doh

Edited October 1, 201312 yr by Iron_Dreamer

Corel Aftershot Pro (similar to Lightroom) FREE at Amazon until 10/6/13!

 

Use this coupon code at Amazon chekout at link below:  MACR0913 

Reviews say Corel is comparable to Lightroom/Aperture but takes less computer resources.

 

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/B0073LIDE4

^ Thanks!

Thanks Jon, I needed a photo software for my work laptop.

Boomer, I can't download it outside the US 

 

Sony ups the WTF factor once again.

As been rumored for a while, Nikon released D610. Of course, somewhat predictably, they don't actual address why they've released a replacement for D600 so soon - sensor dust/debris/oil.

Edited October 8, 201312 yr by Salt Peanuts

Interested to hear if all the problems have indeed been fixed.  I'm ready to get a new camera and it's either this or the D7100 (unless a D400 appears).  I'm torn between FX and sticking with DX.  

Interested to hear if all the problems have indeed been fixed.  I'm ready to get a new camera and it's either this or the D7100 (unless a D400 appears).  I'm torn between FX and sticking with DX.

Unfortunately, we won't know until D610 start reaching consumers. Nikon never really acknowledged that there were any problems with D600 (except for that non-committal release a bit back) and so they couldn't say they fixed those problems by releasing D610.

You should wait and grab the D4 successor or the mythical D400, if it ever comes out.

You should wait and grab the D4 successor

 

Well, that would be the HC way.  

Interested to hear if all the problems have indeed been fixed.  I'm ready to get a new camera and it's either this or the D7100 (unless a D400 appears).  I'm torn between FX and sticking with DX.  

 

Get the D610.  While D7100 is a fantastic crop body, the images I've seen from D600 from friends and on-line are top, top notch.  D610 should be one you can use and keep around for years and years without compromise in photo quality.  Check out iso3200 comparisons of D600 vs. D7100 (select cameras, iso samples, then blow up image) below:

http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM

My only concern would be if you already have a lot of DX lenses. 

But its really just an excuse to upgrade them too. 

And after you grab yourself a FX body, get that purrty Sigma 35/1.4.

 

Oh, and a 135DC to replace your 85/1.8g.

Edited October 8, 201312 yr by Salt Peanuts

Or, forget all that and get the new Zeiss Otus 55 mm f1.4 lens for $4000.00.  It's Moar to the power of Moar 

http://www.imaging-resource.com/news/2013/10/07/zeiss-announces-new-high-end-otus-1.4-55-lens

 

Zeiss55f1.4 by drjlo2, on Flickr

Edited October 8, 201312 yr by Jon L

My only concern would be if you already have a lot of DX lenses. 

But its really just an excuse to upgrade them too. 

 

Well, I only have 3 DX lenses right now (35mm f/1.8, 40mm f/2.8 macro and Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 ) and don't use the 40mm macro that often.  My other lenses are FX (50mm f/1.8, 85mm f/1.8, Tamron 70-300 VC, and Tokina 100mm 2.8 macro).  

 

So I would mostly just be missing a fast zoom.   I probably wouldn't try to replace that, at least right away since FX fast zooms seem to be a bit pricey.   I suppose I could use Sigma 17-50 f/2.8 in crop mode on the D610 for those times I wanted to carry around a zoom.  I assume that would work just as well as on the D90 but that is just a guess.  

 

I would seriously think about getting the Sigma 35 f/1.4 that Haj mentioned though.  

Edited October 9, 201312 yr by shellylh

FWIW, D610 DX crop-mode is 10.5mp.

 

And yes, do get the Sigma 35/1.4.

I have heard about a lot of focus issues with the Sigma 35.  35 f1.4 has been one of my favorite lenses on both Canon and Nikon. Will probably be in the market for the Canon version again soon.

Yeah, I've read that as well, though from what I gathered, it seems to be mostly with D800/E.

 

Oh, and no issues with my copy on my D600.  The caveat being I've only had the lens for less than a week.

Edited October 9, 201312 yr by Salt Peanuts

I have heard about a lot of focus issues with the Sigma 35.  35 f1.4 has been one of my favorite lenses on both Canon and Nikon. Will probably be in the market for the Canon version again soon.

 

If someone has both Sigma 35 f/1.4 and Canon 35L, is it possible to post photos from both lenses shooting same subjects,

preferably with people/skin tones as well as colorful things in the frame? 

 

I'm kind of torn about the Sigma because while no one will disagree it's sharper wide open than Canon, the photo's I've seen from the Sigma seems a little muted in color with less "pop" of the subject, especially in portrait situation.  I've seen some photogs buy Sigma, then return it, complaining of this impression as well.  I'm thining about picking the Sigma up to experiment, but not sure if it's worth the trouble, especially with the possibility lurking my copy may have AF issues, etc.  I'm happy enough with my 35L, though it's getting long in the tooth.  If 35L II comes out with some improvements, I will have to look hard at the presumably big price hike from Canon vs. the Sigma.

Sudden thunderstorm in SoCal today.

 

EOSD5131dx by drjlo1, on Flickr

The D610 release will most likely kill the market for used D600, which already was taking a hit for a while.  In a month or two, you'll probably be able to find screaming deals on them, especially if you can find one without oil/debris issue or one that's had the shutter mechanism replaced (which is what Nikon started doing to D600 returned for oil/debris issue).

 

 

Also - holy poop, the used price on a 35L has come down significantly of late.

Edited October 11, 201312 yr by Salt Peanuts

^ In the same boat here, Jacob (except the shutter - mine was replaced after I sent it to Nikon).

 

I'm thinking for folks who may need a second body or a really cheap FX body, a used D600 will probably be really attractive soon.  I'm guessing it'll break $1000 before the end of the year.

Jacob, I will very interested to hear how you like the Tamron 24-70 f2.8 since I certainly won't be buying the Nikon 24-70 f2.8 soon and would like (but don't need) to have a fast zoom if I go FX.

Shelly, this is what I told Jacob about Tamron 24-70 2.8 VC when I had that lens in my house.

 

Completely unrelated, but in regards to Tamron 24-70/2.8 VC, I'd try it out before you buy one.  The damn thing is rather heavy (well, at least compared to primes) and if you are a filter user, it's going to be expensive (82mm thread).  The deal breaker for me was that its optical stabilization takes noticeably longer than the ones on Nikon (or Canon for that matter) to engage and lock down.  This meant that it took longer than it should to achieve focus if the optical stabilization wasn't already engaged (basically every time I took my finger off AF-On/shutter for few seconds).  Not really a problem if shooting a static scene, but for that spur of the moment shot, it can throw your focus off or won't let you shoot at all (depending on your shutter setup).

 

Of course, one could just kept the VC off unless needed, but I wasn't going to remember fiddling with yet another switch (which is bit more difficult to use than the Nikon VR switch) while shooting.

Edited October 11, 201312 yr by Salt Peanuts

Decided to go out in the sorry weather and try out point and shoot MkII at the neighborhood Botanical Garden and an Octoberfest.  Definitely not a DSLR replacement but might be usable as a travel camera, I guess.  Will probably try out the RX1 to see if it might be more acceptable.