Nikon Introduces the D610 DSLR

[Dieter Schaefer]

<p>Nevermind, Alex already covered what I wrote.</p>

[mike_halliwell]

<p>Who says the D610 shutter is oil spatter free?</p>

<p>Surely it's gone through the same testing as the D600's shutter....:-)?</p>

[Dieter Schaefer]

<blockquote>

<p>The D600 shutter should have NEVER been a weakness....I'm curious how it ever got into production?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Indeed - why isn't the same mirror box and shutter used in every FX camera? OK, I see that the D4 may need something beefier - but for the rest, "one size fits all" seems certainly more cost effective. </p>

<p>IIRC, then the Canon 1D3 issue wasn't one that Canon reacted on quickly - it took quite some doing by Rob Galbraith to get them to acknowledge it.</p>

[Landrum Kelly]

 

<blockquote>

<p>Who says the D610 shutter is oil spatter free?<br>

Surely it's gone through the same testing as the D600's shutter....:-)?</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Mike, I have a hunch that this new shutter mechanism has probably been tested more than any in the history of any camera. Nikon absolutely had to get it right this time--and they knew it.</p>

<p>--Lannie</p>

 

[ShunCheung]

<p>Alex Zepeda, no offense, since I am not a Nikon employee, I can speak freely and have no concerns about offending their customers: If you are so unhappy with what Nikon does but everything Canon does seems right to you, why don't you switch brands to Canon?</p>

<p>I do recall that when the 1D3 was current a few years ago, there were a lot of debates about its AF problems, on this site and on other sites. I remember that one thread (outside of photo.net, I think it was NatureScape) had some 1700+ posts. Needless to say, there were a lot of arguments and counter-arguments on whether there was any problem at all. For example, Jeff Spirer, a Canon user here, still denies that was any AF problem on the 1D3 to begin with.</p>

<p>I kind of doubt that the dust/oil issue is not resolved on the D610. However, I was fairly surprised that the D800 (maybe roughly 20% of them??) had this left AF issue, on an AF module that has been in used since the 2007 D3 and D300. Of course, naturally, the two I used had zero problems. And the D600's problems seem to come from nowhere. Who knows whether people will discover any new issues on the D610.</p>

<p>We'll see when the D610 becomes available.</p>

 

[sergio_ortega7]

Yeah, you can bet the D610 shutter will be oil free. So much so, we'll probably be reading about D610 shutter failures due to lack of lubricant in the not too

distant future.

[alex_zepeda]

<p>Shun the easy answer is: now that Nikon's deliberately tanked D600 resale value I'm not willing to take that kind of loss and switch systems. My D600 works well enough for me now, but I'm fearful of any future problems.</p>

<p>The more nuanced answer is that you're simply inferring things incorrectly. From my last post:</p>

<blockquote>

<p>My point is that problems in complex products aren't uncommon, yet not all companies treat their customers the way Nikon does. It's possible to do better, and Nikon ought to do better. Period.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>So not only am I acknowledging that the competition isn't perfect, I'm not singling out Canon. Fuji behaved in a similarly responsive way. And, you know what? So did Pentax. Yes, it takes a lot of teeth gnashing but eventually Canon, Fuji, and Pentax all managed to fall on their sword while Nikon continues to blame its customers. Here's what Pentax said about the same oil problems on their K-5:<br /> <br /> <a href="http://support.pentaximaging.com/node/1214">http://support.pentaximaging.com/node/1214</a></p>

<blockquote>

<p>We would like to express our heartfelt appreciation for your patronage of PENTAX products.<br /> <br /> <strong>We deeply regret</strong> that the first shipment of our PENTAX K-5 digital SLR camera included some products with a stained image sensor — a problem which <strong>we believe was caused during manufacturing</strong> — causing them to occasionally produce images with spots which look something like water drops, and which users cannot remove with ordinary cleaning methods.<br /> <br /> <strong>We sincerely apologize</strong> for any trouble and inconvenience this problem may have caused. We also promise to do all we can to achieve the highest level of quality control in the future, and eliminate any worries our customers might have about our products. We sincerely appreciate your kind understanding and cooperation regarding this issue.<br /> <br /> <strong>Please Note</strong>: All users of these defective products will receive free repair at our service center. <strong>To request a free UPS shipping label</strong> to use when sending your camera into our shop, please call our Customer Service Department at 1 800 877-0155 (for customers in the U.S. only).</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I went with the D600 because it was announced right before a trip, and I was excited to use my lenses with a full-frame field of view. I'm definitely eyeing Fuji's X system offerings, but I wasn't ready to divest my Nikon mount gear. I'm not happy with some of the compromises that Nikon's made in an effort to avoid cannibalizing their own products, but it functions well enough most of the time. The Sony sensor is nothing short of fantastic, and the rest of the camera is generally good enough.<br /> <br /> What I'm not happy about is how Nikon treats its customers. My hope is that Nikon will see enough pressure over this (and other issues) to reverse course. Maybe it takes more pressure than the competition, who knows. In the end though, with Nikon's aggressive vendor lock-in (XQD, DRM'd batteries, artificially depressed resale value, restricted parts access, proprietary RAW files and lens protocols, etc) they're reaping what they sow: an unhappy customer left with expensive alternatives.</p>

[bruce_brown]

<p>Fascinating Nikon. New shutter and a new model number. Some 'frames per second'. Good discussion about it all, but I doubt if it will change the stock numbers. Last January11th, Nikon was at 30.7 ... closed today at 17.22. Not bad if you have 8-10k invested ... now worth 4.5 t0 7.5k.... but hell, we've got a new shutter with no 'problems'. Maybe worth it. Loss seems small in comparison, eh? But, now if you serve on the board of a corporation or pension fund with, say, just short of 700million invested, and have the fiduciary responsibility to the Company, the Shareholders, and even, the Pension Fund ... you are likely less jovial about the increase in frames per second of the new D610. This product is a Nikon answer. It's Nikon Management. It's Nikon attitude. It's Nikon, thru and thru. Too bad.</p>

[shutterbud]

<p>I'm going to see if I can track down an NOS D700 at the end of the month. I might have some luck if I go into Shanghai. My feeling is that, given the IQ rating on DXO is the same as that of the sensor on the D7000, it is worth the upgrade to get a truly professional body, which is actually made right. Increased functionality, robustness of build, AF module, internal AF motor, shutter speed and hi ISO noise will keep me happy for a while.<br>

I can live with the 12MP from a body of such quality- one could argue it will help me discipline my framing. I am not willing to live with the feeling that I've spent 12,000 yuan on a fix for a botched job D600 which still has an unsatisfactory AF module, or been forced to by a D7100 because there's no replacement for the 300s.</p>

[panayotis_papadopoulos]

<p>The fact that Nikon USA calls D610 a successor to the D600 is kind of a joke. We ALL know why the D610 came out. I sympathize the owners of the D600 and I share their "anger" because of the devaluation within a year of the release of D600 original model.<br>

Also I am thinking all of those who will buy the D610, and about a year from now, they will see the real successor of the D600 in the market with a better AF system and EXPEED 4. Will they be complaining regarding the short life of their D610 and the devaluation? Well they should not...<br>

For me the whole story with the entry FX models of both Nikon and Canon was a big question mark. I really never understood why someone would invest in a "cheap" and "crippled" FX camera (a system that uses very expensive lenses as well). But I guess it was, and still is, the FX syndrome...Cheers!</p>

[Andrew Garrard]

<blockquote>What was wrong with the D700 shutter mechanism?</blockquote>

 

<p>The D700's one is rated to 150,000 exposures (unlike the D3's or D800's, but like the D600's). There's no quiet mode on the D700, and the D600's quiet mode is allegedly actually quiet, unlike the D800's. The D700 shutter can only do 5 fps without an external grip providing some extra power (I'm assuming that's not an artificial restriction). Nikon have been changing the mechanism, for better or worse. Still, I believe the problem with the D600 is likely less to do with the concept than with the manufacturing process, but that's a guess.</p>

 

<blockquote>I'm going to see if I can track down an NOS D700 at the end of the month. I might have some luck if I go into Shanghai. My feeling is that, given the IQ rating on DXO is the same as that of the sensor on the D7000, it is worth the upgrade to get a truly professional body, which is actually made right. Increased functionality, robustness of build, AF module, internal AF motor, shutter speed and hi ISO noise will keep me happy for a while.</blockquote>

 

<p>At high ISO, I'd say the D700 has a slight edge over a D7000. It's about a stop behind the D800 and D600. At low ISO, it has much worse dynamic range, unlike the D600/D800. It's slower than a D600, has longer mirror black-out (I believe), only has one card slot, weighs more, has no quiet mode and doesn't shoot video. I love my D700, and I plan to renew my relationship with it while my D800 is being cleaned, but there's no doubt that it's old technology. If you want what you're getting, good, but don't use rose-tinted lenses to look at it.</p>

 

<blockquote>The fact that Nikon USA calls D610 a successor to the D600 is kind of a joke.</blockquote>

 

<p>That seems unreasonable. You'd prefer them to sell them alongside each other? The D610 is a replacement for the D600 (I'm sure); is it an "upgrade"? Well, a bit. Porsche seem to do okay out of releasing tiny updates every year.<br />

<br />

Actually, it's a refreshing change. For the last few generations, Nikon have produced a lot of "replacement" cameras that have had people up in arms because they're a downgrade in some area. D3->D3s (low ISO dynamic range). D700->D800 (not fast enough). D700->D600 (AF not good enough, etc.) D7000->D7100 (buffer not big enough). Canon kept people very quiet with the 5D3 because it was, at least, not worse than the 5D2 in any area. The D610 is at least definitively not worse than the D600 in any way (that we've found yet).</p>

 

<blockquote>I really never understood why someone would invest in a "cheap" and "crippled" FX camera.</blockquote>

 

<p>Yes, for a long time my response to "we want a cheap FX body" was "it's not going to happen, because people won't be happy paying for an FX sensor and getting consumer handling and autofocus". To my surprise, Nikon released one anyway, and people complained about the consumer handling and autofocus. (I've not been following the 6D, but my feeling is that - to everyone not invested in shooting public lavatories - it's much more crippled relative to its big brother than the D600 is relative to the D800 - I'm surprised it's as capable as it was.) I'm grateful that I don't have to pay D4 money to get a D800, and I'm happy for the people who really want a D600/D610 that they're as cheap as they are, but it does seem like an odd compromise. Not that it should have resulted in oil on the sensor.</p>

 

<blockquote>Also I am thinking all of those who will buy the D610, and about a year from now, they will see the real successor of the D600 in the market with a better AF system and EXPEED 4.</blockquote>

 

<p>I'd be astonished if there wasn't a 51-point AF system in a D620 (or possibly D650; something I'm going to confuse with an early Canon, anyway) in the next couple of years. I'm also expecting a D4 refresh, because the 1Dx seems to have the headline features and Nikon aren't winning the "better AF system" race at the moment. Whether they do it with on-sensor phase detect is another matter. I'm not sure what this means for the D800, but frankly the D800 is not really designed for sports shooting anyway - or wouldn't be if a D600 variant had a decent AF module to replace it. (Speaking of which, does everyone remember when we <i>liked</i> the D7000's AF module? Okay, admittedly it was a bit less puny on a DX sensor.) Since an upgrade is not going to stop me enjoying shooting with my D800, I'm not currently planning to worry about it. And, obviously, Nikon have been known to astonish me before.<br />

<br />

Anyone deciding to wait for a D620 will get a better camera than the D610. The question is how many shots they'll miss while waiting. Cameras depreciate; it is known. If you want different behaviour, by a used Leica.<br />

<br />

When we've stopped complaining about oil, how long do you think it'll be before people want a cheap<i>er</i> full-frame camera? (I've seen a couple of these threads already.) Maybe there's a good reason for Nikon to do it, if they believe they can sell some expensive FX glass. Time to roll out the F75 molds gain, perhaps.<br />

<br />

While there were plenty of rumours about the D610, and I'm not holding my breath on a D300s successor at least until a D4 refresh, what really surprises me is that Nikon didn't refresh the D3200 (not that there's anything wrong with it). This might suggest that Nikon have realised they can't shift some of the cameras that are already on shelves... or it might be coincidence. Obviously a D7100 refresh with a bigger buffer ought to be on the cards, but I'll give them time to stew on that and hope they do a D3-style optional upgrade for existing owners. Now, if Nikon respond to the 100D, I'll be more interested, especially if they use my idea of collapsing the lens mount into the camera for storage (not likely, but it would be pleasing). Fun times.</p>

[Andrew Garrard]

<p>I've just had a look at Thom's summary of the initial responses to the D610. I take it back: Nikon <i>have</i> devalued the D600. Not for any justifiable reason (most D600s are probably fine, I'd buy one with impunity, the D610 is barely an improvement) but because Nikon have cunningly made a load of media sources which weren't currently talking about the oil spot issue bring it up again. Hopefully it'll be a short-term thing until it all blows over again.<br />

<br />

The good news is that it's not like there's much reason to sell your devalued D600 in order to get a D610. (If you got a D600 en route to a D800, well, it was going to devalue somewhat anyway.) Hang on and wait for it all to blow over, and hopefully things will settle. It doubt it will have done more damage than if you bought a D600 at launch and then watched the price tank during the pricing war against the 6D. If you were about to sell anyway, though, you have my sympathy. At least your D600 hasn't actually got worse in the meantime; it's still a perfectly good camera. If you're a retailer with a load of them on the shelves, though, I can understand why you'd not be very happy. I hope Nikon gave you some time to plan - but what I hear about the stock levels suggests that Nikon hasn't been all that good about letting retailers get rid of the old stuff before releasing the new. As a consumer, I'm very grateful to have got my V1 as cheaply as I did; as a retailer, I'm not surprised so many camera stores are struggling.</p>

[shutterbud]

<p>Thanks for the skinny on the D700's shortcomings.<br>

Maybe I should get the Leica 25/1.4 for my GX1 and leave off buying Nikon only if the body I want actually ever comes out.</p>

[c_watson1]

<p>"<em>In the last couple of years, Thom Hogan has reached a point that he complains about everything on every company, Nikon or otherwise. I have stopped reading his blog; I don't need all that negativity in my life</em>."</p>

<p>Any chance Hogan just might possibly be onto something? His D610 coverage discussed the problems the D600/D610 transition is creating for Nikon dealers--the people at the sharp end of the companies' "issues." It's a slant I've not seen elsewhere. It's not a small problem.</p>

[andylynn]

Will you guys never be happy? You wanted cheap FX and Nikon have you the D600. You wanted a way to ID a D600 with

a new shutter and Nikon gave you the D610. Now you're complaining because your D600s - which apparently are

working fine - are worth less were you to sell them used than they would have been if Nikon hadn't come out with a new

model?

 

That happens all the time. Ken R even wrote an article about it (google "digital rot"). If you want to avoid this sort of thing,

never buy new electronics, because the only device that's worth as much when you sell it as it was when you bought it is

an iPhone and that's only because of the artificial conditions that subsidized phones and two year contracts create. That

ad some lenses you can't get anymore. Your TV, your computer, your car and your computer lose value and there's

always a newer model being introduced.

 

Really, this camera is a D600 with a new shutter. That's all it's meant to be. Not a full version upgrade, just a 0.1. It's so

you can buy a D600 without worrying about sensor spots.

[RaymondC]

<p>Maybe some people see that their camera isn't worth much now with the D610 annoucement. </p>

<p>I keep my gear until it dies. My D70 still using it, just got the D600 3-4 months ago intend to keep it for 10yrs. But the more and more I think of it, after 10yrs it was maybe due to an upgrade but I could have delayed it for 3-5yrs and got used. Perhaps $900 ... FX. Needa get that 120 format film camera, have the film already when they canned the E100G wished I got a bit more of that stuff. Well going by history the 24-70 nano lens should be due for an upgrade soon surely within 3 or 5yrs too or even the D5 and so it carries on with its cycle. </p>

[michael_chuang1]

<p>"Any chance Hogan just might possibly be onto something?"<br>

Not 'round these parts. Canon, er, the orthodox position on that is a firm no. That said, I'm getting the strong impression that "Being Nikon means never having to say you're sorry." Or that's how too many decision makers (or a few insular but powerful jackasses) at Nikon view the world. Despite having no dog in the D600 fight (I don't own or want one), I am unimpressed by Nikon's handling of the associated problems.</p>

<p>The strong implication of "There is no systematic problem with the D600 shutter: all oil spot problems are one-off flukes or user failure to maintain sensor hygiene" in spite of reasonable evidence to the contrary is bad enough. Combine that with "Here is a new model that is essentially the D600 again, not that we're admitting anything was ever wrong with the D600" is kind of insulting. If there is truly no systematic D600 problem then stick to your guns and wait until the truly upgraded next iteration is ready. If there is a problem, albeit in a very small minority of all the D600's out there, then admit it and offer a solution to remedy the problem. Refusing to admit to the possibility of a real problem, then trotting out a quick fix to that officially nonexistent problem is the worst of possible responses.</p>

[chris_letts]

<p>Shun - I'd very seriously consider switching from Nikon to Canon for my next camera BUT like most others, I have a lot of money invested in lenses and accessories and I simply could not afford to change brands just like that.</p>

[edwardchen]

<blockquote>

<p>"Shun - I'd very seriously consider switching from Nikon to Canon for my next camera BUT like most others, I have a lot of money invested in lenses and accessories and I simply could not afford to change brands just like that."</p>

</blockquote>

<p><br /> <br />why switch? Use both. Get the best out of the two system. I did it. My life is at peace.</p>

[John Crowe]

<p>Nikon users should be pleased to have a 24 MP full frame camera with 6 fps capability available to them for under $2000 USD, regardless of the focus system.</p>

<p>I have had both a Canon DSLR and Nikon DSLR in the past, and I could see myself doing it again, but it is not ideal, and it could get expensive.</p>

[ilkka_nissila]

<p>Having two systems of cameras is problematic if you travel with your gear and photograph a variety of subjects. If you have lenses and cameras that only fit each other in certain combinations, then if one body fails, you lose access to some lenses with it. I think most would agree that carrying two Canon camera bodies and two Nikons to account for this possibility of failure is excessive.</p>

<p>Boy, is there a tempest in a teacup on this topic.</p>

[panayotis_papadopoulos]

<blockquote>

<p>That seems unreasonable. You'd prefer them to sell them alongside each other? The D610 is a replacement for the D600 (I'm sure); is it an "upgrade"? Well, a bit. Porsche seem to do okay out of releasing tiny updates every year.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>It doesn't seem unreasonable to me. And I don't consider the 610 as a replacement to the D600. The D610 is the model that the D600 should have been in the first place, if it was operating correctly. If people are happy with their D600 and 6D good for them. It's their money, their call...but don't tell me that Nikon released the D610 as an "upgrade" and a successor to the D600 since I am old enough to understand when someone is playing games with the consumers plus a Marketing person that has worked for many multinational companies. So I know how they work...Have a nice day!</p>

[ShunCheung]

<blockquote>

<p>Shun - I'd very seriously consider switching from Nikon to Canon for my next camera BUT like most others, I have a lot of money invested in lenses and accessories and I simply could not afford to change brands just like that.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Chris, for someone who is really unhappy with Nikon, and I think Alex Zepeda clearly falls into that category, you definitely should switch to another brand, and unless you go mirrorless, IMO Canon is really the only logical option. Of course that may involve selling a bunch of lenses, etc. But in these days with eBay, Craig's List, etc., it is much easier than it was 15, 20 years ago.</p>

<p>If you choose not to switch, you only have yourself to blame for any further dissatisfaction.</p>

<p>However, I am sure you find that "the other side" has its share of problems. You will realize it when you get there.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Boy, is there a tempest in a teacup on this topic.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>That seems to be what these web forums, inside and outside of photo.net, all about. :-)<br /><br />Clearly there are "lemon" D600 units, but plenty of them are working just fine or at most with minor dust issues. IMO part of the reason Nikon is moving to a D610 is to clear all the exaggerations and negativity that are now attached to the D600 from various web discussions. Naturally, some people think it is a great move and some don't.</p>

<p>I am actually surprised that so far, there doesn't seem to be any major problems attached to the D7100 yet. I have used two of them extensively and both are perfect. Let's see whether the D610 can steer clear from any major issues.</p>

[derek_thornton1]

<p>I bought a refurbished D600 for $1599.00 with one year warranty. The camera had 7 shots on it and at 4500 shots started getting dust. The dust could not be blown out so most likely stuck to oil type film. I wet cleaned and all is good so far. Personally, I love the camera. I am a little upset that it is pretty much worthless now but why should I care, I will have it to the end anyway. While everyone was whining about it I was getting great photos, and will continue to. I am not upset at all about the way Nikon handled this. However, Nikon has upset me greatly in there decision to stop selling parts. </p>

[andylynn]

Derek, I think "worthless" is an exaggeration. You paid $1600. If you listed it on eBay as, say, "Nikon D600 body, excellent

condition with clean sensor" I'm sure you'd net at least $1400. You'd have spent $200 to have a good camera you got

more than 4500 shots from.

 

For anybody who knows how to wet-clean a sensor, a D600 would be an amazing deal right now.