I don't own the d600, but like many, have read and seen every piece of content. I was a camera shop 'perusing' the other day and tested one out. Clearly amazing. however my first question for current owners is on its actual ergonomics.
I'm huge on tactile feedback and the principles of interaction. How has it been so far? let's try and stick to the physicality of the camera, its controls and the body.
the grip is huge. that's my opinion. but can anyone with smaller / normal sized hands describe their experience with this?
also, the multi selector is super tiny. This seemed very strange too me. it felt delicate and was is not in the same ergonomic language as the large grip (these two interaction points should reflect each other and not combat each other — from a UX perspective).
Stemming from this, I am very interested in the pro body layouts, has anyone who said to themselves "I will only get the d600 if it has a pro layout" who got the d600 anyway comment on their experience? because this is me, right now : )
#1. "RE: ergonomics and 'going pro'" | In response to Reply # 0arjenkins Registered since 24th Jul 2012Sun 14-Oct-12 05:13 AM
My Pennies worth
I have currently the D300. I am debating whether to upgrade to the D600 or the D800. Here in the UK the price difference is about £300-£400 depending on store.
So spending £1650 or £2000 isn't that difference really...
So like you I went into a couple of camera shops here in London and handled them both.
Both appear to be good cameras, fitting well in the hand etc. However for me the D800 felt larger, heavier (in a good sense) and the controls appear more similar to my existing D300. The D600 was slightly different in the ergonomics of the controls.
As such I am likely to get the D800 as it suits me better ergonomically.
Another London Nikonian
#2. "RE: ergonomics and 'going pro'" | In response to Reply # 0jckingca Registered since 16th Dec 2010Sun 14-Oct-12 07:15 AM
I agree with you that ergonomics is a very important factor. I rented a D600 for a week to evaluate how it felt in the hand as well its image quality. I have a D7000, so my comments are relative to that camera.
You are the only person who can really say how the grip feels in your hand. It is only slightly larger than the D7000 but moulded in a slightly different (more comfortable for me) way.
At first I thought the multi selector was very small but after using it for a few days I thought the D7000 multi selector was very large. For me, it's something I got used to immediately.
Other comments on ergonomics are:
-I prefer the larger viewfinder of the D600
-Eye relief seems the same as D7000 and okay for me wearing glasses
-The sound of the shutter firing seems about the same as the D7000, possibly a bit quieter in Q mode.
-LCD screen seems slightly better and it is a tiny bit larger
If you consider the User Interface an ergonomics issue, the D600 is a very easy move for owners of the D7000 with a nearly identical layout of menus and buttons.
It may be a larger change for someone accustomed to a different control layout or wanting to use two bodies with different layouts.
#3. "RE: ergonomics and 'going pro'" | In response to Reply # 2BGD600 Registered since 19th Sep 2012Sun 14-Oct-12 07:24 AM
I don't find the dpad on the back of the body too small, but it is only just big enough IMO. The selector on the optional battery grip is much smaller than I would have liked though
#12. "RE: ergonomics and 'going pro'" | In response to Reply # 2Mon 15-Oct-12 12:02 AM
That was smart — renting the camera first. Thanks for the feedback.
Good to hear on the size of the multi-selector, you're response and acclimation with it was what I would suspect of myself.
I'm definitely more accustomed to the d80/90 setup. And I cannot honestly say I don't like it. Because I do, it works great. What I like a lot about the 'pro' style is the top left command dial. very simple and easy access to ISO, Image Quality and White balance. — although i start to contradict myself in the coming ramble : ]
And if i want to be a nit picky, then I revel in the setup of this space. I'm always fiddling with my settings because i find myself going in and out of sunlight, or under or on top of something, weird places with varying lighting conditions — in and out of buildings. This constant flux of light color and availability has me switching ISO a lot, I used to mess around with WB a bunch too, but auto is fine. And I would totally change up my IQ more on the fly for different images
— YES, I do realize these buttons are at the ready on the D600, d80 and d90, and i simply hate their location. I really dislike those buttons left of the lcd.
Call me nuts, but those buttons are a pain to access when in the viewfinder — I find myself always pulling out of frame to hit the button and then stepping back in, only to have to reframe — do that 500 times in one day and you've increased your shooting time exponentially. not efficient. To me...that space left of the LCD is more for interacting with the lcd, you're looking at that screen, you're hands are properly placed, boom. But when in the viewfinder, my hands are top right trigger and wheels, and around the lens — with my thumb so close to that top left command dial : )
This is *clearly* a rant on my part — and I'm probably replying to multiple responses in this one thread — But I guess I'm just one of the undecideds (queue timely election quip)
#13. "RE: ergonomics and 'going pro'" | In response to Reply # 12PerroneFord Nikonian since 07th Apr 2011Mon 15-Oct-12 01:48 AM
>What I like a lot about the 'pro' style is the top left
>command dial. very simple and easy access to ISO, Image
>Quality and White balance.
The pro bodies are not set up this way. The semi-pro bodies are.
>Call me nuts, but those buttons are a pain to access when in
>the viewfinder — I find myself always pulling out of frame to
>hit the button and then stepping back in, only to have to
>reframe — do that 500 times in one day and you've increased
>your shooting time exponentially.
I can't say that I have ever my WB, or quality setting during a shoot. Not without changing locations (indoors to out, or outdoors to in). Not in 25 years. I have changed the ISO but that's pretty rare.
>This is *clearly* a rant on my part — and I'm probably
>replying to multiple responses in this one thread — But I
>guess I'm just one of the undecideds (queue timely election
We all use gear differently, and my way is no better than your way or anyone else's way. However, if your way is causing you undue pain or stress, you might want to see if there is some other way you can accomplish your goals.
Best of luck.
Visit my Nikonians gallery.
#14. "RE: ergonomics and 'going pro'" | In response to Reply # 13Mon 15-Oct-12 02:09 AM
>The pro bodies are not set up this way. The semi-pro bodies
You are correct, I've never really looked at the pro setups as they don't interest me, and have unfairly lumped pro and semipro together. Thanks for the clarification.
>I can't say that I have ever my WB, or quality setting during
>a shoot. Not without changing locations (indoors to out, or
>outdoors to in). Not in 25 years. I have changed the ISO but
>that's pretty rare.
As for the WB, I like fiddling with things, but have come to realize messing with Kelvins is a waste of time. Also, I don't use my camera to make money, I use my camera as a means for visual expression and exploration, being on the pure artistic side of thing makes me want to play with all the fun stuff more — not saying you don't photograph with those emotions, I'm simply saying that i like to see what things do, fail fast and try again.
And I find myself changing settings because when I go on a photo shoot, I am moving from inside of a building/structure to outside of a building/structure. I tend to immediately move from high sun to no windows (at the drastic end of things). Or ask, what will this picture look like when it's grainy, maybe that will be interesting.
As for Quality, If I'm shooting everyday family pictures, but then happen upon something that sparks my artistic eye, it's nice to swap from a smaller file size to a larger, simple modulation for easier post processing.
>We all use gear differently, and my way is no better than your
>way or anyone else's way. However, if your way is causing you
>undue pain or stress, you might want to see if there is some
>other way you can accomplish your goals.
>Best of luck.
I agree. and my assumption is that the semi-pro setup would alleviate certain issues. Thanks!
#4. "RE: ergonomics and 'going pro'" | In response to Reply # 0
>I'm huge on tactile feedback and the principles of
>interaction. How has it been so far?
For me? Terrible But I expected that.
>let's try and stick to
>the physicality of the camera, its controls and the body.
>the grip is huge. that's my opinion. but can anyone with
>smaller / normal sized hands describe their experience with
For me, the grip is tiny. The camera disappears in my hand. Better than the D7000, but only just.
>also, the multi selector is super tiny. This seemed very
>strange too me. it felt delicate and was is not in the same
>ergonomic language as the large grip (these two interaction
>points should reflect each other and not combat each other —
>from a UX perspective).
Meh, don't notice it much. The one on the battery grips is tiny. The one on the cameras is ok to me.
>Stemming from this, I am very interested in the pro body
>layouts, has anyone who said to themselves "I will only
>get the d600 if it has a pro layout" who got the d600
>anyway comment on their experience? because this is me, right
>now : )
None of these has a pro body layout. They physically cannot. You know this going in, and you know you are going to hate it. You live with it because Nikon refuses to put these great sensors in any pro cameras.
Visit my Nikonians gallery.
#5. "RE: ergonomics and 'going pro'" | In response to Reply # 4SRFast Nikonian since 22nd Dec 2004Sun 14-Oct-12 12:03 PM | edited Sun 14-Oct-12 11:51 PM by SRFast
Welcome to Nikonians.
I don't own a D600, but I do own two Nikon "pro" bodies, a D2H & D3S. With their integrated vertical grips, they are fairly large and heavy. Because of their size, there is plenty of real estate to have dedicated buttons and controls for shooting options and settings. This is not the case on a "prosumer" camera body. Only the "essential" controls have redicated back panel controls. Less frequently used controls are relegated to the menu system.
I've owned a D70/70s, D200, D300 & D3. I had Nikon OEM battery grips for both the D200 & D300. From my experience, each of these bodies were an evolution from one to the next with dedicated buttons and controls on the back. For me, it was an easy transition from one body to the next. The D600 is a departure from this. There is no doubt it is a great camera and as long as the photographer does his/her part, can produce outstanding images, I don't see myself purchasing one. I know D600 buttons can be reassigned to different functions, but the control layout is too different for me. I am sure shooters upgrading from the more current Nikon comsumer/prosumer dSLRs will feel right at home with the D600.
If I eventually purchase a mega pixel body, I will purchase a used D3X or new D800. They are closer to what I am accustomed to.
Just my $.02.....JL
45+ years of Nikon ownership and counting
Visit my SmugMug gallery
#6. "RE: ergonomics and 'going pro'" | In response to Reply # 5DSW90049 Registered since 11th Feb 2012Sun 14-Oct-12 12:54 PM
My hands are not particularly large, and for me, the D600 is just the right size and ergonomics for my amateur use. Pro's have different considerations.
I went from D70->D5100->D7000->D600 and there is a very familiar feel throughout
I am delighted with the D600 and it's amazing picture quality, low light performance, bigger viewfinder and the whole FX transition, though you had better invest in some good glass to with your D600, because you will notice.
Visit my Nikonians gallery.
#9. "RE: ergonomics and 'going pro'" | In response to Reply # 6Sun 14-Oct-12 09:04 PM
Thanks for the feedback.
Thankfully my plan has always been FX. And I only invest in FX glass. I'm more of an AI/AIS manual focus kinda dude anyways. So it hasn't been too difficult on the 'ol wallet.
#7. "RE: ergonomics and 'going pro'" | In response to Reply # 0
>Let's try and stick to the physicality of the camera, its controls and the body.
>The grip is huge. that's my opinion. but can anyone with smaller / normal sized hands describe their experience with this?
I hate to use this type of analogy, but your question is like asking the owner of a particular new car whether or not he or she likes the seats and the size of the rear-view mirror and please ignore everything else. In my opinion that is not the way to evaluate a camera. My hands are the most "normal size" that anyone could possibly have ordered, unless of course, you knew in advance that you would need smaller hands or larger hands for a particular vocation, so I don't find the grip at all large. I also own a D3S and have owned a D700 and a D3200. If I had my druthers, I would prefer the D600 to have the weight and size of the D3200 and the external controls of the D3S. For me, the D600 had a learning curve, because I was used to the D700 and the D3S, but it certainly wasn't a deal breaker. I had a D800 for a brief period of time, and I was very comfortable with the controls. If control buttons and ergonomics were my only concern, then I would have chosen the D800, but I don't want the extra weight and I definitely don't want the file size that you get with that camera. I like the D600 for its size and weight, high ISO abilities, two card slots, and high resolution and DR. Frankly, I was equally impressed by the resolution and DR of the D3200, but I own mostly FX lenses and really do like more external controls. I was also forced to buy a super wide angle zoom for the DX camera that I don't need with FX, so the D600 really was more cost effective in my case.
So, if ergonomics is your major concern then I would have to agree with an earlier post that indicated that only you can decide. It's like going to the shoe store. But, if size, weight, controls and file size are also important to you then I think that you need to look deeper.
Good luck with your decision.
#8. "RE: ergonomics and 'going pro'" | In response to Reply # 7Sun 14-Oct-12 09:02 PM
: ) I'm looking deep. deep into the chasm of my soul.
And I agree with and have concluded the same from your review. Really the one thing I dislike, as a previous post mentioned, is biting the bullet on a non-pro layout but knowing that you just have to.
As a researcher by trade, I didn't want to lead anyone, but am interested if anyone has suffered from odd fatigue because of the grip. And really, it isn't a deal breaker. The erg's are the erg's of the camera, and the d600 is a beast of an FX cam.
With that said, when dropping $2,100 for a piece of equipment, especially as an artist / amateur / enthusiest, you really do need to weigh all the factors — are the windows automatic, check. Are the seats leather, check. Does it have a cup holder...no cup holder! : )
Anyways, point being, the D700 feels better in my hands (albeit is heavier), has a pro layout, produces beautiful images with great high iso capabilities (granted not new tech and not as good as the d600) — but lacks video.
Commenting to another earlier post, I have FX lenses already as I've spent wisely in anticipation for an FX body. But, I don't want to spend my hard earned dolla billz and always hate one or two things about the camera — Know what I mean? — Then again, I could just accept my fate, Buy it, and be a super duper happy person because I have a really amazing instrument : )
#10. "RE: ergonomics and 'going pro'" | In response to Reply # 8jpFoto Registered since 25th Jun 2010Sun 14-Oct-12 11:00 PM | edited Sun 14-Oct-12 11:02 PM by jpFoto
Why don't you fill in your profile information as it relates to your equipment? If you have all DX lenses any advice that we would proffer would be entirely different than it would if you had all FX lenses.
#15. "RE: ergonomics and 'going pro'" | In response to Reply # 11km6xz Nikonian since 22nd Jan 2009Mon 15-Oct-12 04:48 AM
I am one who thinks old habits can change which means any camera can become like an old glove if one gives it a chance. Most often cameras with "bad" ergonomics, are just ones for which new habits have not been adopted yet.
I easily go from D90 to D7000 to D800, and the few times I have had longer uses of the D3s. I think that comes from not expecting other cameras with different design goals and periods of development to be just like whatever I got most used to. Whatever you get, in a week you will think it is the best ever unless you focus on how different it is than your habits every time you pick it up. If you tend to do that to yourself, my sincere suggestion is to not buy anything new. You have a camera which can do all you need now. Any fairly modern DSLR can. We are at point that it is hard to tell the difference in output between the lowest level cameras and highest, so if one is resistant to change they are in luck because there is little need to change any if the old habits are too near and dear. A D3200 is capable of taking any photo hanging on any gallery wall.
I was more interested in your take on adjusting things often for creative reasons between shots. My suggestion here is that you are limiting creative options by not concentrating on good solid data capture and great composition, such as properly exposed and focused which means getting a focusing screen for use of your MF lenses and leaving AWB activated, optimize exposure for best capture of minimum lost data and not worry of about creative expression in-camera. With digital, it's just bits, the creative manipulation occurs in post processing.
You have a world of creative tools and opportunities in post, that if tried in-camera, would result in lower data quality. Good exposure assures the best raw material to work with. Good composition and good exposure are the photographer's contribution to in-camera quality images.
Lighting and composition trump all else, so your camera related field tasks are mostly related to those instead of intentionally compromising camera settings for less than optimum data capture for artistic reasons.
In the field, get the capture, use the tools that work really well such as AWB and now, AutoISO. Get the capture, take it home where you have a calibrated large monitor and do your creative work there when you can see what you actually have.
If it is not print ready, it is easy to change in post to anything you want. Same with focus, get the focus, if you need it to be less than sharply focused, you can blur in post but you can't fix an image that is not in focus at capture.
A D600 has the added advantage of not having to adjust ISO so often. Set the aperture for DOF, SS for the speed of the subject and let Auto ISO work within the range you set as the highest acceptable level. The incredible DR of these new cameras really helps simplify your field tasks.
St Petersburg Russia
Visit my Nikonians gallery.
#16. "RE: ergonomics and 'going pro'" | In response to Reply # 15Light Seeker Registered since 17th Apr 2009Mon 15-Oct-12 08:30 PM
>I am one who thinks old habits can change which means any
>camera can become like an old glove if one gives it a chance.
>Most often cameras with "bad" ergonomics, are just
>ones for which new habits have not been adopted yet.
Stan speaks words of wisdom. Let me share my (limited) D600 experience.
I have a D700 and I've had three occasions to try the D600, D800 and my D700 at the same time (camera store). The first time I instantly enjoyed the D800 and hated the D600. I found the D600 confusing and unintuitive. When I left the store I relished that I had my D700 in hand to shoot with.
During the second visit I discovered, much to my surprise, that the D600 was not that bad to work with. I no longer hated it and instead though to myself "I could probably work with this camera if I had to".
During the third visit I actually enjoyed working with the D600. I could easily adjust ISO, WB, shooting mode, etc. and take the test shots I wanted. In fact, after I left the store I realized that I might have even preferred shooting with the D600 over either the D800 or my D700. It's lighter than my D700 and smaller than either the D700 or D800. The D700 / D800 bodies seemed a bit "cluncky" in comparison. On the other hand, that may just be the desire for a new camera talking!
So, I realized that I can work with any of these three cameras. The biggest feature gap for me is the D600's 3 shot limit on exposure bracketing. It will be somewhat painful to work around this (e.g. 9 shot bracketing), but it can be done.
The decision point for me is primarily based on whether the additional resolution, dynamic range and better noise control warrant the dollars I would need to invest after selling my D700.