Sony a77 Or Nikon D600?

[Wyatt6541]

I have been a Nikon guy since day one of my semi pro photography career. I have done primarily weddings and fine art photography. Lately though, I've been getting into photographing kids sports. I am desperate for an upgrade. I have been set on the D600 until one of the guys at the camera store told me about the a77. I know through research the a77 lacks ISO performance. On the plus side of the a77, it shoots 12 fps, more than double that of the D600. I have been debating which camera to go with for quite a while now and need to make a decision. PLEASE HELP!!!

 

[ConradM]

You should look at the Sony A99 FF. It does great at higher ISO.

 

[Garbz]

One should never buy anything from Sony regardless of how good their products may be. A company who treats their customers like absolute **** doesn't deserve business. With any luck the camera software may come with a rootkit causing irreparable damage to the computer, or maybe they'll release a firmware update for your camera which removes a feature like the ability to shoot continuous, or hell maybe you just need a warranty claim which is now void because you had the audacity to plug the charger into a powerboard rather than directly into the wall socket.

All of these things Sony has done, not to camera customers yet, but the company itself can rot in hell. I just hope they sell the fab side of the business off to someone else first

 

[gsgary]

The A77 is only 12fps when shooting on auto and you dont need that many fps for sport just good timing

 

[jaomul]

D600. If that's not fast enough D300.Any lenses you have are useless if you switch brands

 

[goodguy]

I absolutly LOVE the a77.
I got to play with it only few days ago and man thats a solid camera, super fast AF but really you cant compare it to the D600.
I would go for the D600 in a heart beat if I could afford it.
On the other hand if you think you need super fast FPS and the D600 isnt enough then go for the a99.
But it will cost you about 2800$

 

[pixmedic]

if you have been happy with Nikon, then stick with Nikon and get the D600. as far as i have seen, no one that has gotten the D600 and posted here about it has been disappointed with it at all.

 

[skieur]

I absolutly LOVE the a77.
I got to play with it only few days ago and man thats a solid camera, super fast AF but really you cant compare it to the D600.
I would go for the D600 in a heart beat if I could afford it.
On the other hand if you think you need super fast FPS and the D600 isnt enough then go for the a99.
But it will cost you about 2800$

Gee, I found that even the Nikon D90 beat the D600 at ISO 1600.

 

[goodguy]

I absolutly LOVE the a77.
I got to play with it only few days ago and man thats a solid camera, super fast AF but really you cant compare it to the D600.
I would go for the D600 in a heart beat if I could afford it.
On the other hand if you think you need super fast FPS and the D600 isnt enough then go for the a99.
But it will cost you about 2800$

Gee, I found that even the Nikon D90 beat the D600 at ISO 1600.

I am but a simple man, new in this field and take my info from few reviews I saw and read and all said the D600 is better then the D7000 in low light and they also said the D7000 is better then the a77 in low light so I did the math.
This is not a competition the OP should choose what he see fit, I state what I have learned but everybody should read all the responses then do their own homework and chooce what they want.
If it was up to me I would go with the D600 in a heart beat, its a Full Frame and a good one at that.

 

[TMC]

I absolutly LOVE the a77.
I got to play with it only few days ago and man thats a solid camera, super fast AF but really you cant compare it to the D600.
I would go for the D600 in a heart beat if I could afford it.
On the other hand if you think you need super fast FPS and the D600 isnt enough then go for the a99.
But it will cost you about 2800$

Gee, I found that even the Nikon D90 beat the D600 at ISO 1600.

I am gonna have to totally disagree with this statement. ISO is amazing on the D600. <PERIOD> Not that it may not be good on the D90 too but I don't see the two being in the same discussion really. To each his own tho. i mean no disrespect, just found the statement laughable

 

[skieur]

I absolutly LOVE the a77.
I got to play with it only few days ago and man thats a solid camera, super fast AF but really you cant compare it to the D600.
I would go for the D600 in a heart beat if I could afford it.
On the other hand if you think you need super fast FPS and the D600 isnt enough then go for the a99.
But it will cost you about 2800$

Gee, I found that even the Nikon D90 beat the D600 at ISO 1600.

I am but a simple man, new in this field and take my info from few reviews I saw and read and all said the D600 is better then the D7000 in low light and they also said the D7000 is better then the a77 in low light so I did the math.
This is not a competition the OP should choose what he see fit, I state what I have learned but everybody should read all the responses then do their own homework and chooce what they want.
If it was up to me I would go with the D600 in a heart beat, its a Full Frame and a good one at that.

Forget about the reviews take a look at images and do the pixel peeping. The noise on the D600 images at ISO 1600 was more than that on the Canon 6D and more than that on the A77 as well.

 

[Garbz]

Erm sorry skieur that's just plain wrong. I've never seen a review or a test that has ever claimed that the A77 has the edge over a D600 or 6D in noise performance. The D600 beats the 6D slightly on on about half the images, and completely destroys the A77 in every review and high-ISO test. It's only redeeming feature is fast frame rates and image stabilisation.

Also pixel peeping has always been bad, but suggesting to pixel peep at 24mpxl is horrendous advice. The reason is simple, the higher the resolution of the sensor the finer the random noise is distributed and as such the more success even the slightest amount of noise reduction will have in eliminating the noise while retaining the image detail. e.g. The D700 beat the D800 in pixel peeping tests, but has never produced a better or cleaner full frame picture despite what the SNR statistics will spit back at you. Unfortunately for the A77 you're comparing apples to apples so the SNR figures really say it all, and they say the A77 sucks quite badly.

 

[KmH]

DxOMark - Compare cameras side by side

 

[cwcaesar]

I refused to get the Sony soon after I first considered them. I HATE the electronic viewfinder. And the 'shoot-thru' mirror, or whatever it is called, seems gimicky, and can only hurt ISO performance. Plus, everything for Sony seems to be propretary. I bought the D600 and find the ISO performance to be AMAZING. 5.5 fps doesn't seem to be a hindrance either.