Nikon D610 discussion

sevencrossing

lets take 2 Photographers both at the same age, experience and skill level
Equip Photographer one with a D70 and the old 80- 400
Equip Photographer two with a D7100 and the new 80 -400
send them off to cover a sporting event, in difficult conditions
the odds are, photographer two's results will be better than one's
Two has not become a better photographer, but his results will be better

kenadams

A seasoned pro golfer should be able to pick up any piece of sh*** driver and still be able to get a decent swing right.

Of course better gear is better. That's why it costs more. *All else equal*, better gear should produce better results, "all else equal" being the key words. But that was not the premise. It is not to say that bad/limited gear can't be used to great effect as well. The statement on the pages above was *not* about equally skilled photographers, *nor* was it about special purpose shots like macro. The bottom line was that a good photographer should be able to pick up a Holga or pinhole camera or even a cell phone and get something good out of that, possibly even better than some idiot toying around with a DSLR that is beyond his skill level, be that a D3200 or a D4.

spraynpray

A seasoned pro golfer should be able to pick up any piece of sh*** driver and still be able to get a decent swing right.

What's so hard to understand about this is beyond me, seriously. Of course better gear is better. That's why it costs more. *All else equal*, better gear should produce better results, "all else equal" being the key words. But that was not the premise. It is not to say that bad/limited gear can't be used to great effect as well. The statement on the pages above was *not* about equally skilled photographers, *nor* was it about special purpose shots like macro. The bottom line was that a good photographer should be able to pick up a Holga or pinhole camera or even a cell phone and get something good out of that, possibly even better than some idiot toying around with a DSLR that is beyond his skill level, be that a D3200 or a D4.

There is nothing hard to understand about this, I am agreeing with you on most of what you say although your post above misses the point.

To be clear: If we consider the range of subjects that a cell phone camera can be used for, they are OK, but for all of the very many others, they are not.

heartyfisher

LOL! why are we so darn off topic !

spraynpray

Whats the topic!? )

tc88

The bottom line was that a good photographer should be able to pick up a Holga or pinhole camera or even a cell phone and get something good out of that, possibly even better than some idiot toying around with a DSLR that is beyond his skill level, be that a D3200 or a D4.

Well if a good photographer is trying to compete against an idiot, I won't hold him highly at all.

Regarding golf, as sports, rules are generally set to remove any equipment advantages. A more appropriate example is baseball where corked bats are disallowed. It's because that can enable a hitter to hit better compared to a better player with regular bats.

If you watch those videos of top photographers playing around with toy cameras, you will notice that they all carry 1DX or D4 or other top cameras. Well if they can already take great photos with an old D1 like camera, why do they incur the expense and bother upgrading? The truth is that the bar of good photographs has also kept on raising, and what's good before may not be good enough now. A less experienced photographer with better equipment may very well take better pictures than them. Thus to maintain the edge, they have to have the top of the line equipment too.

Don't be fooled when they go take pictures with 1MP cameras. Those are called occasional gimmicks. If you submit the same pictures for publishing as a nobody, you won't get anywhere. A lof of name recognition and marketing go into it. And if their photography lifehood depends on the shot, you can bet they will pull out a top of the line camera instead of a camera phone.

This is really like an arms race. The quality of the soldiers is important, so is the quality of the equipment.

Now I have successfully transformed the topic from D610 to arms race.

Ade

Yet many of those same pros with D4s, D800s or 1DXs are abandoning them for consumer-grade mirrorless cameras. Which pretty much refutes your whole argument.

tc88

Yet many of those same pros with D4s, D800s or 1DXs are abandoning them for consumer-grade mirrorless cameras.

I don't know who those pros you are referring to, and how many is many. But we can agree to disagree.

Golf007sd

I come from the mind set that likes to believe when an enthusiast photographer gets their hands on a new equipment, their will be learning cure to grow threw. With each use their understanding of the gear will grow and eventually yield better and better results (same can be concluded about golf clubs and the arms race :P)

The amount of advancements in todays modern DSLR and lenses are at times not full capitalized by the enduser. This is true for me with my D4 as I'm sure it will be for those getting the upcoming D610 or other bodies currently available being used by You.

New bodies do open up doors for the photographer that in the past were harder to open. All one has to do is go open up their closet and see for themselves the bodies they have owned in the years past. In my closet I have one body (D7000) and 3 cell phone (Motorola Razor, original iPhone and IPhone 4). The D7000 still take great pictures, and all the phone can still make a call. But they have each served the purpose for me during the time need and now are collectable...except D7000 she still has great usage.

Ade

@tc88

Zack Arias did most of his work this summer with Fuji mirrorless cameras, even though he has many DSLRs and even a PhaseOne digital MF.

In July, Trey Ratcliff abandoned his D800 for a NEX-7.

I know Chase Jarvis tried out an Olympus OM-D as an alternative to his D4.

Brian Smith (the Pulitzer Prize winning photographer) had a beautiful exhibit this summer all shot with his NEX-7 and an old SLT, winning several (more) international awards along the way.

Even among those who are still using DSLRs, not all get the latest & greatest "to maintain the edge". David Hobby (strobist) still shoots his old D3 on assignments (not even a D3s). That's a six year old camera! He also loves his Fuji X100s.

Anyway, this whole "we must buy pro gear" mentality is one created by marketing departments. The D610 will not have a magic shutter button to transform you into a different photographer.

heartyfisher

"The D610 will not have a magic shutter button to transform you into a different photographer."

Of course it will ! if the D610 fits my style of photography and/or opens new areas of photography that i was never able to access due to the limitation of my mobile phone previous gear ;-) . ( Sigh I am getting sucked into this off topic thread !!! ) Choice is awesome.. and the mirrorless tools that we now have gives us more choice. a "photographer" is not one kind of beast but many different kinds that live in different niches. You cant expect an elephant to live on shrimp or a tiger to feed on grass. similarly our tools can and must be different. I do know a number of very competent photographers that have totally switched to Fuji. I know a photographer who is in the top 10 in my country that uses the Fuji mirrorless as part of his arsenal that includes MF and the D4 and D800 i think for him its replaced his DX systems ( WHERE IS THAT D400? ) dont look down on those Fujis the images that come from those awesome sensor rival/approach the Nikon FX cameras in general and beats them in some specific areas. They out perform all of the nikon dx sensors. If you had the choice wont you pick the optimal tool for the job?

PB_PM

@tc88

Zack Arias did most of his work this summer with Fuji mirrorless cameras, even though he has many DSLRs and even a PhaseOne digital MF.

In July, Trey Ratcliff abandoned his D800 for a NEX-7.

I know Chase Jarvis tried out an Olympus OM-D as an alternative to his D4.

Brian Smith (the Pulitzer Prize winning photographer) had a beautiful exhibit this summer all shot with his NEX-7 and an old SLT, winning several (more) international awards along the way.

Even among those who are still using DSLRs, not all get the latest & greatest "to maintain the edge". David Hobby (strobist) still shoots his old D3 on assignments (not even a D3s). That's a six year old camera! He also loves his Fuji X100s.

Anyway, this whole "we must buy pro gear" mentality is one created by marketing departments. The D610 will not have a magic shutter button to transform you into a different photographer.

Number one reason they dropped their bigger cameras is not because they don't like the output, but that they don't like the weight. Nothing more, nothing less. Almost all of them said the gear they dropped was better, but weight drove them to lower end gear. That is something I think any of us can understand.

Add that to the fact that having a mirrorless/large sensor compact camera is the "cool", trendy thing to do now days. Those guys are marketers first, photographers second, and they know where their bread is buttered. My bet is that of that group, half make more money selling tips to wannabe photographers than they ever have selling images. Not knocking them, because I also think most of them are good photographers (Ratcliff aside), just pointing out a likely truth.

Ade

If you had the choice wont you pick the optimal tool for the job?

Let's consider this idea for a moment then. What makes a camera "the optimal tool" for a job? I ask because for the typical consumer, the definition of "optimal tool" has been so warped by marketing.

E.g., there are people who refuse to buy a D800 because it has a pop-up flash. Pop-up flash! Surely, only "amateur" cameras have pop-up flashes, right? Crazy.

When the D7000 came out, many refuse to buy this camera because the ISO button is on the back of the camera, instead of the top. Oh my God, end of the world! Surely, ISO button in the back is an "amateur" layout, because "pros" would want it in the more convenient top position. Nevermind that the D3 had the same back button ISO. When the D7100 came out this was repeated again.

I see people around the net are already complaining that the new Nikon 1 AW1 has "only" 14 megapixels. Who would want to shoot with such low resolution?

Marketers create "must have" features to falsely differentiate their products. These differentiations have little to do with actual photography.

Marketers want you to believe you need one camera for "street" photography, a different camera for shooting wildlife, a third to do weddings, and yet a fourth camera for use in the studio. That's in addition to your 41-megapixel cell phone camera, which apparently is only good for taking selfies. Oh, yeah, now you need an underwater camera.

So when we start thinking which camera is "the optimal tool" for a job, we're really just falling into a marketing trap.

If/when the D610 comes out, it will have "features" and "specs" carefully created to preserve this false differentiation. None of those "features" or "specs" will make you a better photographer.

PB_PM

The fact that people buy cameras at all is just a marketing trap. Nobody needs a camera to survive. Enjoy life and get the camera you want, or that best fits the way you enjoy shooting, stop worrying about the rest.

Golf007sd

For the record, I like marketing. Without them a company cannot survive. It is up to the end user to be savvy enough to know what is hype and what is not. It is threw the process of ownership that we are able to share our knowledge with those seeking the same item. Case in point: the mega pixel marketing war. It is working; hence, I'm agreeing with Abe on that point.

If the D610 marketing team is able to put to rest the issues that the D600 has, then those seeking it to enter the FX/Full Frame D-SLR world should have their needs meet.

Oooh lastly, the least used equipment in my bag: my SB-700 flash....YMMV

MikeGunter

Hi all,

With the benefit of my, ah 'experience', I remember 'pro photographers' pooh poohing built in exposure meters, zoom lenses, and then auto-focus and TTL flash.

I went the other way, and I was glad I did.

But, and this is a big but, when you look to the horizon and see that new thing, don't look at the "thing", look at what kind of picture that 'think' will help you take or how much easier it will make your life in taking it.

My best,

Mike

tc88

Those guys are marketers first, photographers second.

Thanks for saying what I'm afraid to say.

there are people who refuse to buy a D800 because it has a pop-up flash.

That I agree with you is silly.

It is up to the end user to be savvy enough to know what is hype and what is not.

+1. If someone decides to upgrade to a particular model because he wants a faster AF and bigger coverage to track objects more reliably, because he wants FX sensors so that he can get less noise on night cityscapes, etc, and those are what's hamstringing him before, I would say then the upgrade is going to elevate him to produce better quality of photographs.

Now if one's objective is to capture the "puke art" that spraynpray mentioned that won some "award", a camera phone will do. But I have no interest in hanging something like that or the famous dollar store picture on my walls.

Benji2505

Not a big surprise. They only want to close the D600-dirt-on-sensor chapter. Why would Nikon develop a new camera? If there are changes it will be cosmetic. Maybe we see a new button

heartyfisher

Not a big surprise. They only want to close the D600-dirt-on-sensor chapter. Why would Nikon develop a new camera? If there are changes it will be cosmetic. Maybe we see a new button

A super sensor shake button ! When you press it you can feel that the whole camera vibrates!

PB_PM

Not a big surprise. They only want to close the D600-dirt-on-sensor chapter. Why would Nikon develop a new camera? If there are changes it will be cosmetic. Maybe we see a new button

A super sensor shake button ! When you press it you can feel that the whole camera vibrates!

Followed shortly by the sensor breaking...

donaldejose

Oh, I think Nikon will offer a package deal "modification" to the D600 which will include swapping in the newly designed parts if they fit so all of us with a D600 can pay some extra money and essentially have a D610.

kanuck

A little late sorry, but thanks a lot Squamish it was like being reunited with an old friend ^^

Some specs are starting to roll in on the new D610. They basically look the same with the problem areas such as spots on the censor being addressed. If this is the case, will anyone bite and obtain this updated version? I am curious how the sales on this item will be after numerous complaints from some D600 owners. I for one did not mind the D600 that I owned, I just preferred the build quality and additional options the D800e offered that's all.

PadrePhoto

I've been thinking about the D600/D610 upgrade. It seems very reasonable that Nikon will fix their oil spot issue but makes little sense to think they will limit the upgrade to just that. If Nikon wants to address this issue and yet keep enough distance from taking blame for the oil spots, it seems that making a larger upgrade will serve them better. Upgrading the AF and perhaps the shutter speed along with the 100% OK button would probably sell a lot of cameras; they might also increase the burst rate and the buffer size also though probably not as likely.

Everyone keeps talking about the D400 but couldn't it be just as likely that Nikon might choose to make the D610 to serve that purpose? It would be an awesome upgrade to the D300S. It would also free them up to boost the D800 to ensure its dominance over the 5DMarkIII thus being seen as proactive in the market and avoid the image of simply getting by on the past.

I've been using the old D7000, and it has served me well; I'd love to upgrade to the D600 but have held off because of the AF sensor issue. I don't like the buffer gimp of the D800 either. If Nikon doesn't fix the AF issue and do something about the buffer size I'll probably settle for buying a D700.

spraynpray

I put my dollar on the table back at the beginning of this thread and said the D610 upgrade would be just the problem fixed maybe with a small spec boost (to sweeten the pill or pique the interest) and it looks like that was right. It makes no sense for the marketeers to confuse their carefully constructed pyramid by moving it too close to the D800. I get the feeling that if the only difference became 24 Vs 36Mp, sales of the D800 would pretty much stop and I also reckon any other incremental improvements along the way would impact D800 sales.

@donaldjose: You keep saying that it isn't a badly designed part but it is simply an inadequately cleaned part - do you really think that Nikon are that inept? I don't. I would guess it was an inadequately tested design tweak to the shutter that was probably done to reduce costs in the first place which bit them on the bum.

It's all irrelevant now though, we just have to hope that they have the D610 spot-on......

sevencrossing

. I don't like the buffer gimp of the D800 either. .

This is a new one. I did not know the D800 had a GIMP (GNU Image Manipulation Program)

and do something about the buffer size I'll probably settle for buying a D700.

the buffer on the D800 is huge, but will fill up if you shoot 14 bit RAW and use a slow card

the D800 is a vastly superior camera, but I will happy sell you my D700, since I bought a d800 ( over a year ago) , it has only been used twice