Bought the D600 when it first came out. Was extremely satisfied. Yes, I had dust issues on the sensor. Sent it to Nikon and got back a new D610. I love this camera. Except perhaps for the pixel count on the D800, which I consider a negligible benefit, 24 vs 36, for my use. I see no reason for upgrading at this point. If I did upgrade I would probably move to the Z6 or something mirrorless. But currently very happy with the D610.
I am going to be 69 soon. I have been a professional photographer for the last 20 years and now retired. I am a huge fan of the new digital photography technology and all the incredible benefits it offers. With that said I must agree 100% that the old pictures that were taken during the film days still offer me the most memories. When I look at the faded pics and feel the old crispy paper it brings back memories that I can never get looking at a computer screen and or smartphone. I remember the excitement of going to Walgreens to pick up the prints and seeing what I had waiting for me.
Guess I would do a Google search?
Completely intentional. This person is a regular here and absolutely knew this was not the correct section to spew his propaganda. There are always those who actually think they make a difference.
Very Well Done!!! Right Place, Right Time, Right EYE!!!
A lot of excellent advise from the previous post that I absolutely concur with. I was a sports photographer and worked for a company for about three years. I shot primarily baseball and hockey. Be willing to stand outside on those extremely hot days and stand inside shooting hockey in the chilly conditions. You will get a lot of exercise as well. Definitely a full frame camera and fast lenses are mandatory if you plan on selling. Be willing to travel all over the place. I have and still do on occasion shoot dance and cheer competitions. ( another completely different learning curve )
Did I make much money.... NO!! It was really a part-time gig for me and I had the luxury of choosing when and where I shot. It became somewhat of a hobby for me. I do highly recommend it because you will learn a lot about shooting action. You will learn and appreciate what your camera and lenses are capable of. It will be invaluable to you in the future when if you ever need to use that skill set. For me, it was a great learning experience and I had a great time shooting the kids.
Many of the myths are valid however when it comes to dynamic range, noise, depth of field. full frame is a clear winner. Depends on what is important to you. When I left crop and went to full fame it made a huge difference to me. I never looked back. I do a lot of low light and use flash very seldom so the dynamic range and ISO issues are very important to me and I will pay the money for it. I am sure the vast majority out there do not care about those things and therefore the price difference does not justify the end result for them.
Bottom line and most importantly, full frame or crop, the person behind the lens makes for a better image, never the camera. I am sure this thread will receive a lot of interest!!!
Technically you are right. However, I am one of those "people" that feel I own it because I have it on my computer and I want to see someone attempt to take it from me. My point is there are new programs available with the same bells and whistles that you pay a one time charge for. Most under $60.00. It is not the money as much as it is being made to pay for "newer bells and whistles" that in fact, very few will ever use or even need. Adobe makes excellent software but competition has a way of equalizing the playing field and we are beginning to see that happen. I certainly understand Adobe's marketing and I think it is brilliant just not for me.
I have always appreciated, upgraded, and used Adobe programs for many years. With that said If my LR 6 and PSE 10 stand alone's should ever be obsolete for whatever reason, I am moving to one of many new excellent editing packages available for photos. Many of these programs offer all the power of Adobe and you own it. No way will I pay Adobe a monthly fee for programs I do not own. IMHO
I think it is fair to say every now and then the best of the best have occasional shortcomings. I am a Nikon user and ALWAYS had great service from them. With that said I am sure there have been mishaps with other Nikon users. I think people are more verbal when things go wrong and those who have god experiences take them for granted. IMHO
I have a 65" LG 4K. Frankly, that is my new PC screen. I use it as my PC screen for everything. I edit and view all my images on it. I find the detail while editing better than my PC screen. Being a PC guy I cannot speak for a Mac screen. I know they are quite good. The images are displayed brilliantly and sharp. Have not used my PC monitor for over a year now.
Good Luck
I purchased my D600 when it first came out. It definitely had oil issues. I sent to Nikon and they replaced it immediately with a new D610. I never looked back. This is a fabulous camera. I agree it suffers a little in low light focus scenarios and could be better. I shoot a variety of venues which include low light scenarios and 95% of the time it works well. The dynamic range is excellent. ISO performance is also excellent. I have never seen the need for the 750 or 800 series.
I shoot freelance for a number of Dance Cheer competitions. I always use a monopod as a pistol grip is not nearly stable enough. I shoot a D610 usually 1600-4000 ISO Nikon 70-200 2.8 VR II and approx 1/640 to 1/000. Here is an example of one show I shot:
https://roymarphotography.smugmug.com/Sports/Dance/Of course lighting dictates the small difference in my settings and also use post editing LR for noise reduction and cropping where necessary. These settings can be used for most all theater type events with small tweaks here and there. The lens and monopod makes the difference. I am very happy and comfortable using my D610 for its incredible low noise levels and especially its great dynamic range. Over the years I have shot with D300 as well as D4. Certainly the D4 gave the best results but only a small degree difference and certainly not worth the cost difference for the body.
My best advise is every theater is a little different depending on the light and your distance from the stage. Learn to read your histogram and experiment. After a few times it will all come together.
Good Luck!
Hello Allen
I will try to make this short. My wife is from Germany and we travel most every year and stay for a month. We travel extensively from Munich to Berlin and much in between. I just like you dread taking my 70-200 and carrying it around. However since you will be on a river cruise not having to lug it around while walking, I recommend it highly. You will be seeing beautiful castles, towns, and scenery all along the river cruise that your sorter lenses will not be able to capture adequately. You have a 15 meg camera so long shots cropped will not do it. Bite the bullet, perhaps work out at the gym a little extra, and you will be rewarded with some beautiful shots.
I do not really see a need for a big tripod. Sounds like you are covered there with the small one.
Have a GREAT time.