You can tell he is a cannon fanboy. He keeps saying that the d600 in not good in a professional environment. Plus he does not really know the Nikon camera, I can change the settings fast enough. Any full frame and some a lot of crop sensor cameras can be used in a professional manner.
A pretty good review, although a little biased towards the Canon. If this were a true fight you shouldn't have handicapped the Nikon by shooting in default video mode just because the Canon didn't have the clean HDMI output. We still don't know which camera had the best overall video output, although you suggested it would be the Nikon by a large margin. Also a Pro gets to know his camera, where the controls are, and how they work. The D600 wouldn't be "clumsy" to a working Pro. The Canon has no low light AF assist lamp which is a huge disadvantage when working in shadows and no built-in flash; another major point. You only skimmed over these items.
your using an L series lens on the canon compared to a stock lens on the nikon. canons are over saturated and suck compared to the nikons. i once owned both cameras and chose to stick with the nikon.
My point was that the whole thing started on a misrepresentation. I've seen videos that started with one camera without the grip and the reviewer attached it to give perspective. I own the 5DM3 and it's practically the same size as the D600.
I have the D600, and you CAN see the ISO and the exposure-meter on live-view. So that statement is incorrect. Its just you go in to live-view, and press info untill the exposure-meter is on the screen (bottom right) and then it will stay there unless you change it again while shooting in live-view.
I'm sorry but, to me, you are obviously biased. You seem like someone who usually uses Canon, mostly on weddings, hence the problems to adapt to the different button layout of the Nikon cameras. I use a Nikon, but I also had trouble finding some controls on Canon cameras, when I had to use one on an event. So, I think it all comes down to what brand one is used to.
Obviously you get used to the controls and I do shoot Nikon and others quite a bit though my main wedding stills camera is a 5D3. However, the button I was referring to was a dual purpose button that changed function during image review which takes place after every picture. I do think that was a poor implementation though Canon does have their own button issues on some cameras and either way, you get used to even poor button layout. Canon has an issue where you can't change the kelvin white balance with the WB button...you have to jump through the Q menu...drives me nuts and I hate it but you get used to it.
At the wedding, as in German tradition, the best man kidnaps the bride and takes her to a pub. No flash allowed at the pub and the light levels were about candle light. If it was not for the ability to shoot at ISO 12000-25000, I'm not sure how I would have captured those moments. My job at a wedding is to capture moments and if I need 20,000 ISO to do that, so be it. And on the 5D mark III, 20,000 ISO looks like 6400 so 20,000 is just a number now. The D3s & D4 also make 20,000 ISO look great
So most national geographic photographers often shoot Nikon over Cannon cause it is NOT the better choice? Not sure who needs the education around here.
I did have to do a lot of focus and recompose. However, the D600 was way better than the 5D mark II, but after using the 5D mark III for a while, it is tough to go back to only having focus points in the center of the frame. It's not a huge issue most of the time, but if you are shooting really shallow depth of feild, you will likely want to keep your subject in the center. Or you can shoot wider and crop the frame in post to get the subject in the corners.
Haha!!! I was talking about owning a Nikon D600 one day not the Canon. I didn't mean to get you upset. But to compare the D600 with the Canon 5D Mark 3, the D600 must be remarkable.
The Nikon D600 offer better quality of images. The reason is the sensor. To tell the truth, I think that the sensor is from Sony. No matter. Of course, the D600 has limits which are designed to prevent the competition with the D800. But the limits don't affect the quality of the images. For this, the D600 is NEARLY a D800. Nikon's strategy is revolutionary. Nikon gives you different machines, but all perfect in their task. Canon gives you different machines, some more handicapped than others.
So you said, Nikon D600 with the kit lens performs close to the Canon 5Diii with a L lens? I will stop my comparison and decide to buy the D600 now, thanks for the help.
You're absolutely right. Skill being capped by the technology you use can only be argued for a small amount of time...when at the end of the day the question is "how skilled am i?". Even the most famous photographers can take fantastic photos using something as simple as a camera phone.
Very thorough -- thanks for taking the time to make this video. I almost regretted getting my 5D3 when the D600 was announced. Your video has helped validate my purchase. I feel warmer inside. Thanks!!
just bought my D600 with the 24-85mm lens for $1996.95, plus $175 in freebies, plus $40 b&h store cash back, plus the 2K in rewards on my credit card. now the camera is an awesome deal compared to what it cost in October. can't wait to take some shots when I get it in 2 days. finally Full Frame!!!!!
The Nikon D600 is a perfect camera. The Nikon D600 is here to compete against a machine of a higher price-segment. And the D600 wins. The sensor of the D600 is just fantastic. It is a WONDERFUL time to be a Nikon photographer. Nikon has made a revolution: innovative cameras at an affordable price. Nikon has given me EVERYTHING, and I took EVERYTHING. Canon offered me just a minimal improvement but expensive, and I refused the ridiculous bureaucratic trivial improvement of Canon.
Once for all: the Nikon D800 can print uncropped, without problem and without interpolation, about A1-size prints(59,4 x 84,1 cm, at 200 dpi). This is a RECORD for FF cameras today. A record of QUALITY. All lenses which was fine on the old FULL FRAME cameras, will go well also on the D800. But to get the BEST RESULT from this sensor it is necessary to use lenses which have a resolution close to that of the D800-sensor. One of these perfect lenses is the Nikon AF-S Micro-Nikkor 105mm 2,8G VR.
In other videos you mention the Nikon screen turns off too quickly. Have you checked the menu. monitor off delay. You can set it to up to 20 minutes for photo preview or information screen. On the D7000 I is menu C4. Hope that helps. Cheers!
I was in Cologne, at Photokina: Zeis said: "we will build lenses for the D800 and for the next generation-cameras of the future(which will have more than 50 MP). The density is NOT a problem, but it is a possibility. The digital world is based on pixels, and the pixels are DETAILS. Institutions tend toward conservatism. Even Nikon, in the past, didn't want to make FF. But today, the opposite happens: NIKON FULL FRAME accessible to everyone. And the density will increase, thanks to technology.
You are right that the Nikon blows away the Canon on dynamic range (but not in high ISO anymore except with the D4)...and I am not sure exactly what you are reffering to when you say I don't know how to opperate it. A 'Pro' needs quick access to all shooting settings ideally, without taking your eye away from the viewfinder. I felt many controls required me to do this unlike the D800 or 5D3. However, I'll take a D600 over a 6D anyday for photography. See the 5D3 vs the Canon 6D test.
I don't go back and forth when I shoot. I shoot mostly weddings and my workhorse camera is the 5D mark III and right now nothing will change that. I just love testing equipment and seeing what each camera has to offer. I use the D800 and even the D600 sometimes for interior or landscape work but the 5D3 for me is the best for what I shoot. If I could have any 1 camera, it would be the 5D3. If I could use any 2 cameras, it would be the Nikon D4 & D800. The 5D3 is a better all around camera.
The d600 is being compared to the much more expensive and supposedly more professional camera yet the Nikon d600 out performed the markIII without question in most tests other then video, Panasonic ruled that. Nikon has been making glass far longer then connon has even been around! For any cannon user to hate on the amazing technology in the d600, realize u made wrong move. What happened in the NFL ,Cannon lost there contract now all u see nikon! pay more for L lens still years behind Nikon
With the Nikon AF-S Micro-Nikkor 105mm 2,8G VR mounted on the D800, you can take pictures which will be printed in A1-size poster, this means 59,4 x 84,1 cm at 200 dpi, without PROBLEM, without resampling, without interpolation. To do that, you need very good lenses. At this time, only NIKON and ZEISS offer lenses like that. The great sensor of the D800 is not the end, but it is the START of a new era. Very soon, both Nikon and Zeiss will manufacture new lenses for future generations of sensors.
I thought the same as MrJacobMcDermott when I heard you say that. A Pro will know his camera and get used to the layout of the buttons. In use there will be little if any difference in the speed with which a Nikon Pro accesses settings on his D600 than the Canon Pro with a 5DM3. It sounds like you are more accustomed to the Canon layout than the Nikon.
@Hdio99 yes and no. This is the old Canon 24-70 so its not super sharp and both were tested at f/8. At f/8 a $200 lens is sharp. Thus they will be equal and the lens wont matter much for dynamic range and high iso testing anyway.
Thanks. I did not have issues with the D600. It wasn't a champ in low light but it pulled it off and did achieve focus. I was shooting in extremely low light at up to 12,000 ISO in one case. The 5D3 was definitely better at those ISOs and the difference was noticeable.
I NEVER said that Sigma was better than Nikon, but in the "PARTICULAR" case of the Sigma 105mm f/2.8 EX DG OS HSM Macro, I'm sorry to say but it is better than Nikon's 105 in a few ways... Whether you like it or not it's pretty much a fact... It is sharper in close focusing at small aperture (which is what macro is all about) , has less color fringing and distortion. I love my 200mm f4 micro but it can get heavy in the field so that's the only reason i like the 105 as well.
You do really well thought out and thorough reviews, but I noticed you say the word 'now' a lot. In this video, you said 'now' 50 times! That's amazing!!
When you hit the shutter button, even just half way, the screen goes black and you have to manually hit a button to turn it back on to see your settings. That is the case no matter how long you set the delay to. I prefer using the back screen to see my settings because the top display is small, difficult to read, and i'm pretty sure it does not show your exposure meter. I don't know why Nikon doesn't give you the option in the menu of leaving it on like Canon does...just a simple option
I would agree but Canon has not released the 6D yet and it doesn't look like that will change in the next month. Given that the 6D sensor tech will be based on the 5D mark III most likely, the results should somewhat similar. Given that there is no 6D yet, the 5Dmk3 is the most logical comparison. I have also compared it with the 7D in another review.
I do agree that this is not a brand biased review. Logically if your camera sensor performs well in video it should also in stills. If it is better in photos it simply means your camera process and enhance the image which produces longer shutter lag.
Then the Sony Alpha series sucks completely. Oh wait, they compare it to the Nikon D4s in picture quality, and AF speed and tracking. Video however sucks with rolling shutter; even if it's 4k. Still stomps the Canon 5DM3 and the Nikon D600 in still quality though...and it's a crop sensor. Please tell me how this is possible then. -p
Getitdigital which is a camera store on Ebay for example, has it right now brand new with warranty for $850. Amazon.com has it for $859 from a 3rd party seller and $950 direct from Amazon. I have seen them on sale for less. Also, if you buy it with a camera, it is normally only $600 more for the kit with this lens.
It is not so much from a quality perspective. The video quality from the D600 is good. However, you cannot change the aperture in live view mode or when recording which is a huge problem. Plus Canon gives you a video option with less compression which is a little higher. Canon has lenses more geared to video and gives you better options for controlling audio while shooting. Although, the D600 does have a headphone out that the Canon does not. But the video quality on the D600 is very good.
Comparison video without veracity and bias that aims to denigrate the Nikon brand. clearly a canon fanboy. It is sad to see so much wrong information in one video.
why is DR landscape test done only with pulling the shadows up from severely underexposed image? How about overexposing it few stops so we could see what's on the other side of the palette with both cameras?
Not quite. The Mark III was tested with the $1,500 10 y/o 24-70 f/2.8 (the version 2 is $2200 and just came out 2mo ago) but they were both tested at f/8 and at f/8, even a $150 lens looks good and is about the same sharpness as any L glass. But as far as sensor qualtiy, yes, the D600 performs great. The D600 weaknesses were in the body, live view, video, and issues with hot pixels/screen. The 5DmkIII does offer way better AF and controls but that is why there is a $1500 price difference.
The Canon 24-105 f/4mm isn't a kit lens even though there are combinations when sold. It's more expensive than most of the frigging bodies in the entry level segment. Comparing it with a lens with variable aperture over the focal range is not really a good comparison as well.
I used the Canon Kit lens, which is a 24-105mm f/4 IS (retail $1100 but more like $800) against the kit lens for Nikon which is a bit cheaper at $600. I used them both at f/8 for almost all the shots and both lenses are about the same quality at f/8. I wish I could have used the same lens on both cameras but using the kit lenses for each was the best I could do. The differences were minor and would hardly be seen testing anything other than sharpness/contrast/color
Take the battery grip off the Canon before comparing size, or add the MBD14 onto the Nikon ... I appreciate you taking the time to share your observations. But, if you are going to be biased ... state you prefer Canon. Do not present yourself as unbiased if you are not.
The lens I was using was the Canon 24-105mm f/4 which is Canon's closest competition to the Nikon 24-85mm 3.5-4.5 though yes, it does cost more. The Canon 24-105 is also the kit lens for the 5D3 while the Nikon D600 kit lens is the 24-85 so I put each body with the manufacture blessed kit lens against each other. I might shoot mostly Canon but I did purchase the D600 and owned it until I had sensor dust issues. I don't own stock in Canon and love Nikon cameras and almost always have one around
US retail store pricing. But you are right, there is a difference and ideally I would have had the same lens on both. But I do believe using a kit lens from both cameras is OK for a comparison as that is how the manufacture sells it. Nikon shouldn't sell it with a kit lens that makes the camera perform poorly. But once again, I agree with you that the same lens would have been ideal.
When you put the screen ON all the time, it still turns off every time you push the shutter, even half way to focus or get exposure, and it does not turn back on until you hit INFO again. So no, it does not stay on. Trust me...I tried for hours to get this to work. On the size, you can look at the dimensions...they are very different which could be a huge bonus for the Nikon if you want small and light. The colors rendered by Canon & Nikon are very different...even with the same lenses.
speaking for the wedding, why you compare functionality of different class models?? you should compare with d800, as it has all those separate buttons for iso, wb, etc.
The Nikon sounds really interesting to me. The only thing that bothers me is that the display unfortunately is not flexibel. Because I often shoot animals from a low perspective and also concerts from a high perspective, a flexibel display would be perfect. Do you know if any camera comparing to this Nikon does exist with flexibel display?
I skipped around the video, so sorry if I missed this, but when talking about shooting the wedding at 12.5K+ iso on the Nikon and Canon, were you shooting JPEG or RAW? DXO lead me to believe the D610 wouldl slaughter the 5D3 in high ISO situations. THANKS!
treepizzle Sorry for the late response, I was shooting RAW and the 5D3 is certainly better. DXO is misleading because it measure the noise level while keeping the dynamic range at a maximum. Thus the D610 (or Nikon/Sony in general) do better because they have better dynamic range and lower noise levels in the shadows and blacks. Canon has more noise in the shadows but keeps overall noise levels lower at high ISO then the Nikon D610, 750, and D810. I have a hard time with DXO because of the way they score low light especially...it's not really in line with how are eyes judge low light results so it is often misleading if you don't understand their testing.
Just because they are not on the same level, doesn't mean that I don't like the Nikon. I'd take a D600 any day over the 6D for example. I know a bunch of pro photographers that felt the D800 was a poor fit for them (still an awesome camera) due to the high MP, extreme file size, not as wonderful low light results, and slow shooting that were hoping the D600 be a better fit, hence the comparison. I just reviewed the Nikon D7100 and it is an awesome camera as well. Nikon is doing great.
I shoot with both and I will say that I love pulling out the D600 or D800 for wide angle landscape style shots such as from the back of a church at a wedding, architectural portraits or actual landscape photographs. The blacks from the Nikon are so rich it is amazing. However, the 5D3 is my primary body with the state of the art focus system, fast frame rates, and great low light performance. Ideally lenses could be used on either one and you could just pull out the best body for the job
I don't know why compare the cameras. both are superb. Cameras are like golf clubs, You can shot amazing pictures with a simple Nikon D3000 or 1000D, or an amazing shot with 20 year old eye-ping golf club. Both brands and cameras are amazing. But the art is in the eye of the person and the swing and rithm of golfer.
hey guy, I use both Nikon 24-120f4 vr and 24-85f3.5-4.5Gvr kit lens which came with my current copy of D600(I returned 2 of these before I got this one). and I 've owned D600, D800E , D700, D3s ,5D2, A900 and compared them all. I 'd have to say the Nikon kit lens is actually a bit sharper lens than the lousy convenient zoom like the Nikon AFS24-120mmf4GVR, which I most likely selling soon. so I think it is pretty fair comparison , and imho, Dan is very fair and honest.
Not. You are wrong. You may have had a good experience with the Sigma. But the photographic lens Nikon 105mm is SCIENTIFICALLY better than the Sigma you mentioned. In the future, Nikon and Zeiss build photographic lenses for high resolutions of the new cameras. Zeiss said this at Photokina 2012. Presumably the density of the sensors will grow again in the next two years. Sigma has not yet made a lens like the Nikon 105mm. NOT YET.
The reviewers comment was not what information could or could not be displayed - it was that he had to repeatedly press the [Info] button to bring it back up because it goes away automatically... -.-
I agree, the 6D would be the best comparison...but it is not out yet so there is no 6D to compare it to. So I compared it with the only cameras available by Canon, the Mark III & 7D. Either way, the D600 performed really well, especially in DR so Nikon lovers need not complain. Other than video functionality, the D600 did extremely well in image quality tests. I'm no Canon fanboy. I bought the D600 as a 2nd body because I was so impressed with the D800 DR and the 6D specs are disappointing
Still can't believe what Nikon did by somewhat re-igniting the [most] megapixel war. However, they really did alot to make the D600/610 and the D800/E are epic.
The D600 dynamic range makes landscapes look awesome, the focus system was slightly better, it is faster, and 2 card slots is a big deal for me. However, the Canon feels better in the hand (minus that it has no white balance button), is better in low light, has wifi, and blows away the Nikon in video. I don't care about the Canon having GPS or the NIkon having flash. It's a tough call but my images looked better on the Nikon when shooting below 1600 ISO and doesn't make up for it in other areas
The green and purple tints are calibration issues they have nothing to do with the camera designs. In the case of Nikon you can send the unit to Nikon Professional Services and they will correct any color balance issues along with focus calibration and white balance calibration. Its not really something that should keep you from buying one camera over the other.
I understand you. You did not understand what I say. The Sigma 105mm is a good lens. But the Nikon 105mm is unbeatable, only the 200mm AF Micro Nikon has a better sharpness. I have not yet tried the 200mm on a D800, I'll try in the next few months. But there is a myth to dispel: some people think that some of the lenses on the D800 can become worse: FALSE! Sometimes, some lenses improve just slightly, but the sense of D800 is: PERFECTION. "Improvements" are not ENOUGH. Perfection is the goal!
Why is it that you get a great camera like the Nikon D600 and it performs admirably under most situations but gets hang up on the Canon 5Dmkiii because its not called professional! only 7 years ago the specs on the professional cameras where no where as good as what we have today and the photographers then where turning out stunning images. Case in point a Pentax K3 would absolutely murder a so called professional camera of only a couple of years ago, so the camera is not the issue for the word professional it is the person driving the camera. Not so long along ago I saw a professional photographer shoot a whole wedding with a Nikon D40 and the images where outstanding because he knew how to photograph as a craft not driven by huge megapixels.
You forgot that there is also a 1Dx. The 5D MKIII wasn't the only FX-body at the time of making this video. In the meantime there is de 6D what is Canon's counterpart for the D600. Anyaway, both of those plasticy FX-bodies are for the photographer who is on the verge of switching to full frame but don't really had the money for the real deal.
Cool vid! But you really personally like the Canon it seems. Next time it would be great if you used the same lens on both cams. To make a comparison with a 24-70 2.8 vs a 24-85 3.5-4.5 on even different bodies isn't a good comparison. The 24-70 2.8 is way better vs the 24-85 3.5-4.5.
Haha!!! Why? The 5D Mark 3 is incredible. I heard a lot of good things about it and seen some amazing pictures from the old 5D. I am a nikon girl, but I think this video tells us that Nikon put some serious work and features in the D600. It was placed again the 5DMk 3. It's an amazing camera and I will love to own one some day.
still, the L lens is a much higher quality lens than the kit lens of the d600 if it was the 24-85 , i sold that lens immediately when i got the d600. the canon 24-105 retails for over $1400 dollars in canada where the nikon 24-85 retails for around 580. almost a third of the price of the canon. you have to admit a different lens should have been used. where are you're getting your price figures on these lenses?
he is not a canon fanboy, even though i didn't take in very seriously when i saw is videos for the first time, i think he is one of the most impartial reviewers in youtube. I just wished he made more nikon lenses reviews and some sony and pentax reviews. btw mirrorless reviews would be good too
There was no Canon 6D when this review came out. The ONLY full frame camera Canon offered that compared with the D600 was the 5D3. I later gave a 6D review when it arrived.
Throughout the test you said the Nikon was better in all areas except the extreme high ISO test and then you actually said the D600 wasnt a pro camera???? Just because your not used to how the buttons work because your a Canon user. Consider for a moment that a Nikon user would not have an issue with the buttons and would critique Canons for having to go into menus for simple things. Needing two hands to turn a camera on is not pro Canon.
Oh no... Did you not read the reviews before purchasing the camera? I heard a lot about the Canon 7D and would have purchased that if you are into movies
Yes but if you dont have a huge lens and can use a pop-up flash than you can use it just to brighten their faces a little, with -2 or -3 and repair the WB in photoshop or any other software that allow that (lightroom i dont think it can do that) (and if it aint broke dont fix it :D). I dont do weddings (i am a fine arts passionate) but i have a friend who uses 2, 3 or even more flashes on tripods all over the room and uses the camera as a master with a wireless. He has a friend who helps him.
Hi dear, Im about to take a decision to buy either canon eos 5dm2 or 600d ? since am a canon guy (i've 7d) with punch of canon and sigma lenses, but i feel Nikon D600 is worth to shift for Nikon and upgrade to full frame camera! i need your advice.... Thank you for a great video.
I would a agree totally about your point about 'fan boys' but i do think there is a difference between Nikon and Cannon, I'm a Nikon user myself, but after looking at some low light shoots taken with the 5D mkiii and both Nikon D800 and D600... (plus a load of other comparisons) I can't help think the Canon has a better quality image, and at high ISO is less noisy? So much so I'm thinking of jumping Brand before going from DX to FX :( Your thoughts?
thats a huge difference from the stores where i live. not sure why. but i think it would have been much more fair if you had used a lens.such as the nikon 24-120mm f/4 VR.
true. I was just kidding. It's funny to see people see what makes the sensor, how it was made etc, instead of seeing the results. :) I wish Canon outsourced their sensor design to Nikon, because I think the DR of my 450D is way too low.
So the Canon 5D mark iii ($3,499) is tested with L glass ($2,290) , and the Nikon D600 ($2,099.95) with a kit lens ($599.95). Wow talk about unfair comparison. A fixed F2.8 lens vs. variable f3.5-4.5. Canon $5,789 vs. Nikon $2,699.90. Well hands dow Nikon wins by offering similar performance and saving you $3,089.10 to buy more lens or another d600.
I prefer the Nikon D600 over the 6D from Canon for everything except video. I do like the 5Dm2 though and it does offer some great performance for the money (it is now $500 less at least than the D600 by Nikon. I'm in love with the 5Dm3 too. It depends on what you shoot. Nikon wins the dynamic range test so if you shoot landscapes, go Nikon. The Canon 5D2 wins the best bang for the buck, and the 5D3 is the best all around camera in my opinion.
Last thing .. if y want coompare the 2 cameras side by side put the battery grip on the d600 as well ..
Although the canon 5d mark 3 is 2 times more expensive still nikon d600 is better.
nope, nikon d600 autofocus is terrible
You can tell he is a cannon fanboy. He keeps saying that the d600 in not good in a professional environment. Plus he does not really know the Nikon camera, I can change the settings fast enough. Any full frame and some a lot of crop sensor cameras can be used in a professional manner.
@@playerwii64 its been 7 years, but your stupid. I can nail focus on a fly 10 miles away, its you thats slow
So because the Nikon's controls have a bigger learning curve, it's less "professional"? Quite the contrary if you think about it.
A pretty good review, although a little biased towards the Canon. If this were a true fight you shouldn't have handicapped the Nikon by shooting in default video mode just because the Canon didn't have the clean HDMI output. We still don't know which camera had the best overall video output, although you suggested it would be the Nikon by a large margin. Also a Pro gets to know his camera, where the controls are, and how they work. The D600 wouldn't be "clumsy" to a working Pro. The Canon has no low light AF assist lamp which is a huge disadvantage when working in shadows and no built-in flash; another major point. You only skimmed over these items.
your using an L series lens on the canon compared to a stock lens on the nikon. canons are over saturated and suck compared to the nikons.
i once owned both cameras and chose to stick with the nikon.
1080LPtv You chose well.
The canon has the vertical grip attached and the nikon doesn't. Your very first comparison is flawed.
***** not much the difference is hardy anything,
My point was that the whole thing started on a misrepresentation. I've seen videos that started with one camera without the grip and the reviewer attached it to give perspective. I own the 5DM3 and it's practically the same size as the D600.
Bobby Lopez Creative yes you can see that once he has them side by side on his tripod
I have the D600, and you CAN see the ISO and the exposure-meter on live-view. So that statement is incorrect. Its just you go in to live-view, and press info untill the exposure-meter is on the screen (bottom right) and then it will stay there unless you change it again while shooting in live-view.
13:23 nikon destroyed canon. Look at a digital circle a round the sun.
I'm sorry but, to me, you are obviously biased. You seem like someone who usually uses Canon, mostly on weddings, hence the problems to adapt to the different button layout of the Nikon cameras. I use a Nikon, but I also had trouble finding some controls on Canon cameras, when I had to use one on an event. So, I think it all comes down to what brand one is used to.
Obviously you get used to the controls and I do shoot Nikon and others quite a bit though my main wedding stills camera is a 5D3. However, the button I was referring to was a dual purpose button that changed function during image review which takes place after every picture. I do think that was a poor implementation though Canon does have their own button issues on some cameras and either way, you get used to even poor button layout. Canon has an issue where you can't change the kelvin white balance with the WB button...you have to jump through the Q menu...drives me nuts and I hate it but you get used to it.
LearningCameras.com :) So we're cool, then! I agree! I'm glad we're on the same page. Keep up the good work!
raduionut78 HAHAHAHAHA... that guy is not fair
Sorry, but this wasnt a good video.
At the wedding, as in German tradition, the best man kidnaps the bride and takes her to a pub. No flash allowed at the pub and the light levels were about candle light. If it was not for the ability to shoot at ISO 12000-25000, I'm not sure how I would have captured those moments. My job at a wedding is to capture moments and if I need 20,000 ISO to do that, so be it. And on the 5D mark III, 20,000 ISO looks like 6400 so 20,000 is just a number now. The D3s & D4 also make 20,000 ISO look great
Uuuuu !!! You're a fan Canan !!!
not talking about AF, but as well in terms of "image quality" even D600, D610 is better than any canon !!
So most national geographic photographers often shoot Nikon over Cannon cause it is NOT the better choice? Not sure who needs the education around here.
I did have to do a lot of focus and recompose. However, the D600 was way better than the 5D mark II, but after using the 5D mark III for a while, it is tough to go back to only having focus points in the center of the frame. It's not a huge issue most of the time, but if you are shooting really shallow depth of feild, you will likely want to keep your subject in the center. Or you can shoot wider and crop the frame in post to get the subject in the corners.
Haha!!! I was talking about owning a Nikon D600 one day not the Canon. I didn't mean to get you upset. But to compare the D600 with the Canon 5D Mark 3, the D600 must be remarkable.
The Nikon D600 offer better quality of images. The reason is the sensor. To tell the truth, I think that the sensor is from Sony. No matter. Of course, the D600 has limits which are designed to prevent the competition with the D800. But the limits don't affect the quality of the images. For this, the D600 is NEARLY a D800. Nikon's strategy is revolutionary. Nikon gives you different machines, but all perfect in their task. Canon gives you different machines, some more handicapped than others.
So you said, Nikon D600 with the kit lens performs close to the Canon 5Diii with a L lens? I will stop my comparison and decide to buy the D600 now, thanks for the help.
You're absolutely right. Skill being capped by the technology you use can only be argued for a small amount of time...when at the end of the day the question is "how skilled am i?". Even the most famous photographers can take fantastic photos using something as simple as a camera phone.
Very thorough -- thanks for taking the time to make this video. I almost regretted getting my 5D3 when the D600 was announced. Your video has helped validate my purchase. I feel warmer inside. Thanks!!
just bought my D600 with the 24-85mm lens for $1996.95, plus $175 in freebies, plus $40 b&h store cash back, plus the 2K in rewards on my credit card. now the camera is an awesome deal compared to what it cost in October. can't wait to take some shots when I get it in 2 days. finally Full Frame!!!!!
The Nikon D600 is a perfect camera. The Nikon D600 is here to compete against a machine of a higher price-segment. And the D600 wins. The sensor of the D600 is just fantastic. It is a WONDERFUL time to be a Nikon photographer. Nikon has made a revolution: innovative cameras at an affordable price. Nikon has given me EVERYTHING, and I took EVERYTHING. Canon offered me just a minimal improvement but expensive, and I refused the ridiculous bureaucratic trivial improvement of Canon.
Why while comparing canon and nikon size you leave extra battery on canon ?
Once for all: the Nikon D800 can print uncropped, without problem and without interpolation, about A1-size prints(59,4 x 84,1 cm, at 200 dpi). This is a RECORD for FF cameras today. A record of QUALITY. All lenses which was fine on the old FULL FRAME cameras, will go well also on the D800. But to get the BEST RESULT from this sensor it is necessary to use lenses which have a resolution close to that of the D800-sensor. One of these perfect lenses is the Nikon AF-S Micro-Nikkor 105mm 2,8G VR.
In other videos you mention the Nikon screen turns off too quickly. Have you checked the menu. monitor off delay. You can set it to up to 20 minutes for photo preview or information screen. On the D7000 I is menu C4. Hope that helps. Cheers!
I was in Cologne, at Photokina: Zeis said: "we will build lenses for the D800 and for the next generation-cameras of the future(which will have more than 50 MP). The density is NOT a problem, but it is a possibility. The digital world is based on pixels, and the pixels are DETAILS. Institutions tend toward conservatism. Even Nikon, in the past, didn't want to make FF. But today, the opposite happens: NIKON FULL FRAME accessible to everyone. And the density will increase, thanks to technology.
You are right that the Nikon blows away the Canon on dynamic range (but not in high ISO anymore except with the D4)...and I am not sure exactly what you are reffering to when you say I don't know how to opperate it. A 'Pro' needs quick access to all shooting settings ideally, without taking your eye away from the viewfinder. I felt many controls required me to do this unlike the D800 or 5D3. However, I'll take a D600 over a 6D anyday for photography. See the 5D3 vs the Canon 6D test.
I don't go back and forth when I shoot. I shoot mostly weddings and my workhorse camera is the 5D mark III and right now nothing will change that. I just love testing equipment and seeing what each camera has to offer. I use the D800 and even the D600 sometimes for interior or landscape work but the 5D3 for me is the best for what I shoot. If I could have any 1 camera, it would be the 5D3. If I could use any 2 cameras, it would be the Nikon D4 & D800. The 5D3 is a better all around camera.
The d600 is being compared to the much more expensive and supposedly more professional camera yet the Nikon d600 out performed the markIII without question in most tests other then video, Panasonic ruled that. Nikon has been making glass far longer then connon has even been around! For any cannon user to hate on the amazing technology in the d600, realize u made wrong move. What happened in the NFL ,Cannon lost there contract now all u see nikon! pay more for L lens still years behind Nikon
Thanks a lot for this comparison i saved a lot of money buying the d600 will you do a comparison between d610 and d800 please
With the Nikon AF-S Micro-Nikkor 105mm 2,8G VR mounted on the D800, you can take pictures which will be printed in A1-size poster, this means 59,4 x 84,1 cm at 200 dpi, without PROBLEM, without resampling, without interpolation. To do that, you need very good lenses. At this time, only NIKON and ZEISS offer lenses like that. The great sensor of the D800 is not the end, but it is the START of a new era. Very soon, both Nikon and Zeiss will manufacture new lenses for future generations of sensors.
I thought the same as MrJacobMcDermott when I heard you say that. A Pro will know his camera and get used to the layout of the buttons. In use there will be little if any difference in the speed with which a Nikon Pro accesses settings on his D600 than the Canon Pro with a 5DM3. It sounds like you are more accustomed to the Canon layout than the Nikon.
@Hdio99 yes and no. This is the old Canon 24-70 so its not super sharp and both were tested at f/8. At f/8 a $200 lens is sharp. Thus they will be equal and the lens wont matter much for dynamic range and high iso testing anyway.
Thanks. I did not have issues with the D600. It wasn't a champ in low light but it pulled it off and did achieve focus. I was shooting in extremely low light at up to 12,000 ISO in one case. The 5D3 was definitely better at those ISOs and the difference was noticeable.
I NEVER said that Sigma was better than Nikon, but in the "PARTICULAR" case of the Sigma 105mm f/2.8 EX DG OS HSM Macro, I'm sorry to say but it is better than Nikon's 105 in a few ways... Whether you like it or not it's pretty much a fact...
It is sharper in close focusing at small aperture (which is what macro is all about) , has less color fringing and distortion.
I love my 200mm f4 micro but it can get heavy in the field so that's the only reason i like the 105 as well.
Are you talking about the Nikon 85mm f/1.4 G? Maybe, but I was talking about the objectives micro Nikkor.
You do really well thought out and thorough reviews, but I noticed you say the word 'now' a lot. In this video, you said 'now' 50 times! That's amazing!!
When you hit the shutter button, even just half way, the screen goes black and you have to manually hit a button to turn it back on to see your settings. That is the case no matter how long you set the delay to. I prefer using the back screen to see my settings because the top display is small, difficult to read, and i'm pretty sure it does not show your exposure meter. I don't know why Nikon doesn't give you the option in the menu of leaving it on like Canon does...just a simple option
I would agree but Canon has not released the 6D yet and it doesn't look like that will change in the next month. Given that the 6D sensor tech will be based on the 5D mark III most likely, the results should somewhat similar. Given that there is no 6D yet, the 5Dmk3 is the most logical comparison. I have also compared it with the 7D in another review.
I do agree that this is not a brand biased review. Logically if your camera sensor performs well in video it should also in stills. If it is better in photos it simply means your camera process and enhance the image which produces longer shutter lag.
Then the Sony Alpha series sucks completely. Oh wait, they compare it to the Nikon D4s in picture quality, and AF speed and tracking. Video however sucks with rolling shutter; even if it's 4k. Still stomps the Canon 5DM3 and the Nikon D600 in still quality though...and it's a crop sensor. Please tell me how this is possible then. -p
Getitdigital which is a camera store on Ebay for example, has it right now brand new with warranty for $850. Amazon.com has it for $859 from a 3rd party seller and $950 direct from Amazon. I have seen them on sale for less. Also, if you buy it with a camera, it is normally only $600 more for the kit with this lens.
It is not so much from a quality perspective. The video quality from the D600 is good. However, you cannot change the aperture in live view mode or when recording which is a huge problem. Plus Canon gives you a video option with less compression which is a little higher. Canon has lenses more geared to video and gives you better options for controlling audio while shooting. Although, the D600 does have a headphone out that the Canon does not. But the video quality on the D600 is very good.
Comparison video without veracity and bias that aims to denigrate the Nikon brand. clearly a canon fanboy. It is sad to see so much wrong information in one video.
Shoot for the highlights print for the shadows.
I think it would be a good idea to acknowledge that the canon has ,had a battery grip on it hence the size difference Doh .
why is DR landscape test done only with pulling the shadows up from severely underexposed image? How about overexposing it few stops so we could see what's on the other side of the palette with both cameras?
Not quite. The Mark III was tested with the $1,500 10 y/o 24-70 f/2.8 (the version 2 is $2200 and just came out 2mo ago) but they were both tested at f/8 and at f/8, even a $150 lens looks good and is about the same sharpness as any L glass. But as far as sensor qualtiy, yes, the D600 performs great. The D600 weaknesses were in the body, live view, video, and issues with hot pixels/screen. The 5DmkIII does offer way better AF and controls but that is why there is a $1500 price difference.
The Canon 24-105 f/4mm isn't a kit lens even though there are combinations when sold. It's more expensive than most of the frigging bodies in the entry level segment. Comparing it with a lens with variable aperture over the focal range is not really a good comparison as well.
I used the Canon Kit lens, which is a 24-105mm f/4 IS (retail $1100 but more like $800) against the kit lens for Nikon which is a bit cheaper at $600. I used them both at f/8 for almost all the shots and both lenses are about the same quality at f/8. I wish I could have used the same lens on both cameras but using the kit lenses for each was the best I could do. The differences were minor and would hardly be seen testing anything other than sharpness/contrast/color
Take the battery grip off the Canon before comparing size, or add the MBD14 onto the Nikon ... I appreciate you taking the time to share your observations. But, if you are going to be biased ... state you prefer Canon. Do not present yourself as unbiased if you are not.
The lens I was using was the Canon 24-105mm f/4 which is Canon's closest competition to the Nikon 24-85mm 3.5-4.5 though yes, it does cost more. The Canon 24-105 is also the kit lens for the 5D3 while the Nikon D600 kit lens is the 24-85 so I put each body with the manufacture blessed kit lens against each other. I might shoot mostly Canon but I did purchase the D600 and owned it until I had sensor dust issues. I don't own stock in Canon and love Nikon cameras and almost always have one around
US retail store pricing. But you are right, there is a difference and ideally I would have had the same lens on both. But I do believe using a kit lens from both cameras is OK for a comparison as that is how the manufacture sells it. Nikon shouldn't sell it with a kit lens that makes the camera perform poorly. But once again, I agree with you that the same lens would have been ideal.
When you put the screen ON all the time, it still turns off every time you push the shutter, even half way to focus or get exposure, and it does not turn back on until you hit INFO again. So no, it does not stay on. Trust me...I tried for hours to get this to work. On the size, you can look at the dimensions...they are very different which could be a huge bonus for the Nikon if you want small and light. The colors rendered by Canon & Nikon are very different...even with the same lenses.
speaking for the wedding, why you compare functionality of different class models??
you should compare with d800, as it has all those separate buttons for iso, wb, etc.
The Nikon sounds really interesting to me. The only thing that bothers me is that the display unfortunately is not flexibel. Because I often shoot animals from a low perspective and also concerts from a high perspective, a flexibel display would be perfect. Do you know if any camera comparing to this Nikon does exist with flexibel display?
Yup I tried the D600 in their showroom, it is smaller grip compare to my 60D. I would have problem slipping it.
Absolutely. I was told to master lighting and stick with the camera I had. They told me to learn my camera inside out and invest in lens.
I skipped around the video, so sorry if I missed this, but when talking about shooting the wedding at 12.5K+ iso on the Nikon and Canon, were you shooting JPEG or RAW? DXO lead me to believe the D610 wouldl slaughter the 5D3 in high ISO situations. THANKS!
treepizzle Sorry for the late response, I was shooting RAW and the 5D3 is certainly better. DXO is misleading because it measure the noise level while keeping the dynamic range at a maximum. Thus the D610 (or Nikon/Sony in general) do better because they have better dynamic range and lower noise levels in the shadows and blacks. Canon has more noise in the shadows but keeps overall noise levels lower at high ISO then the Nikon D610, 750, and D810. I have a hard time with DXO because of the way they score low light especially...it's not really in line with how are eyes judge low light results so it is often misleading if you don't understand their testing.
Pearstone OLM-10. It's an OK lav mic for the price but the Foam Windscreen will come off. I also use an ME66 K6 shotgun mic when I don't need a lav.
Just because they are not on the same level, doesn't mean that I don't like the Nikon. I'd take a D600 any day over the 6D for example. I know a bunch of pro photographers that felt the D800 was a poor fit for them (still an awesome camera) due to the high MP, extreme file size, not as wonderful low light results, and slow shooting that were hoping the D600 be a better fit, hence the comparison. I just reviewed the Nikon D7100 and it is an awesome camera as well. Nikon is doing great.
I shoot with both and I will say that I love pulling out the D600 or D800 for wide angle landscape style shots such as from the back of a church at a wedding, architectural portraits or actual landscape photographs. The blacks from the Nikon are so rich it is amazing. However, the 5D3 is my primary body with the state of the art focus system, fast frame rates, and great low light performance. Ideally lenses could be used on either one and you could just pull out the best body for the job
I don't know why compare the cameras. both are superb.
Cameras are like golf clubs, You can shot amazing pictures with a simple Nikon D3000 or 1000D, or an amazing shot with 20 year old eye-ping golf club. Both brands and cameras are amazing. But the art is in the eye of the person and the swing and rithm of golfer.
I wonder exactly why canon's video is better? I just bought a D600 for making movies, it was a bad choice? thanks for help.
hey guy, I use both Nikon 24-120f4 vr and 24-85f3.5-4.5Gvr kit lens which came with my current copy of D600(I returned 2 of these before I got this one).
and I 've owned D600, D800E , D700, D3s ,5D2, A900 and compared them all.
I 'd have to say the Nikon kit lens is actually a bit sharper lens than the lousy convenient zoom like the Nikon AFS24-120mmf4GVR, which I most likely selling soon.
so I think it is pretty fair comparison , and imho, Dan is very fair and honest.
Found it in MENU and tried it. Works for me as with my previous cameras, so no issues here.
Not. You are wrong. You may have had a good experience with the Sigma. But the photographic lens Nikon 105mm is SCIENTIFICALLY better than the Sigma you mentioned. In the future, Nikon and Zeiss build photographic lenses for high resolutions of the new cameras. Zeiss said this at Photokina 2012. Presumably the density of the sensors will grow again in the next two years. Sigma has not yet made a lens like the Nikon 105mm. NOT YET.
I think it's more logical to compare the 6D with the D600 or the 5DMK3 with the D800/D3s... This is like comparing the D4 with the 5DMK2
N(ai)kon sounds more attractive. I own a N(ai)kon though and I'm loving it.
Very off-topic comment : Add some music to your videos... as a subscriber to your channel, i made it to the point that i needed music on your videos.
The reviewers comment was not what information could or could not be displayed - it was that he had to repeatedly press the [Info] button to bring it back up because it goes away automatically... -.-
I agree, the 6D would be the best comparison...but it is not out yet so there is no 6D to compare it to. So I compared it with the only cameras available by Canon, the Mark III & 7D. Either way, the D600 performed really well, especially in DR so Nikon lovers need not complain. Other than video functionality, the D600 did extremely well in image quality tests. I'm no Canon fanboy. I bought the D600 as a 2nd body because I was so impressed with the D800 DR and the 6D specs are disappointing
Still can't believe what Nikon did by somewhat re-igniting the [most] megapixel war. However, they really did alot to make the D600/610 and the D800/E are epic.
Try the 5D III it has a fantastic feel. It's actually why I chose the 5D III over the D800.
The D600 dynamic range makes landscapes look awesome, the focus system was slightly better, it is faster, and 2 card slots is a big deal for me. However, the Canon feels better in the hand (minus that it has no white balance button), is better in low light, has wifi, and blows away the Nikon in video. I don't care about the Canon having GPS or the NIkon having flash. It's a tough call but my images looked better on the Nikon when shooting below 1600 ISO and doesn't make up for it in other areas
The green and purple tints are calibration issues they have nothing to do with the camera designs. In the case of Nikon you can send the unit to Nikon Professional Services and they will correct any color balance issues along with focus calibration and white balance calibration. Its not really something that should keep you from buying one camera over the other.
I understand you. You did not understand what I say. The Sigma 105mm is a good lens. But the Nikon 105mm is unbeatable, only the 200mm AF Micro Nikon has a better sharpness. I have not yet tried the 200mm on a D800, I'll try in the next few months. But there is a myth to dispel: some people think that some of the lenses on the D800 can become worse: FALSE! Sometimes, some lenses improve just slightly, but the sense of D800 is: PERFECTION. "Improvements" are not ENOUGH. Perfection is the goal!
Why is it that you get a great camera like the Nikon D600 and it performs admirably under most situations but gets hang up on the Canon 5Dmkiii because its not called professional! only 7 years ago the specs on the professional cameras where no where as good as what we have today and the photographers then where turning out stunning images. Case in point a Pentax K3 would absolutely murder a so called professional camera of only a couple of years ago, so the camera is not the issue for the word professional it is the person driving the camera. Not so long along ago I saw a professional photographer shoot a whole wedding with a Nikon D40 and the images where outstanding because he knew how to photograph as a craft not driven by huge megapixels.
You forgot that there is also a 1Dx. The 5D MKIII wasn't the only FX-body at the time of making this video. In the meantime there is de 6D what is Canon's counterpart for the D600. Anyaway, both of those plasticy FX-bodies are for the photographer who is on the verge of switching to full frame but don't really had the money for the real deal.
Cool vid! But you really personally like the Canon it seems. Next time it would be great if you used the same lens on both cams. To make a comparison with a 24-70 2.8 vs a 24-85 3.5-4.5 on even different bodies isn't a good comparison. The 24-70 2.8 is way better vs the 24-85 3.5-4.5.
Haha!!! Why? The 5D Mark 3 is incredible. I heard a lot of good things about it and seen some amazing pictures from the old 5D.
I am a nikon girl, but I think this video tells us that Nikon put some serious work and features in the D600. It was placed again the 5DMk 3. It's an amazing camera and I will love to own one some day.
These two cameras are not in the same league. Not a good review though. However, you should compare the D800 & Mark iii.
still, the L lens is a much higher quality lens than the kit lens of the d600 if it was the 24-85 , i sold that lens immediately when i got the d600. the canon 24-105 retails for over $1400 dollars in canada where the nikon 24-85 retails for around 580. almost a third of the price of the canon. you have to admit a different lens should have been used. where are you're getting your price figures on these lenses?
It would seem that the lenses used are not of equal quality, or cost. Doesn't this favor Canon from the get-go?
The sensor is a Nikon design, Nikon just rented the factory from Sony, thats how you should see the things.
he is not a canon fanboy, even though i didn't take in very seriously when i saw is videos for the first time, i think he is one of the most impartial reviewers in youtube. I just wished he made more nikon lenses reviews and some sony and pentax reviews. btw mirrorless reviews would be good too
I WANT TO KNOW WHAT MICROFONE YOU ARE USING IN THIIS PRESENTATION.
A NEED TO BUY ONE.
THANKS. I WAIT YOUR ANSWER.
I have an idea... Let's compare a Canon that costs 83% less than the D600. That's what he's doing here.
There was no Canon 6D when this review came out. The ONLY full frame camera Canon offered that compared with the D600 was the 5D3. I later gave a 6D review when it arrived.
The 5D III costs 83% less than the D600? wat?
Throughout the test you said the Nikon was better in all areas except the extreme high ISO test and then you actually said the D600 wasnt a pro camera???? Just because your not used to how the buttons work because your a Canon user. Consider for a moment that a Nikon user would not have an issue with the buttons and would critique Canons for having to go into menus for simple things.
Needing two hands to turn a camera on is not pro Canon.
D600 is worth to compare with 6D
Canon really need to step up on its sensor design to remain competitive.
Oh no... Did you not read the reviews before purchasing the camera? I heard a lot about the Canon 7D and would have purchased that if you are into movies
Yes but if you dont have a huge lens and can use a pop-up flash than you can use it just to brighten their faces a little, with -2 or -3 and repair the WB in photoshop or any other software that allow that (lightroom i dont think it can do that) (and if it aint broke dont fix it :D).
I dont do weddings (i am a fine arts passionate) but i have a friend who uses 2, 3 or even more flashes on tripods all over the room and uses the camera as a master with a wireless. He has a friend who helps him.
Hi dear, Im about to take a decision to buy either canon eos 5dm2 or 600d ? since am a canon guy (i've 7d) with punch of canon and sigma lenses, but i feel Nikon D600 is worth to shift for Nikon and upgrade to full frame camera! i need your advice.... Thank you for a great video.
I would a agree totally about your point about 'fan boys' but i do think there is a difference between Nikon and Cannon, I'm a Nikon user myself, but after looking at some low light shoots taken with the 5D mkiii and both Nikon D800 and D600... (plus a load of other comparisons) I can't help think the Canon has a better quality image, and at high ISO is less noisy? So much so I'm thinking of jumping Brand before going from DX to FX :( Your thoughts?
thats a huge difference from the stores where i live. not sure why. but i think it would have been much more fair if you had used a lens.such as the nikon 24-120mm f/4 VR.
true. I was just kidding. It's funny to see people see what makes the sensor, how it was made etc, instead of seeing the results. :) I wish Canon outsourced their sensor design to Nikon, because I think the DR of my 450D is way too low.
Sorry, I meant 24-70 f2.8. But still - strange comparing cameras in way like this...
Everyone is making a big deal over which brand is better, lets lay out a few facts. They are comparing a simi pro level s
Asked this because it seemed to me that the video from D600 appears to be more "faceted" than Canon 5D.
So the Canon 5D mark iii ($3,499) is tested with L glass ($2,290) , and the Nikon D600 ($2,099.95) with a kit lens ($599.95). Wow talk about unfair comparison. A fixed F2.8 lens vs. variable f3.5-4.5. Canon $5,789 vs. Nikon $2,699.90. Well hands dow Nikon wins by offering similar performance and saving you $3,089.10 to buy more lens or another d600.
I prefer the Nikon D600 over the 6D from Canon for everything except video. I do like the 5Dm2 though and it does offer some great performance for the money (it is now $500 less at least than the D600 by Nikon. I'm in love with the 5Dm3 too. It depends on what you shoot. Nikon wins the dynamic range test so if you shoot landscapes, go Nikon. The Canon 5D2 wins the best bang for the buck, and the 5D3 is the best all around camera in my opinion.