answers: 570

  1. anonym
    20.04.2019

    DON'T, WELL, CHOOSE BETWEEN d600 (610) AND d 7100 (LOADING) BECAUSE OF THE NUMBER OF FOCUSING POINTS - THE FULL BAD!

    Reply

    • Charles
      20.04.2019

      If it was paid out of your pocket - yes.
      And so ... does it matter what some strangers spend their ragged ones on?

      Reply

  2. Vit59
    07.05.2019

    Compare: https://fotosvs.jimdofree.com/
    Lens 16-85 camera Nikon 7100 and Lens 24-120 / 4 camera Nikon 600

    Reply

  3. Dima.
    20.08.2019

    Today I tested two cameras: d7100 and d600. I own one, I bought the second one on Avito. with the same camera settings and shooting conditions, we have the same picture for noise at high ISO.
    f8 iso 6400 Sigma 18-35 Lens

    Reply

    • Vitaly N
      20.08.2019

      Interesting comparison. I chose from 7100 and 610 in functionality. Well, the toad suggested a little.

      Reply

    • Alexey
      20.08.2019

      Well, did you see the difference yourself of these frames?

      Reply

    • Michael
      20.08.2019

      Noises are as if different. And the exposure of the shots is different (the left one is almost a step darker). Not very correct

      Reply

      • anonym
        21.08.2019

        So he, for sure, and set the same exposure. So to speak, for the purity of the experiment. And different shots came out ... Suddenly ...)))

        Reply

      • Michael
        21.08.2019

        No, the same. Not distinguish

        Reply

      • anonym
        21.08.2019

        Sarcasm?

        Reply

      • Alexey
        21.08.2019

        Irony, sarcasm?

        Reply

      • Michael
        21.08.2019

        Of course) The frames are very different

        Reply

    • anonym
      21.08.2019

      On the left photo some clumps of noise form a large grid. What is it?

      Reply

      • Michael
        21.08.2019

        Shumodav)

        Reply

      • Dima
        22.08.2019

        The noise cutter was turned off. on two cameras.

        Reply

      • Vitaly N
        22.08.2019

        D600 on the left?

        Reply

      • Michael
        22.08.2019

        Apparently someone (nikon) is not playing fair. After the noise, these artifacts just remain. Right, mind you, they are not

        Reply

      • Dima
        22.08.2019

        The test was primarily done for myself, so everything is honest and objective.
        I can do another, ask a topic
        Nuance: the picture from 600 is approximated (to compensate for the difference from the crop factor d7100) If this is not done, then the image seems less noisy and more voluminous.

        Reply

      • Michael
        22.08.2019

        Yes, I have no complaints) it is clear that for myself. And how close is it? Crop from the frame? The noises of the 7100 are very low, judging by the RAVs from the network, it may not lose much to the 600. Once I did a similar test with d300 and d750, the difference in noise was somewhere in the notch, but the matrix is ​​ancient there.

        Reply

      • Dima
        22.08.2019

        Michael, procedure: in the bridge I opened NEF Camera-Raw, saved as JPEG, opened it through the standard Win explorer, zoomed in, then a screenshot.

        I myself am surprised. for me, buying a D600 was hasty for me.

        Reply

      • Michael
        22.08.2019

        Yes, really weird. Although there is less noise on the left, it turned out to be darker. When testing, they try to achieve the same brightness of the final image. Some smart sites generally compare in their "equivalent" iso, because on different cameras, images with different brightness are obtained with theoretically the same exposure of frames.

        Reply

      • Michael
        22.08.2019

        By the way, here’s a clue about the noise reduction, perhaps) If you did not change the parameters in acr by default, then the noise reduction engine is not at 0. By default, camera raw slightly suppresses the brightness noise, almost all color and adds a bit of sharpness. Perhaps from here and artifacts. And the disconnected-enabled noise reduction on the acr camera does not see at all)

        Reply

      • Dima
        22.08.2019

        Michael, thank you for noticing: today I will redo the test, try to achieve the same brightness, check the noise reduction in the camera. Just in case, I will give a link to the RAVs. By the way, I did not find “stretching shadows”, the colors of which are not in the D7100, about which they write here on the D600.

        Reply

  4. Dmitriy
    21.08.2019

    Good afternoon, Arkady.
    Question about the use of dx lenses on fx cameras: if I understand correctly, when used in crop mode, the viewing angle and resolution of the picture decreases, but the dynamic range does not change? That is, we get a crop with DD full frame or am I mistaken?

    Reply

    • Vitaly N
      21.08.2019

      And why should it change then?

      Reply

      • Valery A.
        21.08.2019

        When using, for example, 35 / 1,8 DX on FX, we get only slightly darkened corners in the picture, however, an attempt to completely remove them with lightrum does not lead to 100% results - they are not uniform in light.

        Reply

      • Vitaly N
        21.08.2019

        Dmitry about crop mode. There will be no vignette.
        I suspect that the large megapixels of crop are a marketing step not only in the direction that everyone is thinking about. Which manufacturers need a crop with 6 MP but less noise than FF at high ISO?

        Reply

    • anonym
      21.08.2019

      You get dd crop with the same pixel size, because only part of the matrix and part of megapikes are used.

      Reply

      • Vitaly N
        21.08.2019

        And why is this dynamic range reduced? Is the matrix replaced by another?

        Reply

      • anonym
        21.08.2019

        Since only part of the matrix will be used.
        If you do not use a part of the sensor, does your electrician change? )
        The answer is yes.
        The difference is not global, exactly the same as that of crop and ff sensor made by one of those processes and with one pixel size.

        Reply

      • Vitaly N
        21.08.2019

        Does not change. The processor simply does not read information from the unnecessary part. When you sprinkle photos on your computer, does DD also change? Or do you have a low DD photo center?

        Reply

      • anonym
        21.08.2019

        You, as usual, confuse all theories in a heap.
        When the sensor reads ALL information from the entire area, one signal level is obtained.
        When reading partial information, it is different.
        Can you handle the translation?
        You DO lose dynamic range when you lose half the pixels. Dynamic range is not just the max brightness to the darkest tones that are possible to record. Dynamic range has a quality to it. And only using half the pixels means you hit the quality limit less deep into the shadows than if you had twice as many and used those to average out the noise.
        Photoshop does the cropping AFTER getting all the information, if you understand what you are talking about and are not identical to shooting in crop mode.

        Try to understand the topic first and then speak)

        Reply

      • Vitaly N
        21.08.2019

        And you can link to the source, according to how it seems to be said about resize, not crop. And especially about the cropping of one matrix.

        Reply

      • Vitaly N
        21.08.2019

        Or is it the same article where noises of completely different matrices are compared, such as proving that size does not matter?

        Reply

      • Vitaly N
        21.08.2019

        And by the way, when else am I confused? When did you prove the truism that the focal length does not depend on the size of the matrix or something else?

        Reply

      • anonym
        21.08.2019

        Try to re-read the written in foreign) can understand? Although xs ..
        The rest of your fantasies are not interesting to me)

        Reply

      • Vitaly N
        21.08.2019

        Provide a link to the entire article, but not a fragment you like about the effect of reducing the number of pixels on noise reduction. Well, proofs with measurements are possible, but not someone’s speculation.

        Reply

      • Novel
        21.08.2019

        And this is not an article. This is just an opinion. Some of the same Wasya (in this case Andrew) blurted out some garbage.

        The entire matrix works at the hardware level, the image is placed into a buffer, then the central part is bite out of the already formed image and recorded in RAW. Everything. What does dynamic range and noise have to do with it? Well, I still accept the thesis about increasing the grain of noise, but DD ... The characteristics of the matrix are the same. The image is the same. Crop is still the same software, only at a lower level.

        “Dynamic range quality”. Warm tube noise, yeah.

        Reply

      • Novel
        21.08.2019

        https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3960947 - here is the link, if anyone is not interested. Comment below on the thread.

        Reply

      • Vitaly N
        21.08.2019

        Mda Someone really thought something smart wrote. And here is the level of warm tube sound along heated wires in the right direction.

        Reply

      • anonym
        21.08.2019

        At the hardware level, the entire matrix does not work in this case.
        This is exactly the same case as in kenon which solved the problem of overheating the sensor in 4k by crop and reducing the heating area.
        Following your logic, the speed of work in the crop mode should not be higher, but even less, since the percent will be busy with cutting, while in reality in the crop mode the speed is higher - there is no need to read the entire matrix.
        Reading the entire matrix and recalculating to a smaller size make cameras usually for video, this is a different story.

        Reply

      • anonym
        21.08.2019

        I see no reason to argue.
        This question has been known since Nikon d2x and d800. Just take a photo in ff, then in crop mode and check the stock in the shadows.

        Reply

      • Vitaly N
        21.08.2019

        There in the comments there is some truth, but it refers specifically to resize, in which there may be a decrease in DD depending on the picture.
        And for some reason many people don’t think about the fact that banal switching from 14 to 12 bits reduces DD by 4! times.
        And what we ourselves do in the editors, pulling out shadows and overexposures - again, we reduce the DD.

        Reply

      • anonym
        22.08.2019

        Obvious facts that contradict what the novel and vital N. claim.
        1. Matrices with the same process and pixel size but different area should have identical dd if information is read only from the pixel.
        Factcheck: incorrect, crop matrix always has worse dd and higher noise. Those. information is read from the area too.
        2. The ff matrix in crop mode reads the entire area (that is, it forms a rab in the buffer) and then cuts out the crop region.
        Fact check: wrong. Because this should slow down serial shooting, the crop mode increases it, i.e. part of the matrix is ​​simply not read, which significantly increases the speed of serial shooting.

        How noticeable is the loss of dd in crop mode? For example, d800 was intentionally 0.5ev. Which quite fits into the difference between d7000 / d5100 and d800, there is one of those process of exmore matrices with almost the same pixel, it is difficult to notice without laboratory tests but nevertheless, it is)

        Just the facts, whether they like the sofa gurus or not, they will not change. )

        Reply

      • Vitaly N
        22.08.2019

        Where is it intended? Facts and proofs, not clippings are not clear whose words. And again, you compare different matrices with different processors from different cameras.

        Reply

      • Vitaly N
        22.08.2019

        And item 2 - where they read it, none of us wrote about it. Did you invent it yourself?
        And according to claim 1 - there is a well-known photographer with the nickname Yulyasha, who uses a crop of 7100-7200 because of a higher DD compared to FF, while having 800E and 810. What does not fit again? Read less of the bourgeois press, the well-known name of the forum does not mean the absence of delirium. And the post you quoted on the same topic has been repeatedly refuted, but you didn't like it along the way. Or just didn't read further ...

        Reply

      • Vitaly N
        22.08.2019

        I saw Roman wrote about the buffer. Although perhaps he had in mind the matrix buffer, not the camera. Information from the matrix cannot be transmitted instantly, therefore the matrix has its own buffer. In principle, it would not be needed when using only a mechanical shutter, but when shooting video, electronic is used.

        Reply

      • Vitaly N
        22.08.2019

        And at the expense of the D800 and D7000 process technology - the difference is 2! years, what is the same process technology?

        Reply

      • Novel
        22.08.2019

        An anonymous user can say anything to me. It can even give me links to quotes from the same anonymous users like Andrew2 with dpreview. That the earth is square or flat or the moon is made of cheese. Arguing. Articles, links to developer interviews, something else, besides the opinions of anonymous authors - I will gladly correct the gaps in my knowledge and acknowledge your innocence.

        1. Dynamic range, by definition, is the ratio between the minimum and maximum signal level. The matrix turned on, the photons hit the sensor, the photodiode under the filter converted the received photons to voltage, the op amp amplified them, ADC converted it to a digital signal, and placed it in the buffer. Everything. At least one pixel you choose, at least all at once - DD from this does not change. The DD of the entire matrix is ​​the average DD of each of its elements.
        What do you read from the area and how it affects the DD I don’t know. DD and NR are determined by the technological process, the size of the photosensitive element (and, accordingly, the density of their placement on the matrix). Naturally, the 24MP crop matrix will be worse than the 24MP FF matrix - the pixels are smaller. All things being equal, I note.

        2. Blah blah blah. I need proof, the word factcheck is not enough. Burst speed intent on RAW or JPEG? Even when working in RAW, there will be a difference - you need to save a lot of data from the buffer. And for JPEG it is also possible to process this larger amount of data - debayering, color correction, compression. Even high software ISO is also a load on the processor, you need to multiply all the values ​​obtained by a factor. So the question “at what stage does the crop occur” remains open. Moreover, the question remains open as to how turning off a part of the pixels affects the DD of the rest of the matrix.

        “It’s difficult to measure without laboratory tests” - a sect of lovers of warm lamp color, somewhere in the forest.

        Reply

      • Novel
        22.08.2019

        Vitaly N, well, yes, the digitized values ​​must be stored somewhere, so some kind of buffer is immediately behind the matrix. From it there is a selection. It’s easier to sprinkle there, reading only part of the buffer, than to make a complex switch of part of the matrix of an irregular shape.

        Reply

      • anonym
        22.08.2019

        Vitaly N, you post as usual without understanding what.
        Those process on the fab changes every 4-7 years, it is very, very expensive.
        And many matrices during this time are made according to the identical process.
        In general, before you flood at least a little familiar with the topic).

        Dedicated to Fluders and “gurus”:
        About the delusions of cutting in the buffer.
        Prots does not work in a spherical vacuum.
        He needs to put, for example, at d800 data at 70mb in the buffer, there they should be trimmed and passed on. Did you try to do this on the desktop? ))) But the percent of the camera is much slower! And this operation speeds up (!), Following the strange logic of flooders, freeing up the buffer due to which the camera starts to work faster. Enchanting nonsense and misunderstanding of how the carcass generally works)

        Reply

      • Novel
        22.08.2019

        The DMA (direct memory access) technology widget is 100 years old at lunchtime and absolutely nothing prevents the matrix with the strapping from placing the read data into the memory, regardless of the camera’s processor, and only having to select them. And in DX-mode, choose in a cycle with another step.

        Reply

      • Vitaly N
        22.08.2019

        Proof or do you know who?
        Did they tell you a secret in Sony or did you invent it yourself?

        Reply

      • Vitaly N
        22.08.2019

        Roman, I won’t be surprised if he quoted his own post from that forum :)

        Reply

      • Novel
        22.08.2019

        You generally do not leave the main topic, these are details and particulars.

        Even if we assume that at the physical level, part of the matrix does not read the signal and does not transmit it, how does this affect its DD? How in such a cunning way does ALL image and NOT ALL image change sensitivity in shadows or in lights or does DD compression? This already resembles a holographic principle or some kind of esotericism.

        Reply

      • Novel
        22.08.2019

        > Have you tried this on your desktop?

        On the desktop, by the way, this happens regularly. You put a portion of data in the memory of the video card, triangles and textures, she rendered them herself, calculated them, put them in the output area, and from there these data are sent to the output at a certain frequency so that the monique takes them.

        The sound adapter was given a block of data so as not to jerk at it 48 times per second, he himself took it from memory and reproduces it. And if smart, it’s also from different areas of memory, and even he mixes and applies the effects himself.

        Reply

      • Vitaly N
        22.08.2019

        Roman recalled an anecdote: "The worse you do at school, the more miracles around you in adulthood." Just right for an anonymous person :)

        Reply

      • anonym
        22.08.2019

        Insanity grew stronger)
        What is surprising is not a misunderstanding of the basic processes, but aplomb and insistence on outright delirium.
        Roman, well, what are the triangles and textures in the raster image in xxxxx?
        Reading data from the sensor is just an array of data with coordinates, this is for you for a very simplified understanding.
        The sound here is generally out of place like many other processes, you interfere with a bunch of people, horses)
        Further - the camera has one percent, except we do not consider it, the desktop video card has its own percent, etc.
        And the poor carcass has a percent with passive cooling for those processes of 2005, a buffer and a memory card, for your understanding, the buffer is RAM and this is not ddr4)))

        Further. Percent receiving an array of data from a large area more efficiently subtracts noise, improves signal-to-noise ratio - increases dd in the shadows. It's simple. Therefore, all other things being equal, ff is always better than the dd crop.

        Reply

      • anonym
        22.08.2019

        Now let's take a comp sample of the output of d800 ha light, and twist there the 70mb files equal to 36mp for the subsequent buffer cutting. It takes tens of seconds per 1 file)))
        At 1, Karl! Everyone who worked with d800 and more pixel carcasses knows this.
        But theorists on the couch do this circumcision in the spherical buffer of the spherical d800 in a split second! On the process is many times weaker than the desktop)))).

        Reply

      • Vitaly N
        22.08.2019

        Now explain to yourself how such a slow processor in the carcass manages to take several frames per second, while also processing and converting to jeep? When does the same operation on a computer take much longer?

        Reply

      • anonym
        22.08.2019

        Vitaly N, with the joke I completely agree.
        Judging by your knowledge shown, you are very self-critical. Well, your pearl about those process and 2 years we have now hung on a board in the office)

        In principle, this discussion perfectly shows the level of specialists in Ukraine, which is very disappointing. They spanked manegers, secretaries and sellers, lowered their education to the plinth and got what they got, there are no sensible engineers, a screwdriver assembly with solid imports and cheap wages.
        But how much aplomb, children's insults.
        It is necessary to grow up, to learn the mat part.

        Reply

      • anonym
        22.08.2019

        Vitaly N, of course I can paint the specifics of risc and cisc in order to eliminate basic illiteracy, but why?
        You have once again confirmed your complete misunderstanding of the topic with your question.
        If you are really interested, try to start studying at a university in a specialized faculty.

        Reply

      • Vitaly N
        22.08.2019

        Can you even imagine the data transfer rate of the buffer memory? And what is DDR? In processors, the cache does not have DDR4 or even 5, but for some reason the speed is much higher. Laugh further at yourself with the whole office.

        Reply

      • Vitaly N
        22.08.2019

        Well, yes, only you yourself with the type of clever look write posts that contradict yourself. Sew on.

        Reply

      • anonym
        22.08.2019

        Yes, yes, a huge cache in the carcass and ddr9 for the buffer))
        It's like

        Waves falling down by a swift jack

        For reference, the data transmission channel of the d800 simply could not cope with the 36MP array, so the data had to be compressed (!), Which led to tonal color loss and all that followed.

        Reply

      • Vitaly N
        22.08.2019

        I mentioned DDR for a reason ... Do you even know other types of memory, mentioning processor architecture with a clever look? You are that couch theorist who throws smart words, but compromises yourself with every post. You have not yet provided ANY evidence of a drop in DD in crop mode, except for forum tales.

        Reply

      • Novel
        22.08.2019

        > And now take a sample computer of the d800 ha light output, and rotate the files there 70mb equal to 36mp for subsequent buffer clipping. It takes tens of seconds for 1 file

        So what? Specialized solutions always outperform common tasks of their type. The GPU threshes its data at speeds that the CPU never dreamed of. And the camera processor is a bunch of specialized processors inside.

        In short, apart from cheap show-offs and general phrases, I did not get any specifics from you. Come with links, then we'll talk.

        Reply

      • Novel
        23.08.2019

        > For reference - the data transmission channel of the d800 simply could not cope with the 36MP array, so the data had to be compressed (!), Which led to tonal color loss and all that followed.

        Here again. Which channel? At what stage is the compression? Judging by the "all the consequences" - lossy compression. Are you talking about 12-bit RAW files instead of 14-bit? About compressing RAW files? Anything else? Just another crazy unverifiable fact? Forum bikes?

        Reply

      • Arkady Shapoval
        23.08.2019

        Everything there was very cunning and not corny. During processing, the data at one stage of processing lost bitness, and at the second stage, the bitness rose again to hide losses, dithering and something else were used. Once I read the analysis of the program code of this all the fun. Live and learn.

        Reply

      • Michael
        23.08.2019

        Arkady, was it only on the d800, or did subsequent models (810,850) also suffer from this?

        Reply

      • Arkady Shapoval
        23.08.2019

        D800 / 800E

        Reply

      • Michael
        23.08.2019

        Thank you, we will know

        Reply

      • Novel
        23.08.2019

        It would be interesting to read if someone comes across links.

        Reply

  5. Dima
    23.08.2019

    I spread the test, as promised.
    1/500 f8 iso6400
    https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=1IGrBsOFUXhNfQyUzywVZ_3kpmFq1j68R

    Reply

    • Michael
      23.08.2019

      Thanks, cool. Now you can clearly see that buying the D600 was not in vain) There is clearly less noise on the left. Measurements “in numbers” also confirm this - the difference is more than 1.5 times.

      Reply

  6. Dmitriy
    23.08.2019

    And, nevertheless, what with the dynamic range in crop mode: to change or not?

    Reply

    • Vitaly N
      23.08.2019

      If not a part, it will not change. Everything that they write about the decline is if suddenly there is infa in the cut-off part with a larger range than in the center. But she is still cropped, by a camera or a developer. And here is also credited with a decrease in DD during resize, which can also be when averaging neighboring contrast pixels. "Horses, people mixed up in a heap." There are no real measurements, but the empirical "shadows stretch better or worse" can be with any picture. The novel above gave a link - there are many clever sayings, not only quoted.

      Reply

      • Dima
        24.08.2019

        In crop mode, the resolution drops dramatically. Noticeable even on the camera display.

        Reply

      • Vitaly N
        24.08.2019

        Yes, 2.25 times. If you want to lose less information - shoot in full frame mode even with crop lenses, and then crop in the editor. Many DX lenses will cover the full frame under certain conditions, cut out the shading in other cases.

        Reply

  7. Elena
    09.09.2019

    I broke my D90 ((((I read reviews, reviews, etc., choosing a new camera for weeks. I need a camera for portrait shooting. I read that Kenon has better skin color, but I’m not ready to switch, because I’ll have to sell the available flash, lenses for a long time and so on. I choose between about d7200 / 7100 and d610.
    HUGE request - maybe someone has portraits of one person, for comparison, shot on the D90 and D610? D90 and D7100 or D7200? Lay out, please! Thank you so much!

    Reply

    • Roman
      09.09.2019

      Comparison of D90 and D610, D90 and D7100, D90 and D7200. In an amicable way, you need razvki in order to drag them around and decide whether you can get an identical or minimally distinguishable result from all three, focusing on skin color. With a high degree of probability, yes, you will be able to get an identical and relevant color to the plot (and your ideas). If you are comparing on-camera JPEG, then it will be a completely uninformative comparison of presets. The question is about that. With the skills of color correction and other post-processing, you can achieve the best results (aesthetic, acceptable, whatever), so when choosing a camera, the emphasis should be on completely different factors than the “correct skin tone” - this parameter in most cases is subjective and comes down to the selection of a preset, which more likely.

      Reply

    • Elena
      09.09.2019

      I am not comparing the jumbo jpg. I own Photoshop and shoot in Raw. I wanted to see photos of one person taken by different cameras for general comparison, because I want to generally look at the photo and evaluate different parameters, of course not only skin color.

      Reply

      • Vitaly N
        09.09.2019

        Hardly anyone has d90 and newer cameras at the same time. Why do you need q90 if there is much better? And I suspect that in good lighting the result will be the same for everyone. Well, in the shade of a tree he will lie to anyone - if he stretches his skin, he will lie on another.

        Reply

      • Roman
        09.09.2019

        It sounds paradoxical, but when choosing a CAMERA, comparison of pictures will not give anything good. Especially if there are no clear selection criteria and you have such material as a portrait of a person. Colour? So this is one single scene out of many possible. The pose, the smile have changed a little - that's it, you give preference to this “picture”, for you a priori this camera takes better pictures. When choosing a lens - yes, there is "drawing", "picture", optical characteristics are important - they give 90% of the image quality. In general, you can assume that under good shooting conditions, the matrices of all more or less modern cameras give more or less the same (and acceptable) image quality.

        And then the selection criteria that are essential begin. Do you have a fleet of optics and flares? It makes no sense to change the platform, leaving Nikon. All optics are full-frame (or most of it) - you can look towards the full frame. We shoot in difficult conditions at high ISO - we compare the picture of noise without looking at the image. How easy the noise is, how acceptable. Budget? We look at the budget. Focusing speed, the number of frames in a series, the number of shots on one battery, the coverage area of ​​a frame, the shortcomings of a particular camera, and the frequency of contacting service centers - these are the criteria. View portraits - there will be a subjective choice. ANY of the above is better than the D90 in terms of aggregate indicators.

        Reply

      • Oleg
        09.09.2019

        Elena, I want to express my personal opinion, which in no way claims to be the ultimate truth. Among the cameras listed by you, I would choose the D610. Since this is a full frame, and therefore a high dynamic range. I used 7100, I personally did not like it, although many like it. And first of all, I didn't like those very skin tones, no matter how hard I tried, but I didn't always get an acceptable result with the help of lightrum. 5100 I liked much more in terms of color rendition. Now I have a D750 and I'm developing RAW in Capture One. I am more than satisfied with the result ... although now we are quite expecting a raid of haters 750 precisely for his “terrible skin tone” =)

        Reply

      • Novel
        09.09.2019

        Oleg, d750 gives a color suitable for wedding bombs and their customers.
        Well, whoever has normal vision and higher requirements, Nikon will not take it anyway, except for d850 where the color is at least somehow doped to a commercially suitable one.

        Reply

      • Alexey_S
        09.09.2019

        Plus Roman and Oleg. Everything is well said!

        Reply

      • Oleg
        09.09.2019

        Roman, I didn't bomb a wedding. I have no opportunity to compare with 850, but I take your word for it. And of course my eyesight is not great, moreover, I will say - one eye sees a picture in a colder light, the other - in a warmer one ... since childhood. My D750 suits me in color, and this is the main thing for me =)

        Reply

      • Novel
        09.09.2019

        Oleg, so who objects?

        Reply

      • Dima
        20.09.2019

        I shot on one lens with two cameras: d600, d7100 Full-frame has better color clearly, cleaner. The range is larger. The jpeg camera is very good.

        Reply

    • Novel
      09.09.2019

      Elena, everything is simple and complicated.
      1. Color and carcass.
      Well, of course, the carcass plays a huge role in obtaining an accurate or commercial color.
      There is a special toolkit that allows you to measure how accurately the matrix removes color and midtones. Skinton is a complex combination of halftones; to obtain a correct skin tone, the matrix must have an error of no more than 6%.
      No post-processing will return half-tones which are not in the ravine.
      2. Nikon cameras.
      Nikon cameras produced good color in the days of d40. Then everything was very sad until the excellent d850. The new Nikon bz are sad too.
      So there is no special color difference between d7100, d7200 and d610. Unless the d7100 has banding problems and noise in the shadows due to the problem matrix of Toshiba.

      Reply

      • Valery A.
        09.09.2019

        Elena, I can tell you my feelings from the d600. In good lighting, the pictures from it and the existing 5100 are similar, but if the object is in the shade or in bright light, the advantages of the first in DD are visible. There is also a noticeable difference when shooting in low light, with ISO 2500-3200 the picture almost does not suffer. Full-frame lenses open as they should, both 50 / 1,8g and Yu-37.

        Reply

      • Alexey_S
        09.09.2019

        Elena, I’m not sure that at this forum it will be easy for you to find the answer. Some comrades will tell you without reasoning that with a skinton everything is bad and sad for several dozen cameras of one of the largest manufacturers of photographic equipment.
        Then other comrades will come (or the same ones who know), and drag out the song, that the back-focus curse is imposed on the mirrors, and only the sacred BZK will allow you to take sharp photos.
        The next brethren will insist on the inferiority of one system, and glorify the other, so that the worms of doubt gnaw even more and more.

        Believe them or not - everyone's business. Personally, I do not advise trusting strongly negative reviews (from non-owners of the equipment). Almost any technique can be flawed if you look well. The modern advanced amateur / semi-pro technique is good enough to handle 95% (or even 99%) of typical photography tasks.

        Do not be angry with Romana, he speaks wisely. It's just that here for years go holivars about color, from which very many are already tired.

        (IMHO) If you have enough FF lenses (or you can purchase them), then (for your purposes) of the listed cameras, the D610 looks most interesting (I recommend reading about crop identification on this site if you have not already done so).

        Good luck with your purchase and good shots.

        Reply

      • Novel
        09.09.2019

        Each sandpiper praises its swamp.
        If there are no particular requirements, any camera will do.
        If we talk about portraits and skinton, Nikon is resting, this is not his.
        If we are talking about the future, both Nikon and Kenon and Sony and Fuji are switching to mirrorless mirrors.
        And for a portrait, a full frame is better than a crop, that's a fact.
        With d600 and d610 beautiful portraits really could not be obtained. Here are landscapes - yes.

        Reply

      • Elena
        09.09.2019

        Thank you all for the answers. I have been reading for 2 weeks))) information on different forums. I wanted to see a photo of one person taken by different cameras under the same shooting conditions and shooting parameters in order to compare myself, because different people's opinions about different cameras are very different and often quite opposite.

        PS
        In the evening I was told that my d90 would be repaired for 1000 UAH. )) so while I will shoot them, tk. used d610 costs about UAH 16, and I really don't see any reason to buy it yet, because there will not be a big difference, but in terms of money - ogogo.

        Reply

      • Roman
        09.09.2019

        That's right. More attention to photography, less forum debate. Good shots.

        Reply

      • Elena
        09.09.2019

        Alexey_S, thanks! You're right! )

        Reply

      • Novel
        09.09.2019

        I recommend that you look at profile topics in the largest forum in Runet on photo ru. There are a huge number of photos, including paired ones, there are also many owners of the subject.

        Reply

    • Roman
      09.09.2019

      Followed the link. I did not like a single photograph of the author. Generally. Not a single one. Neither in composition, nor in color, nor in post-processing. Sense of reasoning about the crystal clear image? Although I'm lying, I liked one, but this is not a photo of the author. The author before these photos grow and grow. Why is it most about high matters and technical characteristics that spread out those who take off badly?

      Reply

    • Novel
      09.09.2019

      Here, neither like or dislike, here is the question of the matrix and color.
      There is imatest, there is another toolkit.
      Fact - different matrices produce different colors in equal measure and no post-processing will fix it.
      Over there, olaf laid out a pair with kenon r and 5dsr. As people did not try, but to get a distinct color of the 5dsr level, the picture with r did not work.

      Therefore, it may be enough to carry illiterate nonsense that all matrices are removed equally and everything is corrected by post-processing?
      This is true only if you shoot at night as people burn coal in a warehouse without light, or if a person is color blind in whole or in part)

      Reply

    • Novel
      09.09.2019

      If for portraits, you correctly read that kenon is a much better choice, an inexpensive solution is canon 5d or 5d ii.

      Reply

    • Roman
      09.09.2019

      > Here neither like it or not like it, here is the question about the matrix and color.

      I like the whole photo - I don’t like it. The author can tell me all kinds of beautiful stories about ringing high frequencies as much as I like, but if he messed up some garbage after post-processing, lifting up saturation to horror and at the same time miserably arranged the frame, I don’t care how these frequencies ring out and how Canon shoots white on white. The photos in the article are disgusting. In all respects.

      > Olaf has now posted a couple of kenon r and 5dsr. As people did not try, but to get a clear color of the 5dsr level in the picture with r did not work.

      Is this the deity of the sect of witnesses of "distinct color"? Here in the link on the article are disgusting oversaturated photos. Due to the high saturation, the number of shades of beach photos is minimal - I can explain what is wrong with this color. What's wrong with the Canon EOS R's color intelligibility? Got it, please.

      Reply

    • Novel
      09.09.2019

      To stop useless flood.
      Read what is the color space, what the matrix gives out in the equal and what measures for example imatest.
      If the deviation of the color from the real 15% or 25% is a fact that is measured.
      Do you like this picture?

      https://c.radikal.ru/c01/1909/80/3c93343e1f17.jpg

      And here, like or not, to the simple fact that matrices give out different colors and different tones and to fix this is unrealistic? All that can be done is to flood)

      Reply

    • Roman
      09.09.2019

      Flood is really useless and it's not you or me to tell you about the color space. There is only one caveat. I look at the final photo, the result of the work (and processing) of the photographer. It is it that causes my emotions, not the imatest schedule. Therefore, if your goal in itself is color accuracy, which you can guarantee from the moment of shooting to the moment of reproduction - I don't know if you are a forensic scientist, an interior designer or a technodrocher with neglected colorophilia, who is measured by graphs of imatest and dynamic range, then oh. Then you need to take into account all these 100500 parameters, select all the curves perfectly, take 5D, put a woman under a tree, take a picture, turn up the saturation so that you feel sick from greenery and enjoy the potentially low delta on a calibrated monitor.

      Reply

    • Novel
      09.09.2019

      As expected, you cannot say anything clearly.
      So, the fact remains - different matrices give out different colors and halftones in equal measure, which DOES NOT work with demosaic and post-processing.
      Everyone who has ever worked with digital photo knows this.
      Well, I like games I don’t like it or I’ll twist it here and it will be like on the instagram you can flood endlessly.)

      Reply

    • Roman
      09.09.2019

      Namesake, what do you want to hear from me? If I VERY need a maximum color match for some of my mysterious purposes, I will take this colorcher and take a few shots with it for different lighting conditions (I even have this at home, I will tell you a secret - I used it a couple of times, then I realized that nafig need). And then with the help of this color-checker, for example, in 3DLut Сreator I will conduct color-matching and he will select for me the optimal matrix with a minimum delta. Color-checker was invented just for this, I will tell you in great secret.

      I would also like to know what "semitones" are. And what are these secret halftones that cannot be obtained by any post-processing? If you want, fill me with some color, I will reproduce any desired color from it using curves. By the way, a sign of good photography is considered to be a reduction in the number of shades for consistency and visual comfort.

      Well and absolutely indecent question. What do you do with images in which the imatest delta, for example, is less than five? They turn you on, huh?

      Reply

    • Novel
      09.09.2019

      Interestingly, camera owners with mediocre color love:
      - assert that all matrices are the same
      - looking for the very editor
      - we are sincerely sure that by applying a super secret profile in the editor and painting over the gray with carrot green spots, at least something will get something just like good cameras
      - they understand little about color and its objective parameters
      - by any means they find color accuracy
      - have a complex of inferiority that makes them rude and flood non-stop.
      - a special irritant for them is skinton.

      It is very enviable for such an audience that you can get a beautiful color right away in jpeg or with two clicks from your native converter) but with other cameras. )

      Reply

      • Maria
        17.09.2019

        Very dubious claims to the post above.
        1) Color perception is a psychological thing, and not all people are far from lovers of "acid" and "fancy". It is like saying that all people love sweets. I have a personal nostalgia for the color rendering of Fuji film from the 80-90s, moderate with an emphasis on red contrasting areas of color. By the way, they have all the movies of the 80s in such moderate colors. Very sincerely. And someone is generally a fan of monochrome.
        2) All Nikon cameras have default color rendering schemes, among which there is a moderate gamut, judging by the fact that it is generally present in the settings, it is in great demand;
        3) Working or not working with color is a conscious choice. A photographer is an artist in a sense. Working on the CC or sharpening and practically converting the edits without edits is just a conscious choice of technique. Painting with watercolors or oils, sculpting a new reality in the studio or finding rare shots of street photography is just a deliberate choice.
        4) rely on and boast about the capabilities of iron - this is a real complex)
        5) In all creative communities, holivars of this kind are in the order of things. It's not even funny anymore. Techniques in one area or another cannot be an end in itself, it is entirely the style and preferences of the artist.

        Plus, all the less or less intelligent photographers somehow have the financial ability to acquire a fashionable toy, so an attempt to offend clean trolling in this plan.

        Reply

      • Michael
        17.09.2019

        +100500

        Reply

      • Oleg
        17.09.2019

        Maria, you are smart. Bravo! A true Photographer's answer to the typical number / comparison / performance obsessed person with a camera.

        Reply

      • Dima
        20.09.2019

        color perception for the most part is universal and not a matter of taste: there is color and complimentary color combinations, color schemes.

        Reply

    • Roman
      09.09.2019

      I have your recommended 5D II, by the way. And also 1100D, 7D II, 200D and somehow I'm not worried about the color with any of them. RAWs had to be edited very differently. The very best editor is Adobe Camera RAW with a custom profile and an extracted contrast curve to make it easier to wind the outer loot on top. This is if I want to get an interesting result with cinematic color or use some kind of film profile and not get an image with excessive contrast. Or a standard profile - if you are too lazy to mess around.

      I can only praise the color accuracy, but for me color is not an end in itself. Because I'm used to the fact that the people who advocate “outstanding color” are in most cases no photographers. They don't shoot color, they shoot photos.

      Reply

    • Roman
      09.09.2019

      > Such an audience is very jealous that you can get a beautiful color right away in a flash or with two clicks from the native converter) but with other cameras. )

      You either take off the cross, the namesake, or put on panties. Cross panties. Is beautiful color an accurate color? Film color is beautiful but imprecise. Teal Orange is beautiful, but generally imprecise. Any BEAUTIFUL color assumes a very unreliable color rendering - with increased or decreased contrast and with bringing all the available colors into harmonious combinations, depending on the taste of the photographer. There is no accuracy from the word at all.

      Reply

    • Peter Sh.
      09.09.2019

      A real man will never allow himself such an appeal to a woman.
      You have absolutely no concept of decency and tact.
      If you communicate in real life this way, I frankly feel sorry for you. In real life, you can get it in the face.

      Reply

      • Novel
        09.09.2019

        Peter, do you need to pay attention to the troll?
        There are several poorly educated trolls suffering from a lack of attention. They are rude, post nonsense, they try to flood any opinion or fact.
        The best way to deal with them is to simply ignore them.

        Reply

      • Roman
        09.09.2019

        Cross or panties, namesake? Beautiful color or exact color?

        Reply

  8. Sergei
    11.09.2019

    But it’s interesting how much d610 is quieter, d700. It’s not that people scorch and even birds in the city take off from flapping d700.

    Reply

    • Arkady Shapoval
      11.09.2019

      Yes, noticeably quieter

      Reply

  9. EvAlex888
    24.09.2019

    Hello everybody! So I looked at the review of the NIKON D600 and D700 cameras, and was very disappointed! From those photos from these cameras that are presented here. I, even on a regular, old NOKIA 302 mobile phone, (not even a smartphone!) With just 3 mp. And then the pictures come out better. See for yourself! Well, if you praise, it would be necessary to present the goods with your face, so that both looked and Ahhh !!! And here it turns out Fu-ooo! I even got sick of buying these devices. I’ve done better at Zenith when. Now I will always be skeptical of all kinds of Brands.

    Reply

    • EvAlex888
      24.09.2019

      Here are a couple of photos

      Reply

    • EvAlex888
      24.09.2019

      Here's another. There are only one photo to accept

      Reply

    • EvAlex888
      24.09.2019

      And yet. There seemed to be crystal, from close range. Here I present. And all the photos, without too much light, and flashlights.

      Reply

      • Vitaly N
        24.09.2019

        Where's the cat on the couch?

        Reply

    • Makunochimaster
      24.09.2019

      how thick, straight fat from the monitor dripped

      Reply

      • Vitaly N
        24.09.2019

        It's not trolling, it's a different state ...

        Reply

  10. Serg
    05.12.2019

    Hello Site Host and Readers! Maybe someone will tell me - I want to take a used Nikon d600 or Nikon d610. The question is - is there a difference between them (picture, autofocus)? which one is better to focus on?

    Reply

    • Arkady Shapoval
      05.12.2019

      Take d610, it will be easier to sell it later

      Reply

      • Serg
        05.12.2019

        Those. is that the whole difference? Good advice if you look into the future) Thank you. If there is no other difference, then….

        Reply

      • Arkady Shapoval
        05.12.2019

        d610 is a slightly updated d600, there is no difference in image quality, focusing, etc. d610 shoots half a frame per second faster and added "quiet" shooting mode

        Reply

      • Serg
        05.12.2019

        more or less clear. I couldn't find any worthwhile information on this topic on the Internet ... Thank you, Arkady.

        Reply

      • Arkady Shapoval
        05.12.2019

        the d600 had problems with the shutter at the start of sales, in order to wash off a bad opinion of the model - they released the d610 without jambs. In fact, this is the same camera.

        Reply

      • Serg
        05.12.2019

        I think that during this time both shutters and nikon have laundered)

        Reply

      • Pawel
        06.12.2019

        And for myself I decided to take the D600 with mileage under 100k. Firstly, it’s cheap - about $ 500, and secondly, I have a lifetime warranty on the shutter, my number starts at 507 so at any time I can set the shutter from 610 at will. Of course, +0,5 fps would not hurt me, but I'm already used to shooting on the D50, which has one frame per minute :) and I have some kind of quiet mode, but apparently this is not something, since I have never used it, it is most likely needed for shooting in silence and babies.

        Reply

      • Serg
        06.12.2019

        )) what a coincidence - I'm also looking for a replacement for D50

        Reply

      • Valery A.
        28.12.2019

        In good light (and on a fix would be) D50 awesome shoots (painted 600 matches).

        Reply

      • Valery A.
        28.12.2019
  11. Pokemon
    05.12.2019

    “Official Nikon Portal Japan has published a list of cameras that are now considered discontinued. These cameras are Nikon D610 and D810 today. This does not mean that the cameras are bad, no, it's just that these devices are outdated, and other novelties have taken their place. "
    That's it, EOL (End of Life) for D610 and D810.
    https://photar.ru/nikon-d610-i-d810-oficialno-snyaty-s-proizvodstva/

    Reply

    • Pokemon
      05.12.2019

      I’ll add from myself that there have been rumors for a long time that the replacement of the D610 and D750 will be one camera, which will be released next spring on a matrix similar in performance characteristics to the Z6 and A7M3.

      Reply

  12. Nicholas
    03.01.2020

    On my D600, on many lenses, the -20 AF correction in the camera does not help back / focus. I suspect that the wrong focus shift to the far side is sewn into the camera settings (there are values ​​in the firmware in the range from -124 to +124). Can anyone have a NIKON D600 INSPECTION & ADJUSTMENT PROGRAM adjustment program that allows you to update the new autofocus shift values? I tried a similar program for the D7000 and successfully adjusted the AF shift (without twisting the three AF ​​adjustment bolts), but I can't find it anywhere for the D600.

    Reply

    • US6IBD
      26.02.2020

      On D610, I also twisted corrections for the Tokina AF 28-70 / 2.8. Moreover, 28 had back focus, and 70 had front focus. I used the method of shooting the target scale at an angle of 45 degrees ...
      Then I used a simpler method - shooting the newspaper on the wall with corrections -10, 0, +10. Each time I manually knocked out the focus. It turned out that no amendments were required at all!
      My advice is not to rush to twist the lens or adjust the shift in the device. Try this simple verification method. Browse the results naturally on your computer.

      Reply

  13. Marina
    26.02.2020

    Hello! Tell me please. There is an option to buy Nikon D3 (native shutter, mileage 56 thousand)
    Or Nikon D600 - there are many options in the secondary market with low mileage.
    I now have a nikon d7000. But I already feel that I need a full frame. Here's what will be better in the picture? Nikon D3 or Nikon D600? The difference in price there is not very big. More interested in the difference in the photo. It is embarrassing that Nikon D3 is said to be “brick” .. that it has not been produced for a long time and that even if the mileage is not large and was lying on a shelf, it might still break down from time to time after a month of use .. Or is it not?

    Reply

    • Arkady Shapoval
      26.02.2020

      In general, the d600 will be better in the picture, in general, in many things it is preferable

      Reply

  14. Dmitry.Sh
    21.04.2020

    Not all of the body is made of metal alloy. The front part is made of polycarbonate ... I don't see any problems at all .... (D610) everything is on the level

    Reply

  15. kolodiazniy
    01.07.2020

    Hello again, Arkady.
    When viewing this page
    plenty of advertising
    somehow inadequately loading the computer processor.
    I cannot say which block it is doing, but it is a fact.

    Reply

    • Arkady Shapoval
      01.07.2020

      Thank. Let's figure it out

      Reply

  16. kolodiazniy
    02.07.2020

    Say, Arkady:
    But personally, you have faced the problem of getting oil on the matrix,
    found in this model?

    Reply

    • Arkady Shapoval
      02.07.2020

      I did not come across. At the same time, the hands of the d600 often fall with colleagues too. The problems were in the first installments.

      Reply

      • kolodiazniy
        02.07.2020

        Thank you for your reply.
        I just wanted to find out
        what is the nature of the problem:
        either chaotic or serial.

        Reply

      • to_c
        05.07.2020

        And how to distinguish the first from the non-first?

        Reply

  17. an256
    16.12.2020

    Hello, I would like to hear your opinion, my relatives want to give me a gift, a new camera, the choice is between Nikon d610 and d7500, which one would you recommend to buy, given that under the d7500 I already have lenses: Nikon DX AF-S Nikkor 35mm 1: 1.8 G SWM Aspherical and Nikon DX AF-S Nikkor 16-85mm 1: 3.5-5.6G ED VR SWM IF Aspherical, and on the d610 I will most likely only be able to buy Nikon AF-S Nikkor 50mm 1: 1.8G SWM Aspherical.

    Reply

    • Michael
      16.12.2020

      Two simple lenses are not a hindrance, especially at 610 they will work in crop mode. Enough for the first time, but the 7500 is a very controversial camera

      Reply

  18. Acuna Jorge
    17.05.2022

    Excellence compilation...!

    Reply

  19. Mr. boggy
    08.06.2022

    “The photographer shoots, not the camera.” Yes, it is, but it should sound like this: “The photographer shoots with a camera.” Not potatoes. The quality of the instrument is important, it is clear that this is an individual matter, but after ff, I don’t want to return to a modern 30 megapixel crop.

    Reply

  20. Alexander
    27.06.2022

    Hello. Interested in the old firmware C1.02 L2.009 can anyone have it, or tell me where you can download it.

    Reply

  21. Victor
    15.11.2022

    I want to buy this camera. I have a Sigma Zoom 17-50mm 1:2.8 EX DC lens. Yes DC. Can anyone tell if it will work fine on this camera or something will be wrong?

    Reply

    • B. R. P.
      15.11.2022

      I can say. This is a crop lens, and the D600 is a full frame. If your Sigma is Nikon mount, it will only work in crop mode. That's what will not be.

      Reply

  22. Load more comments ...

Reply

 

 

Top
mobility. computer