 |
| |
| This site requires new users to accept that a small amount of member data is captured and held in an attempt to reduce spammers and to manage users. This site also uses cookies to ensure ease of use. In order to comply with new DPR regulations you are required to agree/disagree with this process. If you do not agree then please email the Admins using info@nikondslr.uk after requesting a new account. Thank you. |
| Moderated by: chrisbet, | ||
| Author | Post | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
highlander
|
I am looking to get a full frame used Nikon. Due to budget constraints I am limited to the used section. I can get a low shutter count (26k) D600 for a very good price, but I am concerned about the reputed dust/oil spot issues. It seems that Nikon were fixing these for free, but only for the original owners, and where they couldn't be fixed replacing the camera with the D610. Which makes me wonder if the D600 I have seen will be ok or not. I would really like the D800 but it's £400 more and right now that's not really an option for me. Thoughts please. |
|||||||||
Gilbert Sandberg
|
H, re: D600 The D600 is a consumer camera, with ruggedness to match (or the lack of it). When I held a D600 once, just with one hand, I was afraid I would break it. re: D800 Considering the release of the D850, there will be a number of D800/810 for sale in the near future, driving down prices. Regards, Gilbert |
|||||||||
Robert
|
Decent D3's can be had for ~£500 now... And D700's even less with the the same excellent sensor/controls but lighter. |
|||||||||
jk
|
If the shutter count is past 6000 and there is no apparent oil on sensor then your versio (like mine) is a 'good' D600. No complaints about my D600 except that the AF is not as good as my D3S. |
|||||||||
highlander
|
Maybe I'll do some eBaying of junk and buy the D750 instead. I am sure there is just too much choice these days. |
|||||||||
Gilbert Sandberg
|
H, re: there is just too much choice I agree, especially if one wants to buy a used camera. Just a few chance remarks: -D600: most will have a low mileage, but ruggedness is nil -D800/810: one up on the scalle of ruggedness: some may be high mileage, but some are low. Older camera's like D3/D700 may be interesting, but older technology, I would not buy one without provenance/guarantee and proven low mileage. Regards, Gilbert |
|||||||||
highlander
|
Thanks Gilbert and JK. I had a D700 and it has always been my favourite camera (with the D200 close behind). I am probably going to need a higher resolution than these would offer due to the demands of the agencies I supply to. I also know how well used most of them will be so I would be very cautious about getting either the D700 or D3 without knowing the seller personally. My local dealer has a very low (under 3,000 shot) D800 but its a little more than I am comfortable spending used. Even low mileage you never know whats happened to them or if they low because there is an issue. I have only ever had problems with two cameras actually packing up mid shoot, and both were bought used. Both ended up being scrapped because they weren't financially viable to fix. I am now super cautious about buying without a manufacturers warranty. The D800 and the D600 both have well known issues, which makes me more concerned. Especially as the D800 has such a low use and is quite, for what it is, cheap. But I am also concerned about buying a new D750 as these seem to be subject to three separate recalls now. I am worried that Nikon's quality control is definitely NOT what it was when the D700/D3s came out. First the D600, then the D800 both had problems and were replaced swiftly by the Dx10 versions. |
|||||||||
jk
|
Teeheee. My D700 with battery grip sits in my camerabag and works very nicely. Low low mileage as it was always a backup camera. I preferred my D3 and D3S. D3S and D700 will get ebayed or sold soon. Any offers? PM me. |
|||||||||
Eric
|
highlander wrote:Thanks Gilbert and JK. I had a D750.There was a recall in the first few weeks but I wasn't aware of anymore in the year I had it? Without looking back at the specification...was it fully weatherproof?? I found it a very nice camera in the hand. The deep grip (now copied on the D850 ) very easy to hold. It didnt have the buffer speed of the D3 but produced very nice images better than the D3. |
|||||||||
novicius
|
Hello Highlander , just been reading " A birding walk " , and do appreciate the way you write , ( who are "we" ,...students , yer dog ? )... I also like yer compositions , that `s how I like to see things , are we " soulmates " ?...which leads me too.. Seeing as that you are the seasoned pro, and I`m just a retired has-been, who am I to tell you anything ,..and yet,I dare say : Nikon D3X !!..it just works , flawlessly , with a 14-24 f2.8 and yer in business , a combo unsurpassed , sure ,the S is Fast and has video , yet looking at your blog , I have the impression that Fine detail is what you are after , and that`s what the S is all about , set to 14 bit depth and it`s as close to medium-format as you could wish for, Active-D lighting can save the day , the build-in lens profiles are a bonus to boot , they just work , secondhand it can be had for a reasonable money , many have been used in the studio, so one in Perfect condition can be found , and the 14-24 has come down in price considerably. Personally I think of it a Medium-format in a 35mm package. When your Lifelyhood depends on it , then it´s Costly to experiment , a D3X and that 14-24 , and most likely , You will Not look back. |
|||||||||
highlander
|
The we is me and the dog. Sometimes its me the dog and a friend or two. The D3 series is too big and too heavy. Thats why I had a D700 and a D200 as a wedding photographer. Now, I have 'retired' from the wedding business and I'm doing more writing and photography for magazines, websites, etc. I am also selling images via agencies, libraries, fine art sales, greeting cards, and all kinds of stuff. I moved on from Nikon to Fuji, but it was a love/hate relationship. I then went to Olympus but all is not as well as I hoped. I like the results, don't like faffing with the camera. I can operate a Nikon in the dark, as its years of familiarity and intuitiveness. I do not miss the weight. I do miss full frame. But Sony A7 series cameras have crappy battery life, and unless you take our a mortgage for some Zeiss glass the lenses are pretty rubbish too. I do not have a budget for Zeiss. Image prices have gone down and down over the last five years, and making a living is getting harder and harder. Shutterstock pay just $0.25 per image now as one example of what I'm up against. So. Anyway, enough waffle. I have ordered a used D600 with 26K on the clock. I'll get it tomorrow morning with a 6 month warranty. Wish me luck. Any tips JK? |
|||||||||
jk
|
Just go shoot Jan. The D600 is very capable but the AF is not great for Birds In Flight especially when compared to the D500. D850 is still in testing so I cant compare D500 v D850. Next few months will see me reduce my camera stock but I intend to run a Fuji and Nikon line set. Mirrorless has advantages and disadvantages but once you know your camera and situation you adapt to use the better alternative. |
|||||||||
novicius
|
Hope that D600 will be what You need , Good Luck Highlander  |
|||||||||
highlander
|
novicius wrote:Hope that D600 will be what You need , Good Luck Highlander  |
|||||||||
highlander
|
An update: I got my D600 last week and have spent some time with it now. It is like an old friend and I can almost use it blindfolded already. I am delighted with the raw files, which require very little processing and less than I had with the D700. I have had a couple of dust spots appear, but I would expect these from a used camera, with interchangeable lenses, and using a zoom that does not have a fixed barrel length and therefore is sucking in air and particles during use, to a degree. I have not noted any oil spots as yet. I believe that this body fill one of the following it as a) been back to Nikon for the replacement shutter, b) was a late release one that didn't have the problem, c) was one of the lucky ones, d) has simply got to the shutter count whereby there isn't anything lose to still come out Of course, I may now have tempted fate.... |
|||||||||
Eric
|
highlander wrote:An update: You could perhaps get some reassurance by emailing Nikon Customer Support. They will have a list of D600 serial numbers for cameras that have been back through their labs...or never needed it.  |
|||||||||
jk
|
I belong to the D600 owners C group.  It is a fine camera. |
|||||||||
amazing50
|
On my D600 the oil and debris permanently damaged the sensor and after the third return Nikon replaced it with a D610. |
|||||||||
jk
|
amazing50 wrote: On my D600 the oil and debris permanently damaged the sensor and after the third return Nikon replaced it with a D610.That is interesting as I havent seen published any reports as to exactly why Nikon replaced some D600 units with D610. Thanks Mike. |
|||||||||
Eric
|
I remember reading somewhere, a list of D600 serial numbers that were affected. It wasn't a definitive list from Nikon, but one compiled by people submitting their own inflicted camera number. My memory is a bit vague but I thought UK serial numbers affected were all below 640000. Of course they may have stopped producing them at 640001 and switched to the D610. |
|||||||||
highlander
|
Mine starts with 60 |
|||||||||
Eric
|
Sorry...told you my memory was vague but my typing is even worse. Muxed ip the 4 and 0..... 604000 |
|||||||||
highlander
|
Now problems so far. Yes, I have had a speck or two of dust but I'd expect that in normal operation. |
|||||||||
highlander
|
Having a bit of a moan. I bought the D600, I was told it wasn't affected by the dust/oil issue as it was a later one. It is, I have to clean it every time I use it, but I knew it was a risk I was taking on, as I said in this discussion thread. Nikon UK have said that I can send it in and IF it turns out to be covered by the original warranty issue then they will clean it (big deal, I do that) or POSSIBLY replace the shutter, but only IF and POSSIBLY. They also want my camera for 4-6 weeks, they can't do it faster. I can't be without a camera for a month! I'm trying to earn a living here. So, I'm stuck with spending a fortune on cleaning swabs whilst I save to replace it. |
|||||||||
highlander
|
Don't know why I got a double post. Latest offer from Nikon is minimum two week turnaround, could be up to four weeks. And then they won't say it's covered or that they'll do more than clean it, which i can do myself. Whatever, it's too long and if they charge me for a repair then it's probably not even worth doing. Guess I'll start saving for a D800 and hope I don't get one with the left focus point issue.  |
|||||||||
Eric
|
Oh dear, sorry about that Jan. I suppose the problem with rushing them, might be they decide a quick fix is all they can do. It's also one of the problems of putting all your eggs in one camera basket. I was reading a very good logical and informed review of the D850 yesterday. The reviewer likened the 'bar raising' of the D850 to the launch of the D3....which I wholeheartedly agree, was monumentally groundbreaking at the time. But one person made the equally compelling arguement that a D810 plus a D500 didn't add up to the price of the D850, yet covered most of its functionality. The one thing he failed to point out, was that the two camera option was not only cheaper, but gave flexibility AND if one had to be repaired.....you still had the other to carry on using. |
|||||||||
highlander
|
Absolutely. When I was shooting weddings I had two bodies for that reason. Landscapes don't tend to require an immediate back up although of course it is still annoying to be without a camera. Up until now, whenever I have required a service or repair I have used authorised but non-Nikon owned companies and the turnaround has been usually 72 hours at most. Sadly, Nikon need 4 weeks minimum evidently to assess and possibly fix it. If it wasn't that it's the shutter and thats expensive, I would be inclined to get it done elsewhere and just pay for it. That isn't at the moment an option financially. Neither is buying a second body. |
|||||||||
Eric
|
highlander wrote:Absolutely. When I was shooting weddings I had two bodies for that reason. Landscapes don't tend to require an immediate back up although of course it is still annoying to be without a camera. Up until now, whenever I have required a service or repair I have used authorised but non-Nikon owned companies and the turnaround has been usually 72 hours at most. Sadly, Nikon need 4 weeks minimum evidently to assess and possibly fix it. If it wasn't that it's the shutter and thats expensive, I would be inclined to get it done elsewhere and just pay for it. That isn't at the moment an option financially. Neither is buying a second body. I thought you bought this from Ffordes? Isn't there some comeback on them? Surely there's some comeback on the vendor whoever it was, after only a couple? of months??? |
|||||||||
highlander
|
I will have to discuss it with them, although I imagine they will only offer to send it away in the same way that I can. |
|||||||||
Eric
|
highlander wrote:I will have to discuss it with them, although I imagine they will only offer to send it away in the same way that I can. Err...no. If you bought something defective from a retailer you have a legal right to have fair reparation. Under 2015 consumer rights you have 30days to get full refund. After 30days..... " You're entitled to a full or partial refund instead of a repair or replacement if any of the following are true: 1. the cost of the repair or replacement is disproportionate to the value of the goods or digital content 2. a repair or replacement is impossible 3. a repair or replacement would cause you significant inconvenience 4. the repair would take an unreasonably long amount of time." See points 3 and 4!! At the very least, they should be incentivised by this, to loan you a camera for the duration!! Go bite their legs, girl!  |
|||||||||
highlander
|
Does that still apply on used goods? |
|||||||||
Robert
|
That aside, you raised concerns with the seller at the time of purchase, they apparently stated that this camera wasn't affected, which persuaded you to purchase, it has happened, so it seems to me they should sort it. |
|||||||||
Eric
|
highlander wrote:Does that still apply on used goods? Yup. https://www.which.co.uk/consumer-rights/advice/the-second-hand-camera-i-bought-is-broken-can-i-get-a-refund |
|||||||||
jk
|
Jan, If your camera is giving oil then check what the shutter count is. This problem was meant to go away after 6000-7000 actuations. Luckily my D600 has been trouble free on this front but it does need cleaning more often than my other cameras but that is because I like my sensors pristine. |
|||||||||
Robert
|
jk wrote:This problem was meant to go away after 6000-7000 actuations. After it runs out of oil???  |
|||||||||
Eric
|
Robert wrote:jk wrote:  |
|||||||||
jk
|
Robert wrote:jk wrote: Well I did wonder and I guess yes. So how long before the shutter then fails/sticks due to metal on metal? I guess this is why Nikon either replaced camera with D610 or put in a new shutter. |
|||||||||
Eric
|
jk wrote:Robert wrote: It beggars belief that after 100years, or whatever it is, manufacturers still find a way to mess up the basics. Change for the sake of change has a lot to answer for. My own hobby horse is the changing eye cup. I would have thought they could have evolved the perfect shape of eye rubber after all these years....ideal viewing needs have been known for sometime!!! But virtually every new model has a variation in some way. I can't help thinking with all the component complexity they have to deal with, standardising some components across all their models would be a welcome simplification. |
|||||||||
highlander
|
But then more things would be interchangeable and you wouldn't need to buy so many accessories. Manufacturers like to make you buy overpriced accessories. I've cleaned the sensor again. Now I'm going to do a day long shoot and see what the results are. I'm not going to do any dust reference images, or cloning, and if its bad then I am sending the images to Ffordes for comment. |
|||||||||
Eric
|
highlander wrote:But then more things would be interchangeable and you wouldn't need to buy so many accessories. You are absolutely right about the different accessories. Batteries are the worst example of built in incompatibility. But you would think, or should I say, I would like to think, that the market sale value of a rubber eyecup would be minuscule in terms of revenue from after sales. So why change that in every new model? The tooling for making different mounds, or however they make them, must be an unnecessary expense and the perfect eyepiec3 design must have been perfected after 100 years. |
|||||||||
novicius
|
But then , thingies like rubber eyepieces are made by 3rd party mfgrs.,I guess the lowest bidder gets the job. |
|||||||||
jk
|
highlander wrote:But then more things would be interchangeable and you wouldn't need to buy so many accessories. Jan, Go to SupaDrug or the opticians and get a box of lens cleaning tissues. Double it over and it makes a replacement spatula tip cover for cleaning the sensor. These do not scratch the sensor unless you put grit onto the mix! |
|||||||||
Robert
|
Having watched the Nikon technicians at work I noted that they don't use wide wiping spatulas when they clean sensors. The use round sticks, like blunt ****tail sticks about six inches long, they wrap a small strip of lens cleaning tissue around the end of the stick and dip the tissue tip in one of two or three dishes of solution, different solutions for different types of mark. They then address an individual mark or dust bunny on the sensor using an illuminated lupe to see what they are doing. A gentle blast of compressed air and on to the next mark. They did not appear to wipe an entire sensor on any of the cameras I watched two technicians cleaning. Indeed they didn't appear to have any of the spatular type cleaning wipes in their kit. I must have watched them clean perhaps 20 cameras and lenses that morning? They were very thorough, my D300S was immaculate after they had cleaned it. |
|||||||||
jk
|
That process they have is more time consuming but much more targetted on the dust marks that will be visible to the photographer. This process needs a clean area with no/low dust in the air. The spatula method provides a general clean but may not remove all the dust unless you clean multiple times. I clean with the spatula tool but use a used one for the primary clean then I do a secondary clean with a new one. This usually results in a super clean sensor. |
|||||||||
highlander
|
Returned my D600 |
|||||||||
Robert
|
Wise move methinks. Good luck with the replacement. D750, or D850? |
|||||||||
jk
|
Should be a lot of good D750 around or even D800/810 if you dont want to splash for a D850. |
|||||||||
highlander
|
jk wrote:Should be a lot of good D750 around or even D800/810 if you dont want to splash for a D850. I have a D800 with under 4k activations in almost mint condition |
|||||||||
jk
|
Go for it if you want the MP. There is little difference betwen D800 and D810. I think the D810 has highlight metering mode extra. |
|||||||||
highlander
|
Will need to get bigger memory cards, but my mac should cope with it and I can upgrade the RAM if needed. I use a pair of external drives for my library anyway and just keep the current year on the machine itself. |
|||||||||
jk
|
I havent found that the larger images are a problem. Obviously they use more diskspace but Mac is happy even on Macbook Air 2010 with only 4GB RAM. |
|||||||||
Robert
|
Most modern computers and I think all tablets, are running on SSD's or fusion drives, the need for large amounts of RAM is reduced because, certainly with the Mac, the memory swap outs and effective RAM disk with SSD's make up any shortcomings in actual RAM, in some cases the SSD's are faster than the RAM to the point where RAM is becoming less critical. Software is becoming more efficient and less RAM hungry too. I believe Apple are making use of the fastest M2 SSD's in the top iPads and MBA'a which I understand are in the region of four times faster than the fastest SATA SSD's, that's FAST. |
|||||||||
Eric
|
Robert wrote:Most modern computers and I think all tablets, are running on SSD's or fusion drives, the need for large amounts of RAM is reduced because, certainly with the Mac, the memory swap outs and effective RAM disk with SSD's make up any shortcomings in actual RAM, in some cases the SSD's are faster than the RAM to the point where RAM is becoming less critical. Software is becoming more efficient and less RAM hungry too. ...and 10x faster than me. |
|||||||||
Iain
|
I changed my HD in my MacBook pro for a sad and noticed the difference. |
|||||||||
Current theme is Blue
| A small amount of member data is captured and held in an attempt to reduce spammers and to manage users. This site also uses cookies to ensure ease of use. In order to comply with new DPR regulations you are required to agree/disagree with this process. If you do not agree then please email the Admins using info@nikondsl.uk Thank you. |