Nikon folks, particularly those with some "in" knowledge, has this problem been solved, or is there still a quality control with Nikon in the production of this camera? Even as late a November, I see a lot of still disgruntled purchasers on places like Amazon and eBay.
Nikon Customer Service (customer dis-service I should say) has nothing to say to me on this point, not even recognizing that such an issue ever occurred. I love Nikon hardware, but their customer service (and software) really stinks!
I've not seen anything to suggest anything has improved.
It seems to me that the issue has been somewhere between moderately and vastly overhyped. I bet 90% of the reviewers on Amazon and the like would have quite happily used the camera for years without noticing, but a couple of prominent bloggers comment on it and suddenly they're going around photographing white walls for days on end and it's the worst camera ever made.
Looks awful until you click on the two unprocessed photos he's posted at the bottom. And that's a shot at f/22 against a white wall -- the absolute worst case. (I wish my Canon 50D looked that clean!)
All DSLRs need cleaning if you're picky about dust spots. It's incredibly rare to get a sensor without dust on it when you buy a new camera, and if you're the kind of person who notices/cares about dust spots, you'll be unlikely to take more than 5000 photos between cleaning.
Yes, it does seem that the D600 generates a little more dust and oil in the first few thousand shots than many cameras. But if you notice them then you're going to notice the dust any other DSLR generates, and you'll be familiar with cleaning it. With the D600 you just might have to clean it a couple more times near the beginning of it's life. Budget an extra $10 for a couple more sensor wipes.
It certainly wouldn't put me off buying one if it was the right camera in other regards.
@abirkill Thanks for your evaluation. The bottom line is that i have "crashed" my D5100 and am thinking I really shoud upgrade to a full-frame camera. We have to see what the cost estimate is for recovering my D5100.
Alex, thanks as always for your evaluation here. i am seriously thinking I should upgrade, even given the small time I have been here.
It's a really nice camera. Just be aware that you're buying into a much more expensive world when you upgrade to full-frame. Lenses designed for crop sensors, or full-frame lenses used on crop-frame cameras, are typically much cheaper (and lighter) for equivalent sharpness, because they don't need to project such a wide image circle (or the less sharp corners of a cheap full-frame lens are not captured by the small crop-frame sensor).
For example, decent ultra-wide zoom lenses for a crop-frame camera are available from around $450-$800, whereas for a full-frame camera you're looking at between $1300-$2000.
I rented a d600 for a wedding and it is an amazing camera. I didnt notice any oil spots or anything. I was blown away with it compared to my d90. Its got amazing dynamic range, great iso performance, white balance was great. Out of 1600 photos i had 4 that were only slightly out of focus so quite happy with the autofocus. The colors on the files straight out of camera were amazing. I am saving to buy one now. I hate even shooting with my d90 now lol. As far as lens, no you dont have to buy $2000 lens. You got more choices with full frame because you can use all the older nikon lens and all the D lens are still amazing lens. I got a 50 1.8 which is like $125 bucks, got a used 85 1.8 D for $250 which is a really great lens and a new 80-200 for $1079. As far as wide angle there is no comparison. Because of the crop factor a 24 mm on full frame is the same as an 18 on crop so you dont have to spend a ridiculous amount of money to get wide angle on full frame.
@soia 24mm is not ultra-wide angle on a full-frame any more than 18mm is ultra-wide angle on a crop-frame camera. I think the cheapest Nikon ultra-wide you can get that works on full-frame is the 18-35, but it's not especially wide, and has rather average quality.
The quality of the lens is almost always more important than the quality of the camera. This is especially the case with full-frame cameras, as lenses are always worst in the corners. An expensive lens on a cheap camera will usually give better results than a cheap lens on an expensive camera, if used correctly.
@abirkill@abirkill@soia Thanks for the time you all took commenting thoughtfully. Just lamenting the fact that my D5100, that I really like, is in the camera hospital after I fell with it two days ago, and apparently won't be back for 6 weeks! i am in withdrawal mode.
@frankhymus - From what I've read, after 3k shots, no more oil accumulates on the sensor. So if you're comfortable cleaning your sensor with eclipse liquid, pec-pads and a sensor swab, the oil thing is a non-issue. (It's a bit scary cleaning it the first time, but it's really easy, and as long as you lock up the mirror properly, there's very little risk of damage)
@cmc1200 - If you pick up a D800, then in DX mode, you're at 17MP, which is the same as the D7000, so you really don't loose anything on the ultra-wide side, you just don't gain any thing in megapixel count or reduced noise.
@frankhymus I feel your pain - my D700 was out at the shop for over three weeks and I felt like I lost an appendage. My last post summed up how it felt to get it back!
The oil issue is overhyped. There were some who are saying that the original issue was limited to one production set, and the problem corrected. Other folks are seeing what might be normal wear usage. Others simply like bashing everything in site. I would be more worried about how to afford the bigger glass, since that will make those 24 MP really snap!
@wardie Paul, thanks for your recommendation @sudweeks Thanks, but I'm not into cleaning sensors yet. Tthanks to both of you for taking time to read and answer.
Nope, the problem persists, although I'm hearing reports that it subsides and disappears around exposure 3000. I just passed the 1000 exposure mark on my body. I bought the D600 day one, and was the first to bring up the problem on the net. I swapped out for a new body, and suffered even worse. I follow the issue daily now (yay Google Alerts!). I've gotten around my dust issue with an Arctic Butterfly [dry] sensor cleaner. Consider it an extra cost of the D600; it simply makes the problem go away, and it's so easy to use. The Nikon D600 is otherwise an *amazing* camera. My only other gripe is the clustered auto focus points.... grrr!
It's a dry sensor cleaner, so you essentially just brush the sensor left to right 3 times (to cover that huge 35mm), spinning the brush before and after each wipe. That's it. A caveman could do it.
One thing to know is that your battery needs to be *fully* charged, or the Nikon D600 won't allow you to lock up your mirror to access the sensor (actually, you're cleaning the Anti Aliasing filter, but that's not important).
@cameronknowlton Cameron, I see you love the camera, and are prepared to put up with this "minor" contamination issue. Thanks for your perspective. i am afraid I would not stick with a camera that can't solve such a basic manufacturing problem. Not for something I would pay $2,000 plus for.
It's funny. You never think of public complaints as a means of causing results. In my case, I collect Nikon F's and now was the time to upgrade to a real digital camera. The D800 seemed too much like an F-5 in size and weight (at least the heaviest of the shoulder-able Nikons). The D600 was a natural. And I have some Nikon glass admittedly not VR. In any case, they could be used on occasion or with a tripod. But I also liked the Canon 6D with it's built in GPS and wireless. But it's a Canon not a Nikon. Time to pull the trigger .... a Canon D6 with two zooms was the result. No matter the history with Nikon (since 1969) it's another century and another technology. Plus transparency rules. If Nikon had just put out a press release saying "While we don't know if there is a problem, you can be sure that if there is one and it affects the quality of the images or prints, or otherwise affects the known quality of our hardware, it will be handled appropriately." Even something as vague as that would have helped. Instead ... the sound of silence or, as one site reports a Nikon rep as saying "Sensor dust is normal." Therefore, even with the December 15 price drop and the fact that the 6D was already priced higher than the Nikon before the drop, Nikon lost a good customer. The body arrived and the large zoom should arrive today. I thought if I found that "missing: press release today, I would have returned the Canon and ordered a D600, but Nikon is frozen in time. I made the right decision at this particular time no matter what Nikon does about the issue in the future. I don't want to take the chance and hassle of two wet cleanings. I wonder how many other lost sales have ensured?
@cmlevy its an interesting issue you're facing and not dissimiliar to mine... canon seem to be coming up with crazy pricing for their camera bodies and even crazier in terms of lenses (24-70 F4???)
I ended up getting a canon 5D MKIII and love it but have a nagging feeling that canon will keep doing dodgy lenses that dont really seem to fit what customers are asking for and charging crazy amounts.
An interesing aside RE the Nikon D800 was when I was doing a landscape course for Lee Filters. Aparently when doing long exposure with the D800, its so pixel dense that the pixels overheat and you get lots of white spots on the resulting image. According to the people on the course, this could be fixed by using the inbuilt noise reduction, but that added a similar amount of time to the processing. Ie at sunset, shooting a 2 minute exposure would also require something like 2 minutes more in the camera to reduce the noise. Given that at sunset, it all happens in a 10 minute time frame, this was a bit of a game changer. I believe you can also decrease the quality and it fixes it though?
@Weng. I am litterally sitting here with a fresh ground cup of coffee looking at a EOS 6D kit (in box) and a box containing an EF70-300mm 4-5.6L IS. I am paralyzed as to what to do with it. I have not even taken a peak. That little slip that plugs into the box to hold it closed has not even been moved. Every day I look for a press release or some reliable mention that Nikon acknowledges the D600 sensor issue and will be taking care of it in the near future. Still not seeing such a statement, last night I ordered a medium level lens adapter that will allow me to strongly mount my old Nikon lenses (in manual, w/o auto exposure control) on the 6D. MY ETA as to opening the boxes and using the equipment is moving down from weeks to days. I just cannot believe that a major company, a company founded on quality is willing to allow its name to be trashed. If I make this switch under these circumstances, I don't think I will ever go back to Nikon short of an mind blowing product that cannot be duplicated by Canon (even if it takes Canon years to come out with an equivalent product). This has become personal.
UPDATE? It's now been months since the D600 sensor problem was identified. It's been a month since the last "update" on the issue. Has anyone found more current information as to Nikon's OFFICIAL position (not telephone advice)? Has anyone determined whether the plethora of re-manufactured D600's from Nikon have modified sensors?
It seems like there was outrage at the beginning of this issue, and the D600 owners have since fallen off this flat planet. I think that if I was an owner, I would be furious and constantly on top of this issue.
Write a Reply
Sign up for a free account or Sign in to post a comment.
Tweets ahoy!
Join the Group
Pin With Me
It seems to me that the issue has been somewhere between moderately and vastly overhyped. I bet 90% of the reviewers on Amazon and the like would have quite happily used the camera for years without noticing, but a couple of prominent bloggers comment on it and suddenly they're going around photographing white walls for days on end and it's the worst camera ever made.
Most of the shots people bandy around on the 'net have been enhanced to make the dust stand out. There's a timelapse video from a guy in Canada who took 1000 shots with his new D600 to see the buildup here:
http://kyleclements.com/blog/2012/a-review-of-the-nikon-d600s-dust-problem/
Looks awful until you click on the two unprocessed photos he's posted at the bottom. And that's a shot at f/22 against a white wall -- the absolute worst case. (I wish my Canon 50D looked that clean!)
All DSLRs need cleaning if you're picky about dust spots. It's incredibly rare to get a sensor without dust on it when you buy a new camera, and if you're the kind of person who notices/cares about dust spots, you'll be unlikely to take more than 5000 photos between cleaning.
Yes, it does seem that the D600 generates a little more dust and oil in the first few thousand shots than many cameras. But if you notice them then you're going to notice the dust any other DSLR generates, and you'll be familiar with cleaning it. With the D600 you just might have to clean it a couple more times near the beginning of it's life. Budget an extra $10 for a couple more sensor wipes.
It certainly wouldn't put me off buying one if it was the right camera in other regards.
Alex, thanks as always for your evaluation here. i am seriously thinking I should upgrade, even given the small time I have been here.
For example, decent ultra-wide zoom lenses for a crop-frame camera are available from around $450-$800, whereas for a full-frame camera you're looking at between $1300-$2000.
The quality of the lens is almost always more important than the quality of the camera. This is especially the case with full-frame cameras, as lenses are always worst in the corners. An expensive lens on a cheap camera will usually give better results than a cheap lens on an expensive camera, if used correctly.
@cmc1200 - If you pick up a D800, then in DX mode, you're at 17MP, which is the same as the D7000, so you really don't loose anything on the ultra-wide side, you just don't gain any thing in megapixel count or reduced noise.
The oil issue is overhyped. There were some who are saying that the original issue was limited to one production set, and the problem corrected. Other folks are seeing what might be normal wear usage. Others simply like bashing everything in site. I would be more worried about how to afford the bigger glass, since that will make those 24 MP really snap!
About $125, the price of 2 cleanings.
It's a dry sensor cleaner, so you essentially just brush the sensor left to right 3 times (to cover that huge 35mm), spinning the brush before and after each wipe. That's it. A caveman could do it.
One thing to know is that your battery needs to be *fully* charged, or the Nikon D600 won't allow you to lock up your mirror to access the sensor (actually, you're cleaning the Anti Aliasing filter, but that's not important).
I ended up getting a canon 5D MKIII and love it but have a nagging feeling that canon will keep doing dodgy lenses that dont really seem to fit what customers are asking for and charging crazy amounts.
An interesing aside RE the Nikon D800 was when I was doing a landscape course for Lee Filters. Aparently when doing long exposure with the D800, its so pixel dense that the pixels overheat and you get lots of white spots on the resulting image. According to the people on the course, this could be fixed by using the inbuilt noise reduction, but that added a similar amount of time to the processing. Ie at sunset, shooting a 2 minute exposure would also require something like 2 minutes more in the camera to reduce the noise. Given that at sunset, it all happens in a 10 minute time frame, this was a bit of a game changer. I believe you can also decrease the quality and it fixes it though?
It seems like there was outrage at the beginning of this issue, and the D600 owners have since fallen off this flat planet. I think that if I was an owner, I would be furious and constantly on top of this issue.