My Story on the Nikon D610 is it a keeper? Find out

[vipgraphx]

So, you're comparing a $2,999 camera from five years ago with a $1,999 camera from last year...in other words, you expected a three thousand dollar camera for two thousand dollars? ;-) I mean, because for three grand today, you get what is arguably the finest d-slr on the market in the D800.

That's what I was hoping for 

But after using it and thinking about it I realized that the d610 was more of an entry level camera where the d700 was not so much and entry level ff and more of a pro grade camera.

Wishfull thinking 

Yeah...I know what you mean vip...the D610 is basically built on a consumer-level body. For me, the issue is the eyepiece and viewfinder system in the D600/D610...I cannot see the edges of the viewfinder image while wearing my glasses...the same thing with the D7000/D7100, which is the chassis for the D600/D610...

The extra $1,000 in price for the D700 bought the user a higher grade of body. It would have been SWEET if Nikon would have provided the same grade of foundation for a thousand dollars less, but instead, they offers Nikon users a MAJOR upward move, at the SAME price, for the D800, and reduced the entry price to FF Nikon from $3k to around $2k.

Yeah that eye piece is defiantly not as user friendly as the circular eye piece. And you think going from 12mp to 24mp was the jump but it actually went from 12mp to 36mp

Perhaps we can agree that the D800 is actually the replacement for the D700..it would have been also nice if Nikon would have done something like sony offering the A7 @ 24mp and the A7r @ 36 mp and price accordingly..

This would be the D800 @ 24mp and the D800e at 36mp and put the D610 at 16mp at a lower cost..So we would have had a price point of $1500, $2000 and $3000 price ranges for FF nikons. This would have really made more sense.


Or have made the D610 a D7100F and left out the D610 name. Then you would of had something similar to the A77 and A99…D7100 Crop and D7100F Full Frame…

just saying

 

[ratssass]

...i might be (probably)speaking where i shouldn't,but i recall reading a cheat to 9 bracketed frames from the d7000....I don't recall all the details,and I'm not even sure if they would apply,but it might be worth searching.

 

[vipgraphx]

...i might be (probably)speaking where i shouldn't,but i recall reading a cheat to 9 bracketed frames from the d7000....I don't recall all the details,and I'm not even sure if they would apply,but it might be worth searching.

I know that cheat but its not really auto you have to switch from user 1 and 2 to add in the additional exposures. Here is the problem, when you are shooting sunsets with clouds. The faster the better so you do not get an oblong sun and ghosting in clouds. The time it takes to adjust those are shoot again makes a difference and less issues trying to correct in post.

With the D700 and battery grip I was shooting at 8FPS so 5-7 exposures would be very fast...

 

[Geaux]

I've never owned a Fx and have been thinking of purchasing the 610, but have always had thoughts of getting a used d700 instead for its 1/8000 shutter and other things mentioned. Something to think about with the shutter, the d610 offers native low iso of 100 whereas the d700's native is 200iso. So there's your one stop of light you're missing, its in the ISO on the d610

Thanks for making my decision harder though. Coming from a d90, the 12mp doesn't bother me one bit on the 700 and the 36 on the 800 is ridiculous overkill for my uses.

Edit: I agree 7-9 shots for an HDR is overkill as well, 3 is more than enough.

 

[scotts2014se]

The D610 was strategically designed to keep the other Nikon cameras in the lineup alive. If you got all you were looking for in the D600/D610, such as 51 point focus system (or focus points not cluttered on center), 1/8000 max shutter speed, more bracketing shots, etc. then the sales of the D800/D800E would substantially suffer. Nikon achieved what they wanted to achieve with the D610 even in your case, they have you ditching out more money for the D800. It's unfortunately the sad truth. As for me, I quite like what my D600 offers and to me paying the extra $1000+ for upgrade to the D800 would be pointless. I am glad I got to save 1K or more to not have the option of the extras that otherwise would make the D600 more expensive.

You have an interesting point however in my thoughts when he D700 was new the D3 was out which made the D700 nikons entry level FF camera which included those features..Maybe I am mistaken and the D700 was never an entry level FF but more a PRO FF camera in which case would say it all and to your point you would be correct.

D610 was designed with certain compromises to meet a price point. It's billed as an entry level full frame camera. The things you mentioned are what one would expect from such a camera. At the end of the day it's still a very good camera and would meet a vast majority of users expectations. It's all about realistic expectations.


And needing 7 bracketed exposures is a bit overkill for HDR IMO.

Yes the D610 is a great camera and I do agree would meet many user expectations.

Have you ever tried shooting 3 bracketed shots in the low light and processed them? it creates a lot of noise and film grain. You need to have more exposures to get a much cleaner outcome.

Example..

In order to not have blown out lights (on the wall) and window lighting it was a must to have more exposures. Then it was needed to mask in those original exposures back into the HDR file to correct the lighting. If I only did three I would not have been able to produce a shot like this…this was 9 exposures..


St_Phillips_Church by VIPGraphX, on Flickr

Here is another example…look at the stain glass windows. ITs very hard to pull out detail with only three exposures, usually a window like this would be blown out. This
is 7 exposures


St. Augustine cropped by VIPGraphX, on Flickr

Very Nice! I tried to "Like" it twice!:thumbup:

 

[astroNikon]

A few months ago I nearly bought a d700. I bought a refurb'd d600 instead. Price is about the same at the time.
It's a very tough call. The d600 has the improved Expeed, lower ISO abilities, and 24mp. The d700 just was a nicer layout and all the at your finger features. The d800 was total overkill for me and priced out of my league.

My main objective though was star stuff ... so I went with the megapixels.

Truthfully .. I'd still would love to have a d700 as I had briefly tested on before.

I still have my d7000 too and I didn't want to go below 16mp. If the d700 was 16 instead of 12, it would have been an easier decision. Not that it really matters in comparison of the two ,, just one of those things where you put down a requirement.

 

[vipgraphx]

Yes it boils down to requirements and compromises. There seems to be not one camera that does it all, so you have to get the one that best suites your needs and budget. I also take into consideration cost and features.

My ideal camera would be a mix of the sony a99,a7 and nikon d800e

This would be the ultimate camera for me.

 

[JTStrong]

"If you are stepping into FF from Crop then this could be your dream come true."

You are correct with that statement.