Fri 15-Jun-12 02:04 AM | edited Fri 15-Jun-12 02:07 AM by ZoneV
>I just don't get the idea behind a D600. Why cut down what >would be a D800 to make it a D600 (or D800 lite)? The D400 >makes sense as the D300 is very long in the tooth. Nikon >really needs to get that camera to market this year. I, for >one, will buy one to compliment my D800. And I don't expect >it to come in as low as the reported $1800. My guess would be >around $2,000.
Probably because Nikon:
A.) Wants to be the first company to offer an FX body for under $2000.
B.) Wants to amortize the R&D they put into the D3x sensor (this one is likely an improved version of that base design).
C.) Wants to leverage the R&D effort they put into the D7000-size body. The D600 body will be similar, apparently.
And maybe they know something we don't (i.e. what Canon plans to launch in the near future).
And yes, $2000 makes a lot of sense. D800 at $3000, D600 at $2000, and D7000 at $1000.