My New D600's LV SUCKS!!!!!

[rexbobcat]

www.imaging-resource.com The test image comparisons

DXO Mark and other reviews such as Photozone say otherwise. At ISO 1600 it's not all that spectacular. It's about the same amount of noise as my 60D which is "meh."

Not bad but considering that the D90 is 12 bit and the D600 is 14 bit with more resolution, larger sensor, and with newer tech, I think I'll have to go with the FF camera.

But if I do recall you also argued that the A77 is a good lowlight performer so I assume this post will be disregarded. It's w/e

 

[sleist]

????

I own the D90 as well as the D700. There is no way that the D90 sensor surpasses the D700 in handing high ISO.
The D600 would need to be far worse than the D700 for the D90 to be better. That is simply not what I have seen.

 

[greybeard]

I have to agree, LV sucks on my d7000 too. It's ok for composition on a tripod but that is about it.

 

[jake337]

my LV works just fine on my aging D90....

But heck, i usually have my settings dialed in before i switch to live view.

 

[skieur]

www.imaging-resource.com The test image comparisons

DXO Mark and other reviews such as Photozone say otherwise. At ISO 1600 it's not all that spectacular. It's about the same amount of noise as my 60D which is "meh."

Not bad but considering that the D90 is 12 bit and the D600 is 14 bit with more resolution, larger sensor, and with newer tech, I think I'll have to go with the FF camera.

But if I do recall you also argued that the A77 is a good lowlight performer so I assume this post will be disregarded. It's w/e

As any photographer should well know, the bottom line is side by side image comparisons. Use your eyes and you will see the noise and sharpness differences on imaging-resource.com.

I argued that the A77 was as good as any other camera at ISO 1600, which is true if you look at the images side by side on this website.

NOTE: imaging-resource. com has NO bias toward any particular make of camera and subjects them ALL to the same photo tests, unlike some other reviewers.

skieur

 

[skieur]

????

I own the D90 as well as the D700. There is no way that the D90 sensor surpasses the D700 in handing high ISO.
The D600 would need to be far worse than the D700 for the D90 to be better. That is simply not what I have seen.

I don't see any examples of the same shot, same lighting taken with both cameras.

 

[skieur]

www.imaging-resource.com The test image comparisons

DXO Mark and other reviews such as Photozone say otherwise. At ISO 1600 it's not all that spectacular. It's about the same amount of noise as my 60D which is "meh."

Not bad but considering that the D90 is 12 bit and the D600 is 14 bit with more resolution, larger sensor, and with newer tech, I think I'll have to go with the FF camera.

But if I do recall you also argued that the A77 is a good lowlight performer so I assume this post will be disregarded. It's w/e

Your argument is pretty weak, if you have to degenerate into misreading my former post.

skieur

 

[JackLee198]

Hello everyone

Maybe i m doing something wrong and i'd be very grateful if somebody points me
to the right path. But i hv found autofocus on DSLR (in my case 7D with
EF-S 10-22mm) to be real menace. At first i think it is hardware problem.i sent
it service center,but they told me every thing is ok in my cam.

It is extremely frustrating and really ruins my day down there, that's why I

 

[ralphh]

I used to think of liveview as pointless on a DSLR until I got my 85L, now I find it surprisingly useful for portraits...

 

[.SimO.]

Hello everyone

Maybe i m doing something wrong and i'd be very grateful if somebody points me
to the right path. But i hv found autofocus on DSLR (in my case 7D with
EF-S 10-22mm) to be real menace. At first i think it is hardware problem.i sent
it service center,but they told me every thing is ok in my cam.

It is extremely frustrating and really ruins my day down there, that's why I

Both camera body and lens are fantastic. Doubt those are the problems. I have the 600d and the 10-22 and seems to work fantastic as long as my settings are adjusted for what i'm trying to focus on.



In regards to LV, I utilize Live View for landscape shots where I am trying to get a very sharp image. With a tripod of course, I AF first, then magnify and sharpen accordingly. That's usually the only time I use it on my T3i. As for getting down and dirty for the hard to reach shots, that's is part of the fun for me. I like getting in near neck-breaking situations, lol. Maybe that's just me though...

 

[cgipson1]

I will use live view for really precise Macro focusing... and sometimes for focus stacking (although I am usually tethered to a laptop / larger screen for that). It sounds to me more like the OP needs to learn how the Live View works on that body rather than just dismiss it like this.

 

[ralphh]

^^^ Indeed - the cameras I've owned with LV have exposure simulation on or off modes...

Called various different things -
Eexposure simulation on Canon - on being LV matches exposure
Liveview Boost (or something similar) on Olympus - off being LV matches exposure

You sure you've not jsut got something set wrong? The default settings are not always what makes sense to you...

 

[Solarflare]

About the Canon alternative: the Canon 6D, on second sight, is indeed a much better deal than it looks like on the first sight.

Yes you only get 11 point AF, but the middle point is extra sensitive (-3 EV) AND ironically these mere 11 AF points are MUCH better distributed than the 39 AF points of the Nikon D600. So actually I would prefer the 6D AF over the D600 AF, even if its technically inferior. But it is more practical.

Yes you get a lesser noise performance, and better dynamic range etc. BUT Canon included stronger and apparently pretty good noise reduction algorithms (I've seen multiple YouTube videos and website articles of clueless noobs who claim the ISO performance of the 6D would be better. Even DigitalRev claimed that) AND the camera allows you to go to ISO 102,400 while the D600 for some odd reason only allows ISO 25,600 at Maximum, despite being pretty noise free even at this maximum.

So yeah, bravo Canon, you created a pretty fierce competition for the D600.

There are details I dislike, though. No second memory card slot for making a backup of your picture. On/Off switch not right next to the release button.

And there are features of the D600 I find most highly appealing, like the silent shutter.

Ultimately, my ideal camera would be a D600 with a more reasonable distribution of AF points. And I really would like to have a flipscreen on it, too. Then I could live with the little faults the OP mentioned, like no change of aperture when using Lifeview. Yeah, annoying, but not dealbreaker. Also I would put up with the other faults of the camera, like often oil spots on the sensor for the first 3k acutation, or lack of 1/8000 sec shutter speed despite the fact the successor in spirit (D7000) has that. The silent shutter and the fantastic sensor makes all that worthwile.

My Sony has a tilt screen and even moves around. Never use it.

I use my 5100 flip screen all the time. Really anytime I want to have an unusual perspective.

As for not being able to see in bright sun, I suspect that's more LCDs displays in general ... for various degrees of bright.

Since its so fun to quote Ken Rockwell, for after you quote him nobody wants to take you serious anymore, here goes: Nikon vs Canon:

LCD Quality

As of 2012, Nikon's four new full-frame DSLRs (D600, D800, D800E and D4) share a problem new to DSLRs: they tend to be a bit too yellow when new! We have to depend on the accuracy of our LCDs, and Nikon has taken a step back in 2012.

Another subtle but important advantage of Canon is that their LCDs have the same 3:2 aspect ratio as their images, so the images fill the entire LCD. Nikons use a different aspect ratio for their LCDs, so while two cameras may have the same diagonal size rating for the LCD, the actual image size is bigger on the Canon DSLRs! Another reason as of 2012 I've switched to Canon.

Canon's LCDs are usually behind anti-reflection coated glass or plastic, so we can see bright, contrasty images with great blacks while outdoors, while Nikons usually use uncoated screens on which we see reflections of the world around us. On Nikons therefore, it's much more difficult to see our images in daylight.

Canon's screens are often coated with magic stuff that resists grease and smudges. Nikons are not.

The Nikon D90 with onyl 12 megapixels beats the D600 at ISO 1600 in both less noise and more sharpness if you compare images.

Err, sorry, but thats an older APS-C sensor vs a brand new FF sensor. Even the D600 24 Megapixel pixel size is still (a little) larger than the D90 12 Megapixel pixel size. The DxOMark rating differences between these two is also extreme.

So unless you want to claim that Nikon actually LOST knowhow between the construction of the D90 in 2008 and the construction of the D600 in 2012, I would say its pretty safe to say you're wrong.

Unfortunately noise is a highly complex issue. With the right program and optimizing noise reduction by hand, one can get really impressive results. I've seen example images at ISO 25,600 out of a µ4/3" camera that had no visible noise at all. Doesnt mean that images from such a camera WITHOUT noise reduction will not have a lot of noise in them.

 

[djacobox372]

I resent your implication that the D600 is even approaching pro quality, good sir.

It's a D7000 with a shiny new FX sensor crammed inside, with a couple extra bells and whistles and a whole lot of intentionally gimped features.

Lol, okay maybe I overstated but so are u; both the the d7000 and d600 are at definatly approaching pro quality.

 

[Mach0]

????

I own the D90 as well as the D700. There is no way that the D90 sensor surpasses the D700 in handing high ISO.
The D600 would need to be far worse than the D700 for the D90 to be better. That is simply not what I have seen.

X2
I still love my d90 but the d700 is muchhhhhhh better at high ISO.