In the last several months, I’ve had a fair number of changes to my equipment collection.

When I acquire something new, I like to write about it, whether it’s a “keeper” or not.  We’ve talked most recently on these pages about the Fuji X Pro 1. Given some new developments involving the technology surrounding that camera, there will be more to say.  Now however, I want to talk about a camera acquisition I also have alluded to recently, the Nikon D600.

I acquired this device shortly before the X Pro 1, and was shooting it extensively up to the point where the Fuji arrived.  As the Fuji was the older camera, I decided it would be more appropriate to  offer my comments on that camera first, as I was already late in the game.

Now, on to the D600.

The D600 is closely related to previous Nikon DSLR designs, particularly to the D7000.  Its body design follows a pattern seen in that “serious prosumer” camera bodies that Nikon has put out over the years.  Happily, the specifications keep improving with each generation, to a point where they have become very credible professional tools on their own; less robust perhaps than the D800 or D4, but more than adequate for fairly heavy use.  Now I am a somewhat leisurely landscape photographer, who will not be climbing in the Himalayas, or repelling off some cliff in the Amazon Basin. For me, these cameras are a nice combination of ruggedness, yet with reasonable weight.

Perhaps the most important new feature on the body of the D600 is a locking button on the mode dial on the left upper top.  This eliminates one of my main objections to that control style, vs. the three or four button knob  in that location on the D700/800/D4 bodies.   Every so often I will shoot with for instance, my D7000, only to find the mode dial has moved either to “program”, or to full manual; the latter setting particularly screwing up the exposure.  With the D600, this should no longer happen.

There also some changes to the video controls on the camera, which are admittedly less interesting to me.  When compared to the D7000, the D600 body is “puffed up” by about 10% visually.  All of the good things about the earlier camera have been retained (and I really enjoy that earlier camera).

There are certainly some wonderful websites such as DPreview, where you can read an in-depth description of the camera functions, and menus.  As always, I hope to convey to you the experiences of an “average” user and how the cameras features impact my photography.

I have had a somewhat jaded approach to this camera.  I admit being somewhat thrilled, but slightly intimidated, by the quality the sensor and its high-resolution.  I’ve discussed here before that I have a less than robust collection of FX appropriate lenses.  Other than some prime lenses, I own a 17-35 mm, f2.8, as well as the 70-200 mm f2.8.  My best midrange zoom seemed to be a Tokina 28-80 ATX f2.8, which has not always been well reviewed but I always thought was quite sharp, at least on DX.  I began to consider purchase of some serious glass, perhaps starting with the Nikkor 24 -70 mm F2.8.  I looked through my lens collection to see what I wasn’t using, and could sell to fund this expensive purchase.  The Tokina seemed a likely candidate for a quick eBay sale and I began to look for the box and packing materials.

But then it occurred to me that just maybe, I ought to consider shooting the D600 with the Tokina lens.

This particular lens, out of production now, is roughly as massive and heavy as the legendary Nikkor 28-70 mm F2 .8.  The lens is beautifully finished with a black crinkle surface.  Over the years its weight and size have tended to relegated to my storage closet as I have many DX lenses that seemed as sharp… and were a lot lighter.  Nonetheless, I figured I ought to at least give it a try before selling it.  I mounted the lens on the D600 and went hiking (with a tripod) in nearby Nescopeck State Park.

All I can say is wow!  To my eye, this is a very fine FX lens, and is extraordinarily well matched to the 24-megapixel Nikon sensor.  Contrast and detail are outstanding even at the edges of the frame.  I say this, even after shooting the extraordinary 60 mm Fuji “X” lens.  I’m not it selling it now.

I shot the 17-35 mm lens which is certainly excellent, though not quite so clear edge to edge.  It’s still a wonderful optic, and to me it should certainly not be discarded on acquisition of the D600/800.  The 70 – 200 mm VR lens (the first version) also to my eye looks fine, very sharp in the center and only slightly less so at the edges. Generally with a zoom of that range, I don’t care about the little vingnetting described by reviewers (which is easily corrected on processing), or whether the corners are absolutely sharp (version 2 of that lens is said to be better optimized for FX).  For now I see no reason to upgrade to the newer version.  That having been said, the main problem with all of these lenses is that they are seriously large and bulky.  You’ll need a serious backpack to carry good FX glass, plus a tripod for great remote landscape photography.

There is another option. With the Nikon primes I own, the D 600 is wonderful.  Shooting for instance with one of the excellent 50 mm Nikkors, is a delight.  A handful of primes would seriously reduce what you would carry on your back.

I did acquire with a camera the “kit lens” the Nikkor 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5G VR lens.  This is in fact a fairly reasonably sized midrange zoom with image stabilization.  I’m not a lens snob, and I’d hoped this lens would be similar to the 16 – 85 mm VR DX glass, which is essentially parked on my D7000 and is quite sharp and contrasty.  Unfortunately at least my copy of the lens was lackluster at best, and I returned it. Interestingly, the little Nikkor 28-70 f3.5 I wrote about here, looks better to my eye on the D 600, than the newer lens.

I shot some comparison photos as is de rigueur for these camera tests.  I shot my usual test subjects with the D700, the D600, both with a Nikkor 50 mm f1 .8, and compared them to the X Pro 1 with its 35 mm f1 .4, (which on DX has nearly the same field of view)both at F 5.6.  For the record, I developed them using the same raw developer (which currently cannot currently be named) which is said to be the best developer in particular for the Fuji files and also great for Nikons.  I did not always use standard settings, but attempted to best optimize each image.

Here’s 100% crop of images I shot at ISO 320 on the X Pro 1 and the D 600

Here’s a set at ISO 3200, including shots from the D 700:

In either the low or high ISO images, I think it’s clear that the Nikon has an advantage in resolution.

I think the high ISO noise rankings (higher is better) would be D 600 > X Pro 1 > D 700.

I’m impressed with the Fuji.  The difference in resolution between it and the Nikon seems clearly less than the eight megapixels the sensor sizes would suggest.  This is probably the cause of the removal of the anti-aliasing filter on Fuji.  Again, I think the high ISO images suggest that the D600 is better than the Fuji, which is slightly better than the D700.  That camera, even allowing for the different image magnification of its smaller files at 100%, clearly has less resolution, and noise suppression than the other two.  It’s amazing how good these imagers are getting.

I’m actually rather impressed that the Fuji does not lose ground to the Nikon D600 as the ISO numbers increase.  The newer Nikon in my mind however, is a clear winner here.

I should also mention that in playing with the files, the dynamic range of the camera seems very high.  This camera appears to have some of the same abilities to lift the shadows as its older sibling the D7000.  It also does a very nice job at highlight detail retention.  In this regard it feels almost like my old Fuji S5 pro.  On a raw image, you can dial back what appears to be a blown out sky or snowfield, and find that there is significant detail available.

One issue with this camera has to do with the autofocus.  There been reports that the performance of the autofocus on this camera is mediocre, compared to cameras higher up in the Nikon line.  To me the autofocus always functioned well, but my main frustration was the rather restricted area of autofocus points in the viewfinder.  This is very frustrating for landscaping.  It can be very difficult to bring a focus point for instance on a spot in the periphery of the image.  Then I realized that a simple solution for this is to move to “live view” while, particularly on a tripod, which brings to bear the camera’s very adequate contrast detection autofocus system which can cover the entire frame.  Problem largely solved.

One other issue I think deserves discussion.  Some very thoughtful photographers have written about the importance of using careful shot discipline, if we’re to extract all of the high-resolution of these devices.  As the megapixels increase, it seems logical that we may increasingly rely on camera stabilization devices, whether physical or electronic, in order to prevent motion blur.  The larger mirrors in the full-frame digital SLRs such as the D600 can cause issues with camera motion when they swing up and out-of-the-way on shutter activation.

Also with FX Nikon cameras is that the few image stabilized lenses available tend to be rather large and not particularly fun to carry around ( excepting the little  Nikkor 28-70).I did do some free hand shooting with the D 600 and noted that it was fairly difficult at times, to prevent motion blur, unless one used at least a monopod. Now I don’t shoot thousands of frames every day, and there are pro shooters who are so steady, and have such good technique, that this may not be a problem for them.  For me however, I need to be careful.

For these reasons, I believe that mirrorless devices such as G series Panasonics, and the Fuji X cameras, which are smaller than full-frame DSLRs and offer lenses with image stabilization, will likely be my choice for free-hand shooting.    I find, for instance, that the mirrorless cameras are much more forgiving in this setting.  I get much less motion blur with even the non-stabilized 60 mm lens (90 mm equivalent) on the X Pro 1 then I do with shorter lenses on the D 600.

At any rate, that Nikon D600 is a wonderful camera and will add significantly to most shooters capabilities, both out in the woods, on the street, and in challenging low light situations.  For me the camera’s weatherproofing makes it a natural choice for use when it’s raining and snowing, and its small size and lightweight but sturdy build make it a good companion out in the wilds.  The only disadvantage of the FX format is the need for larger lenses, and some sort of camera stabilization.

When you comply with its needs however, the results are wonderful.

 

The Box (Nikon D700, Nikkor 50mm f1.8)

 

I’m sitting in my photography office.  I’m staring at a box which contains some brand spanking new photo gear. But I can’t open it. It sits on my floor almost taunting me.

 “Open me” it seems to taunt me, lounging provocatively in front of my couch. “You know you want me”, it seems to say, its sleek, seductive, cardboard flanks emblazoned with phrases such as: “A new standard in vivid uniform glossy prints”, or “dramatically improved facial tones”.

 But, I can’t open, it no matter how tempting it seems. I have to wait. Wait until the big brown truck stops once again at my door with another package.  

It will be my brand new Nikon D7000.

 I’m in an unusual and slightly frustrating situation. I’ve been following the reviews of this new Nikon, a new mid level DSLR with excellent specs that even rival more pro level offerings from Nikon. The D7000 is smaller than other most other Nikons yet of metal construction and yet fully weather-sealed. It has 16 Mp of resolution, and surprisingly good low light capability for a high resolution DX (smaller) sized sensor. In other words, it is an ideal photographic tool for use while hiking or skiing. It so far well reviewed.

And, because of all of this, it’s very hard to obtain one.

I was going to hold out while demand died down (my usual strategy in these situations), until I became aware of a deal offered by Epson, maker of my favored line of photo printers. Turns out that who with the purchase of certain new printers along with new DSLR, Epson will rebate to the buyer, $450 dollars.

Now I have two photo printers in my studio, an Epson Stylus Photo 3800, an A2 sized (17”inch carriage)  pro level printer, and smaller, 13” carriage, Epson R 1800. The latter, is very versatile, and particularly adept at printing on gloss paper. Both printers use pigmented archival inks and suitable for printing gallery prints.

  The Epson R 1900, the replacement model for my smaller printer is one of the printers feature in the rebate. It is said to be even better, particularly suited to printing skin tones.  It sells for around $500

So buy a camera, get a excellent photo printer for fifty bucks?  I wasn’t really in desperate for a new printer, as the R1800 works well, but for the money, it’s a no brainer. I put my order in through B+H Photo in NYC a week ago. I did call them to confirm that the rebate would not be affected by the availability of the camera. They confirmed it.

In usual B+H style, a large a box arrives in my office the next day. It’s the printer of course. The Nikon is backordered, delivery date unclear.

So I print up the rebate coupon from the Epson website. The purchase deadline for the rebate is December 31, which I’ve already met. There are two other wrinkles:

One, the other deadline is thirty days from the date of the order. Not a big deal.

The other though is a problem. I need a serial number, and UPC code from the camera. The one that’s really hard to get.

Uh oh, B+H was wrong. I should have called Epson.

So now I sit with a large box in my studio. I can’t open it as it wouldn’t be as returnable (no reason to jerk the retailer around). If it gets to 28 days or so without receiving the camera, I’ll have to wrap it up and send it back (or pay $500 for a printer I don’t need).

I tell this tale not to elicit your sympathy (though I’ll take it if offered). I tell it to remind the dear reader, and fellow buyer of electronic and photo gear, to make sure you know the actual terms of rebates offered, especially when the money back offer is the difference between buy, and no buy decision.

So, for now, I wait.

  Addendum:

 Today the UPS truck delivered the extra battery for the D 7000, but still no camera itself.

 They’re obviously teasing me.

Long ago, as a young man, I acquired my first SLR. It was a Fuji body with a 50mm f1.9 lens. Before this acquisition, I had only used “point and shoot cameras. The “fifty” was the standard lens for SLR bodies in those days, useful because 50mm for 35mm film, is a so-called “normal” lens; the field of view close to that of normal human visual perception. At the time, most zoom lenses were far inferior to their so-called single focal length “prime” lens. They also tended to be slow, with narrow apertures that limit subject isolation, and light gathering.

This lens/body combination had an extraordinary ability to recreate what I was actually seeing with my eyes to the film stock.

I remember the joy of discovery when my slides were developed. After many years of shooting compact cameras like the Olympus XA 2, I was able to capture the scene as I remembered it. The lens was razor sharp, and the format was liberating.  I was finally able to control the depth of field in an image. I was 18 years old, and I was hooked.

Later in life I became intrigued with digital imaging. The thought that I would be able to control the whole image path, from acquisition to print was irresistible.

 Affordable early digital cameras were modest devices. I was forced initially to abandon larger “sensor” photography for point and shoot digital cameras that were available before the millennial change (the few digital SLRs available were very expensive).  These cameras were rangefinder devices; it was hard to get a feel for how the final image would appear.

Many of us acquired digital SLRs in the early 2000s. These bodies, whether Canon or Nikon, had smaller than 35mm sensors, forcing a crop factor of 1.5 on the traditional system lenses. As a Nikon user, I began to collect F mount lenses including the Nikkor 50mm f1.8. On a DX format body, like my Fuji S5 or my Nikon D2x, this glass is a 75mm equivalent portrait lens, and I have used it to good effect in this role. I had a Nikkor 35mm f 2.0 that, with the crop factor, was close to a 50mm equivalent but I never felt as though I experienced the sense of immediacy that I experienced with my film SLR and a “normal” lens.

Last year, I purchased a Nikon D 700 which has a full size 35mm sensor (Nikon calls it the FX format) of extraordinary quality. Many of the zoom lenses I had collected were dedicated to the smaller DX format and were not useful. Happily I had begun to purchase a variety of prime lenses, suitable for the full 35mm sensors. I had also kept a lookout for pro level full frame zooms on EBay and have purchased several. These are also fine performers; technology has allowed zoom lenses to approach, and sometimes surpass the optics of earlier primes. Anyway, it is wonderful to use a lens at it traditional (for 35 mm) focal length again.

I keep coming back to that 50mm.  It’s small, discrete and pin sharp. The wide aperture allows me to shoot in low light, and creates a pleasant blur effect when desired, for shooting people. In short- it sees what I see.