john_mcclain

<p>I took the chance about 2 weeks ago on a refurb D600 from Adorama and I couldn't be happier! If you decide to go the refurb route, here are my tips:<br>

<br />1)Buy from an official Nikon seller - Adorama and B&H are my suggestions. Stay away from most ebay sellers!<br>

2)Pay close attention to your warranty. You really need to know how long you're covered<br>

3)Shoot many pictures at first. I'm talking 3,000 in your first couple days. This may produce oil/specks if your camera has that issue. I used the D600's intervalometer to shoot 3 sessions of 999 pics each to test my unit.<br>

4)If things all check out, you'll have gotten an awesome camera for a steal.</p>

<p>In all likelihood, almost all the affected D600's have been removed from circulation or repaired, but it is possible to still receive one. Do the appropriate testing early so that you don't have any nasty surprises later.</p>

<p>I just received my refurb D600 today. Initial testing shows about 2 dozen specks in the upper left corner of the frame. They are almost gone by f/11 and completely gone by f/8. I rarely shoot at f/8 or smaller. This is an issue certainly, but not a fatal issue. I will continue to use and clean the camera as needed until the warranty period draws near to the close. If needed, then I'll send it in.</p>

<p>Responding to OP. I can agree with your line of thinking here. I see both the D600 and the D800/e as two-for-one cameras. The DX crop mode of these cameras with their sensors' superb quality mean each can serve many purposes from sports to weddings. The issue, I think, is that Nikon may have believed more people would have this line of thinking. Unfortunately, it seems that people want is a dedicated DX camera rather than just being a feature of an FX camera.<br>

<br />Personally, I see it was a gateway into FX. If you're a DX shooter that gets a D600 for the crop mode, you may already own say a 50mm f/1.8 and give FX a try. Nikon knows you would fall in love and maybe make the shift to FX.<br>

<br />I hope all these D610 rumors are true because I plan on picking up a D600 for dirt cheap. I shoot with a D3/D700 setup and I can easily see a D600 weaseling its way into my bag.</p>

 

<p>deleted</p>

<p>Frank - Allow me to amend that. I mean during the ceremony. Of course there will always be guests snapping photos through any wedding day. The ceremony, however is mine alone to wander around without obstructions. Of course there will be the occasional guest that may stand up to get his/her shot and I'm okay with that but I would prefer not to shoot in that situation again. Its now in my contract. Wedding photography is a small sector of my business - my specialties are commercial photography and videography so I am choosy with my clients. Typically, I like to shoot ~12 weddings a year.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Slightly different situation but still related... I shot a wedding recently where many of the bride's family was moving around during the ceremony to take their own pictures. It was annoying for me as the paid photographer but the families didn't mind it. As the B&G were kissing, one of the "Uncle Bob's" stepped right in front of me and blocked my shot. I'm pretty tall at 6'3" so I captured an image that was mostly obstructed by this man's balded head. I showed the B&G later on in the day and explained that we would need to reshoot the kiss... something I've never had to do.<br>

<br />Lesson learned - I will show that picture to ALL future B&G's during their consultations and insist that I will not shoot if there are any Uncle Bob's walking around. <br>

<br />Take what you've experienced and learn from it. Best of luck!!</p>

<p>Yes, Nikon and Canon have sort of abandoned pro DX and this Sigma lens may seem silly to some. For me, the fast & constant aperture, decent wide zoom range, and the fact that its parfocal make this lens a winner for video on my GH2 with an adapter.</p>

<p>Hmm that is very interesting data for sure! Honestly, I felt it was a little bit of forced differentiation from usual website menus but hey if it works it works! I like your site and your work. You have a definite look to your work that remains consistent while still having variety. My one critique is the length of your pages. This may just be me but I'm not a big fan of very long pages that require so much scrolling. Is there any sort of feature within your analytics to show if visitors to your site scroll the entire length of each page?</p>

<p>For the most part I just bounce off the ceiling and/or walls to get some nice directional light but... when I do use a modifier I usually grab my Demb flip it. I use it mostly when the ceiling/wall is too far away to get nice coverage. Looks nicer on the flash than an index card and is very compact.</p>

<p>Steve-<br>

He wasn't sharing an opinion here... he was claiming it as fact. Again, I realize now that it was just a joke.</p>

<p>I know haha. I just have a problem solving addiction. If something intrigues me, I have an impulse to examine it to death. Only a waste of 20 minutes or so haha</p>

<p><i>Exciting 3/18/13 update: Moved from Nikon forum to photo.net's exciting new <A HREF="http://www.photo.net/casual-conversations-forum/"><b>Rumors/KR/Versus Forum</b></A>. Enjoy!</i></p>

<hr>

<p>I've long been a reader of Ken Rockwell's site strictly for his technical analysis of new cameras and lenses. Personally, I could care less about his ever-contradicting opinions on gear so I just skip those sections of his articles. One of the things that has always bothered me about his site is the photo of him using a left handed camera on his Home page. I've always assumed that he flipped the original correctly-oriented image for some random reason... but then I just happened to glance at his About page and found this:<br>

http://www.kenrockwell.com/about.htm#lefty<br>

He claims that Nikon considered production of a left handed F100 and gave him what seems to be a one of a kind prototype on permanent loan. Obviously, he knows that making such a claim is begging for naysayers so he welcomes readers to inspect a full resolution photo of him with the camera on his Contact page.</p>

<p>http://www.kenrockwell.com/contact.htm</p>

<p>On a quick glance of the photo I see that the Nikon logo on his flash is indeed correctly oriented and there is no wedding band on his ring finger. So, it appears that he could be telling the truth regarding wearing his watch on his right wrist and claiming he did not flip the image. BUT... I noticed something strange about his watch... it is upside down. I did a quick youtube search the first video I watched disproved him: http://youtu.be/MIYv7Xzvfz0</p>

<p>He clearly is wearing his watch on his left wrist. Its easy enough to fix the Nikon logo and remove his wedding ring in photoshop but his seems he had a little trouble correctly re-orienting his watch face.</p>

<p>I guess my question is... why? I seriously have an issue with people that flat out lie. I know that he has his little fun with his opinions but this seems to me to be a pointless lie. Any thoughts?</p>

<p>EDIT: Upon reading a little more I saw Ken mention putting African Elephant "phallus hide" on his D1h as a better grip. I should have known he was just being a piece of $#%!</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I'm gonna throw a monkey wrench into the equation haha. What if I consider getting a D600 while keeping my D700 and D3? It seems to be the wide spread opinion that the noise levels are about one stop better at high ISO's in the D600 when compared to the D3/D700. Combine that with a slightly higher MP count for cropping and awesome IQ as well. I might end up renting it first. If I like it, I may pick one up to supplement my current set up. Any thoughts?</p>

<p>Ralph, that is an excellent point that I never even thought of. I definitely will do my own testing to determine what's best for me. I'm very happy with the D3's noise performance at ISO6400 but need an extra stop of light. So, if the D800 can't give me the about same noise levels or better at ISO12,800, then the D3s it is!</p>

<p>Thank you for your response, Kenneth. This article is what got me thinking of the D800 over the D3s in the first place: http://www.sashdias.com/equipment-blog/nikon-d800-vs-d3s--iso.html The last comparison is the one that intrigued me. After downsizing to 12MP and noise reduction, the noise from the D800 looks nearly identical to that of the D3s with more detail to boot.</p>

<p>I never do noise reduction with my D3/D700 at ISO 6400 for sports but will do it for weddings. For the most part, 12MP is plenty for my print needs (in sports)so downsizing a batch of photos from 36MP would be no problem when necessary. Yes, I would have to add extra post-processing time into the D800 images to make them equal to the D3s but is that a deal breaker? No. I'd say about 80% of the time I'm shooting indoor sports I'm in good enough light that the D3 at ISO 6400 can handle it and I'm pleased with the results. The other 20% of the time I definitely need something better. I think I might be willing to have to add extra time behind the computer that 20% of the time with the D800 considering all of the added benefits that camera would add in other aspects of my photography. The added DR and higher resolution are features that I could utilize in my art prints, portraiture, and weddings for sure.</p>

<p>Not that price will be the end-all deciding factor, but it certainly contributes heavily to the equation. Is the added low-light performance of the D3s versus the D800 worth the extra $1200 or more? If the difference is anything less than a stop of quality ISO performance, then I say no.</p>

<p>Thanks everyone for your input! Weight has definitely shifted to the D3s side. I'm going to hold off for about a month or so to be sure and to feel out different deals. As it is, a used D3s in good condition is still more expensive than a new D800. Refurbished D800's are even less expensive. May end up renting a D800 and borrowing a D3s to do my own comparisons. Everyone shoots/post processes differently so I think it would be beneficial to see their differences when applied to my own work.</p>

<p>Hey everyone. I thought I would ask the forum this question that has been floating around my mind for a while. I'm a pretty non-specialized photographer, meaning I shoot just about anything. A large amount of my work is sports photography but this is not where I make most of my money. I also shoot weddings, portraits, events, concerts, all sorts. So, I guess you can say I have a diverse set of needs for my equipment.<br>

Currently, I shoot with a D3 and a D700. They obviously compliment each other perfectly due to the same sensor within them. I use the D3 as my primary sports body with the D700 as a second body usually with a super wide or mid zoom attached. For weddings, again the D3 takes the lead with the D700 as the second. For everything else I use the D700 primarily. <br>

Before going full frame I shot with a D300s/D90 setup. The low light capabilities of the D3/D700 were astounding when I first got them. To this day I still am amazed at some of the photos they can produce, but I am finding more and more that I require better low light performance for my photos. Dimly-lit gymnasiums and churches are the main reasons. So, I need to upgrade one of my cameras relatively soon.<br>

My thinking is this: the D3s is astounding in low light, we all know that. I have no problem shooting at ISO 6400 currently so I probably won't mind shooting at ISO 12,800 on the D3s. The body is exactly the same as my D3 so no learning curve there. And it still shoots at 12 MP so no additional hardware is needed to handle the files. At first, I thought this would be my clear winner for sports and weddings.<br>

Then I got to thinking about the D800... At first I thought that 36MP was overkill for a DSLR, especially for my needs. But there are little things I thought of: the D800 is supposedly about 1 stop better than the D3/D700 (usable 12,800 vs. 6400??) with better DR. The 36MP image when downsized to 12MP would be sharper than a native 12MP image. The DX crop mode would give me around 15MP which would be great for daylight field sports. The D800's video mode would make a great low-light camera for me ( I already have GH2's). <br>

I realize there are some compromises using the D800 as a sports camera like low framerate and huge file sizes. I would imagine that for sports I would only use it as a primary body when low light is an issue and as a second body all other times. For weddings, it would become my primary. Everything else will be a job to job decision for using the D3 or D800.<br>

<br />Based on all this, do you think the D800 would make a suitable replacement for my D700 and would satisfy my needs alongside my D3? Or would the D3s be a better choice? My thinking is the D800 would work, but I would love to hear your input. If I've left any info out that you'd like to know, please ask! Thanks for reading!!</p>

<p>Interesting that so many people are suggesting to keep the D70s versus upgrading. I think they may just be looking out for you and your wallet; $1200 is a very large amount of money for a 16 year old to spend. But, I think you should definitely upgrade. After 4 years of shooting with a camera that was already outdated, you will see a massive improvement in image quality not to mention ISO capabilities. You'll be able to shoot in lighting conditions you never have before, you'll have a faster frame rate to capture action, a more rugged body, better metering and white balance, better autofocus, and much higher resolution plus so much more.<br>

<br />A new camera body at this point is a very logical option. You will grow as a photographer with the D7100 for sure. A needless upgrade would be from the D7000 to the D7100. You, however, have probably exhausted the capabilities of the D70s to the point that it is holding you back. <br>

My advice is to talk it over with your parents and if you feel you can afford to spend that kind of money, GO FOR IT! You won't be disappointed.</p>

<p>With that setup I would say you're well equipped as a second shooter for a good portion of pro wedding photogs. The main issue is that you must have the skills to use that equipment effectively. Make sure you take the time to learn the ins and outs of your equipment before putting yourself out there for wedding work.</p>