not take them. So even though I would normally do minor editing i now spend a few

minutes adjusting other areas such as saturation or something but only if I want a "creative look" to a photo.

 

The last few shots have Been shot in Raw and Manual in the stream.

[ann_overland]

<p>I wonder if anyone else is having these problems with the 24-70mm lens on a D600? Are there anyone out there that has to compensate for overexposure with this lens on a D600 on a regular basis?</p>

[jesus_zendejas]

For those who may be wondering my tests are inconclusive. Before driving 30 miles to the camera store I fine tuned Wb

and exposure. Played with it and reset the settings. I explained my concerns to the store employees and we tested two

d600 and my 24-70. With both employees they concluded my D600 was underexposing with no yellow tints. They did the

test and then after all testing I tested a d-800 I was testing for exposure and the meter was off by 1 stop. I didn't expect

identical metering results but once both cameras were manually put to the same exposure settings both photos looked

great.

 

When we tested my d-600 and two 24-70 the results remained the same. So if there is an issue it exists within the d600.

 

Doing controlled lighting in the studio nothing is under or over exposed. Colors looks nice with the K Wb set to the alien

bees 5600k with no modifiers.

 

Playing with low light window lighting in Matrix metering the camera does an awesome Job to pick up the whole scene

(bright scene). Doing spot metering in the same focus point it does an excellent job of what I see is what I get.

 

Maybe it is the sensor and the 24-70 working the way it should and I'm not used to it like with my previous DX cameras.

So overall matrix does an excellent job of exposing the picture. Adjusting in LR is not too bad.

 

With those results in mind I braved the cold windy Chicago weather and did my first street shoot with the camera.

 

I set to Program ISO 800 50mm 1.8d on purpose because I didn't wan to change settings for every photo braving the

wind.

 

Same results. Matrix metering over exposes and spot metering exposes properly. I looked at the photos in LR and sure

enough LR kept flashing the whites. Adjusting the exposure I'm getting -1.7 and highlights -xx and so on.

Matrix and spot metering a person made a big difference but that is to be expected but my matrix shot had the whole

scene very bright.

 

When I got home I color calibrated my monitor with the x-rite and started editing. I recovered the matrix metered photos

and I was happy. I made some single shot and 3-shot bracketed HDR with NIK Software and I was happy with them. The

camera does do a great job with the dynamic range.

 

So if I'm going to edit and do controlled lighting than my issue can be shrugged off but I'm planning on doing on the spot

prints and a photo booth setup for some parties. Maybe email the photos thru the iPad or whatever. Emailing or printing

an incorrectly exposed photo is not ideal. We don't want people looking like Casper.

 

Today I expect to take advantage of the sunny day and use the 24-70 for some architecture shots. I'm going to shoot

RAW and JPG and do some 3 Bracket shots for HDR.

 

Since I already have a dusty sensor if I'm not 100% I'm going To exchange it or upgrade to the D800. I loved the 9

bracket shots for HDR and the body alone is a better grip for me. Shooting at 1/125 since my strobes only go from 1/125

and 1/250 with the cyber commander shooting at 1/200 required some tinkering so that alone may persuade me to

change to d800.

 

Let's see what happens.